The “Catholic Woodstock” strikes again…
Vatican Launches Explicit Sex Education Program for Teenagers at World Youth Day
The Vatican offers the uncensored version, of course…
The entire reason for the existence of the Novus Ordo Sect is the destruction of souls. Although most of the time this is committed through spiritual poison such as heresy, doctrinal error, and impiety administered by the supposed “Catholic authorities”, it is also accomplished by a deliberate assault on children’s innocence, modesty, and purity.
Just in time for World Youth Day currently underway in Cracow, Poland, the Vatican’s so-called Pontifical Council for the Family has launched a sexual education program for the youth called “The Meeting Point”, available in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese, and Italian. It is being presented this week at the World Youth Day gathering (see Intervention of “Mgr.” Simon, Undersecretary of the Council), where hundreds of thousands of people, mostly youngsters, have their guard down and are happily flirting with the errors of the Vatican II Sect — and with members of the opposite sex, of course.
The Vatican’s new sex-ed program bears the academic-sounding subtitle “Project for Affective and Sexual Formation”. The American pro-life organization Life Site immediately sounded the alarm and published an article with detailed information on the program, as well as a slide show of some explicit images contained in the Vatican “learning material”:
- At World Youth Day, Vatican releases Teen Sex-Ed Program that leaves out Parents and Mortal Sin
- Image Slide Show: What’s in the Vatican Sex Ed Program? (CAUTION! Explicit images)
The official web site of this dirty sex ed garbage — yes, it has its own web site! — is available at this location:
The program is free (of course!) and available in its entirety online, where both instructors and victims students can download the material, which is divided into six units. Each unit comes with a slew of lessons and corresponding teaching and learning aids, including a set of movies/movie scenes about sexuality, to discuss and “reflect on” for each unit.
As the Life Site article reveals, some of these movies/clips are nothing short of explicitly immoral (you can verify this yourself by clicking on the bolded text in the following excerpt, which leads directly to the source files where the Vatican-approved filth is found). Have a look:
Unit 4 recommends the 2013 R-rated film “To the Wonder” to discuss the “call to the donation of oneself.” Focus on the Family describes the sexual content in this way [WARNING–EXPLICIT]: “So while love is the primary focus of To the Wonder, sex becomes an integral part of its expression. Both Neil and Jane, and Neil and Marina, engage in explicitly rendered intercourse. Nudity stops just short of full; motions and sounds are passionate, erotic, titillating and extended—the blending of bodies to suggest complete intimacy. There’s the visual suggestion that Neil and Marina have sex in the coach compartment on a train. An (almost) oral sex scene is used to express distance and dissatisfaction.”
Unit 6 recommends the 2010 R-rated film “Love & other Drugs” to “reflect on the part of the formula with which a man and a woman express their mutual consent to contract marriage.” Focus on the Family describes the sexual content in this way [WARNING–EXPLICIT]: “For a good chunk of the film, Jamie and Maggie seem to be in a constant state of lovemaking. They smash into cabinets, writhe on the floor, pant and moan, engage in oral sex and loudly express their orgasmic responses. Audiences see both of them completely naked. (Only their pubic regions escape the frame.) It’s pretty explicit stuff…Later, after Maggie and Jamie tape one of their sexual escapades, Josh finds it and watches it. It’s implied that he masturbates while doing so. And he spends the rest of the film making crude comments about his brother’s anatomy.”
Unit 2 recommends the 2013 film “Stockholm” to raise the question, “Is it really worth it to give myself to the first person that approaches me?” Hollywood Reporter describes the film as a “cat-and-mouse” game where the man “expertly dresses up his desire for sex with her as real feeling” while “quizzes him about his real motives for his interest in her.” After the “commitment of sex has happened,” which appears to be graphically depicted based on previews, the couple starts to find out “who they really are and that they’re seeking entirely different things.”
(Pete Baklinski, “At World Youth Day, Vatican releases teen sex-ed program that leaves out parents and mortal sin”, Life Site, July 27, 2016)
The secular and independent movie review site Common Sense Media has reviewed the first two of the three films mentioned above. Click on the following links to see the whole evaluation:
- To the Wonder (4 out of 5 points for sex)
- Love & Other Drugs (5 out of 5 points for sex)
If only “Fr.” John Zuhlsdorf had had a hand in this, then The Lives of Others would have probably made the list as well.
But be that as it may, the Pontifical Council for [What’s Left of] the Family has put together a promo video for its sordid program, which shows some general immodesty but is not as explicitly sexual as the learning material:
Ironically, the promotional materials for this sex ed program speak of “chastity” and “dignity” while showing young women dressed like hookers and mingling familiarly and intimately with young men. It would be quite humorous if it weren’t so serious. Our Blessed Lord warned sternly: “But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Mt 5:28). Consenting to or entertaining a mere unlawful thought or desire of such kind suffices to commit a mortal sin of impurity. In light of this, how can the Vatican put out such trash that is bound to lead countless souls into mortal sin?
A standard Novus Ordo objection that is typically made at this point goes like this: “Are you saying sexuality is wrong? God made us male and female. He created us with our bodies and our sexual differences. He made us with all our desires. Our bodies aren’t dirty! We shouldn’t be afraid of the other sex!” Where this objection fails, however, is in what it leaves unsaid: Entirely missing from this objection is the truth about original sin and concupiscence, which is the effect of original sin. It is a most dangerous error to act as though we were all in the state of original innocence, in which our passions would obey our reason perfectly and clothes would not be needed to cover our nakedness (cf. Gen 2:25).
Since the fall of Adam and Eve, alas, men have labored under concupiscence, especially with regard to sins of the flesh (cf. Gal 5:17), which are sins of weakness to which we are particularly prone, wherefore we must guard ourselves against them all the more diligently. In the Modernist’s conspicuous omission of this fundamental and all-important truth, we find once again the Naturalist denial of original sin and its effects. The Novus Ordo Church is a cesspool of Modernism and Naturalism, and hence it is not surprising that this objection, based as it is on a denial of original sin, would frequently be heard from this camp.
Pope Pius XI outlined Catholic doctrine on this matter in his 1929 encyclical on Christian education:
Another very grave danger is that naturalism which nowadays invades the field of education in that most delicate matter of purity of morals. Far too common is the error of those who with dangerous assurance and under an ugly term propagate a so-called sex-education, falsely imagining they can forearm youths against the dangers of sensuality by means purely natural, such as a foolhardy initiation and precautionary instruction for all indiscriminately, even in public; and, worse still, by exposing them at an early age to the occasions, in order to accustom them, so it is argued, and as it were to harden them against such dangers.
Such persons grievously err in refusing to recognize the inborn weakness of human nature, and the law of which the Apostle speaks, fighting against the law of the mind [Rom 7:23]; and also in ignoring the experience of facts, from which it is clear that, particularly in young people, evil practices are the effect not so much of ignorance of intellect as of weakness of a will exposed to dangerous occasions, and unsupported by the means of grace.
In this extremely delicate matter, if, all things considered, some private instruction is found necessary and opportune, from those who hold from God the commission to teach and who have the grace of state, every precaution must be taken. Such precautions are well known in traditional Christian education….
(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, nn. 65-67; underlining added.)
Even grown and older people, too, must continually be on their guard against the vice of impurity, through custody of the eyes, modesty in clothing, decent company and wholesome conversation, control over one’s mind, frequent reception of the sacraments, and a strong prayer life. The temptations of the flesh will not cease for as long as we live. Even St. Paul the Apostle was not exempt from constant vigilance: “And lest the greatness of the revelations should exalt me, there was given me a sting of my flesh, an angel of Satan, to buffet me” (2 Cor 12:7); “But I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway” (1 Cor 9:27).
The Novus Ordo Meeting Point sex ed program is simply the latest extension of “Pope” John Paul II’s disgusting “theology of the body” — a euphemism for what is in reality “sexual phenomenology” — , which has corrupted the hearts and polluted the souls of countless youngsters under the guise of “papal” teaching. In the United States, Christopher West has made a veritable career out of teaching it, whereas Randy Engel has blasted the Wojtylian pornology in an 81-page study entitled, “John Paul II and the ‘Theology of the Body’ — A Study in Modernism”.
Gone are the days of true Catholic shepherds, who cared for their flock’s spiritual well-being above all else. Gone are the days of the Young Man’s Guide for boys and the Catholic Girl’s Guide for young ladies. Gone are the days when the parents alone — or, in their absence or failure, a suitable spiritual guide — decided when and how to intstruct their children in the facts of life, with modesty and tact. This has always been the Catholic teaching:
Finally, with the discretion of a mother and a teacher, and thanks to the openhearted confidence with which you have been able to inspire your children, you will not fail to watch for and to discern the moment in which certain unspoken questions have occurred to their minds and are troubling their senses. It will then be your duty to your daughters, the father’s duty to your sons, carefully and delicately to unveil the truth as far as it appears necessary; to give a prudent, true and Christian answer to those questions, and set their minds at rest. If imparted by the lips of Christian parents at the proper time, in the proper measure, and with the proper precautions, the revelation of the mysterious and marvelous laws of life will be received by them with reverence and gratitude, and will enlighten their minds with far less danger than if they learned them haphazard, from some unpleasant shock, from secret conversations, through information received from over-sophisticated companions, or from clandestine reading, the more dangerous and pernicious as secrecy inflames the imagination and troubles the senses. Your words if they are wise and discreet, will prove a safeguard and a warning in the midst of the temptations and the corruption which surround them….
(Pope Pius XII, Address to Women of Catholic Action, Oct. 26, 1941)
Banish from your heart that cult of pleasure, and do your best to prevent the spreading of a literature which considers as its duty the description in full of the intimacies of married life under the pretext of instructing, guiding and reassuring. In general, common sense, natural instinct and a brief instruction on the clear and simple maxims of Christian moral law, are sufficient to give peace to the tender conscience of married people. If, in certain circumstances, a fiancée or a young married woman were in need of further enlightenment on some particular point, it is your duty to give them tactfully an explanation in conformity with natural law and with a healthy Christian conscience.
This teaching of Ours has nothing to do with Manichaeism and Jansenism, as some would have people believe in order to justify themselves. It is only a defense of the honor of Christian matrimony and of the personal dignity of the married couple.
(Pope Pius XII, Address to Midwives on the Nature of their Profession, Oct. 29, 1951)
In 1950, Fr. Leslie Rumble published a little guide for parents on how to instruct their children in sexual matters without offending their tender ears or endangering their innocence while keeping it age-appropriate:
- What Parents should tell their Little Ones on Sex by Fr. Leslie Rumble, MSC
Our Blessed Lord issued a stern warning when it came to the question of corrupting children: “And whosoever shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me; it were better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck, and he were cast into the sea” (Mark 9:41).
Hence we understand the true Catholic Church’s unyielding stance on these matters. In its decree De “Educatione Sexuali” et de “Eugenica”, dated March 21, 1931, the Holy Office reiterated the Church’s condemnation of sex education, referred back to Pius XI’s encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, linked above, and explicitly warned against “dangerous reading [!], obscene shows, filthy conversation, and any occasions of sin” (Acta Apostolicae Sedis XXIII [1931], p. 119). Not so the Vatican II Sect, which promotes filthy movies, scandalous pictures, and obsence talk under the pretext of “educating” the youth.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their fruits you shall know them” (Mt 7:15-16).
In light of the Vatican II Sect’s sex ed garbage that has recently received new impetus from “Pope” Francis in the disastrous exhortation Amoris Laetitia (nn. 280-286), we have created a bumper sticker that attendees of Cracow’s World Youth Day may be interested in getting:
With or without the Meeting Point pornography, however, any World Youth Day experience always proves to be an occasion of sin for healthy youngsters. The links below show why the event the secular media has dubbed the “Catholic Woodstock” is indeed worthy of its moniker:
WARNING: Many of the below links contain different degrees of immodesty and therefore incitements to sin. Browse carefully. If in doubt, do not click.
- A Preview of World Youth Day 2013: The Shalom Dance Band
- The “Catholic Woodstocks” Continue: Madrid 2011 CAUTION! GRAVE IMMODESTY
- World Youth Day 2011: An Enormous Orgy CAUTION! GRAVE IMMODESTY
- Novus Ordo Nun engages in Lewd Dance with Novus Ordo Priest: Cologne 2005
- “Waiting for the Pope”: Toronto 2002
- What’s Wrong with World Youth Day? A Book Review by Marian Horvat
- World Youth Day 2005: No Sign that the Tide Has Turned
- World Youth Day 2005: “Free Love” under the Auspices of the Vatican II Church
- World Youth Day 2005: Girls “Love the Pope” on their Lower Backs CAUTION! GRAVE IMMODESTY
- World Youth Day 2005: Cultural Revolution under the Novus Ordo Umbrella
- The Subjective Morals of Mr. Karl Keating Marian Horvat Responds to “Catholic” Answers on WYD
Nothing new. Back in the early 90’s I had to pull my daughter out of catholic (?) school because of this. I had to fight to get her out of the class. They made her sit in the hall outside while the class went on. Then they tried to force her to receive communion in the hand. I fought that too. There is no difference between Lutheran and Catholic schools. Now we have a Lutheran pope! Sorry, didn’t mean to insult Lutherans! They probably are disgusted with Bergoglio also.