The End Of Innocence

In January of 2019, the Argentinian apostate pretending to be "pope," Jorge Bergoglio, made the following pronouncement about sex education:

He [Bergoglio] said: "Sex education must be given in schools." Specifying and underlining that above all "sex is a gift from God." And "it’s not a monster." It is God’s "gift to love." Then – fully aware he added - that some people use it to earn money or exploit is another problem, yet it does not affect the innate purity of the gift. .. Then he adds and explains: "Because if sexual education is given in schools soaked in ideological colonization, you destroy the person." At the same time, sex understood "as a gift from God must" be "taught" not with "rigidity," or with mental and ideological closure. By creating taboos, precisely. The Pope specifies that "to [be] educated, from the Latin "educere (to lead, to draw out, ed.), is to bring out the best of the person and accompany him/her along the way." The Bishop of Rome [sic]warns: "The problem is the system." He warns against the risks that "those responsible for education, both at the national and local levels, as well as in each school unit, may encounter:"  in particular, the type of "teachers" chosen for this task, and the "textbooks" that are adopted for children and young people.
(See https://www.lastampa.it/vatican-insider/en/2019/01/29/news/the-pope-sex-is-a-gift-we-must-talk-about-it-also-in-schools-1.33673131)

That we live in a sex-saturated culture is an understatement. In movies, television, radio, music, schools, and even in Vatican II sect churches, sex propaganda runs rampant. Promotion of artificial contraception, fornication, adultery under the euphemism "open marriage," sexual perversion/homosexuality, "single parenting," and abortion are routinely pushed on innocent youngsters with disastrous consequences to their bodies, souls, and society at large. Sex education is a large part of the problem, which is now lauded by Bergoglio and his sect of clerical perverts. When I speak of sex education, I'm not talking only about the kind found in the godless public school systems, I'm referring to any form of sexual education, even when under the auspices of a church and/or those claiming "traditional family values."

Sex education is inherently evil, and the reason was summed up nicely by a group in the early 1990s calling itself The National Coalition of Clergy and Laity (NCCL): Classroom sex education is a perversion of nature. It makes what is by its very nature private and intimate, public and open. All education is an activity which is essentially public, but because matters of sex are private and intimate (and pertain fundamentally to the family), the teaching of sex can not ever be accomplished in the classroom without violating that privacy and intimacy. Such a violation is an abominable form of scandal, scandal of the sort which Our Lord solemnly and literally condemned when he declared: "And whoever receives one such little child for my sake, receives me. But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it were better for him to have a millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depths of the sea." (Matt. 18:5-6) (The group's website--which is "conservative" Vatican II sect--does not seem to be active in over ten years; See https://www.national-coalition.org/about.html).

This post will demonstrate Church teaching on sex education, the inherent evils that it produces, and its promotion by the Vatican II sect, which gives yet another reason that the sect cannot be the One True Church of Jesus Christ.

The Teaching of the Church on Sex Ed

Naturalism is the philosophy that human reason is supreme and nothing exists beyond nature; therefore there is no supernatural order. One of the grave errors that flow from Naturalism is that of Indifferentism. This is the heretical idea that one religion is as good as another (positive indifference) or the idea that one religion is just as bad as another (negative indifference). The United States was based on this premise since most of the Founding Fathers were Freemasons, and Naturalism is the guiding force of Masonry.

Public schools, as they exist in most countries today, have a type of sex ed most especially dangerous, because it is founded on Naturalism. No religion is allowed to be taught in public schools as they banish God from the classroom. Hence, everything must be approached as if God does not exist. We must depend upon ourselves to solve problems. No consideration of fallen human nature, sin, or God's grace can ever be considered.

Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri:

 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; 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. (On Christian Education, 1929; para. #65 and #66).

Yet, what about sex ed in Vatican II sect schools? Aren't their sex education programs--sometimes called chastity programs-- morally acceptable because they are not based on Naturalism, and God can be invoked, especially in a "conservative" parish school? No. The reason was articulated well by the NCCL, "The child is deliberately exposed to information which focuses on and stimulates the sexual function - while at the same time he is being told to be chaste, i.e. pure in thought, word, and deed. This causes a tremendous (and unnatural) psychological, moral and spiritual conflict in the young, especially considering that stimulation of the sexual function, which is cumulative, will find a way to express itself."

The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office
The Congregation was asked, "Can Catholics approve of the method called "sex education" or "sex initiation"? Response: In the Negative. In the education of youth the method to be followed is that hitherto observed by the Church and the Saints as recommended by His Holiness the Pope in the Encyclical [Divini Illius Magistri, cited above] dealing with the Christian education of youth, promulgated on Dec. 31, 1929.The first place is to be given to the full, sound and continuous instruction in religion of both sexes. Esteem, desire and love of the angelic virtue must be instilled into their minds and hearts. They must be made fully alive to the necessity of constant prayer, and assiduous frequenting of the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist; they must be directed to foster a filial devotion to the Blessed Virgin as Mother of holy purity, to whose protection they must entirely commit themselves. Precautions must be taken to see that they avoid dangerous reading, indecent shows, conversations of the wicked, and all other occasions of sin.

Hence no approbation whatever can be given to the advocacy of the new method even as taken up recently by some Catholic authors and set before the public in printed publications." Therefore, any theologian who advocated any loosening of these norms, on any grounds, would not have their books approved and would be censured. They could no longer be considered approved theologians.

Moreover, these norms against sex education or "chastity programs" retain perennial principles that do not diminish or "change with the times." When confronted with such Modernist sentiments the pope spoke forth.

Pope Pius XII, Allocution to French Fathers and Families, Sep. 18, 1951
…Even the principles so wisely illustrated by Our Predecessor Pius XI, in the encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, on sex education and questions connected thereto are set aside — a sad sign of the times! With a smile of compassion: Pius XI, they say, wrote twenty years ago, for his times! Great progress has been made since then!...Fathers of families… Unite… to stop and curtail these movements under whatever name or under whatever patronage they conceal themselves or are patronized.

Pope Pius XII, Allocution to the Fifth International Congress of Psychotherapy and Clinical Psychology, April 13, 1953
The Holy See published certain rules in this connection [sex ed] shortly after the Encyclical of Pius XI on Christian Marriage [Casti connubii].  These rules have not been rescinded, either expressly or via facti.

The Dangers of Sex Ed--Both Public and Religious

1. It has a political agenda. As far back as 1991, Newsweek magazine reported in its June 17th issue that the ACLU was suing to get an abstinence-based sex ed program (still bad but much better than the rest) called Sex Respect. The reason the ACLU wanted it banished almost 30 years ago is telling: 

"Sex Respect, according to the ACLU, stereotypes boys as 'sexual aggressors,' and girls as 'virginity protectors,' mischaracterizes AIDS as nature's way of 'making a statement on sexual behavior,' frowns on birth control, and presents two-parent heterosexual couples as 'the sole model' of a 'healthy,' 'real,' family." 

Sex ed effectively:

• rejects traditional Catholic moral standards
• makes all things relative by interpreting traditional moral teaching as "outdated" or even "abnormal"
• considers religious objections to any behaviors to be irrelevant
• promotes choice and motive  as the sole criteria whereby sex acts are to be judged
• construes and calls any restraint on sexual behavior "an intrusion on human rights"
• encourages birth control, abortion and "sexual experimentation" through peer pressure

2.  The Vatican II sect supports this political agenda; now consider why they do.

After the 2002 pedophile scandal erupted, the Los Angeles Times conducted a survey showing how the sodomites had taken control. It began with the Communists putting an estimated 10,000 sexual deviants in the seminaries, and culminated with the Modernists letting the perverts walk in openly through the door after Vatican II. The results are here for all to see. I use the term priest without quotations for the sake of brevity:

• The Times poll of priests asked respondents to characterize their sexual orientation. A combined 15% identified themselves as homosexual (9%) or "somewhere in between, but more on the homosexual side" (6%)
• However, for priests ordained after 1982, the number of homosexuals rose to 23%
• 5% declared themselves "in the middle" (i.e., bisexual)
• 53% of priests who were ordained in since 1982 said a "gay subculture" existed in the seminary when they attended

(See https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-oct-20-me-gaypriest20-story.html)

In some accounts, the number of perverts (sodomites and bisexuals) are placed as high as 80%. (See In the Closet of the Vatican, [2019] by Frederic Martel).  If the sodomites can make their abominable acts acceptable, think of the benefits for them, and the inestimable harm to souls. 

3. On what basis can the Vatican II sect justify using sex ed or "chastity education"?

Four words: The Second Vatican Council. By introducing false principles by which theology should be guided, they lead the way to acceptance of unnatural behavior. The "Constitution on the Church in the Modern World" (Gaudium et Spes) begins the moral decay:

Para. #54:  "The circumstances of the life of modern man have been so profoundly changed in their social and cultural aspects, that we can speak of a new age of human history.New ways are open, therefore, for the perfection and the further extension of culture. These ways have been prepared by the enormous growth of natural, human and social sciences, by technical progress, and advances in developing and organizing means whereby men can communicate with one another. Hence the culture of today possesses particular characteristics: sciences which are called exact greatly develop critical judgment; the more recent psychological studies more profoundly explain human activity; ..." (Emphasis mine). 

Para. #62: "In pastoral care, sufficient use must be made not only of theological principles, but also of the findings of the secular sciences, especially of psychology and sociology, so that the faithful may be brought to a more adequate and mature life of faith." (Emphasis mine). 

The pagan aspects of psychology and sociology were thereby introduced. Vatican II joins modern psychology in the heretical teaching of humanity's "intrinsic self-worth." In Gaudium et Spes, para. 24 states, "...if man is the only creature on earth God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself," as if people possesses such value in themselves that it would cause God to create them.  In the Catholic meaning, the self-worth or "dignity of man" cannot be considered as a characteristic in people's very nature that imposes respect for all choices, because this dignity depends on right will turned toward the Good and is therefore a relative and not an absolute value. 

A Father Who Really Knew Best

My friend, the late Fr. Paul Wickens, ordained in 1955 for the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey, found his way back to the True Church when Archbishop Peter Gerety, an ultra-Modernist validly consecrated just after Vatican II (1966) "suspended" Father for his activities against him. One of Father's greatest complaints involved Gerety's attempt to destroy the innocence of children with a sick and sinful sex ed program. As reported in 1984 by the New York Times:

The 54-year-old Father Wickens, a self-styled traditionalist, has preached against the teaching of sex education in parochial schools, a view contrary to the Archbishop's, and then helped publish a newsletter which was generally critical of the Archbishop. (See https://www.nytimes.com/1984/09/02/nyregion/newark-archbishop-evicting-defiant-priest.html)

Fr. Wickens told me how he then heard of Fr. DePauw and started reading his material. He eventually rejected Vatican II and opened up his own Traditionalist Chapel in 1996. Called St. Anthony of Padua Traditionalist Chapel, Father Wickens affiliated himself with the SSPX. He never made it all the way to sedevacantism, although he kept an open mind in our discussions. When he had approached Gerety about the sex ed program, he had a well-written statement about how all sex education conflicts with True Catholic teaching (as I outlined above). Gerety threw the paper in Father's face saying, "You don't know what you're talking about Wickens!!" He had Father unceremoniously thrown out of the Chancery and was told "don't bother me anymore." 

Father had cited statistics which former Secretary of Education William J. Bennett, in a speech to the National School Board Association, would later discuss:

• More than one million teenage girls become pregnant each year, and 40 percent of today’s fourteen-year-old girls will become pregnant by the time they are nineteen.
• Teenage pregnancy rates are at or near an all-time high. The 25 percent decline in birth rates between 1970 and 1984 was due to a doubling of the abortion rate during that period. More than 400,000 teenage girls have abortions each year.

Bennett himself confessed, "These numbers are an irrefutable indictment of sex education’s effectiveness in reducing teenage sexual activity and pregnancies." (See William J. Bennett, “Sex and the Education of Our Children,” U.S. Department of Education, 22 January 1987; transcript of talk at the National School Board Association in Washington, D.C.) Yet, according to Gerety, Fr. Wickens didn't "know what he was talking about." Right.

Father Wickens died in 2004 at the age of 74 from esophageal cancer. While in the hospital, Gerety had the audacity to visit him and ask him to "be reconciled with the Church (sic)." Father's response was to throw his bedpan at Gerety's head and sent him running from the room! Gerety went to Judgement in 2016 at the incredible age of 104--and at least publicly---without any repentance for his heresy, his many sins, and corrupting the innocence of thousands of young people in his "Catholic" schools.

Conclusion

The Church has always taught that sex ed corrupts the minds, bodies, and souls of youth. Yet "Pope" Francis says, "Sex education must be given in schools." Vatican II sect apologists tell us that there is a "hermenutic of continuity" between mutually exclusive, contradictory teachings. The "recognize and resist" forces will tell us that Francis is a heretic, and sex ed is wrong, but Bergoglio can still be pope. It is allegedly up to us to decide what to accept and what to reject. This makes the individual (and not their pope) the Rule of Faith, which is contrary to Church teaching. $teve $kojec will tell us "the Church can defect, so please pay me for telling you" or words to that effect.

 In so doing, they all support, directly or indirectly, the man who destroys the innocence of youth. Remember the words of Our Lord quoted above and shudder, "And whoever receives one such little child for my sake, receives me. But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it were better for him to have a millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depths of the sea." (Matt. 18:5-6).