Parishes that have formed working groups to study which safe-environment program to choose are siding 4 to 1 in favor of FICC, according to PEL
I have not been able to get TaT on my radar again. Perhaps what should happen is for me to organize a meeting and we can make up the flyer/pamphlet - and come the Fall, execute a parish to parish strategy.
I think we've settled on the theme of Ten Most Frequently asked Questions about "Safe Environment Programs" - Why your children are in more danger than ever before.
Remarkably, Sr Fran conceded at one point, " It[Talking About Touching] isn't very Catholic, but it's real."
She's skirting the danger:
That in some instances, children are being taught by immoral people that genital touching is safe when it feels good and when they want it.
What is "real" about this program, is that sexual predators know exactly how to manipulate the children into believing they're willing participants. They know exactly how to manipulate the children's emotions to make the child believe the sex is intimacy in a "relationship" It's futile to expect children to recognize when an adult is feigning affection to sexually exploit them.
On April 23, the St. Paul-based Catholic Parents Online (CPO) group ran half-page anti-TAT ads in the two leading Twin Cities papers that reach a combined 850,000 subscribers. Tellingly, The St. Paul Pioneer Press refused to include in the ad excerpts from the TAT lesson plans, CPO head Colleen Perfect told The Wanderer. The paper said the TAT content violated the paperÂ?s obscenity guidelines.
"We're a family newspaper," the Pioneer Press explained to Perfect.
I've run into the same answers, even in the secular media. They too, claim the material is too obscene for prime time hours. I think this has to be incorporated into the Ten Most Frequently Asked Questions.
The diocese responded with the same tactics as Cardinal O'Malley and Boston Chancery officials: The parents are giving out misinformation.
The visibility of the ads prompted Vicar General Fr. Kevin McDonough to preemptively send a letter to all pastors warning them of the Â?misinformationÂ? in the ads. Joe Towalski, editor of the archdioceseÂ?s Catholic Spirit, followed with a similar editorial in the April 27 edition of the weekly.
Most parents are unware of the conduct of Chancery officials. This is also something that needs to be highlighted in our campaign.
For instance, in Boston, the Chancery also resorted to threatening us personally with ambiguous accusations that parents who object will be added to a list of suspected child molesters which will be passed into their USCCB central headquarters in Washington D.C. Such a list has been made of parents who object - and is indeed sent into a database in Washington. They also tried to say that our children would be ineligeable for Sacraments. At another point, they said that we wouldn't be able to come onto the parish property.
This is the strategy Cardinal O'Malley launched against parents who have been fighting Planned Parenthood and sexual predators for decades in Massachusetts.
The duplicity of the campaign against parents is rather staggering. For instance, the same week a story ran in the Pilot accusing parents of being fringe people spreading misinformation, I was asked to be on the Mass Catholic Conference team to testify as an expert against a sex ed Bill coming before the Legislature.
The FICC versus TAT debate has produced a secondary effect for Twin Cities Catholics: It has clarified where their pastors stand on the theological spectrum.
This is the blessing. I believe we also learn which pastors would harbor a pervert on the say so of the Bishop, even though they know it's harmful.
Berrick's study found that children participating in these programs showed no cognitive retention of the material because they were not old enough to deal with the hypothetical scenarios the programs are based on, and they could not process the suggestion that their trusted parents and relatives could harm them.
The suggestion that Catholic parents are sexual predators is absurd. In fact, the evidence of record demonstrates that Catholic parents are the people who report abuse. Not only does Talking about Touching hijack the situation to use moral dissenters to malign the parents protecting children in society - what is not being very well articulated is the fact that we are missing the opportunities to more acutely train parents. This makes it much more easy ignore the warning signs of a priest who paints Mapplethorp pornography and sells the concepts on his parish websit, while running a "ministry" that encourages adultery.
Realistically, if the Chancery position is one that parents and trusted relatives are the perverts, their programs & strategies must derail authentic attempts to heighten their awareness in their homes, schools, communities. Less perverts get caught.
The article also mentions a reversal in the obstacle course Theresa Kettelkamp put into place tt make it difficult for parents to obtain the Sacraments for their children without exposing them todemoralizemoralization program. While it's victorious that she had to back down, let's be vigilant in how this program actually makes their compromise impossible to achieve in parishes where Boston College, Leadership Roundtable, Call to Action, VOTF, Cardinal O'Malley are setting up pilot parishes and schools for "Century 21". Administrators sidetrack parental attempts to exclude their children by saying the material is given to children that are impossible to predict beforehand. The materials are pulled out when other lesson unexpectedly end early. There's only a five minute warning time which makes it impossible for them to remove children whose parents object. There's nobody to watch them, etc.
I also think it's very important to put together an executive report on the program, the actual increased (not decrease) exposure of children to predators, the conduct of the Chancery officials, the known characters Boston is using to execute this program, and put it on the desks of people for accountability later on. I think it's important to send the summary certified mail for future tracking to Kettelkamp, their attorneys, to Flynn, and to some Bishops across the nation as well as the CDF. I do believe this has to play out, but with a good paper trail on who knew and when they knew it.