Monday, September 11, 2017

The SSPX’s “Child Protection Policy” endorsed masturbation, sodomy, obscenity, pornography, etc...


🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 WARNING 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
CONTAINS 
SEXUALLY EXPLICIT
PERVERTED WRITTEN 
CONTENT
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 WARNING 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

The FSSPX school in Burghclere, England.


Thanks to George Lydda who made this important matter to known to the general public with a facebook post (see below) and to the anonymous reader of Call Me Jorge... who brought it to our attention.



The following screenshots are taken from the document, “St. Michael’s School Child Protection Policy, Procedure and Guidance” from Appendix IX (pp. 30-2) posted on Great Britain’s SSPX website which appears to have now been removed.  (click here to download the document)  Here's the link to the cached document from the Great Britain SSPX website.  This document is almost identical to documents appearing on other schools’ websites in Great Britain such as: St. John the Baptist CE Primary School; Barton Primary School; Redlands Primary School; Swanmore College; Grayshott C of E Primary School; etc... who have all also adopted the Brook Sexual Behaviors Traffic Light Tool.  The appendix reads at the top of each page, “All green, amber and red behaviours require some form of attention and response. It is the level of intervention that will vary.”


For Ages 0 to 5

For Ages 5 to 9

For Ages 9 to 13

For Ages 13 to 17 

Absolutely disgusting!

So who’s responsible for St. Michael’s School and the policy document that’s been posted, removed, reposted and removed once again?  That would be Fr. John Brucciani, St. Michael’s headmaster, and Fr. Robert Brucciani, the District Superior of Great Britain.





According to the SSPX website, Fr. Robert Brucciani’s responsibilities as District Superior include, “the wise pastoral care of the priests, brothers and sisters of his District, together with their priories, schools and chapels, according to the statutes and spirit of the Society.”  Why not give the District Superior a call and the headmaster at St. Michael’s and let both of them know how you feel about this on again—off again policy at St. Michael’s?  Ask why Fr. Patrick Summers removed the offending material only then to be removed from his job as headmaster and why did the administration under the new headmaster, Fr. John Brucciani, put the morally offending document back up?  Point out to them that if they need to have a document such as this to fulfill British law for having a school, perhaps they shouldn’t have a school.  Ask them why they ever thought it a good idea to adopt the policy of the pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, sexually confused, pro-contraceptionBrook in the first place! 


Excerpt from Brook’s Position Statement on Relationships and Sex Education:



Contact information from “St. Michael’s School Child 
Protection Policy, Procedure and Guidance”

Rev. Fr. Robert Brucciani, the District Superior 
of Great Britain & Scandinavia.

Better yet, call Menzingen and ask Bp. Fellay if he is going to remove Fr. Robert Brucciani and Fr. John Brucciani from their posts.  Remind Bp. Fellay of the seven deans that were removed in France by himself and Fr. Christian Bouchacourt, the district superior, for simply voicing their disagreement with the ongoing talks with modernist Rome.







Would Abp. Lefebvre stand for this behavior?




24 comments:

  1. Thank you. I pray the SSPX removes these men from their positions. Alas, the rot is everywhere. Everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a scam. I know all three priest's as i was at school there and they would never have posted such a thing. There is no such thing as green behaviour taught there.

      Delete
    2. It is no scam the “St. Michael’s School Child Protection Policy, Procedure and Guidance” was posted on Great Britain’s SSPX website.

      Delete
  2. A bunch of VILE VIPERS so devoid of ANY morality that Satan himself is nauseated!!! These degenerates that allow this FILTH are as vile as the demons that now grace the Vatican!! They WHORE themselves out for more POWER and MONEY and STATUS maybe?? Well, if I had a child in that school, hell would have no more furry than a parent scorned. Let's put it this way: They wouldn't want to deal with the likes of me. This needs to go viral and the school needs to be 100% emptied.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Staff and Parents,




      You will have become aware of accusations against St. Michael's in regard to our Child Protection Policy. It is claimed that the policy is proof that the SSPX is promoting the moral corruption of children.




      We reassure you that we do not seek nor wish to corrupt the children entrusted to us. On the contrary, we gladly sacrifice ourselves for them, daily.




      In 2016, the Hampshire County Council Child Protection Policy Template for Schools (available on their website) was used to update our child protection policy here at St. Michael's School. The template contained the Brook Sexual Behaviour Traffic Light Tool, which describes as normal certain sexual activities and attitudes that are sinful. Unfortunately, due to a lake of oversight or distraction, the Brook Tool was overlooked and published as part of St. Michael's School Child Protection Policy.




      Ten days ago, before any polemic arose, I read (and updated) the policy for the first time. I noticed the Brook Tool. I inquired if its inclusion in our CP Policy was a legal requirement. Since it is not a legal requirement, I withdrew it.




      Coincidently, several days after the policy had been amended, the internet became alive with the 2016 version of our CP policy, that has quietly nested on our website undisturbed for over 15 months.




      The present attack on the SSPX is particularly disturbing in that it seeks to harm the only means we have of keeping our child safe from the many evils around us, namely St. Michael's School.




      Please pray for your priests, religious and teaching staff, that we be able to accomplish much for your children with the limited means we have at our disposal.




      All our policies will be readily available on a new website we are preparing and which we hope will go live in a week or two.




      Please forgive this delayed contact. I hope to write to you more fully very soon. So much to do.




      Sincerely in Christ,







      Fr. John Brucciani | Headmaster

      St. Michael's School

      Harts Lane

      Burghclere RG20 9JW

      U.K.

      Delete
  3. Don't all schools need to post this garbage in the UK to even function? I think it highly unlikely that the school wasn't forced by the government to put it up for parents to view. Doesn't mean they teach it or follow it. I would be really careful before you blame

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As we wrote in the post, “Point out to them that if they need to have a document such as this to fulfill British law for having a school, perhaps they shouldn’t have a school. ”

      Delete
    2. You don't play footsie with the devil under any circumstances Clare and you never, ever peddle filth, especially to children.

      Delete
    3. What is your point? Do tell. Jesus called out the vipers and hypocrites Himself. Are you saying He was wrong to do that?

      Delete
    4. No, I wasn't saying it's wrong to call out evil, just to find out what's really going on there. It's awful poison to be sure. Just hoping there is an explanation and the priests warned the patents about the website and why it was there, etc. As foster parents, my husband and I had to have access to this sort of information as part of our "training". Doesn't mean we brought it into the house or were even required to use it with the children. Knowing several holy priests of the SSPX I hope this is the case.

      Delete
  4. Aren't schools in the UK required by law to post this garbage? Doesn't mean the school promotes it to the children. I would be very careful before blaming anyone or calling any priest a viper. It seems to be posted for parents' sake. It would be a real win for liberals if they could take all Christian schools away by requiring this sort of thing and then all of us freaking out and shutting down. Talk to the priests. So glad to be an American, at least for now!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, it is a matter of law, Clare. Which shall the SSPX choose?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The SSPX must choose God's law!

      It should not even be a question.

      Delete
  6. It doesn't matter. These priests SHOULD HAVE REFUSED TO POST IT.

    THEY HAVE NO COURAGE.

    THAT MEANS THEY ARE NOT SHEPHERDS.

    RUN. RUN QUICKLY. THEY WILL BETRAY YOU TO THE WOLVES IN THE END, AND YOUR CHILDREN WILL BE THE VICTIMS.

    ReplyDelete
  7. There is no requirement in UK law for sinful garbage like that to be contained in any Child Protection Policy. The SSPX school freely chose to include it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I know none of you will listen, reading the comments on this post, but I still want to make the truth stand whether you like it or not.

    This post was written by a married man whose behaviour is very much into question and is just very bitter as this was not accepted by the SSPX. I know the people involved in this, so know the facts.

    The posting of the extremely offensive policy was due to an update of the school policies copied from somewhere else. Due to a lack of oversight or distraction, the Brook Tool was overlooked and published as part of St. Michael's School Child Protection Policy and was withdrawn as soon as noticed. Errare humanum est. If you never make a mistake, throw the first stone!

    St Michael School has never and will never stand for what the author of this article claims. Every religious and member of staff is fully dedicated to do the best they can for all the pupils and to giving them a fully Catholic education and all on a shoe string. It is not a perfect place, as nowhere is, but try they certainly are.

    Please, before deliberately spreading filth, claiming the SSPX stands for all sorts of vices, don't get the information from an embittered individual who's only motive seems to be extremely questionable.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nice one Isabel Grimer. It's all absolutely been taken out of proportion. What would these people prefer? No sspx schools and where would the Childre go to school? Public school? Yep...that's a better alternative!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Homeschool's the answer

      Delete
  10. I'm 'George Lydda' mentioned at the beginning of the blog post. The latest news is this:

    The headmaster, Fr. J. Brucciani, emailed parents and staff yesterday stating that 10 days ago, 3rd September, "I read (and updated) the policy for the first time. I noticed the Brook Tool. I inquired if its inclusion in our CP Policy was a legal requirement. Since it is not a legal requirement, I withdrew it." .......

    Question: Then why was the Brook Traffic Light appendix still part of the updated and amended policy emailed from the school to its staff on 7th September?

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is whole thread is inaccurate, and then taking inaccurate comments and running down a rabbit hole. Fr Summers "was removed"??? Actually, he was doing a great job, and was needed to run one one of the largest SSPX parishes. So was he removed? NO... This is just a very simple example of how this article is misleading, and a "witch hunt"... I also believe if you are unable to use your name, you're a coward. Wearing a "mask" and spreading lies. My God have mercy on your soul. Dan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We are familiar with several SSPX churches and chapels which must have revolving doors because the priests change so often being assigned and removed.

      It's no witch hunt, the SSPX still hasn't come forth with an official explanation of how the Brook Tool ended up in their policy.

      Delete
  12. The SSPX does not need to come forth with any explanation to you, who are nothing at all to the school. The only explanation needed was the letter Fr. Brucciani sent to staff and parents which copy you can find above as someone posted it in its entirety above.
    What you are responsible for though are the vile calumnies being thrown at the school which are being spread over the web by people like you. Ultimately, YOU and the like will have to answer to God for it and I would not like being in your shoes when that happens....

    ReplyDelete
  13. Dear Isobel Grimer,
    On the contrary, the SSPX positively needs to explain to the entire trad Catholic world, chapter and verse, exactly how this all came about. It involves scandal, and requires a full explanation lest souls continue to be scandalized. So, by all means, give us the necessary excuses such as gross incompetence and rank stupidity which is far preferable to other reasons.
    I saw that Fr. Brucciani made the comment that UK law doesn't require the posting of the material in question hence his removal of same. Is he completely insane, or is this the sort of decision that SSPX training and culture produces? Let me set you, Isabel, Fr. Brucciani, Bp. Fellay and entire SSPX clergy and laity straight. If it were required by law to publish that type of material you have two choices: SHUT DOWN the school or BREAK that PERVERSE law. A *Catholic* couldn't justify any other course of action. The fact that Fr. Brucciania made the comment, "I inquired if its inclusion in our CP Policy was a legal requirement. Since it is not a legal requirement, I withdrew it," is frightening, because ANYONE who would see that material on their SSPX school website would be gravely scandalized, and after becoming aware that it was incorporated to conform with UK law would be further scandalized that the SSPX would accede to that type of demand. Bottom line: SSPX, please start acting like CATHOLICS.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The entire traditional Catholic community worldwide owes a profound debt of gratitude to the whistle-blower and to the owner of this blog for exposing this horrid scandal.

    As it stands, the following still hasn't been satisfied: "It's no witch hunt, the SSPX still hasn't come forth with an official explanation of how the Brook Tool ended up in their policy."

    This needs to be followed tbrough to the end, and then all of the history recorded and saved. Those responsible in the SSPX would dearly love to see this blog close down one day and, consequently, all of the evidence disappear. This is the sort of incident that they wish they could suppress, but like it or not it's now a part of post Vatican II Church history.

    May Almighty God abundantly bless you and your good works!

    ReplyDelete