How does a Catholic teacher deal with students who have different moral perspectives or come from different religious backgrounds?

Deacon Douglas McManaman

There is no other way to deal with such students than to welcome them, accept them, and love them. If they chose to attend a Catholic school, it would appear that they want what the school has to offer, and what we have to offer–or should have to offer–is a genuine learning space that is rooted in genuine listening and dialogue, not to mention a community that prays. And so, it is very important not to get flustered by a highly diverse classroom. My last 20 years of my teaching career took place in a very diversified religious environment. We had a rather significant percentage of Muslim and Hindu students, some Sikh students, Buddhists and even atheists, not to mention a good percentage of Catholics. In the end, they made me a better Catholic, a more ecumenically minded one, and the study of the gospels, according to these students, made them better Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, etc. The teaching of religion and school wide masses was clearly not a source of contention for these students. In fact, the devout Muslim, Hindu and Sikh students were my biggest cheerleaders. Moreover, the Muslim students typically had a much better understanding of the Catholic faith than did most of the Catholic students. 

C. S. Lewis made the point that when we study various cultures throughout history, specifically their understanding of morality, what is striking is not how radically different their moral systems are to our own, but how similar their moralities are to ours in the Western world: for example, no culture honours those who run away in battle, or the liar or thief, etc. The reason is that there is one universal moral law, just various degrees of understanding of those principles and their application, which is where conflict typically arises in the world. 

As for the variety of religions, it is very important that we understand one another if we are ever going to be able to live together in peace with one another. But better still, it is more important that we learn from one another, that is, allow other religions to make us more deeply and completely religious; for Western Christianity certainly does not have a monopoly on God. In fact, it can be argued that the Catholicism of the Latin West has allowed itself to be far too influenced by Greek Neo-Platonism, and so although Greek thought has brought a great deal to Christian culture, a perspective is always limited and open to further expansion. Indigenous spirituality, for example, can do much to help us cultivate a deeper reverence for the earth as well as a more consistent appreciation of the sacramental character of creation. Eastern thought can help enrich the mystical aspects of the Catholic faith. In fact, we can look at the various religions of the world as an upside down pyramid, with the wider base at the top and the single point of convergence at the bottom. On the top surface we can place the various religions of the world in chronological order, from the left to the right. But as we enter more and more deeply into the mystical branches of these religions, such as Sufism, or Taoism, Zen, or Hasidism, the more we converge towards one another, and soon it becomes very difficult if not impossible to distinguish between them–at some point they all begin to speak the same language. This suggests a common origin. In other words, on a very profound level, we really are brothers and sisters.

To discover this, however, requires an ability to listen. A religiously diversified classroom is a perfect space in which to learn to listen to one another. For centuries now, religious people, Catholics included of course, have been more or less sectarian. Some people are so entrenched within a tribal “us and them” mindset that they are scandalized when a Catholic preacher quotes the Hadith (Sayings of Muhammed), or repeats a Hasidic tale, or cites a Protestant scripture scholar.

Granted, some Muslim parents were very nervous about the prospects of their child taking a religion course in a Catholic school for fear that their child would be pressured to convert. Hence, it is important to distinguish between proselytizing and evangelization, a distinction that many are still unclear about.[1] Pope Francis addressed this distinction. He wrote:  

Don’t proselytize; respect others’ beliefs. We can inspire others through witness so that one grows together in communicating. But the worst thing of all is religious proselytism, which paralyzes: ‘I am talking with you in order to persuade you,‘ No. Each person dialogues, starting with his and her own identity. The church grows by attraction, not proselytizing.”

Evangelization is neither apologetics nor an attempt to convert others to our religion. It is the proclamation of the good news (evangelion) of the risen Christ, and we do that first and foremost by living in the joy of Easter and loving others as another self (Mt 22, 39).

The wonderful thing about an interreligious environment is that students eventually realize that the Hindu or Muslim girl sitting next to me, the Sikh boy behind me, and the Catholic teacher in front of me, etc., are not the “infidels” or “lost souls” that I might have been led to believe they were, but really are my brothers/sisters. The classroom is meant to be a learning space, and genuine learning can only take place in an environment in which everyone has learned how to listen (synodality), because listening gives rise to intelligent discourse. Nancy Kline writes: 

Attention, the act of listening with palatable respect and fascination, is the key to a Thinking Environment. Listening of this calibre is enzymatic. When you are listening to someone, much of the quality of what you are hearing is your effect on them. Giving good attention to people makes them more intelligent. Poor attention makes them stumble over their words and seem stupid. Your attention, your listening is that important. We think we listen, but we don’t. We finish each other’s sentences, we interrupt each other, we moan together, we fill in the pauses with our own stories, we look at our watches, we sigh, frown, tap our finger, read the newspaper, or walk away. We give advice, give advice, give advice. Even professional listeners listen poorly much of the time. They come in too soon with their own ideas. They equate talking with looking professional. …Listening to each other, if you want to think for yourselves, requires discipline and the most profound attention for each other.[2] 


Notes

  1. “If I had power and could legislate, I should certainly stop all proselytizing. It is the cause of much avoidable conflict between classes and unnecessary heart-burning. But I should welcome people of any nationality if they came to serve here for the sake of service. In Hindu households the advent of a missionary has meant the disruption of the family coming in the wake of change of dress, manners, language, food and drink.” Mahatma Gandhi, originally published in his weekly journal, Harijan, on November 5, 1935.

  2. Nancy Kline. Time to Think: Listening to Ignite the Human Mind (pp. 37-38). (Function). Kindle Edition.


Leave a Reply