Worst. Sex Ed. EVER.

 You read that right.

Let’s begin with a prayer…

“Domine Iesu, dimitte nobis debita nostra, salva nos ab igne inferiori, perduc in caelum omnes animas, praesertim eas, quae misericordiae tuae maxime indigent.”

“O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy. Amen.”

You may think that I am a Sedevacantist (Sedevacantism is the position, held by a minority of traditionalist Catholics,[1][2] that the present occupant of the Holy See is not truly pope and that, for lack of a valid pope, the see has been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958. — Wiki) But I am not. I am a devout Roman Catholic; loyal to the Chair of Peter and to the Traditions of the Catholic Church. And when I see and read such diabolical things taking place in the Church it makes me sick to the stomach. Although I am “a bear of very little brain” (ha!) and not a very important person per se; I will do my best to spread the truth where I can.

So.. what’s up with this? What’s going on? Well, if you haven’t heard, the Pontifical Council for the Family came out with a new Sex Education program called, “The Meeting Point”, which was given to the youth at the World Youth Day in Poland this year (2016). It is to be implemented in all Catholic Schools and can be downloaded for free from their website.

What’s the problem?

The problem is this: there is so much wrong with the website, information, and WHATEVER that it blows my mind! And not just my mind; the mind of many others. including LifeSiteNews, whom I will be taking much of my quotes and information from. (see full article here)

 “I find it monstrous that an official arm of the Church would not only create a sexual education program for teens but one that bypasses parents as the primary educator of their children,” said Dr. Thomas Ward, Founder and President of the National Association of Catholic Families as well as a Corresponding Member of the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Ward called the program “thoroughly immoral,” “Parents are the primary educators of their children, especially when it comes to passing on sexual morals and values. They, and they alone, know when their child is ready for such information,” he said, adding that the “right information at the wrong time could cause catastrophic damage to a child.”

Christine Vollmer, a founding member of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life as well as the founder of the Latin American Alliance for Life, says, “Sadly, these will have either the effect of arousal or of turning off the kids, and many parents will feel disappointed or even betrayed by this surprising error in the program,” 

“Famed Catholic thinker Dietrich von Hildebrand, called by John Paul II ‘one of the great ethicists of the twentieth century’ and by Pope Benedict XVI one of the ‘most prominent’ figures in the intellectual history of the Church in the last century, held that any form of classroom sex education damaged children.” He said this:

‘The nature of sex, itself, must first be grasped if we are to estimate the damage done to the souls of children by the so-called sex education in the classroom — damage not only from the moral point of view, but also from the one of human integrity and spiritual health,’ he wrote in an essay published in 1969, eight years before his death.”


Is This A Real Program?

Unfortunately, yes, it is. With caution, you can check out the Official website for the program here. Or just go onto the Official website for the Pontifical Council for the Family and scroll down a bit, on the right side will be a picture to lead you to the website titled, “The Meeting Point: Effective Sexual Formation.”

The program was unfortunately presented to young people at World Youth Day in Poland, and is to be implemented in Catholic schools.

You can read more about the program, who is in charge of it and more information in this article here.

Should I Be Worried About My Kids Being Taught This?

Again, unfortunately, YES.

“The Vatican materials have been received with apprehension in some circles.

The US-based Catholic Media Coalition, for instance, called on the faithful to protest this “sensual, graphic sex education program.” 

The American Life League, also US-based, has launched a petition “against the Vatican sex-ed program.” (Imagine that! A PETITION AGAINST a program from the VATICAN!) 

Judie Brown, president of American Life League, stated in a press release: “It’s bad enough when Planned Parenthood pushes perverse forms of sex education into our schools. For the Vatican to jump on that bandwagon is a nightmare scenario. Someone must be asleep at the wheel, and it’s high time for them to wake up!”

Both groups complained of “sexually explicit pictures,” such as one portraying a group of campers in which one young guy has his hands on the buttocks of a young woman; a smiling couple standing in front of a statue depicting lovemaking; and an image of fruit depicted as breasts in an advertisement.” (from article I linked earlier.)


The photo below is one from the actual book; (I “fixed” it so its more modest….) It doesn’t lack in detail let me tell you…


The photo below later asks, “Can you identify which couple is having a sexual relationship?” Uhmm both of them!? Sexuality is NOT just the first three letters!  Saint Pope John Paul II expressed this in Theology of the Body! And YES; I had to fix this photo too!


“The (Cardinal) Newman Society notes the approach to sex education taken by the program is often at odds with the Pontifical Council’s The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality just two decades ago.

“Catholic parents and educators should not assume that this program in its current form is suitable for a faithful Catholic education simply because of its association with the Pontifical Council for the Family,” the group states, observing that no Vatican official has directed the program’s use in parishes or homes, and that the U.S. bishops have not called for the adoption of the program.

Writing at National Catholic Register, the Newman Society’s president, Patrick Reilly,asserts, “This is not what Catholic families need while facing today’s corrosive culture, which is only getting worse.”” (text from this article)

Personally, I find it quite surprising that the above article was in the National Catholic Register; which is a “nice” Catholic news agent but fails at a few major points that I feel strongly about. (Such as their movie reviews, which avoid any opinions on the movie based on its morals or Christian/anti-Christian viewpoints.)

“In the end, the Vatican’s sex-ed program might at best be described as a mixed bag and at worst as a misguided effort that falls very much short of the mark. While the casual reader can point to various texts that suggest that the program is aimed at promoting modesty, abstinence, and saving sexual relations for marriage, there is nevertheless something quite disturbing happening between the lines. 

Because of the program’s failure to honor the God-given role of parents as primary educator, its utter failure to name and condemn various sexual sins, and its use of sexual explicit materials and films, the program not only fails to achieve its goal, but it could arguably have the opposite effect of awakening in youths disordered sexual desire and giving them the impetus to act out sexual fantasies. The program attempts to instruct young people about the importance of modesty, chastity, and intimacy and does so by violating the very values it is trying to instill. In this way it is self-defeating. In short, the program could lead youths not closer to God, but further away from him.

One might go as far as conjecturing that had the sainted Maria Goretti been formed by the Vatican’s sex-ed program, it is unlikely that she would have had any heroic words of virtue to say to her sexual attacker. She would not have been formed to say: “No! It is a sin! God does not want it!” She would not have learned that what her attacker wanted was an offense against God. Nor would have Saint Dominic Savio, in the same vein, been able to say: “Death rather than sin,” because he would not have learned about the horror of sin…

A program in sexual morality that fails to teach young people to live the Gospel without compromise is unworthy of being taught.”

 Parents, please take a moment to reflect and pray about this terrible material that has been put into the hands of children!

What Exactly is in this Program?

I will give you TWENTY-FIVE examples of how and why this program is a terrible disgrace to the Catholic faith and a serious danger to souls.

  1. Three videos that are on the programs official website which have a bad if not terrible and secular portrayal of the dignity of men and women, and of their roles together.

The first video is a beer commercial, where in the end it states that it is what bring men and women together. There is also a scene where at a bar a man helps a woman with her jacket, and she is wearing a revealing tank top. He ogled her chest and then turns and takes a slug of the beer.

The second video is a Nike commercial which seems so very Feminazi from the beginning, it was hard for me to continue watching it. It depicts men and women trying to be the best at running, while continuously putting each other down to beat the other in the physical sport. In the end it says, “Join the men VS women challenge”.

The THIRD video is a music video titled, “Desire”. Yeah, I probably don’t have to explain this one but what the heck… the lyrics are as follows, “Instinct, two different humans beings loving each other for the first time Desire, everywhere I look I see you everywhere I look I see you everywhere I look I see you …. Sweet magnetism, two opposite charges looking for the same thing.Uhm… awkward… None of this material points in reference to men and women’s true divine nature, nor their call to work together with God to create life… which is the beauty of Marriage… sooooo what’s the point of this Program again?

Pope John Paul II, in his apostolic letter, “Mulieris Dignitatem” wrote, “”I will make him a helper fit for him”. The biblical context enables us to understand this in the sense that the woman must “help” the man – and in his turn he must help her – first of all by the very fact of their “being human persons”. In a certain sense this enables man and woman to discover their humanity ever anew and to confirm its whole meaning. We can easily understand that – on this fundamental level – it is a question of a “help” on the part of both, and at the same time a mutual “help”. To be human means to be called to interpersonal communion. The text of Genesis 2:18-25 shows that marriage is the first and, in a sense, the fundamental dimension of this call. But it is not the only one. The whole of human history unfolds within the context of this call. In this history, on the basis of the principle of mutually being “for” the other, in interpersonal “communion”, there develops in humanity itself, in accordance with God’s will, the integration of what is “masculine” and what is “feminine”. The biblical texts, from Genesis onwards, constantly enable us to discover the ground in which the truth about man is rooted, the solid and inviolable ground amid the many changes of human existence.”


2.  Sexual Sins Are Not Mentioned At All.

(ROME, July 27, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) )– “More souls go to hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason,” Our Lady of Fatima warned the three young seers in 1917. But this message, unfortunately, is entirely absent from the Vatican’s newly released sex-ed program for teens. Instead, sexual sins are not mentioned at allThe 6th and 9th commandments are ignored while sexually explicit images and immoral videos are used as springboards for discussion. 

3. Handing the sexual formation of children over to educators while leaving parents out of the equation. 

4. Failing to name and condemn sexual behaviors, such as fornication, prostitution, adultery, contracepted-sex, homosexual activity, and masturbation, as objectively sinful actions that destroy charity in the heart and turn one away from God. 

5. Failing to warn youths about the possibility of eternal separation from God (damnation) for committing grave sexual sins. Hell is not mentioned once. 

6. Failing to distinguish between mortal and venial sin. 

7. Failing to speak about the 6th and 9th commandment, or any other commandment. 

8. Failing to teach about the sacrament of confession as a way of restoring relationship with God after committing grave sin. 

9. Not mentioning a healthy sense of shame when it comes to the body and sexuality. 

10. Teaching boys and girls together in the same class.

11. Having boys and girls share together in class their understanding of phrasessuch as: “What does the word sex suggest to you?”

12. Asking a mixed class to “point out where sexuality is located in boys and girls.”

13. Speaking about the “process of arousal.”

14. Using sexually explicit and suggestive images in activity workbooks (here, here, and here). 

15. Recommending various sexually explicit movies as springboards for discussion (see below for links).

16. Failing to speak about abortion as gravely wrong, but only that it causes “strong psychological damage.”

17. Confusing youths by using phrases such as “sexual relationship” to indicate not the sexual act, but a relationship focused on the whole person. 

”In one activity, youths are asked to look at a picture of an older couple who are sitting in front of an image of a “young man and woman, joining their half-naked bodies in a hug.” They are asked: “Which of the two couples is having a sexual relationship?” The teaching guide states: “The objective is for the young person to feel ‘provoked’ in front of these two images, or even confused by the title of the topic and the image presented.” And that is the essential problem with this program: Young people will simply be confused by the conflicting messages, the explicit images and films, and the lack of moral directives. ”

18. Speaking of “heterosexuality” as something to be “discover[ed].” 

19. Using gay icon Elton John (while not mentioning his activism) as an example of a gifted and famous person. 

20. Endorsing the “dating” paradigm as a step towards marriage. 

21. Not stressing celibacy as the supreme form of self-giving that constitutes the very meaning of human sexuality. 

22. Failing to mention Christ’s teaching on marriage. 

23. Treating sexuality as a separate subject instead of as something integrated into the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church.

24. Explicit films used as a springboard for discussion.

”Of urgent concern with the program is the number of films recommended by the program as a springboard for discussion that cannot be construed as anything but sexually immoral. For example:

  • 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.””

The film selection reveals a startling lack of moral compass in the program creators, something that should alarm any parent thinking of allowing their child to be formed by this program. 

One pro-family campaigner against Planned Parenthood’s explicit version of sex-ed gave this comment, under condition of anonymity, about the Vatican’s sex-ed program: “I had a hard time deciding if the authors were trying to cleverly disguise a bad program or if they were just thoroughly incompetent. They tried to interweave modern-day movies to support the vague concepts they were trying to get across, but, how they did that was not very effective.

25. The strange, and odd-placed videos on the website.

Again, with the website videos? Aside from the first three mentioned above; there is a whole playlist of videos that don’t really make any sense. If you click on the playlist button on the website it sends you to YouTube, to a playlist called, “THE MEETING PLACE – Emotional and sex education” which was created for the Pontificium Consilium pro Familia YouTube channel.

Not only are there the three mentioned videos, but also a few AUDI commercials (yes… like.. for the car.) There is another music video with sensual lyrics,

“It will be a gift for you to open,
that you have to take care to make me open myself more to you.
And you will be the greatest thing for me till i die
I will love you, all and more,
look at me, i am here.”

TWO Batman Begins trailers… (an okay movie but… still confusing as to its connection with sexuality.. stuff?)

A disgusting song,  ‘Pereza – Todo (con letra)’

(mind you, its in Spanish. soooo… that totally makes it okay….. NOT!)

 Here are some lyrics… WARNING EXPLICIT CONTENT!

‘Fly, fly, fly with me
Slip inside, tell me boy
Give me warmth, make me shine,
Make love to me in our nest
I don’t want anything, anything else
Not even air.

Give me whatever you’ve got left, give me a bit more

Give me everything I want.
More and more I feel jealous of everything.
Give me whatever come to you and everything will come,
Give it to me and only me
More and more I feel I need more.
Everything, everything
I want everything with you
Little, little by little, little
Bring on the magic and we are
Alone, alone, alone, alone
I want with you alone
Alone caressing each other everywhere, sweating, horny,
Turning mad, going berserk,
Staring at each other, drinking straight from the bottle.”
 I am speechless at finding this trash….. yes, there are a couple of videos that affirm the dignity (ish) of life, like a video that shows life from conception and how the human grows… the story of a man who lives with no arms or legs. BUT, this is no way makes up for the utter garbage that is …… “The Meeting Point”.


‘Why the erotic pictures that bordered on porn? I thought the whole thing would be confusing to youth and frankly a large waste of time.'”

(from LifeSiteNews)

 Here is an example of an activity in the workbooks,


Uhm…. excuse me? This is kind of … blatant…!? It is treating the “marital embrace” in the most secular and terrible way possible.

Also notice the image of the people holding hands dancing around a fire; it kind of reminds me of the pagans and witches with their rituals of dancing around the fire and such… BUT! Who knows. That’s just my little opinion…. 🙂 Capture




There is still quite a bit I could say on this particular subject… I could consider what the previous Pope’s say about it being the parents duty to educate their children in the matters of sexuality.. but I think you get the point. If you would like more information and insight, please see Life Site News; they cover the issue quite well.

Also see Church Militant for their excellent coverage on the issue.

  Until next time.. God bless you.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s