Did Monsignor Stanislaw Dziwisz, the Pope’s secretary, destroy my letter? There was no response.

May 4, 1994

Pope John Paul II
c/o Msgr. Stanislaw Dziwisz
Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City State, Europe

Your Holiness,

With apologies for being so blunt, however, it is necessary that you examine some terrible samples (taken from the Boston Archdiocese) from so-called Catholic sex education programs which are promulgated by American bishops in all the states.

The Benziger’s “Family Life Program” re-defines the family as a “group of people who live together and love one another.” (Grade 5,TX p. 6) Cohabiting couples and practicing homosexuals become “family” in the children’s eyes, by your bishops endorsing this program. So much for Holy Matrimony, Your Holiness; it’s gone. I can barely hold back my tears.

Examine what your bishops teach children in the Franciscan Video Series, “In God’s Image.” – Consequences

“Chances are you will not get these diseases if you are not sexually active or have engaged in oral sex, which is genital kissing or climaxing in the mouth.”

The U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops is allowing the program’s author, Patricia Miller, to speak for them at teacher workshops interpreting their recent document, “Human Sexuality: A Catholic Perspective for Education and Lifelong Learning.” (Miller is certified as a sex educator by the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors, and Therapists (ASSECT), the largest multi-disciplinary sexological organization and the only such certifying arm for Planned Parenthood teachers.

Another “Catholic” author, Kiernan Sawyer, in “Choices and Decisions,” tells our innocent children:

A. The Bible clearly condemns homosexual activity. However, modern biblical scholarship suggests that the condemnation is often directed toward homosexual acts by heterosexual persons… They hold that the contemporary questions concerning loving sexual activity between consenting adults in a committed loving relationship was simply not addressed in the scriptures
(Directors Manual, 1990, p. 83)

“Choices and Decisions” by Kiernan Sawyer is an excellent sample of values clarification, disscent, and the political agenda of the contraceptors, the abortionists, and the homosexuals. It grieves me that you allow yourself and Christ’s beloved bride to be identified with such a syllabus.

Below is the first sample of erotic stimuli which was submitted to Cardinal Law – as far back as 1988 – a sample from Nancy Hennessy Cooney’s book, “Understanding Sex and Sexuality.” Nancy, who signed the solidarity ad in the New York Times on March 2, 1986, advocating that abortion could sometimes be a morally valid choice, instructs children that:

“The Mound of Venus’ contains nerve endings that all add to sexual excitement when rubbed or pressed.”

Children are then required to study an obstetrical view to learn female reproductive anatomy. One ponders, why the anus was included under “reproductive anatomy.” How is it humanly possible for your bishops to allow this filth and dissent to go on unchecked?

On what grounds do they allow pro-abortion advocates to teach our Catholic children? This last sample is a perfect sample of what you condemned in “Familiaris Consortio” (ß37) when you told parents:

“The Church is firmly opposed to an often widespread form of imparting sex information dissociated from moral principles. That would merely be an introduction to the experience of pleasure and a stimulus lending to the loss of serenity . . . while still in the years of innocence . . . by opening the way to vice.”

“Sex information without moral principles” in no way gives license to a form (or program) of sex information with morality. After children learn in class about “rubbing the Mound of Venus,” wouldn’t you agree that no amount of true morals added to this instruction can restore their lost innocence. Shouldn’t this never, never be taught, at any age?

By placing their bets on the chastity cartel of sex educators, who claim their programs are “Catholic,” your bishops are either unwilling or unable to grasp the simple difference between heretical, dinical, erotic sex information, and the proper formation in moral catechesis. The dinical sample cited above simply makes open, public, and profane what is by nature private, intimate, and sacred; whereas, formation in purity “keeps the sexual secret hidden as a dominion whose disposition lies in the hand of God.” (Dietrich von Hildebrand) Therefore, this formation needs to be part of teaching the entire Faith – and proceeds gradually, delicately, cautiously, and prudently under the principle of parental subsidiarity.

It is impossible to pass the above samples off as “chastity” formation or Catholic moral law, and good parents everywhere know that to try to do so is a charade.

Thus, before Christ, present in the Eucharist, I pray that you will claim your rightful authority and put an end to sex information programs in Catholic schools, and tell parents to exclude their children in public school when such programs cannot be eradicated.

I close by begging you on my knees, in 1994, to respond to the regulative norms of natural law and constant doctrine set forth in Pope Pius Xl’s “Christian Education of Youth” (copy attached), in the same mariner in which Pope Paul VI exhorted priests to assent to “Humanae Vitae” in 1968 (copy attached).

Please redffir tlw Lu validity af Pope Pius XI’c official ban on classroom sev education, identifying the dangerous elements, i.e., naturalism, self-autonomy, relativism, disregard for the effects of original sin, invasive pedagogy, explicit subject matter, and current political agendas indusive of contraception, abortion, homosexuality, feminism, dissent, androgyny, and the feminization of God.

Even children excluded from programs are not safe, because they hear the repeat of the instruction on the playground or lunch room. Unless you help us, parents have no choice but to remove their children from all such schools. In the United States, classroom sex-education is a universal phenomenon, with only a handful of exceptions.

Please write a document to help us eliminate this danger to our children who are the hope of the future. We mothers and fathers pray that St. John Neumann and St. Elizabeth Seton, whose missions established holy American parochial schools, assist you with the response to our request.

Sincerely and with respect,

Alice Ann Grayson
(mother of four)

Encyclical Letter of Paul VI – Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life)

July 24, 1968
(Article 28)

Your first task – especially in the case of those who teach moral theology – is to expound the Church’s teaching on Marriage without ambiguity. Be the first to give, in the exercise of your ministry the example of loyal internal and external obedience to the Magisterium of the Church. As you know well, that obedience obliges not only because of the reasons adduced, but rather because of the light of the Holy Spirit, which is given in a particular way to the Pastors of the Church in order that they may illustrate that truth.

From Pope Pius Xl Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri (Christian Education of Youth)

December 31, 1929

Another 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 youth 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 refosing to recognize the inborn weakness of human nature, and the law of which the Apostle speaks, fighting against the law of mind (Ronians 7:23); 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.

In this extremely delicate matter, if, all things considered, some private ins truction is found necessary and opportune, from those who hold from God the commission to teach and have the grace of state, every precaution must be taken, Such precautions are well known in traditional Christian education, and are described adequately by Antoniano cited above, when he says:

“Such is our misery and inclination to sin, that often in the very things considered to be remedies against sin, we find occasions for and inducements to sin itself Hence it is of the highest importance that a good father, while discussing with his son a matter so delicate, should be well on his guard and not descend to details, nor refer to the various ways in which this infernal hydra destroys with its poison so large a portion of the world; otherwise it may happen that instead of extinguishing this fire, he unwittingly stirs or kindles it in the simple and tender heart of the child. Speaking generally, during the period of childhood it suffices to employ those remedies which produce the double effect of opening the door to the virtue of purity and closing the door upon vice.”