[This is part of a series about a catechism (PREP) class that I'm co-teaching.]
Last Sunday, one of the boys showed up wearing a shirt with a big skull and crossbones on the front.
Me: "That's a Catholic symbol!"
Kid: "What? ... no, it isn't!"
I figured this was what they call in the trade a "teachable moment", so at the beginning of class I called him up to show everyone his shirt. I drew a crucifix on the board with a traditional skull and crossbones at the base, and asked the kids, "Whose skull is it?" Legend has it that it's Adam's skull (because Christ was called "the new Adam").
Me: "What did Adam do?"
Kid: "He died!"
I was about to say, "Hey, you're right!" when I realized that this particular kid always gives this answer, no matter the question. It's remarkable how many times he's been right.
Then I did some review about Α and Ω, after discovering that the kids didn't remember what I thought I had taught them about it last week; a good reminder to me about the possible gulf between teaching and learning.
Moving along, the big focus was "the Liturgical Year", for which my co-teacher organized the kids into a parade, holding banners of their own making, representing the different segments of the year. I thought this went quite well.
Next week, my co-teacher will be out of town, so I'm dragging Sainted Husband in to co-teach. We'll introduce the Ten Commandments, with a focus on iconoclasm, which is a particular interest of mine. I figure if I'm interested in a subject, I might be able to get the kids interested, whereas if I'm not interested, there's no way I can get the kids interested.