Alice Ann Grayson
887 Spruce Peak Rd.
Stowe, VT 05672
(802) 253-4080
Mr. Kevin P. Scully
Diocese of Burlington
351 North Avenue
P.O. Box 526
Burlington,VT 05402-0526
February 6, 2006
Dear Kevin,
I am writing to thank you for sending to me a copy of “Formation in Christian Chastity” curriculum developed by the Diocese of Harrisburg, and also the Kettlecamp letter. We only live in Vermont in the winter, and so I did not receive this information until Christmastime. Thus, my tardy response.
I would first like to respond to the religious program relating to the virtue of chastity, which has sprinkles of safe environment. I believe that the intent of the authors is to present the Church’s teaching on chastity in the context of the Catholic Faith.
Those of us who oppose “chastity programs” rely on Magisterium documents which forbid such programs which teach chastity by itself. The Magisterium always says that we should teach the children Christian doctrine, and part of that is sexual morality. Of course, it urges caution, delicacy, and brevity for obvious reasons, as well as a respect for individual maturity, individual teaching, and parental rights. Overall, this program seems to abrogate the right order. The Church should be teaching Faith, inclusive of ethics, and not teaching a specific chastity or safe environemnt program with some parts of Catholic Faith included.
Regarding the chastity component, I was happy to see that the authors taught that God was their creator, and we, his people, are precious in his sight. The program anchors a personal love of chastity in the concepts of vocation-of-service to God, and to become holy, especially in charity as a path to chastity. The authors use stories of heroic saints to foster witness and aspirations of sanctity, although I think that sometimes the gory deaths of martyrs are introduced at too young an age. The authors do not neglect to teach the need for grace to be chaste. The curriculum emphasizes the necessity of being close to the sacraments, especially Holy Eucharist and the sacrament of penance. Truly, fostering the virtue of chastity must include these concepts-hence our total opposition of Pelagian sex education.
I do have criticisms and suggestions, however.
First – at a very young age children are taught, in groups about abortion and euthanasia. These are violent topics. Ten year olds are still carefree children and do not need to be burdened with the evils of the world. Certainly, these topics belong at home or from the pulpit where the words are carefully nuanced to teach adults while not traumatizing children.
Along the same lines I am concerned that twelve year olds are writing down examples and discussing in class the ten commandments, inclusive of the sixth. There is an example I have in my files of a child asking what adultery is, and before the teacher could give an abstract answer, an older, worldlier boy gave a very crass, graphic response sending the girl into tears. The Ten Commandments can be taught, but very carefully by the teacher or parent (who can nuance words and teach in abstract), not by children’s examples. Classroom discussion of the sixth commandment is a Pandora’s box. Classroom discussion of sexual topics has no control of the curriculum, the discussion, the teacher’s personal style and beliefs, not enough respect and understanding of the individual child. It distorts the meaning of sex to make open what should be private and personal.
Likewise, by grade eight, the curriculum becomes very heavy. Too much talk about sex makes kids think about sex. A teacher needs to know before hand the maturity of each and every one of her students. She has to have discussions with parents to tailor the teaching to only what is needed and appropriate. (In grave cases of neglectful parenting, a teacher should work with the student tenderly, one to one – not in a group.)
On the eighth grade level, I would first of all substitute the words “marital act” with the words “marital embrace,” a Dietrich von Hildebrand word suggesting by the words themselves that the marital embrace is ordered to wedded love. Here is where a healthy dose of von Hildebrand thought is welcome.
To begin with, the topic itself, is reverent, and should be addressed with respect and reserve, not in terms of sensual pleasure as is often the case. Von Hildebrand says that “Chastity is that virtue which keeps the sexual secret hidden, as a dominion whose disposition lies the hand of God,” Our sexuality is our personal secret, a hidden garden. Moreover, the authority of God as he speaks through the Church is essential in the discussion of any morality and the natural law. More emphasis should be placed on the meaning of intimacy, of “holy bashfulness.” Von Hildebrand distinguishes between people’s hiding something because it is ugly or because it is intimate, pertaining to the soul. What makes the use of the sexual faculty holy is the sacrament of marriage. (God’s grace and permission.) What makes its extra-marital use sinful is its essential sacrilege, the message (meaning and purpose), becomes a lie, and disobedience is arrogant. Girls need to understand the great privilege it is to be a woman, and that it is in their wombs that God comes to create the human person.
As with all things sacred there is mystery, not all should be known or understood. (Scientific discussion kills mystery and it should only be done sparingly by a parent – one to one. Once the private become public, it not only traumatizes, it distorts meaning.) As Shakespeare put it, care must be taken to guard that “precious jewel.”
I have not read Aquilina’s book, and therefore cannot comment. TMHS is an excellent resource.
If the concepts I mentioned were more emphasized, nothing would need to be said of sinful or perverse acts because their origin is selfishness. The less children of thirteen years know of perversion, the better. (Veil of Innocence’s web site quotes, “Remain simple and innocent as children, and you will not know the evil that affects men’s lives.”) www.veilofinnocence.org This is parental work, not classroom.
In summary, I think there is risk in the seventh and eight grade curriculum regarding chastity, and would be slow to plunge ahead in the manner outlined in the curriculum.
I was overall displeased with the safe environment aspects of this program. Parents have not asked for this and it violates the principle of subsidiarity. Children much too young are beings asked to think about sexual subjects and also to be traumatized by danger situations. It is sex initiation, making public and open what is private and sacred, and worse during the years of innocence. I do not object to an informational parents meeting about child snatchers etc., but leave the children at home.
Also, last summer I sent you some information about the safe environment programs. Apparently, the diocese is planning on doing Lures. The Veil web site is behind on posting some articles, particularly about Virtus, but I do have some critiques and stories on Lures. Please visit the Veil web site if I have tweaked your conscience or Bishop Matano’s. I have inserted a paragraph (below) of one gentleman’s thoughts on Lures. I also attach a quick summary of safe environment.
I have reviewed the teachers manual for the Child Lures program (one of the more docile secular “safe environment” programs being marketed to schools—not parents) and from kindergarten on, in almost every lesson, teachers must define for children the words “sexual abuse, child molester, pedophile, predator, pornography, x-rated pictures, movies.”
It is impossible to define sexual abuse unless children are taught what sexual means first, that is, they must be taught sexuality, and this is sex education. Particularly scandalous is that this sex education focuses on educating children about a wide variety of deviant sexual behaviors during the years of innocence.
The elementary classroom teacher is instructed to “establish an understanding of private parts, display a bathing suit, ask what it covers, and then put his hand inside the bathing suit and ask children if this is real or fake love.”
A teacher must ask children questions like: “Which parts of the body does a bathing suit cover?” “What is pornography, how many of you have seen pornography and where did you see it?” What should you do if someone asks to take nude photos of you?” “What should you do if an adult wants to tie you up, duct tape or handcuff you, even as part of a game?” To “Who can be a child molester?” the teacher tells the children that child molesters are usually not strangers but “nice and friendly people like a neighbor, family friend, relative, playmate, scout leader, teacher, or a parent” [emphasis added].
— Sean Mackin
In closing, I really do apologize for being so tardy in response. I hope this is helpful. Teresa Kettlecamp’s letter is a joke. She insults both bishops and parents. The chastity formation had a lot of good in it – one of the few that held to objective morality and grace let alone the absences of silly games and graphic detail. I hope, however, you consider my suggestions. Give the good parts to the parents and remind them them to first teach the faith, and in that holy context, foster in their children a love of purity.
I hope to meet you sometime. I have only heard Bishop Matano speak once, on Christmas day at Blessed Sacrament. His sermon was wonderful. I hope you share this letter with Bishop Matano and Sister Marie Kelly.
Sincerely,
Alice Ann Grayson
Veil of Innocence