This paper examines Thomas Groome's Christian praxis approach and its application to contemporary religious education, with particular attention to the Australian Catholic school context. It argues that the separation of religious education from catechism — driven by modern rationalism and political forces — has diluted the essence of Christianity in schools. Drawing on Groome, O'Murchu, and Ryan, the paper outlines the five core movements of Christian praxis, its emphasis on experiential learning and social justice, and its capacity to foster both personal character development and collective social progress. The paper also addresses the challenge of diversity and offers strategies for making the approach more inclusive.
According to Thomas Groome (n.d.), religious education has become completely divorced from catechism. Groome (n.d.) partly blames the intense rationalism of modern Western philosophers like Descartes, but also points to political and cultural motives for the separation of religious knowledge from catechetical knowing. The Christian praxis approach that Groome (n.d.) presents is one that can ideally fuse religious education and catechism.
Religious education can be loosely defined as the bare facts of the faith — the Bible as literature and Christ as a historical figure. How religion transforms the character of an individual is largely glossed over, if it is discussed at all. Critical reflection is reserved mainly for the analysis of data rather than for self-reflection. Groome's (n.d.) Christian praxis approach bravely reintroduces catechism into religious education. The praxis approach is, according to Ryan (2007), "a significant refinement of contemporary catechetical ideas and practice" (p. 111).
In the contemporary Australian school system, the Christian praxis approach reveals very real benefits. However, it can also become one of the most controversial elements in a student's religious education. Drawbacks — or at least potential drawbacks — to Groome's (n.d.) Christian praxis approach begin with the fundamental fact of diversity. As Groome (n.d.) himself admits, the praxis approach must be tempered with political and cultural realities. Christian praxis is uniquely Catholic, as Groome (n.d.) notes, which could serve to isolate some Christian students from the core dialogue and discourse. Moreover, students engaging in religious education may not necessarily be Christian at all. Political sensitivity and awareness of religious diversity must be taken into account when incorporating Christian praxis into general religious education classrooms.
It would be theoretically and practically impossible to present Christian praxis without its religious context. Ryan (2007), O'Murchu (n.d.), and Groome (n.d.) himself concur that the story of Christ and the Christian experience are the central fountains from which students draw the necessary tools and frameworks for understanding real-world issues. The Christian praxis approach entails increasing student knowledge of the Christian tradition while also engaging in a highly participatory environment (Ryan, 2007). Real-life situations are viewed through the lens of both personal experience and Christianity, making genuine critical analysis possible. It would be impossible for educators to teach character development without a core framework or set of criteria.
For this reason, incorporating praxis into religious education can make that education more meaningful — it may, in fact, be the only way of doing so. As O'Murchu (n.d.) points out, the traditional emphasis in religious education on the Church "has been so central and patriarchically controlled that we have lost virtually all semblance of what the new reign of God (the Kingdom) is about" (p. 46). Divorcing religious education from catechism has, O'Murchu (n.d.) argues, diluted the essence of Christianity. It would seem worthless to provide a religious education without catechesis alongside.
The benefits of the Christian praxis approach are far-reaching. They include both the personal development of the individual student and the collective development of society. Students introduced to the Christian praxis approach learn how to address real-life problems through a Christian lens — but one that denounces dogma in favor of genuine critical thought. While the story of Christ and the Christian experience are central to the praxis approach, so too are the student's own story and experience of suffering or joy.
"Personal and collective development through praxis"
"Ryan's five-movement methodology for classroom use"
When students can apply what they learn in any classroom to real-world settings, they thrive. Experiential learning is valid not only in the realm of religious education but in all other areas of pedagogy. Therefore, the drawbacks of Christian praxis are relatively few in comparison with its benefits. To reframe Christian praxis as a universal method of social betterment would help dismiss biases that the method relies too heavily on Catholicism. Similarly, educators can illustrate the explicit psychosocial benefits of introducing students to the praxis approach. As Groome (n.d.) puts it, the praxis approach "informs" minds, "forms" values, and "transforms" lives (p. 45).
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.