Kapłan gwiazdor, showman i inkwizytor: Zagrożenia aktywizmem w posłudze katechetyczno‑duszpasterskiej

Abstract

Przez analizy prowadzone w tekście przewija się zasadnicze pytanie: czy usprawiedliwione jest stosowanie metod aktywizujących w nauczaniu religii i pracy duszpasterskiej? Nowe trendy w teologii i nauczaniu religii mają bez wątpienia wiele zalet; podkreśla się zwłaszcza wynikającą z nich efektywność nauczania. Czynią także zadania ucznia bardziej atrakcyjnymi i ułatwiają pracę nauczyciela. Z ich zastosowaniem wiążą się jednak pewne niebezpieczeństwa, przede wszystkim przecenienie roli psychologii w podejściu do doświadczenia religijnego i koncentracja raczej na metodzie uczenia niż na jego celu. Stąd w podejściu do metod aktywizujących należy zachować arystotelesowski „złoty środek” – właściwą równowagę.

On 19th June 2009, Pope Benedict XVI inaugurated the Year for Priests which will last till 19th June 2010. The motto of this year is “The faithfulness of Christ, the faithfulness of a priest”. The Year was established on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of death of St John Baptist Marie Vianney, the parish priest of Ars. The question about the role of a priest in society, especially in a parish, at school and in local communities seems to be of great importance nowadays. A contemporary man is often exposed to the influence of numerous experimentalists, showmen and pedagogical inquisitors, and the rapid expansion of psychology in our lives, which sometimes leads to a complete takeover, is present in most areas of everyday life. This process also concerns the religious sphere, and the subjectivization of a religious experience makes people feel as if they are left on their own. The overuse of psychology in religious experiences is dangerous as it might be connected with moving the sphere of the sacred onto the plane of the personal experience of a man, and it carries with it the lack of any needs to participate in religious observances and redefining ethical and social norms. In this situation priests and religious educators must choose suitable methods of evangelization with a great deal of responsibility and care. At the same time they cannot follow the modern teaching fashions too closely, because then the main aim of their work, which is leading people to God and salvation, might be deprecated. It might lead to so‑called religious infantilism – the religious experience lasts as long as the stimulus (influencing the senses) is at work. When the stimulus disappears, so does the religious experience. This situation may take place when a priest‑showman puts the teaching method in the first place and neglects the very essence and aim of his teaching. Although active‑learning methods stimulate creative actions and creativity, they also carry with them the dangers of knowledge which has not been consolidated and which is superficial. They threaten religious educators by assuming the role of a showman or an inquisitor. Religious educators and priests should treat themselves with a certain dose of reserve, so that God is always at the centre of the process of religious education. A fundamental question runs throughout the analyses that has been carried out – is using active‑learning methods in religious education and pastoral service justified? New trends in methods of education and theology are definitely in their favour, and they emphasize the correlation between using active‑learning methods and the effectiveness of teaching. This process concerns both working at school and in the parish. Undoubtedly, they make teaching more attractive and they facilitate the learning process. However, they are also connected with the danger of the over use of psychology when looking at religious experience and of placing too much emphasis on the teaching method itself rather than its aim. Thus, what we should wish for is that active‑learning methods should be used while preserving the Aristotelian golden mean – a proper use of the desirable balance between two extremes, finding a compromise and moderation between them, according to the saying nec temere, nec timide (neither rashly nor timidly).