Values have to do with human persons, with men and women. As such, values are concerned with the "only creature on earth which God willed for its own sake, and for whom God has his plan, that is, a share in eternal salvation."1 This "does not mean dealing with man in the abstract, but with real, `concrete,' `historical' man". They are the concern of each and every man and woman as persons, and of the human societies which they create and constitute.2 Vatican II popularized the traditional Christian principle that "only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. Christ, the new Adam, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love, fully reveals man to himself and brings light to his most high calling."3

The Christian view of man/woman, therefore, is a major chapter in theology and religious education. In fact before the advent of the social and behavioral sciences, human values and virtues generally were considered to be more or less the exclusive domain of literature, philosophy, and theology. With the great expansion of the "human sciences," this monopoly has been decisively broken. But the new problematic has made it imperative to re-assert the necessary and legitimate role of theology in understanding, evaluating, and developing authentic human values. In terms of Filipino culture and values, it is all the more imperative to consider values and values education in direct relation to Christian Faith and faith education.

This brief essay will offer first a short survey of pertinent recent work on values and values education, in order to introduce, secondly, certain basic dimensions of the place of values in contemporary theology and religious education. Finally, it will conclude with a theological critique of this new value approach.


Social scientists like to situate "values" in relation to a number of allied concepts. Behavior is taken to refer to specific, observable actions; attitudes refer to favorable or unfavorable dispositions toward certain objects or situations; belief systems are overall frames of reference or world views composed of certain assumptions made about ourselves, others, the world, and the like. In this context, values are enduring preferences for certain modes of conduct (e.g., honesty) or life-situations (e.g., inner peace). They usually cluster to form a values system in which particular values are ordered according to a certain priority of importance.4 The important thing for the social scientist is that values are learned--they do not come "pre-packaged" in the new-born babe.

The simplest description of value is "a reality insofar as it is prized by a person."5 Three components are implied: 1) the nature of the reality prized; 2) the aspect of the reality that makes it to be the "prized"; and 3) the extent to which the prized aspect is internalized and affects the person. The first component is the objective base of the value; the second is the subjective appreciation of that base, and the third is the variable effect in the prizing/valuing subject. From a theological perspective, what a value approach does, then, is to bring together the traditional idea of objective good with the modern stress on the personal subject who values that good and is being formed and changed in the valuing process.

The new stress upon the subject implied by the developing attention to values is characteristic of contemporary trends in theology and religious education. This is spelled out in greater detail in the seven-point description of value used by Sidney Simon and collaborators. The seven points can be conveniently grouped under three headings:

Choosing: 1) freely; 2) from among alternatives; 3) after considering the consequences of each alternative;

Prizing: 4) cherished and pleased with; 5) publicly affirmed; and

Acting on: 6) carrying it into action; 7) repeatedly, with some consistency.6

The direct relevance of this threefold sketch of value to theology can be seen by comparing it to Vatican II's similar three-fold description of the "sense of faith" of the people of God, the Church. After describing how "this appreciation of the faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth," the Council asserts that the believer:

adheres (clings) to this faith;

penetrates it more deeply with right judgment; and

applies it more fully in daily life."7

Thus there is solid ground for relating--without in any way identifying--values education to faith education.

Values Education and Development

The serious pursuit of values education has contributed significantly to the detailed study of personal development. Taken theologically, this corresponds to the complex process of conversion and personal salvation. The social sciences have done much to delineate basic dimensions of the human drive for self-transcendence: the affective dimension explored by Erikson's eight psycho-social stages; the cognitive dimension developed in Piaget's genetic epistemology, and the moral dimension exemplified in Kohlberg's six stages of moral reasoning.8 Fowler has had some success in working out a comparable process of a generalized faith development.9 However, the self-transcendence indicative of Christian Faith goes far beyond that conceived and studied in the social and behavioral sciences. The difference can be pictured in terms of three "dreams": 1) our individual ideal; 2) our community's dreams; and 3) the Christian image of the kingdom of God.10

Nevertheless, certain insights regarding personality typology have proved helpful in creating a more holistic catechesis and education in the faith. Carl Jung's work presents four major functions--two distinct ways of perceiving: sensing and intuiting; and two distinct ways of judging: feeling and thinking. These form the basis of a four-fold view of the person and personal functions: the analyzer and the personalizer in judging, and the pragmatist and the visionary in perceiving. (Figure 1) This is further developed in terms of historical growth by using Brian Hall's sketch of four phases of consciousness. Each phase is described in terms of three factors: 1) how the world is perceived; 2) how the individual perceives himself; and 3) what human needs the self seeks to satisfy. (Figure 2) When related to stages of value development, these phases of consciousness are significant for understanding and communicating God's Word and the Gospel values.



Theology conceived as "faith seeking understanding" has always been concerned with the human person's ultimate values. As stressing "thinking faith," theology seeks that truth which transforms--a type of "loving knowledge" that brings authentic liberating salvation. As such, there is great value in theologizing for the individual believer as well as for the community of believers, the Church. But rather than treat the value of theologizing itself, this essay concentrates on the theology of values, that is, what theology and religious education have to say about values.

For the Christian, God's revelation provides the inexhaustible truths of the origin, ultimate meaning and final destiny of each and every person, and of human society itself. Through the study of Christian revelation, then, Theology focuses on Christ Jesus, God's self-revelation, as: 1) the ultimate ground of all authentic human values, 2) the basis for formulating a correct hierarchy of human values; and 3) the final criterion for judging the truth and authenticity of all values.

This over-all perspective can be developed in greater detail by structuring Christian faith's response to God's self-revelation in Christ in

terms of the traditional triple catechetical division of doctrine (Creed), morals (Commandments) and worship (Sacraments). Within this division, values pertain more directly to moral theology. General morals treat the dignity of the human person, his freedom, conscience, law and authority, and sin. Special morals take up sexual and family morality, and especially the social doctrine of the Church. But this does not in any way belittle the values intrinsic to both the truths of systematic, doctrinal theology, and authentic sacramental theology. Both of these areas are related intrinsically to the primary theological focus on values in moral theology.

Regarding doctrine, the general truths are: creation, redemption in Christ, grace, and final values. But current theology and religious education put special stress first on Christ as the "master symbol for Christians," the primordial (Ur-) sacrament and value who reveals both God and man.11 A second favorite theme is the Church as the community wherein values are internalized, lived, and passed on to others (cf. #435). A third doctrinal topic which relates directly to values education research is the whole process of moving from the experiential to the dogmatic or rule--a kind of phenomenology of how Creeds came to be formed.12 This can offer significant help for understanding the proper methodology for religious education and catechesis.

Sacramental worship, in keeping with values education, stresses the central place of symbol and ritual in human life, both individual and communal. Sacraments are viewed as the faith community's ritualized expression of "peak experiences" which touch life's common mysteries at a depth that goes beneath particular social and cultural milieux. The values educator's distinction between foundational and second order symbols helps in developing a contemporary understanding of the sacraments (cf. #110, 338, 422, 425), and in avoiding the trap of empty ritualism (cf. #103, 167, 327, 430) by integrating worship with the thrust for justice.13

Contemporary Moral Theology and Values

A decade or more ago, "values clarification" was popular, particularly in moral education.14 But its popularity was relatively short-lived, due mainly to its relativism and nonjudgmental stance which rendered it incapable of handling questions about the truth, authenticity, and relative priority of the "clarified values." Nevertheless, the movement did raise the consciousness of moral educators to the essential place of the moral agent's subjectivity in "prizing" objective moral good, i.e., values.

Partly perhaps in reaction, favor in moral education next swung to Kohlberg's cognitive development approach, stressing that the levels of moral reasoning constitute an irreversible linear sequence in terms of justice as the key virtue for moral life and growth.15 This approach has also been shown to suffer from the fundamental inadequacies of neglecting the affective, non-cognitive factors in moral life as well as the presence within and without the person of evil tendencies, summarized in theology under the term "original sin."

A third contemporary approach to moral education centers on moral character and vision precisely as formed by the Christian narrative.16 Serious inadequacies have likewise surfaced in this approach, but there have also been permanent positive gains in focusing on the character of the moral agent within a formative historical process, created in great part by the Gospel story.

What is obvious from this brief selection of recent trends in contemporary moral theology/education is the common felt-need: 1) to break out of the so-called "rationalistic, analytical, legalistic, and authoritarian" characteristics of traditional moral theology; and 2) to incorporate human affections and the "heart" within moral reasoning and living. It is true that much of the negative criticisms constitutes little less than a caricature of the tradition--confirmed by the consistent failures of the newly proposed moral approaches. Nevertheless the positive thrust for a more holistic "value" approach to Christian moral living is certainly sound, and will undoubtedly continue to be an intensely pursued goal.17

Structuring Moral Theology/Education

This current attempt to create a more holistic, personal moral theology is sometimes described as a conscious shifting of emphasis from rules to values, from prescriptions to vision, and from individual choices to fundamental option.18 More attention is now directed to the basic configuration of Christian moral living, that is, the following of Christ. The call-response image has been used very successfully to picture Christian moral living in terms of some essential characteristics: vocation, responsibility, covenant, discipleship, and conversion.19 Rather than starting with the Ten Commandments, this whole approach to moral education centers on the positive evangelical values which include the individual person and all his basic relationships in society.

This call-response image can be developed further into a general moral educational theory that structures moral life into three levels: 1) a vision of the fundamental underlying values that respond to the meta-ethical question of "why?"; 2) the moral norms which answer the normative question "what?"; and 3) the moral choices which conscience makes in applying the norms to individual cases, responding to the strategy question "how?"20 In such a structure, the values constituting the vision become the single most controlling factor in moral education and living.

There still remains the challenge of transmitting these Christian values in a manner that elicits true personal, moral and religious transformation or conversion, as well as the practical need for developing the skills necessary for discerning, choosing and acting in an authentic Christian manner. But the three-fold pattern brings a new clarity to, and offers a holistic structure for, understanding and interpreting everyday moral life.

Values Education in Religious Education

The close relationship between values and values education with current catechesis and religious education is quite apparent from even a cursory study of the National Catechetical Directory for the Philippines. This official handbook for Philippine catechesis clearly manifests the role of values in catechesis/religious education in terms of: 1) its general goal, 2) the basic process involved, developed in terms of its tripartite structure, 3) its general methodology, and finally 4) the key points of its doctrinal, moral, and worship content.

General Goal. The basic aim of catechesis or Christian religious education is to "put people not only in touch but in communion, in intimacy, with Jesus Christ."21 This sharp Christocentricity, the outstanding characteristic of current catechesis, is developed today in relation to the basic human values which Christians share with Christ, their Lord and the perfect human person. Following Christ, or authentically living the Christian way of life, is now viewed as the believers' progressive interiorization of Christ's own values. Religious education, then, becomes the process of drawing believers more deeply and consciously into the value system of Christ, made present and passed on by the Christian community through "handing on the symbols of Faith."22

Actually, this internalization of Christ's values is described in the NCDP in terms of an enculturating process by which Filipino values are evangelized "in depth and right to their roots" (EN 20), purified, permeated and strengthened by Gospel values; Gospel values in turn are concretized and actualized in Filipino values and patterns of action.23

A chief means for carrying on this mutual interaction between Filipino and Gospel values is by "maintaining and transmitting the Catholic sacramental life and basic symbol structure," as well as updating, transforming, and creating new symbols of faith. (#42, 44f). For it is precisely in such communal faith celebrations and rituals that the imagination, the affectivity, and the "heart" of the faithful are most involved.

Basic Process. Value education stresses a number of the key aspects which typify current religious educational approaches: 1) the experiential, 2) grasped as progressive; 3) involving affectivity and imagination, and 4) constituting a socialization process. A brief description of each will suffice to indicate the communality of these emphases.

A major shift toward human experience, particularly in the area of morality, occurred in catechetical methodology, especially after Vatican II (cf. #401, 422). What is at stake here is the fundamental catechetical principle espoused by the NCDP of communicating to people "where they're at," that is, in terms of their "level of age and experience" (#166f), "adapted to the different conditions of infants, children, youth, adults--to the handicapped, the aged, to quasi-catechumens and to professionals [CT 34-35]" (#107). This principle, which is also fundamental to all value education, is carried through the NCDP's treatment of doctrine (#171), morals (#259-63), and worship (334).

The progressive nature of maturing in the Faith is stressed in the traditional themes of conceiving "following Christ" as "the Way," and Christians as a "pilgrim people."24 This emphasis on process in religious education (#101) mirrors the current theological stress on God's progressive Self-Revelation and His plan of salvation (#90, 204, 328).

The special role of affectivity and imagination in catechesis develops the "feeling" dimension, especially in worship (cf. #352), but also in terms of improving catechetical materials and texts (cf. #504). What needs to be affirmed strongly is the compatibility of this "feeling" dimension with the authentic truth and objectivity of Faith. Properly understood, imagination and affectivity are not obstacles, but human means for attaining authentic, objective truth.25

Finally, this affective and imaginative "instructing in the Faith" actually constitutes a "socialization process" which incorporates those being catechized more fully into the complex culture of attitudes, symbols and values of the Christian community (#436-37). Besides the primary enculturating consequences of such a socialization process, there are the specific "transformative" and "purifying" aspects exercised by Gospel values and the Scriptural Word of God in direct contact with any local indigenous culture.

Structure and General Methodology. The basic objective structure of catechesis manifests a tripartite division into: "knowledge of the Word of God, the profession of faith in daily life, and celebration of faith in the sacraments" (#78, 414). The believer's subjective faith response manifests a parallel tripartite division: faith's act of believing (#146), doing the truth (#149), and trustful worship (#152). This delineation of faith's basic structure takes on new meaning when viewed as the ways in which the Christian community expresses and practices the enduring values of the Christian tradition in their own unique, indigenized manner. Moreover, it is through the doctrine, morals and prayer-worship of the community that the individual Christian--and the Christian community as a whole--create and gradually forge their own self-identity, and are able to communicate their values to others.26

To internalize values means to actualize them with understanding and free decisions, with personal feelings and attitudes, as the typology of Figure 1 depicts. But in catechesis this goes beyond merely actualization of the individual human person, doctrine, morals and prayer-worship relate the believer directly to God. They are the practical means of "glorifying God" (#78, 252). St. Irenaeus' popular adage--"the glory of God is the human person fully alive"--makes this point very forcefully, especially when the second half of the adage is added: "while the full life of man consists in the vision of God." The personal experience of faith, embracing the believer's head, hands, and heart, takes on new colors and clarity when viewed as a process of internalizing values.

General Methodology. Values play a significant role in implementing each of the three major methodological principles proposed by the NCDP. The first is the principle of integration, or fidelity to God: integrating the Christian Message with daily life; integrating doctrine, morals and worship with one another; integrating the use of the primary sources of Scripture, Church teaching, and human experience; helping the hearers' subjective faith integration of head, hands, and heart; and finally, integrating the Christian message with the local culture and environment (#75, 87, 97, 425). This is accomplished through a triple fidelity: to God, to man, and to the Church (#68, 107, 414). When interpreted in terms of internalizing Christian values and truths as opposed to any process of manipulative indoctrination, this principle of integration forms an effective corrective to the danger of secularization, encountered whenever religious education is conceived primarily as a "socialization process."27

Here value educators can be of great assistance to the catechist by offering insights into how ordinary persons actually integrate their manifold experiences. Value communication attempts to make another aware of a person's perspective on life, with its consequences for concrete behavior which is then proposed as "valuable" and "good" for the other. The normal process for this religious search for personal meaning and value by a particular race or community flows: 1) from the experience of faith and love, 2) to a responsive, intuitive level of poems, songs, and myth, and then 3) to an active level of knowledge expressed in creeds, moral norms and religious rites.28

Integrating the Christian message with daily life, therefore, does not consist in amassing trite, trivial applications, but rather in drawing the hearers back to an appreciation of the deep values already present in their significant experience. This can be done only by calling on their responsive, imaginative consciousness. This, in turn, means that catechists/religious educators have already reflected in this way on their own personal experience. Briefly, "catechists must see and understand the doctrines they tech in terms of their own lives" (#167).

The NCDP's second major methodological principle is "enculturation," or fidelity to man (#426-33). Here the central focus is precisely on concrete Filipino values, attitudes, and customs. The key to enculturation in religious education is the creative use of symbols. Symbols have been described as capable of translating "vague feelings into meaningful experience, confused impulses into purposeful activity, and puzzlement into understanding."29 In this light, the NCDP's directives regarding "creative use of local customs, symbols, traditions, and popular religiosity" (#462) can be interpreted as underlying the need to fix on values as the key to effective catechesis.

Finally, NCDP's third methodological principle is "interpersonal and community-forming," or fidelity to the Church (#434-42). Drawing on much research which has focused on the essential communitarian dimension of human values, two outstanding religion educators have developed this dimension in different ways. First, James Fowler presents mature Christian Faith in terms of the Christian community's core story (Biblical narrative of God and His Christ), central passion (Jesus' Paschal Mystery), the Christian pattern of affections (fruit of the Spirit), and generation of Christian virtues (Beatitudes)--all contributing to the practical, particular shape of the Christian's life.30 In a different manner, Gabriel Moran analyzed four different communitarian forms of education: family-community, schooling-knowledge, job-work, and leisure-wisdom. These are then interrelated to one another within each of the different temporal stages of educational development.31


This brief critique will treat, first, the relation of religion to values, including the Christian faith's response to basic human needs, its illumination of the human situation, and its general functions. Secondly, the positive content contributions from theology and religious education to values education will be sketched, followed by a concluding section dealing with the goal of values education in relation to the Christian vocation and destiny.

Christian Faith and Values

Both current theology and religious education make a great deal of beginning with the human situation in the concrete: the local Church and the environmental and cultural conditions. For example, the most quoted of the sixteen documents of Vatican II is "The Church in the Modern World." The NCDP's introductory chapter is an extended treatment of Filipino value and belief systems. This practice is grounded on the firm conviction that Christian faith deals with human values, and that authentic human values are grounded on religious faith. In fact one phenomenological description of religion is as "value definer" since it provides believers with dignity, direction and a destiny.32

Basic human needs. For most Christians, in an often unconscious but profound manner, their Christian faith is at the center of discerning and prioritizing their own basic needs. Christian faith thus interprets and criticizes the social science account--for example, Maslow's popular presentation (see Figure 3). As a constitutive part of consciousness, Christian faith responds to the cognitive search for meaning and order, the affective need for celebration and ritual, the social need for community with others, the existential need for facing pain, evil, and death, and the transcendent need for an absolute ground for personal fulfillment.33

The human context. Besides responding to human needs, Christian faith through its prophetic function tests and challenges the social situation (cf. #257, 436). Most significant here is exposing the human condition as a grace-sin tension by making people today conscious of the "sin of the world" which is both about them and within.34 This is an area in which the Christian view of the world and to man has much indeed to offer to the behavioral and social scientists (cf. #259, 266, 373).

General Functions. Within the human context, Christian faith, and the Catholic Church in particular, exercise a number of basic functions: 1) a "shaping and significance" function in presenting Christ as the meaning and ultimate Truth on which rest the human person's purpose and identity; 2) an ethical/prophetic function indicating Christ as the Way of moral direction; 3) a worship/sacramental function that celebrates Life in Christ, offering hope and resources for creating community and overcoming pain and loneliness.35 The Church supplies these functions in large measure through its doctrine, morals, and worship, to which we now turn.

Content Contributions from Theology/Religious Education

Most treatments of values today focus on such very practical concrete realities as honesty, courtesy, patriotism, physical health, self-reliance, and so on. Christ, the Church, the sacraments--all seem very far removed from such practical matters. Perhaps that explains in part the almost scandalous lack of any explicitly religious or Christian dimensions to values education as commonly proposed (by practicing Catholics) in our country today.

This essay takes the opposite position. It affirms: 1) that there are explicitly Christian "prized realities" such as the living Risen Christ; and 2) that more importantly, these specifically Christian "prized realities" (values) ultimately affect and influence the prizing of all other authentic human values.36

One does not first become psychologically, socially, and culturally mature and responsible in order to then become a mature Christian; rather Christian catechesis can exert a most powerful influence in the "natural" development of the Filipino's personal and familial maturity (NCDP #50).

The following rests on the underlying principle that there is an intrinsic relationship between values education and Christian convictions, moral norms, attitudes, virtues, and prayer/worship.

Doctrine and Value Content. Five basic truths sustain the Christian view of human persons, their situation, their good, and their final destiny. Grounded on the fundamental truth that God is creating everything now, all is seen as endowed with an innate goodness, especially the human person created in the divine image and likeness. While experiencing their fallenness in sin, Christians nevertheless believe in God's incarnation in Jesus Christ, by which they are adopted as sons and daughters of the Father, redeemed from sin and graced by the Holy Spirit in the Church, the people of God, and called to eternal life with God. Thus, the basic truths of the Christian Faith--Creation, Sin, Incarnation, Redemption, Grace and Glory--delineate the individual human person's "good," as well as the basic values for all.

Morals: "Doing the truth." Moral theology views God's perfectly gratuitous love for us as the basis for all moral action (cf. #258, 281). The christian commandments, then, are "concrete signs of love," grounded in the great commandments of love (cf. #81, 101, 256, 258). Human freedom is ordered toward love, and experienced not only in individual free acts, but also in terms of the self's fundamental commitment which is gradually formed around the faith, hope and love inspired in us by the gift of God's grace, the indwelling Holy Spirit.37

But it is in the formation of Christian conscience, and through the factors operative in Christian moral decision-making, that Faith has its greatest moral influence. (See Figure 4) As with forming personal convictions, so the central factor in the formation of a Christian conscience ultimately is Christ's role in one's life. This is experienced in prayer and active participation in the Church's sacramental life; it is expressed in the moral guidance given by Christ and the Holy Spirit through the magisterium. (NCDP #275)

Prayer/Worship and Values. The unique power of liturgical worship to communicate, through symbol and ritual, both values and Christian affective attitudes and responses, has already been pointed out. Here we wish to stress the role of worship in the human sense of mystery, and in the inevitable wrestling with suffering and death. Through Christ, the primordial sacrament, and in the Church, the fundamental sacrament of Christ's presence among us, the seven sacraments become real and efficacious means for authentic human development (cf. #356). In the Church's eucharistic worship Christians are brought to the grateful memory [of Christ's sacrifice] in the past, are empowered to take, bless, break, and share in the present, and are called to view all in terms of the world to come.38

Christian Destiny and the Goal of Values

What is unique about the Christian view of the human person's destiny is its presence in daily life: the "eschatological" is operative even now, in everyday life, through God's grace. In brief, what we do day by day makes a difference for our eternal destiny. Thus the Christian's view of "the goal" turns life into a "vocation," and transforms the "self-made" agent into a person open to communion. When human life is viewed as a personal vocation--being called by God--anxiety drops, competition wavers, communion with others thrives, jealousy and envy wither.39 The heresy of the self-made man is seen for what it really is: an illusion.

The central inspirational force that brings the endtime into our daily lives is the Holy Spirit. Thus the final, ultimate basis for all authentic religious education as well as values education is God's Spirit within us, and within each and every person of every time, clime and race (cf. #206, 257, 412, 433, 445, 449).


In any act of communicating, four things are involved: 1) the communicator; 2) his message; 3) his idea of the hearers. Values education has had the happy effect of alerting theologians and religious educators to these dimensions in their task of communicating the Gospel message.

The message itself is valuable--something to be prized by the hearers, because it reveals the Self and Love of God, the Communicator. Moreover, it is God's idea of the hearers, and god's view of His covenantal relationship with them, that must be projected in communicating the "Good News."

Finally, the creedal truths, moral commandments and virtues, and sacramental worship of the Christian message, are simply the breakdown and the means of God's infinite Love, creating and calling us to love through his loving Presence.40 This is the essence of values and values education.

Ateneo de Manila University



1. "Church in the Modern World," no. 24, in The Documents of Vatican II, ed. Walter M. Abbott, S.J. (New York: America Press, 1966), 223; and John Paul II, "Centesimus Annus" (Vatican, 1991), no. 53, 102.

2. John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis (Pasay: Daughters of St. Paul, 1979), no. 13, 52.

3. "Church in the Modern World," no. 22, 220.

4. Janet Kalven, "Personal Value Clarification," in Readings in Value Development, ed. Brian Hall, et al. (New York: Paulist, 1982), p. 7.

5. Peter Chirico, S.S., "The Relationship of Values to Ecclesiology," Chicago Studies, 19/3 (1980), 321.

6. Kalven, p. 15.

7. "Dogmatic Constitution on the Church," no. 12. See Evelyn and James Whitehead, Seasons of Strength (New York: Doubleday, 1984), p. 70.

8. Walter Conn, "Moral Development as Self-Transcendence," Horizons, 4 (1977), 189-205. See also Andrew Thompson, "Towards a Social-Psychology of Religious Valuing," Chicago Studies, 19 (1980), 271-89.

9. James Fowler, Stages of Faith: the Psychology of Human Development and Quest for Meaning (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981). For a sharp critique by a professional sociologist of this use of development psychology to describe faith development, see Robert Wuthnow, "A Sociological Perspective on Faith Development," in Faith Development in the Adult Life Cycle, ed. Kenneth Stokes (New York: Sadlier, 1982), pp. 209-23.

10. Whitehead, pp. 23-27. These dreams exemplify the triadic pattern of all communication: the self, others, and some shared center of values and power. See Fowler, Becoming Adult, Becoming Christian (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984), p. 110. What is different in Faith is that the "shared center of values and power" is God!

11. See Berard L. Marthaler, OFM Conv., "Handing on the Symbols of Faith," Chicago Studies, 19/1 (1980), 27. For our Philippine context, see Maturing in Christian Faith, the National Catechetical Directory for the Philippines (Pasay: St. Paul Publications, 1985), nos. 420, 438-39, 505. All numbers cited in the text refer to this work, known as the NCDP.

12. See John J. Shea, "Experience and Symbol: An Approach to Theologizing," Chicago Studies, 19 (1980), 7-18; also Chirico,"Values and Ecclesiology," 296-300.

13. Don E. Saliers, Worship and Spirituality (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984), pp. 22-24; also John J. Egan, "Liturgy and Justice: An Unfinished Agenda" (Liturgical Press Pamphlet, 1983), 24pp.

14. See Sidney Simon, Leland W. Howe, and Howard Kirschenbaum, Values Clarification (New York: Hart Publ. Co., 1972); and Kevin Ryan and Frederick E. Ellrod, "Moral Education in the United States: An Overview," Communio, 10 (1983), 80-91.

15. See Lawrence Kohlberg, "Stages of Moral Development as a Basis for Moral Education," in Moral Development, Moral Education and Kohlberg, ed. Brenda Munsey (Birmingham: Religious Education Press, 1980).

16. See Stanley Hauerwas, Character and Christian Life: A Study in Theological Ethics (San Antonio: Trinity Univ. Press, 1975); Vision and Virtue (Notre Dame: Fides Publ., 1974) Truthfulness and Tragedy: Further Investigations in Character Ethics (Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1977).

17. See Charles Shelton, S.J., Morality of the Heart: A Psychology for the Christian Moral Life (New York: Crossroad, 1990); and Joseph Grassi, Healing the Heart: The Transformational Power of the Biblical Heart Imagery (New York: Paulist, 1987).

18. See the NCDP, no. 271. See also Lucie W. Barber, Teaching Christian Values (Birmingham: Religious Education Press, 1984).

19. See Sr. Aida Bautista, SPC, Values Education in Religious Education (Manila: Rex Book Store, 1989).

20. J. O'Donohue, "The Challenge of Teaching Morality Today," Living Light, 21 (1985), 253-59.

21. John Paul II, Catechesi Tradendae, no. 5, quoted in NCDP, no. 77.

22. See Marthaler, pp. 21, 25-26.

23. NCDP, no. 428.

24. The NCDP refers to the human development process in general in no. 443, in its socio-cultural aspects in no. 45, and its stages in nos. 107, 166, and 422.

25. See Kathleen R. Fischer, The Inner Rainbow: The Imagination in Christian Life (New York: Paulist, 1983); Philip S. Keanne, S.S., Christian Ethics and Imagination (New York: Paulist, 1984); Mathias Neuman, OSB, "Towards an Integrated Theory of Imagination," International Philosophical Quarterly 18 (1978), 254-57; and my previous study, "Imagination and Integration in the NCDP," Docete, 9 (no. 45; April/June 1986), 2-7.

26. Chirico, p. 296.

27. Marthaler, p. 30.

28. Michael D. Place, "Philosophical Foundations for Value Transmission," Chicago Studies, 19 (1980), 318, 324, 330-32.

29. Marthaler, p. 26.

30. Fowler, Becoming Adult, Becoming Christian, 114-27; also Place's 4th stage of interaction, "Philosophical foundations," 324.

31. See Gabriel Moran, Religious Education Development (San Francisco, Winston Press, 1983), pp. 165-82.

32. Clyde F. Crews, Ultimate Questions: A Theological Primer (New York: Paulist, 1986), pp. 80-81.

33. Daniel Bell, The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (New York: Basic Books, 1978), 169; also Saliers, p. 32.

34. Crews, Ultimate Questions, 143-45. Craig Dykstra offered a brief but sharp critique of this lack of sin-awareness in recent authors in "Sin, Repentance and Moral Transformation: Critical Reflections on Kohlberg," Living Light, 16 (1979), 4551-60.

35. Crews, pp. 140-43. See also Craig Dykstra's book, Vision and Character: A Christian Educator's Alternative to Kohlberg (New York: Paulist, 1981), and his article "Transformation in Faith and Morals," Theology Today, 39 (1982), 56-64.

36. Chirico, "Values and Ecclesiology," 294; see also Jean Bouvy's report on "Education in Values for the Societies of the Year 2000," Lumen Vitae, 37 (1982), 249-75, which stresses four values: 1) respect for others, 2) responsible solidarity, 3) creativity, and 4) interiority, all inspired by Gospel love.

37. See Bernard Haring, CSSR, Timely and Untimely Virtues (Middlegreen: St. Paul Publ., 1986), pp. 27-43.

38. Haring, 44-52; also Saliers, pp. 15-26.

39. See Fowler, Becoming Adult, Becoming Christian, pp. 103-105.

40. For example, see John Navone, S.J., Gospel of Love Wilmington: Glazier, 1984); and John Crossin, OSFS, What Are They Saying About Virtue? (New York: Paulist, 1985).