Violating the rights of parents since 2005

Here's something else chapping my ass in the Diocese of Scranton. All you parents out there in fantasy land sending your kids to CCD class and the elementary schools...do you really know what's going on? I bet not.

The Diocese has implemented VIRTUS since the spring of 2005. Our ordinary has decided to take the job of teaching our children about the dangers of sexual abuse out of the parent's hands.

Sometimes an event is so tragic that people react in a way that only makes it worse. Such is the case in the U.S. Catholic Church since the explosion of sex abuse cases came to light in 2002. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, financially bleeding from the bad publicity, concocted a Charter for the Protection of Children, which, upon closer examination, appears to be a lot of empty window-dressing to appease the masses, including an alleged mandate for "safe environment" programs in every diocese.

So what are our dioceses doing to create this "safe environment" for children? Implementing programs like VIRTUS for all parish volunteers who come in contact with youth (read: "CCD teachers") and TALKING ABOUT TOUCHING programs for the children, as well as fingerprinting all volunteers and even doing criminal background checks.

This begs these two questions, since the overwhelming majority of abuse cases were committed by clergy (most of them homosexual clergy):

• WHY ARE LAY VOLUNTEERS AND CHILDREN BEING FORCED TO GO THROUGH "TRAINING"?

• WHAT IS BEING DONE TO PROTECT MINORS FROM THE ONE GROUP IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH THAT HAS PROVEN MOST LIKELY TO ABUSE THEM--ERRANT CLERGY?

VIRTUS
It should come as no surprise that most dioceses, including the Diocese of Scranton, are employing the controversial VIRTUS program, a hoop all volunteers must jump through before they can work with minors. The VIRTUS program is noted for hitting its subscribers over the head with statistics that emphasize that homosexuals are not responsible for the majority of clerical sex abuse problems. A rather absurd assertion, when you take into account this statement from the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights:

Almost all the priests who abuse children are homosexuals. Dr. Thomas Plante, a psychologist at Santa Clara University, found that “80 to 90% of all priests who in fact abuse minors have sexually engaged with adolescent boys, not prepubescent children. Thus, the teenager is more at risk than the young altar boy or girls of any age."

The fact is, programs like VIRTUS attempt to shift the blame away from homosexual priests--thus shifting the focus of the problem away from the truth of the problem. Again, no surprise, since it is rooted in pro-homosexual propaganda.

Some of VIRTUS' programs begin as early as kindergarten-age, exposing children to sexual information that most of their parents probably would not find age-appropriate.

Further, VIRTUS, even though mandated by the USCCB charter, is in direct contradiction to the Pontifical Council for the Family's The Truth and Meaning of Sexuality, which provides guidelines for education within the family:

It can be said that a child is in the stage described in John Paul II's words as "the years of innocence"[106] from about five years of age until puberty - the beginning of which can be set at the first signs of changes in the boy or girl's body (the visible effect of an increased production of sexual hormones). This period of tranquillity and serenity must never be disturbed by unnecessary information about sex.

A close reading of the document also makes it clear that VIRTUS usurps the authority of Catholic parents:

The Pope insists upon the fact that this holds especially with regard to sexuality: "Sex education, which is a basic right and duty of parents, must always be carried out under their attentive guidance, whether at home or in educational centres chosen and controlled by them. In this regard, the Church reaffirms the law of subsidiarity, which the school is bound to observe when it cooperates in sex education, by entering into the same spirit that animates the parents".

Fortunately, not all of our bishops are playing the game. Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, wrote in 2005 that he could not comply with the USCCB Charter until more questions were answered:

"Are such programs effective? Do such programs impose an unduly burdensome responsibility on very young children to protect themselves rather than insisting that parents take such training and take on the primary responsibility for protecting their children? Where do these programs come from? Is it true that Planned Parenthood has a hand or at least huge influence on many of them? Is it true that other groups, actively promoting early sexual activity for children, promote these programs in association with their own perverse agendas? Do such programs involve, even tangentially, the sexualization of children, which is precisely a part of the societal evil we are striving to combat? Does such a program invade the Church-guaranteed-right of parents over the education of their children in sexual matters? Do I have the right to mandate such programs and demand that parents sign a document proving that they choose to exercise their right not to have their child involved? Do such programs introduce children to sex-related issues at age-inappropriate times? Would such programs generate a fruitful spiritual harvest? Would unsatisfactory answers to any of the questions above give sufficient reason to resist such programs?

"There are many concerned parents who have indicated to me that the answers to all of these questions are unsatisfactory."

Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska (now there's a bishop!) also made the decision not to introduce this rot into his diocese and was criticized by Patricia O'Donnell Ewers, Chair of the National Review Board for the Protection of Children. Here is Bishop Bruskewitz' public response:

Some woman named Patricia O'Donnell Ewers, who is the Chair of something called "A National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People", has said that her Board "calls for strong fraternal correction of the Diocese of Lincoln." The Diocese of Lincoln has nothing to be corrected for, since the Diocese of Lincoln is and has always been in full compliance with all laws of the Catholic Church and with all civil laws. Furthermore, Ewers and her Board have no authority in the Catholic Church and the Diocese of Lincoln does not recognize them as having any significance.

It is well known that some of the members of Ewers' Board are ardent advocates of partial birth abortion, other abortions, human cloning, and other moral errors. It is understandable then how such persons could dislike the Diocese of Lincoln, which upholds the moral teaching of the Catholic Church.

The words attributed to Ewers seem to confirm the suspicion that the members of her Board are unfamiliar with Catholic teachings, Catholic ecclesiology, and even the basic rudiments of the Catholic Catechism. Rather than concerning themselves with the Diocese of Lincoln about which they appear completely ignorant, Ewers and her colleagues would occupy themselves in a better way by learning something about the Catholic religion and the traditions and doctrines and laws of the Catholic Church.

The Diocese of Lincoln does not see any reason for the existence of Ewers and her organization.

CONCLUSION
The USCCB has no authority whatsoever to impose these programs on the Catholic children of America. My pope trumps your bishops conference every time.

If you are being forced to go through this dishonest training to teach CCD, offer up your suffering for the souls in Purgatory. If you are being fingerprinted and investigated for clearance, you have nothing to fear if your record is clean, but you still shouldn't have to go through this.

If your parish is forcing your children to suffer through VIRTUS or some similar "safe environment" program, I suggest that you follow these directions from The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality:

It is recommended that parents attentively follow every form of sex education that is given to their children outside the home, removing their children whenever this education does not correspond to their own principles.