Catholic Exchange

What’s Going on in Sex Education?

Childhood ought to be an innocent time free of adult cares and concerns. Christ treasured innocence in children. He never commanded children to be like adults. He commanded adults to be like children – to accept the Kingdom of God as a child does. "Amen I say to you, whoever does not accept the Kingdom of God as a little child will not enter into it" (Mk 10:15).

At increasingly younger ages, childhood innocence is being shattered. This shattering happens through the Internet, magazines, television, radio, immodest dress, and now through "sex education" even in some Catholic schools, at most tender ages.

Sex education programs may be given names like "Safe Touch" and seem to place sex safety right next bike safety as if the two were connected. Rome has warned us of the danger these programs pose in their document entitled The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality : Guidelines for Education within the Family (TMHS). The guidelines are issued by the Pontifical Council for the Family. The Council warns us that "In some societies today, there are planned and determined attempts to impose premature sex information on children" (TMHS 83).

 Rome asks us to pay attention:

Parents should…be attentive to ways in which sexual instruction can be inserted in the context of other subjects which are otherwise useful (for example health and hygiene, personal development, family life, children's literature, social and cultural studies, etc.) – TMHS 141.

The Value of Innocence

The Pontifical Council especially opposes programs which use graphic depictions of sexually explicit material through dramatized representation, mime or role playing, drawings, charts, models, and oral or written exams (TMHS 127).

Like Christ, Rome values innocence. For this reason Rome guides us to protect childhood innocence by ensuring that young children are not subjected to "direct" information about sexual topics. From about age five to puberty, a child is

in the years of innocence. This period of tranquility and serenity must never be disturbed by…unnecessary information about sex…. So as not to disturb this important natural phase of growth, parents will recognize that prudent formation in chaste love during this period should be indirect…. (TMHS 78)

What Rome called "this important natural phase of growth" is sometimes called the "latency period." It is a time of great intellectual growth during which a child learns to move from concrete operations in thinking to high levels of abstraction. It is a time during which the child's rapidly growing body becomes adept at everything from catching and jumping to making delicate stitches and hitting the right piano keys. When the innocence of this time is not disturbed and a child's talents are explored and developed, this time becomes golden, a psychic treasure that the adult person will draw upon in pleasant reverie until old age.

What about Protecting Them?

Despite the Council's teaching, some Catholic instruction has been developed to teach young children "direct" and detailed information. The logic is that direct information will enable children to "protect" themselves, even at most tender ages. It is very true that children need to be protected from predators. But children can't be expected to protect themselves. Expecting that of them would be placing adult responsibilities upon them – making them into adults and taking away their childhood.

The need to protect children from predators can not be used as a reason to sexualize young children. Rome warns us that

[A]t this [innocent] stage of development, children…cannot understand and control sexual imagery within the proper context of moral principles, and, for this reason, they cannot integrate premature sexual information with moral responsibility. Such information tends to shatter their emotional and educational development and to disturb the natural serenity of this period of life (TMHS 83).

Responsibility for this topic must be returned to the parents. Parents must be encouraged in their teaching role, because if we reject this role, then any substitute will likely fail. "The role of parents in education is of such importance that it is almost impossible to find an adequate substitute" (TMHS 23). Rome instructs us that the family is "suited to making acceptable without trauma the most delicate realities" of life (TMHS 64). The voice of Christ speaks through His Church. If we sincerely want to follow Christ, then in this matter – as in all matters – we ought to follow Rome.

The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality, published by the Pontifical Council for the Family, can be viewed here.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I have to admit that I have never been able to figure out the hulabaloo about sex education – meaning, any institutionalized need for it, even at the family level. Most persons in my generation were taught by the ‘osmotic method’ – whatever floated about in the environment. Most of us became corrupted because
    such as Playboy magazine was not given the short shrift by anyone and we ‘osmotically’ picked it up. I have to believe that many parents thought that this was suitable ‘sex education’ for their sons; and, one has to think that many a daughter ended up believing that she had at least in behavior to qualify having staple holes in her.

    How I ever got to treating women with the respect I don’t know – e.g., I have never looked at the distaffers as capable only of being ‘Suzy Homemaker’ – I have always thought that their maternal powers put them a step up on men. I have not insisted on they’re each choosing to be mothers or nuns, but I have seemed always to know that their role in having the babies was the highest role accorded humans.

    I was a virgin when I married, but knew plenty enough how to make up for that fact; as did my virgin wife. We ‘honeymooned’ for all of our marriage. (Note this well, youngsters, and remember: my wife and I never owned a TV.)

    Our worst ‘sex’ failure? Having but an only-daughter; we should have had a houseful, even as my eldest would have only been ten when my wife died. And, this failure was all mine; and I have paid for it ever since.

    But, our ‘sex education’ was limited to commonsense and love – real, Sacramental, decisive, choose-each-other-to-give-oneself, divorce-not-in-our-vocabulary, life-partnered love. No distractions (e.g., TV) + full commitment = communicate or fall silent and wither away . We talked almost nightly about various things and knew each other like we had always been together. I miss those nightly soirees into lovely talk. (Yeah – even when and as she won all the debates!)

    And, ladies, yes – you’re right – I never deserved such a one in my life, let alone vowed with me in Matrimony.

    You can imagine how much I miss my best friend in this life. I have lived with a saint, and it is wondrous beyond words. I call her Saint Sharon, Little One of the Little Flower of Jesus. The title becomes her, and she never failed to earn my devout trust that God has her with Him, now.

    BUT – I never have missed sex education.

    I remain your obedient servant, but God’s first,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @mail.catholicexchange.com or …yahoo.com)

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Mary Anne,

    There are many, many of us parents that are fully in agreement with you…really with what the Pontifical Council counsels! So – yes – we opt our children out of these insidious and insipid “touching” programs. But the dilemma is even greater.

    We have hundreds of schools and parishes implimenting these programs because they feel the thumb of the (arch)diocese. They believe they ultimately have to obey, eventhough they disagree. To some extent, that notion is laudable, because the notion of obedience in general is often lost. However, they do not know how to balance obedience to their authority (the bishop) while keeping the children truly MORALLY protected (like not implimenting these programs). Our clergy are truly confused and lost as to what should be done.

    Where does one go from here?

    — Loretta
    cross ref article:
    Catholic Medical Association recommends immediate removal of Touching Safety Programs

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    You know, I hate to say it, but get someone the bishops do seem to listen to . . . a good attorney, but with orthodox Christian spirit. ‘Threaten’ first your pastor, and on up until you get heard. I get this feeling about our American hierarhy, especially, that you have to hit your mule in the head to get his attention before he will even hear, let alone listen.

    That, yes, is pathetic – but, this is America, where ‘squeaky wheels’ are the only things getting heard. What with ACLU, PPA, NORML, our allegedly ‘supreme’ court, etc., devoutly dedicated Catholic attorneys are fighting a powerfully tough battle, already. Why should we lay folk be forced into a corner that only such talent can get us out of?

    Meantime, deepen ‘sex education’ at home, emphasizing eternity with God, and how God’s love is all. LIVE sex education, too, by exemplifying what ‘the marriage act’ – sex, as it is meant by our loving God – is all about. Make it the sex education that really counts with your children.

    Good to see you here, Loretta. I remember your intelligent posts back at that primitive old CE site. Also saw elsewhere that you would submit yourself (how very Islamic of you) to submitting your writing to CE. Good idea! Start with practical sex-education tips 😉

    I remain your obedient servant, but God’s first,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @mail.catholicexchange.com or …yahoo.com)

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Thank you Warren!

    I am currently “working the system” trying to find a contact that could get a group of us in to see the bishop. He has a blog site – do you think he reads it, too?

    As for submitting myself, I did see somewhere around this new site something about “submit your articles to the editors,” but heaven seems to forbid that I find it again. Have you noticed how easy it is to get lost on this site? I’m trying to think of a good way of preventing that!

    — Loretta

  5. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Having been ‘lost and confused’ most of my life, this site just doesn’t strike as a ‘losing-me’ proposition.

    I think that you are confused, however, in that Mary K. suggested postings from established news sources by each of our widdo selves. She did not encouarge our own authorship, and I haven’t run into that among posts. I think among contact info, you will find method for submissions. I think that there was something about providing pizza and combo sandwiches with your submission so that they have 1) a meal-time during which not to need to acquire food and, hence and thence, 2) can review your submission.

    Don’t forget about 6 liters of beverages . . .

    I remain your obedient servant, but God’s first,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @mail.catholicexchange.com or …yahoo.com)

Leave a Reply