Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Deviant sɛҳuąƖ behavior defended by SSPX school in the UK  (Read 13106 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MaterDominici

  • Mod
  • Supporter
Re: Deviant sɛҳuąƖ behavior defended by SSPX school in the UK
« Reply #35 on: September 11, 2017, 02:53:34 PM »
So if I understand this correctly, this policy is mandated by the government for all schools throughout Great Britain, even private ones. Presumably then if they didn't have such a policy the school would be shut down - that's the choice.
.
someone already added that this "traffic light" policy is NOT required; the school is free to write their own

Quote
The school is required to have in place a suitable Child Protection Policy but such a policy does not have to include the Brook 'Traffic Lights' garbage or anything remotely similar. 

Re: Deviant sɛҳuąƖ behavior defended by SSPX school in the UK
« Reply #36 on: September 11, 2017, 03:03:19 PM »
I told you all many times before -- SSPX priests, priors, and officials all over the world have CathInfo as their homepage -- or at least on the main Bookmarks Bar (not in the Bookmarks Menu -- that's not accessible enough.) They keep an eagle eye on on their "enemy" at all times. And in this they do well: CathInfo is one of their largest public or online enemies. What I mean is, they can't keep an eye on Bp. Zendejas because he keeps a low (read: non-existent) profile on the Internet. They no doubt have a great interest in him, but all they can learn about him comes through CathInfo, the St. Dominic's Chapel website, etc.

I invite everyone to pay attention to the original post, at the bottom. There are THREE links. A graphic, and 2 links above that. One link is to the "Child Protection Policy" PDF. The other is a PDF printout of that school's links webpage yesterday morning. Both are archived for the permanent record, and will be around as long as CathInfo (did I say how permanent they were?)

EDIT: I've included most of the materials at the bottom of this post as well. I created a graphic, screenshot version of the Table of Links to St. Michael's School Policies page as well.

Quote
Need I point out --

When you catch a child with his hand in the cookie jar, and he puts back the cookie, do you conclude, "What an honest little boy!"
Heck no! He would have raided the jar if only you hadn't been there.

The SSPX taking down this material is the largest admission of guilt I could possibly imagine. All the excuses ("all schools in the UK have to have this -- it's required by law!") fall apart to pieces in the face of what the SSPX just did. They admitted that they COULD have taken it down at any time -- they just didn't want to.

If it weren't for a certain person informing me about this, and CathInfo publishing it to the four corners of Tradition, the material would still be up on the website today.

They want themselves, and their schools, to be increasingly "mainstream" and accepted by the wicked Modern World. They want their name removed from the SLPC website, they want to stop being called αnтι-ѕємιтєs, etc. and for those cowardly goals all I can say is: shame on them!


Maybe these particular posts and the accompanying PDFs should be pinned, or pin the whole thread.


Re: Deviant sɛҳuąƖ behavior defended by SSPX school in the UK
« Reply #37 on: September 12, 2017, 10:35:26 AM »
.
someone already added that this "traffic light" policy is NOT required; the school is free to write their own
.
Thanks, but I don't think this addresses the specific question.

The link provided by JmJ2cents only talks in general terms about charities. Now although the SSPX in Britain is a charity, the school itself is a registered private school, they have regular inspections from the school authorities. So the question remains, are there any specific legal requirements that a registered school must comply with?

Yesterday in England there was a row over parents removing their son from a "faith" school (C of E) due to another boy being allow to wear a dress (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-41224146). The school's defence was that they are required by law to allow this (I don't know if this is true).

Perhaps JmJ2cents' friend can be more specific. Also, I'm not sure that by removing the material on line that means the policy itself has been removed.

Re: Deviant sɛҳuąƖ behavior defended by SSPX school in the UK
« Reply #38 on: September 12, 2017, 10:41:08 AM »
Better a bumpkin in Heaven than a genius in Hell.

Re: Deviant sɛҳuąƖ behavior defended by SSPX school in the UK
« Reply #39 on: September 12, 2017, 10:59:46 AM »
Sympathy? Zero.


         Okay DZ,  I'll give you a puff.