Andrew Gniadek's Response to William Horan's Question

Please Note:  

After Andrew Gniadek’s last letter, reader William Horan left the following comment.  Below the comment is Andrew’s response.  I thought it worthy of its own blog post in the “Letters from Andrew” series.

Thanks

Larry

Dear Andrew:

This letter reminds me of the Catholic school system here in the USA. It is trying to provide general education along with Christian formation. However, it seems that it is serving primarily the upper classes while the poor are left in the public schools. Is this system “Awash in information and bereft of wisdom”? Should the Catholic schools give up trying to provide general education and use the resources for Christian formation?

Dear William,

You make a great point. If Catholic schools are perceived as excelling in “general education”—which can be equated with “information”—but lack in “Christian formation” or their spiritual mission—representing “wisdom”—they might be seen as "awash in information, bereft of wisdom” within an educational setting. Additionally, if efforts to provide general education and appeal to the “upper classes," as you suggest, lose sight of this purpose—their primary mission to foster spiritual growth and bring students closer to Christ and His Church—then their efforts, regardless of academic quality, could become superficial and empty without Christ.

Two points come to mind: first, if these schools are seen mainly as a means to achieve social status, financial gain, or academic success, or as an appeal to the “upper classes,” rather than environments for spiritual transformation, they contribute to spiritual gluttony. This is because the good feelings associated with a prestigious education are mistaken for genuine spiritual growth. Second, if parents delegate all Christian formation to the school without cultivating faith, hope, and charity at home and within the community, this creates what I call "offloading," where the school becomes a proxy, leading to superficial engagement instead of deep, faith-rooted involvement.

I'm not saying this is the case with you or your view, but I need to state it clearly. Even a focus on helping the poor, which might seem virtuous on the surface, can become a form of spiritual gluttony or a substitute for authentic internal spiritual growth—mainly if the motivations are driven by feelings of social praise, trendy activities, or perceived righteousness. To be blunt, as Larry often quotes, nemo dat quod non habet, and what we must give is Christ. Serving the poor must come from a place of self-gift, that is, sharing the love of Christ, aimed at the salvation of the other. Simply setting up a school run by someone else, which uses the institution as a proxy for service, doesn’t constitute genuine service. True charity involves giving ourselves, our time, and some good—whether material, in aiding the materially poor, or spiritual, through counseling the ignorant—without hiding behind an institution as a stand-in for personal sharing of that gift. Institutional giving must be secondary, not primary; otherwise, we risk making the poor an abstraction, as we never see or interact in human experience person-to-person.

I’m not arguing against donations to worthy causes; instead, I want to emphasize that this gift must come from a right internal relationship with God, rooted in your vocation. For example, if you have a spouse and children and think, ‘I should be on a mission trip somewhere far away because God wants me to serve the poor,' you are likely not discerning God’s will correctly. You might be abstracting the Gospel based on personal preferences. I knew a priest who relentlessly pushed for social justice donations that were sent regularly to far-off lands and scolded anyone who didn’t contribute or questioned it. Yet, he refused to bring the Eucharist to the homebound, sending the deacon instead, because of the outside conditions of these homes and fear of what might be inside. Bishop Sheen’s story of the leper and the rosary highlights that we must identify with the struggles of the poor and love them as we are called—to bring that love practically and personally, not just talk about sending money abroad while neglecting Lazarus right at our doorstep.

Mother Teresa once appeared on Firing Line with William F. Buckley, and the conversation went as follows:

William F. Buckley: Yeah, now, but you made no appeal directly on that program. Well, would you be offended if I were to mention that your order would accept gifts?

Mother Teresa: No, that's not offending, sharing. I want the people to share, and by giving, say for example, when you share, then you give something until it hurts.

WFB: Where should people so inclined send their gifts?

Mother Teresa: If the people of Washington want to give, they give it to the sisters because I want the people to see the poor. It's not so much the giving; I want them to touch the poor, to feel the joy of loving… I love the people to share the joy of loving, to come and touch the people. I don't want the people to give me from their abundance; I want them to share.” (see https://youtu.be/3__jvGa5L6Y?si=5wIv68-LMT8v48c-&t=704)

True education invites people to “share the joy of loving,” as Mother Teresa said above. Without this spiritual depth, even the most intellectually rigorous schools may fail to produce individuals who live out their faith in practical ways. You will create a generation that has an excessive desire for worldly goods and success since they are knowledgeable about facts of the world but hold a tenuous connection to the divine.

Therefore, it is essential that Catholic schools, while excelling in their academic mission, never lose sight of their primary purpose: to nurture spiritual growth in their students. By prioritizing and integrating deep spiritual formation with academic excellence, they can cultivate individuals who are not only knowledgeable but also genuinely committed to living out the Gospel in their daily lives. We do not want knowledgeable people who are worldly successful without Christ; we want virtuous people, first and foremost, who make a livable wage and share the joy of loving with their neighbor.

While considering what I mentioned above, we should also remember that schools cannot operate without enough income to cover all expenses, including teachers' salaries. It would be unfair to expect school staff to work for unjust wages just to lower tuition, regardless of financial details. My point is that we must recognize the practical reality of a school's financial needs to keep it running. Funding the high costs of a school is not easy.

Best,

Andrew

‍