Beware of Catechesis of the Good Shepherd.

[Br_Allen]

21 hours ago, Anastasia said:

Thank you, I am familiar with this method but it is highly inconvenient (and also, web design-wise, the necessity of such an action means "the website is not well done" or "the authors do not care about the reader's experience" since the reader must conduct an additional action). The question arises, why not to create a text of high readability initially instead of expecting a reader to do the work? 

My critique of your design comes not just from my preferences and difficulties with reading but also from a formal education in graphic design and professional experience. There are rules which a designer must follow if he wants his audience to read the text. One of the rules says that one should not overuse the light text against the dark background. (In a case of your website, much of the light text is also done as Italic and it makes its readability even worse.) It can be used occasionally, typically for small portions of the text. Those who ignore this rule lose the audience.

(That was a constructive critique)

I will not comment the above, it is your choice obviously. But even more so there is need to make a good, light design. The darkness of your website that clearly conveys a sense of "a mystery", closed doors, secret information etc being combined with the anonymous authorship automatically put the website into a category of... well, anonymous accusatory "remnant-type" things. 

Thank you for your insights. I will convey this information to our web designer.

[qfnol31]

The Subcommittee on the Catechism's conformity review process requires student textbooks contain most of the doctrinal information. It is inappropriate to make a judgment about a program simply because it does not appear on the Conformity Review List.