Archbishop ok's condoms for HIV couples

  • Thread starter Thread starter yinekka
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

yinekka

Guest
The archbishop of Mombasa in Kenya says it is ok for HIV couples to use condoms. This is against the mind of the Church. Is this the beginning of a revolt against the teachings of the Magisterium by bishops who appear to be appointing themselves as their own Magisterium. We have the case recently of Swiss bishops telling Rome that they have given permission for the non Catholic spouse of a marriage to receive Holy Communion. The Vatican apparently caved in because I have seen no statement issued to the contrary. Where will it end?
 
Wow, that’s wrong as all hell.

Let’s pray he was understood.
 
40.png
yinekka:
The archbishop of Mombasa in Kenya says it is ok for HIV couples to use condoms. This is against the mind of the Church. Is this the beginning of a revolt against the teachings of the Magisterium by bishops who appear to be appointing themselves as their own Magisterium. We have the case recently of Swiss bishops telling Rome that they have given permission for the non Catholic spouse of a marriage to receive Holy Communion. The Vatican apparently caved in because I have seen no statement issued to the contrary. Where will it end?
Click to expand...
Did this really happen? Can you point us to the offical statement from this archbishop?
 
40.png
yinekka:
The archbishop of Mombasa in Kenya says it is ok for HIV couples to use condoms. This is against the mind of the Church.
Click to expand...
Is this really against the teaching of the Church? For a married couple to take protective measures against the transmission of disease, even if those measures have an unintended contraceptive side-effect seems no different than allowing a woman to have a hysterectomy.

Am I missing something?
 
This might not be as wrong as people think. Married Catholics are licitly allowed to use things that are contraceptive if the intent is not contraception. In this case, the condom is purely to prevent transmission of the disease and contraception is an unfortunate and unwanted side-effect. The same is true of using the birth control pill to regulate hormones for medical reasons, or the aforementioned hysterectomy in the case of serious illness such as cancer.
 
40.png
Ghosty:
This might not be as wrong as people think. Married Catholics are licitly allowed to use things that are contraceptive if the intent is not contraception. In this case, the condom is purely to prevent transmission of the disease and contraception is an unfortunate and unwanted side-effect. The same is true of using the birth control pill to regulate hormones for medical reasons, or the aforementioned hysterectomy in the case of serious illness such as cancer.
Click to expand...
The church teaches that people who have STD’s, especially deadly ones, shouldn’t be having sex anyway. Not to mention that condoms are not 100% effective against them. Kinda like russian roulette.
 
h
40.png
RichT:
The church teaches that people who have STD’s, especially deadly ones, shouldn’t be having sex anyway. Not to mention that condoms are not 100% effective against them. Kinda like russian roulette.
Click to expand...
That’s how I understand it. And if they are married then they should be willing to accept the risks.

I pray that I’m wrong and not the good bishop…
 
40.png
RichT:
The church teaches that people who have STD’s, especially deadly ones, shouldn’t be having sex anyway.
Click to expand...
Where is this teaching, please?
 
40.png
Ghosty:
This might not be as wrong as people think. Married Catholics are licitly allowed to use things that are contraceptive if the intent is not contraception. In this case, the condom is purely to prevent transmission of the disease and contraception is an unfortunate and unwanted side-effect. The same is true of using the birth control pill to regulate hormones for medical reasons, or the aforementioned hysterectomy in the case of serious illness such as cancer.
Click to expand...
Married Catholics are allowed to accept *medical treatment * even if it has the unintended effect of preventing pregnancy. A condom is not a medical treatment.
 
40.png
kmktexas:
Married Catholics are allowed to accept *medical treatment * even if it has the unintended effect of preventing pregnancy. A condom is not a medical treatment.
Click to expand...
Ah! That’s a distinction I can understand! Thanks!
 
Ghosty said:
This might not be as wrong as people think. Married Catholics are licitly allowed to use things that are contraceptive if the intent is not contraception. In this case, the condom is purely to prevent transmission of the disease and contraception is an unfortunate and unwanted side-effect. The same is true of using the birth control pill to regulate hormones for medical reasons, or the aforementioned hysterectomy in the case of serious illness such as cancer.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Here is a thorough article refuting claims for a moral exception for the use of condoms to prevent the spread of aids:

The Church’s Infallible and Immutable Doctrine on Contraception Stands Amid Growing Opposition: AIDS Prevention Cannot Justify Condoms – Their Use Is Intrinsically Evil and Ineffective

http://www.tfp.org/TFPForum/catholic_perspective/can_the_church_change.htm

Here are a few quotes that likewise clarify the authoritative teaching of the Church:

Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify* recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).”* (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2399)

“Contraception is to be judged so profoundly unlawful as to be never, for any reason, justified.* To think or to say the contrary is equal to maintaining that in human life, situations may arise in which it is lawful not to recognize God as God*.” (Pope John Paul II L’Osservatore Romano, October, 10, 1983)

“It is not licit*, even for the gravest reasons***, to do evil so that good may follow there from”(Humanae Vitae).
Bottom line: there is always the alternative of abstinence and growth in the virtue of chastity.
 
40.png
Timidity:
Where is this teaching, please?
Click to expand...
Read it on the Ask an Apologist forum from a reply by Father Serpa I believe. Someting about a person who had an STD should not get married as this would go against the whole teaching of the church on sex and procreation within a marriage. As far as two people already married, this is one of those things that does happen and sadly those folks should refrain from sex due to the fact that condoms aren’t 100% effective. His reply made perfetly good sense and I have no reason to doubt it. This was some time ago, maybe you can do a search on it.
 
40.png
yinekka:
The archbishop of Mombasa in Kenya says it is ok for HIV couples to use condoms. This is against the mind of the Church. Is this the beginning of a revolt against the teachings of the Magisterium by bishops who appear to be appointing themselves as their own Magisterium. ?
Click to expand...
is it the beginning? you must lead a sheltered life. It is hardly the beginning, simply the latest in a long line of dissenting bishops doing their own thing. Until you can come up with an effective means of solution other than burning at the stake, it will continue as long as men inside and outside the Church serve Satan in the name of compassion and wisdom.
 
40.png
RichT:
Read it on the Ask an Apologist forum from a reply by Father Serpa I believe. Someting about a person who had an STD should not get married as this would go against the whole teaching of the church on sex and procreation within a marriage. As far as two people already married, this is one of those things that does happen and sadly those folks should refrain from sex due to the fact that condoms aren’t 100% effective. His reply made perfetly good sense and I have no reason to doubt it. This was some time ago, maybe you can do a search on it.
Click to expand...
Please show the AAA post where the Church says that “those folks should refrain from sex due to the fact that condoms aren’t 100% effective”. The use of condoms in the sacrament of marriage is NEVER licit, even if condons were 100% effective against the spread of HIV virus.
 
I wanna see everything that the bishop said because it would not be the first time the media have taken a bishop’s words out of context and made it look like he supports contraception. There are some alarming quotes that should be investigated, no doubt. How would you contact that bishop or his office?

Scott
 
Any person with AIDS who is still willing to have sex with their spouse even with a condom is selfish and cares more about sexual pleasure than the spouse’s well-being. Condoms have a 10-14% failure rate resulting in pregnancy–imagine how many times they fail when pregnancy does not occur! HIV does not have an infertile period.
 
40.png
yinekka:
The Vatican apparently caved in because I have seen no statement issued to the contrary. Where will it end?
Click to expand...
Um… the Vatican is a little busy right now. And, you do NOT presume the Church has taken no action just because you have not heard about it. The Church typically takes a pastoral approach first, in private, to correct the individual. Only obstinate refusal to comply with Church teaching will result in public censure.
 
40.png
Timidity:
Is this really against the teaching of the Church? For a married couple to take protective measures against the transmission of disease,
Click to expand...
It would be the duty of an infected person to take steps protective measures against the transmission of disease.

The only effective measure is 100% abstinence.

Everything else is a form of Russian Roulette (chancy and immoral)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top