Serious Deficiencies Abound in Popular Religion Text
Free eBook:
|
| Free eBook: No Offense Intended |
Milwaukee — It has been nearly a decade since the U.S. bishops, as a body, realized that they had to confront their 40-year-old problem with catechetics which produced a generation of "religious illiterates," and bring the most widely used catechisms into conformity with the Catechism of the Catholic Church and tried and true pedagogical methods. Problems still abound in some of the most popular texts, however.
For example, Margo Szews, a Milwaukee mother of three and grandmother of 15, and a 20-year veteran of the catechetical wars in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, was reviewing a text, Joseph Stoutzenberger's Morality: An Invitation to Christian Living (Harcourt Religion Publishers, 2000). She was doing so at the request of a friend whose child was using the book at one of the archdiocese's high schools, Catholic Memorial — which two of Archbishop Timothy Dolan's nieces attend.
What Mrs. Szews found is that some of the most salient deficiencies of popular catechetical texts from the 1960s and 1970s abound in this new text.
Stoutzenberger's Morality carries the imprimatur of Archbishop Jerome Hanus, OSB, of Dubuque.
As a result of a critique Mrs. Szews wrote in the summer of 2003, a copy of which was sent to both Archbishop Dolan and Archbishop Alfred Hughes of New Orleans, chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Catechism, she was informed by Dolan in a July 22, 2003 letter that "the morality of the book is in the process of being revised and will be published next spring with the approval, based on conformity with the Catechism, by the Bishops' Committee on Catechesis . . . I have been assured that Catholic Memorial will be using the revised edition as soon as it is ready.
"Thank you again for all the work you did evaluating the text."
In the 2004-2005 academic year, Stoutzenberger's Morality, in its unrevised form, is still being used at Catholic Memorial, at the Jesuits' prestigious Marquette High boys' school, and in numerous other Catholic schools around the country.
In her letter to Archbishop Hughes, dated January 28, 2004, Mrs. Szews observed that the "distortions in this book can never be corrected to put this book 'in conformity with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It appears to me that this author [a professor of religious studies at Holy Family College in Philadelphia — editor] does not believe what the Catholic Church believes and teaches, and therefore, if the necessary corrections were made to this book, I do not believe the author would put his name on it."
Mrs. Szews added: "I suspect that this may also be the case with many other authors of deficient books."
Before pointing out some of the most egregious examples of this text's non-Catholic approach to morality, Mrs. Szews stated:
"Although the 'Mission' statement on the copyright page indicates that this book was 'written to reflect the teachings of the Catholic Church,' a close examination of the contents reveals that the basic fundamentals of morality taught in this book are diametrically opposed to the moral theology taught by the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
"Even though the book contains much religious discussion, it is grounded in 'values clarification,' a teaching method designed to teach situation ethics. Both values clarification and the teaching of situation ethics are forbidden in Catholic catechesis. The 1978 National Catechetical Directory states, in regard to The Moral Life:
"'Nor may our decisions be arbitrary, for "good" and "bad," "right" and "wrong" are not simply whatever we choose to make them. On the contrary, there are moral values and norms which are absolute and never to be disregarded or violated by anyone in any situation.'
"In 1995, the Pontifical Council for the Family published The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality, which specifically forbids the teaching of values clarification."
Truth and Meaning said values clarification "encourages indifference to moral law and permissiveness" — which, Mrs. Szews observed, is precisely what this country has experienced over the past 40 years.
Additionally, Mrs. Szews pointed out that:
"The values clarification format is blatantly verified on p. 57 [of the Stoutzenberger text] with the promotion of Lawrence Kohlberg's 'Levels of Moral Maturity.' What the author does not explain is that Kohlberg was not a Catholic (was a Jew) and his theory of moral development, as a values clarification model, results in a relativistic morality which is antithetical to Catholic teaching. In his later years, Kohlberg lamented the fact that his model of teaching moral development was not producing the moral behavior anticipated . . .
"Values clarification can be identified by a horrendous invasion of personal and family privacy, role-playing activities, discussion of moral dilemmas, and the writing of personal journals. The students are continually being asked invasive questions regarding their personal and family values. Eventually, this process separates the child from his own family, and an 'autonomous thinking' child is created. The child is manipulated to focus inwards on thoughts, feelings, and choices that are to be his 'own.' In these classroom discussions, everyone has an 'opinion,' and the idea of a particular 'right' or 'wrong' or the idea of objective 'truth' is gradually diminished . . .
"I submit that this text is grounded in an anti-Catholic pedagogy, should not have been given an imprimatur, and should not be used in Catholic schools. Unfortunately, this book presents an insidious undermining of Catholic teaching and cannot be recommended."
Specific Problems
From the beginning of the text, as Mrs. Szews documented, the Catholic student is pressured to accept the notion that all thoughts, feelings, and beliefs are equal.
On p. 4, the tenth-grade students who read the text are told: "You are expected to take charge of your own life . . . without always having someone tell you the right thing to do."
On p. 5: "However, it is important to realize that each person has his or her own sense of what is moral and what is not."
On p. 11, rather than teaching key Catholic doctrines on sanctifying grace or actual grace (the two terms do not appear in the index), the student is taught about "cheap grace" and "costly grace": "Cheap grace denotes a relationship with God that we take for granted . . . costly grace denotes a relationship with God that involves a response on our part."
On p. 17, students are encouraged to disregard the Ten Commandments: "At times morality is presented in terms of negatives — a long series of 'thou shalt nots.' In recent years Church teaching has re-emphasized the more essential, positive dimension of 'morality'."
By p. 19, students are invited to consider "how we can be morally creative with our thinking and feeling, our sexuality, our unique personality, our family situation and community?"
In chapter 2, which is allegedly on "The Virtues, Cultivating Character," Mrs. Szews showed how the student is continually prodded to re-examine his beliefs at the same time that he is given erroneous concepts of sin, conscience, and morality by which to judge those beliefs.
One of the most insidious passages in the entire text is a page on St. Thomas More, "Model of Conscience."
After a brief introduction to More's life and times, and how Henry VIII had him found guilty of treason and beheaded him for refusing to nullify his marriage to Queen Catherine, the author surmises:
"Was More wrong? Many of his contemporaries in England — even important Church people — did sign the oath that More refused to sign. No doubt many acted out of cowardice. But, on the other hand, many signers probably acted in good conscience. Certainly a case can be made for signing the oath as a good act . . . By his death, he caused great sorrow to those who loved him. Wouldn't he have been justified in signing the oath in order to spare his family and friends this hardship?"
At the end of this chapter, students are asked to "name and describe Lawrence Kohlberg's three levels of moral maturity."
In chapter 4, "Jesus, Model of Morality," the image of Jesus presented to students is reminiscent of the Jesus of the 1960s: "Jesus' point of view," students are told on p. 65, "on moral questions is not that of a philosopher, one who stands back and makes pronouncements on right and wrong from an ivory tower . . . He is not a teacher or a rabbi who is associated with any particular school."
Later, on p. 66, students read: "The only story we have of [Jesus] before the age of 30 can be read as one of youthful rebellion."
Throughout this chapter, students are encouraged to downplay the significance of the Ten Commandments, and make as their reference point for moral action the beatitudes.
In chapter 6, with its distinctly Jungian title, "Sin and Morality: Bringing Our Dark Side Into the Light," students are told: "In recent decades Catholicism has experienced changes in its perspective on sin. Social sin refers to behavior patterns, values, and social structures that encourage or support sin in a society," giving students the impression, as Mrs. Szews pointed out, that "personal sin is less important than it once was."
The view of personal sin, especially mortal sin, expressed by the text in numerous passages, Szews observed, was roundly condemned by the Vatican in its 1975 statement, Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics. She attested: "The author is certainly negligent in not properly informing his Catholic students that individual acts, e.g., willfully missing Mass on Sunday, fornication, drunk driving, etc., are mortal sins."
After recounting more passages where the notion of personal sin is ridiculed or belittled, Szews writes: "For the student who might still want to confess personal sins in sacramental Confession, we find this:
"'An overemphasis on delineating specific sins people commit . . . leads to a "grocery list" approach to the Sacrament of Reconciliation. That is, going to confession, and rattling off sins committed and the number of times each was committed, ends up sounding like a grocery list: "I lied three times; I disobeyed four times; and I stole once." This list might be rattled off with the same degree of detachment that someone would express when reading off a grocery list: "Three dozen eggs, two quarts of milk, and a loaf of bread" . . . A more accurate understanding of sin seeks to relate our actions more closely to who we are and who we want to become'."
In chapter 8, on "Moral Decision-Making: A Process," students will be intentionally confused on major moral issues of the day.
For example: "Determining facts should be a straightforward, noncontroversial matter, shouldn't it? For instance, abortion is abortion, right? However, as you know, some people refer to abortion as 'terminating a pregnancy' while others label the same action 'murder.' In other words, on this important moral issue disagreement exists even on the fact level."
In chapter 9, "Sex and Morality," students are again taught to view the Church as trying to overcome the obsession with sex it has had "from the Church's beginning." In the two-page discussion on homosexuality, students are told that "homosexual activity is sex engaged in by two people of the same sex; heterosexual activity is female-male sex." Nowhere are students told the truth of Catholic moral theology, that sodomy is a mortal sin and the homosexual inclination is "objectively disordered."
While a little box summarizes Church teaching on sexuality and marriage in three sentences on p. 185, on the center of the page, in much larger letters, in bold print, the student reads:
"Even in high school, Jackie sensed that she was different. She always had friends, both boy and girl friends. She was a leader in many school activities. But dating never appealed to her much. She preferred group activities and working on projects with classmates.
"When Jackie entered her state university, she looked forward to continuing her involvement with clubs and activities. One organization that caught her eye during orientation week was the 'gay and lesbian students' association.' At first she laughed: No such organization existed at the Catholic high school she attended! However, she felt drawn to exploring what the organization and its members stood for. Perhaps she could find out more about why she always felt different from her friends who were dating so much. Jackie decided to seek out the campus minister who worked at the Catholic Newman Center at the college. Maybe she could help her with her dilemma."
On the next page has a snapshot of a gay pride parade, with middle-aged parents wearing placards, "I love my gay daughter," among others, as the discussion around it focuses on how the Church can reach out to gay and lesbian Catholics, on whether or not gays should have the right to marry, and ends with a recommendation to read Always Our Children, the controversial statement from a U.S. bishops' committee.
In other words, this religion text, used throughout the country despite the fact that it is not on the list of "approved" books by the U.S. Bishops' Committee on the Catechism, is just another way to deconstruct Catholic morality and promote the libertine lifestyle.
As Mrs. Szews told The Wanderer: "Parents in Milwaukee, and around the country, can only hope and pray that Archbishop Dolan — and other bishops — realize how anti-Catholic this book is. Bishops, for starters, must require that their Catholic high schools only use books that are on Archbishop Hughes' approved list.
"I would personally recommend the Catholicism Series — four excellent books published by C.R. Publications."
(Editor's note: For information on the Catholicism Series, call 877-730-8877, or visit www.crpublications.com.)
This item 6390 digitally provided courtesy of CatholicCulture.org
