After decades of opposition, Vatican view on condoms begins to shift

  • Thread starter Thread starter CelticSword
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
carol_marie said:
I agree with you… I don’t get it either.

I also wonder something similar when someone says that if they get pregnant again they will probably die … so now they MUST use artificial contraception. To me, that’s like making the choice: possibly spend eternity in hell OR go without sex.

It’s a no-brainer to me. Don’t get me wrong… sex is good - but it’s not THAT good. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I totally agree and I think that the Pope will agree - no condoms.
 
carol_marie said:
I agree with you… I don’t get it either.

I also wonder something similar when someone says that if they get pregnant again they will probably die … so now they MUST use artificial contraception. To me, that’s like making the choice: possibly spend eternity in hell OR go without sex.

It’s a no-brainer to me. Don’t get me wrong… sex is good - but it’s not THAT good. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes Carol marie, and another thing too, is people who use condoms to protect their partner also have another thing to consider, that is, the procreation of another human being.

It’s bad enough if they fail and don’t protect the partner, but if life is created and it’s passed onto the child, well that is just dead wrong.

Condoms may protect the body, but damned useless at protecting the soul.
 
HoppityRedux said:
The CDC disagrees. Here is what it says at two different places in the same referenced document.

“The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is to abstain from sexual intercourse, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected.”

“Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.”

cdc.gov/nchstp/od/latex.htm
Click to expand...
I think here the CDC and the Church agrees:

“The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is to abstain from sexual intercourse, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected.”
 
gilliam said:
I think here the CDC and the Church agrees:

“The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is to abstain from sexual intercourse, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected.”
Click to expand...
Sure they agree. I am not aware of anyone who disputes that. Disagreement arises when the CDC attempts to deal with the set of people who do not abstain or limt their relations to a single monogamous relationship.

However, it’s important to know what the CDC says about condoms since many folks tell us condoms are not effective. It’s especially important for kids to know what the CDC says so they can evaluate what they are told from other sources.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
The Vatican view on condoms has not changed at all–condoms used for contraception are forbidden, as all contraception is an act of intrinsic evil. This new tactic of arguing that the ‘intent’ of the couple is not contraception but protection from illness is fatally flawed from its conception (pardon the pun).

Somehow I fail to see the same ‘mechanism’ which admittedly is flawed enough to have a less than 100% protection against pregnancy and STDs being ‘permitted’ to married couples because one of them has AIDS or HIV.

Benedict, God bless him, is an intelligent man. He understands that he has to look at so-called ‘new’ techniques, techologies, etc. just so that he can be absolutely sure that he thoroughly understands the situation. But he is not going to be swayed into doing anything against the Church teaching. No, not Benedict. . .nor any other Pope. The gates of hell will not prevail.
Click to expand...
AMEN!
 
This article was written by the Guardian, a liberal piece of pap which should not be taken seriously. They have been banging the same old drum for years.
 
This is why I am on the way out of Catholcism. If the church changes on this is that not a change in “turth” as taught by Paul VI? Many will argue the point but I see this, if true, as just the beginning. The Anglicaniszation of the Catholic Church. Truth is not immutable.

A dear secular friend of mine - strong feminist - told me today that finally the churuch may be coming around. That says it all. I am barely holding on now, but if Benedict affirms this I am out of the Catholic Church - and probably Chrtiainity altogether.

And you wonder why so many in Europe and America are feeling the draw of Islam. Truth is Truth. If Christianity continues to change the “truth” - well, there is no truth in Christianity. For myself anyway.

By the way, rememeber the Lamberth Conference? This, if it comes to pass, will be that for the Catholic Church. Just the beginning.

IMO, Christianity seems to be collasping on itself and secularizing. This will/would be a sign that the Catholic Chruch is no different thant the Anglicans of the 1930s. If you have doubts now, wait to see the coming decades if this change goes through.
 
My guess is that the Church will give the tough answer most people don’t want to hear.

Condom failures will inevitably produce children born with AIDS just like we have now, just a reduced number.

It is not the Chuch’s responsibility to tell people how to sin. We can figure out that one by ourselves.
 
rien said:
This is why I am on the way out of Catholcism. If the church changes on this is that not a change in “turth” as taught by Paul VI? Many will argue the point but I see this, if true, as just the beginning. The Anglicaniszation of the Catholic Church. Truth is not immutable.

A dear secular friend of mine - strong feminist - told me today that finally the churuch may be coming around. That says it all. I am barely holding on now, but if Benedict affirms this I am out of the Catholic Church - and probably Chrtiainity altogether.

And you wonder why so many in Europe and America are feeling the draw of Islam. Truth is Truth. If Christianity continues to change the “truth” - well, there is no truth in Christianity. For myself anyway.

By the way, rememeber the Lamberth Conference? This, if it comes to pass, will be that for the Catholic Church. Just the beginning.

IMO, Christianity seems to be collasping on itself and secularizing. This will/would be a sign that the Catholic Chruch is no different thant the Anglicans of the 1930s. If you have doubts now, wait to see the coming decades if this change goes through.
Click to expand...
Wow. Sounds like you’ve been burned. Care to share?
 
rien said:
This is why I am on the way out of Catholcism. If the church changes on this is that not a change in “turth” as taught by Paul VI? Many will argue the point but I see this, if true, as just the beginning. The Anglicaniszation of the Catholic Church. Truth is not immutable.

A dear secular friend of mine - strong feminist - told me today that finally the churuch may be coming around. That says it all. I am barely holding on now, but if Benedict affirms this I am out of the Catholic Church - and probably Chrtiainity altogether.

And you wonder why so many in Europe and America are feeling the draw of Islam. Truth is Truth. If Christianity continues to change the “truth” - well, there is no truth in Christianity. For myself anyway.

By the way, rememeber the Lamberth Conference? This, if it comes to pass, will be that for the Catholic Church. Just the beginning.

IMO, Christianity seems to be collasping on itself and secularizing. This will/would be a sign that the Catholic Chruch is no different thant the Anglicans of the 1930s. If you have doubts now, wait to see the coming decades if this change goes through.
Click to expand...
I think if you go back and check your facts, the Church has never changed her teachings on sex outside of marriage, the use of artificial birth control, divorce, and other such moral issues. The Protestants, however, have changed their stance on every single one of them, all within the last 100 years. I’m not sure what you’re basing your opinion on, but it certainly doesn’t seem to be on the actual teachings of the Catholic Church.
 
Care to share?

Its all downhill since I left evangelical Christianity for Catholocism. Benedict, for me , has been a great disappointmnet. His appontoment of “my bishop” Levada to the Congregation for the Faith was a gut wrencher. I’ve lived in SF for the past 6 years and Levada has not been orthodox in any way. Then Benedict appoints the Salt Lake City bishop to SF. Read Catholic World Report from October for an expose on what/how the new bishop seems to be “end running” from orthodoxy and Vatican norms on gay adoption.

I will probably get points towards banning for this post but the only focus for the bishop of Rome is supposed to be as shephard for the faithful. I see this not with Benedict. His move to generalities is leaving the sheep open to the wolves.

So why should I continue to believe in the Petrine ministy?
 
Oh yes, I’m supposed to post links to me references. CWR does not have that particular article archived on their site but, if anyone here wants a copy, send me your address. I will photocopy and e-mail you the article at no cost to yourself. I’m referring to the article on Bishop Niederhauer and gay adoption.
 
rien said:
Care to share?

Its all downhill since I left evangelical Christianity for Catholocism. Benedict, for me , has been a great disappointmnet. His appontoment of “my bishop” Levada to the Congregation for the Faith was a gut wrencher. I’ve lived in SF for the past 6 years and Levada has not been orthodox in any way. Then Benedict appoints the Salt Lake City bishop to SF. Read Catholic World Report from October for an expose on what/how the new bishop seems to be “end running” from orthodoxy and Vatican norms on gay adoption.

I will probably get points towards banning for this post but the only focus for the bishop of Rome is supposed to be as shephard for the faithful. I see this not with Benedict. His move to generalities is leaving the sheep open to the wolves.

So why should I continue to believe in the Petrine ministy?
Click to expand...
I’m so sorry to hear about the things that have troubled you.

I’m sorry, but I am totally unfamiliar with the situation. Were the bishops you spoke of hand picked by Pope Benedict?
 
mark_a said:
I’m so sorry to hear about the things that have troubled you.

I’m sorry, but I am totally unfamiliar with the situation. Were the bishops you spoke of hand picked by Pope Benedict?
Click to expand...
Absolutely! There was somewhat of a stir when Benedict appointed the somehwat gay-friendly Levada to his post. Neiderhauer as the new bishop stirred controvery among orthodox circles but was applauded by the gay community here.

Its not like I’m making this out of whole clothe. PM me and I will send you a copy of the article from CWR re: Niederauher and the local church’s continuing support for gay adoption.

BTW, I will gladly mail a copy to the moderator lest I get banned or points towards banning for posting this info.
 
rien said:
This is why I am on the way out of Catholcism. .
Click to expand...
So you’ve preempted the decision of the Pope ? if, if ,if , a small word with a big meaning, at least wait until there is something definite, just like the Limbo, wait.
 
rien said:
Absolutely! There was somewhat of a stir when Benedict appointed the somehwat gay-friendly Levada to his post. Neiderhauer as the new bishop stirred controvery among orthodox circles but was applauded by the gay community here.

Its not like I’m making this out of whole clothe. PM me and I will send you a copy of the article from CWR re: Niederauher and the local church’s continuing support for gay adoption.

BTW, I will gladly mail a copy to the moderator lest I get banned or points towards banning for posting this info.
Click to expand...
Please post up a link to this story, so we can all give an unbiased opinion to it.

Sorry, just caught post #33
 
The Church’s teaching on condom (contraception) will not change.
The day it changes is the day I cease to be a Catholic!

Really!

But I know it can’t and it wouldn’t.
 
I really think this is just a bunch of hype. Someone is bringing the issue to the Pope, who will likely chuckle as he says “ah, buh bye” to the issue – but the simple fact that someone has made the move to bring the issue before him sends the liberal media dizzy with anticipation…

too bad it will be short-lived

“after decades of opposition, Vatican view on condoms begins to shift” ----- sure got you to read the article didn’t it? But if you read thru it, (once you’re hooked in, that is) you realize there’s nothing really newsworthy in there…a new Pope, all the old challenges reintroduced in the hopes of a “freebie from the new guy” – it’s just not going to happen, IMHO.
 
rien said:
Read Catholic World Report from October for an expose on what/how the new bishop seems to be “end running” from orthodoxy and Vatican norms on gay adoption.
Click to expand...
Would this be the article?
ignatius.com/Magazines/CWR/charities.htm
So why should I continue to believe in the Petrine ministy?
Click to expand...
Because if God took the trouble of sending his Son, he would have taken the trouble to guarantee that the Word not get lost. The Church is that safeguard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top