I highlighted some of this in my own article about Talking about Touching, but it’s worth revisiting what exactly this program entails. The Primary Educators League has posted some of the sample lessons online which expose the explicitness of the program. If you’re tempted to say, “So what, it’s not any worse than what you see on network TV at night,” keep in mind that this is for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd graders.
All of these lessons use the explicit names for body parts, no euphemisms. If you ask the Talking about Touching trainer why this must be so, they will reply that it is necessary so that the children will be good witnesses for law enforcement. So much for preventing abuse; instead they’re concentrating on preparing their trial testimony. There’s no sense of safeguarding the innocence of children, but there’s plenty about making children paranoid and distrustful of everyone, including parents, but ironically not teachers and other institutional authorities.
As I’ve said before, it should be up to parents and institutions in loco parentis to be sure that predators, potential and actual, be kept away from children and not make children their own first line of defense.
My pastor and I have refused to implement this in our parish despite a direct order from Cardinal O’Malley. My pastor told the cardinal that he cannot be ordered to do something immoral and in violation of his conscience and if the cardinal wishes he can remove him as pastor. Good for you, Father.
As your pastor explained to the Cardinal his objection?
Warning!!!! Please note I am being very sarcastic!
With the Church leaders we have had so far, who wouldn’t trust them implementing such programs as Talking About Touching? I mean, they, collectively, have done such a stellar job so far with priestly formation….just look at the the number of priests who steal from the Church, molest teenage boys, have sexual relations with adult men or women, drive luxurious cars, devout time to spreading heresy from the pulpit, etc ad nasuem.
If you can’t trust these leaders, who can you trust?!?!?!?!?
Its a shame your pastor in Salem is probably one of very few priests in ADBoston who sees a problem with this and is willing to stand up to the Cardinal. If there were more I think the Cardinal might take another look at the whole program.
It’s not 3 years of courses, it’s 10 years, right up through confirmation or beyond depending on how long religious education goes in the diocese.
As for the innocence, making kids as young as 6 focus on sexual matters is just immoral. Teaching them the clinical words for their genitalia is part of that. Heck, why stop at penis and vagina, why not the C words?
The question is whether Flynn’s order is immoral or violates canon law.
Dom,
Who determines whether Flynn’s order is immoral? I know nothing about Canon Law, so I wouldn’t even skip down that road.
There’s nothing immoral in Fr. Altier’s homilies, nothing against the Faith. And it appears that many people are edified by reading them.
So Flynn is purposefully denying edification to those who, in some cases, seem to really depend on it.
What purpose does that serve? That’s like withholding food from the hungry.
Without a direct explanation from Flynn, the only thing one can surmise is that he’s doing it out of spite, and to shut someone up who’s speaking out against his TAT filth.
I’d say his actions are immoral and he deserves no respect.
And that would be your prudential decision to make. If you’re wrong, then you deal with consequences. Unfortunately, this sort of stuff isn’t black and white.
I know, it’s not black and white. But it sure smells like something rotten.