Help Help with Priest E-mail and contraception and TOB

  • Thread starter Thread starter Odell
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Odell

Guest
Hi Everyone,

Thank you for a very productive and enlightening meeting last night. Issues around sexuality are often times outside our “comfort zone” and not easy to approach. Please know how much I appreciate your willingness to enter into this dialogue. We are blessed to have you all on board giving of your time and talents.

Pursuant to the mixed responses in our meeting last night, I would like to go into a little more detail about the complexities of teaching human sexuality in a Catholic venue. As HIV education was our focus last night, here is a quote from the USCCB’s document: “The Many Faces of AIDS A Gospel Response” that may help us to understand the appropriateness of a comprehensive approach as we introduce our youth to the beauty and sanctity of human sexuality: (The underlining in these quotes is mine.)
Code: 
* In light of this understanding of the human person, we are convinced that unless, as a society, we live in accord with an authentic human sexuality, on which our Catholic moral teaching is based, we will not address a major source of the spread of AIDS. Any other solution will be merely short.term, ultimately ineffective, and will contribute to the trivialization of human sexuality that is already so prevalent in our society.
* That is why we oppose the approach to AIDS prevention often popularly called "safe sex." This avenue compromises human sexuality—making it "safe" to be promiscuous—and, in fact, is quite misleading. As the National Academy of Sciences has noted in its study of AIDS, "many have argued that it is more accurate to speak in terms of 'safer' sex because the unknowns are still such that it would be irresponsible to certify any particular activity as absolutely safe.”
* "Should there be educational programs about AIDS in our schools, religious education programs, and adult education programs?  While we recognize, above all, the inalienable rights of parents as the primary educators of their children and their importance in this area, we also affirm that there ought to be educational programs about AIDS at every appropriate level of Catholic schools and religious education programs. Adapted to the maturity of the learners, these programs should communicate the biological facts about AIDS as well as the values which should form their consciences. Several dioceses in the United States and Canada have developed guidelines for these educational efforts. The guidelines of the diocese of Cleveland provide an example of one approach to developing an initial pastoral response. Essential to these efforts are programs to assist parents in their responsibility to be the primary educators of their children."
* Because we live in a pluralistic society, we acknowledge that some will not agree with our understanding of human sexuality. We recognize that public educational programs addressed to a wide audience will reflect the fact that some people will not act as they can and should; that they will not refrain from the type of sexual or drug.abuse behavior that can transmit AIDS. In such situations, educational efforts, if grounded in the broader moral vision outlined above, could include accurate information about prophylactic devices or other practices proposed by some medical experts as potential means of preventing AIDS. We are not promoting the use of prophylactics, but merely providing information that is part of the factual picture. Such a factual presentation should indicate that abstinence outside of marriage and fidelity within marriage as well as the avoidance of intravenous drug abuse are the only morally correct and medically sure ways to prevent the spread of AIDS. So.called safe sex practices are at best only partially effective. They do not take into account either the real values that are at stake or the fundamental good of the human person.
If you read through this whole document (which I encourage you to do), it is clear that the Church’s primary focus in HIV prevention is abstinence and the promotion of a positive theology around sexuality (which we are doing at BSC). However, as underlined in the last bullet point, the Church is not against the teaching of “accurate information” to avoid transmission of the virus . . . providing that moral/theological teaching foundational.

continued…
 
I pulled two other quotes out of this document which I believe may help you to understand why I promoted in my teaching a “do no harm to others” approach for those who failed at chastity. Any sexually active youth/adult outside the confines of a HIV negative monogamous relationship is considered to be “at risk.” I approached this knowing I had sexually active students, as well as HIV infected students within our demographic. The last sentence in the second bullet point refers to avoiding “inflicting greater harm.” I believe this implies that if you cannot abstain from sexual activity, and you are at risk, you should choose the “lesser of the two evils” and prevent the greater harm (the transmission of the virus).
Code: 
* "We also wish to say a word about the responsibilities of those who find themselves "at risk" of having been exposed to the AIDS virus. Earlier we stated something of the meaning and purpose of human sexuality. If a person chooses not to live in accord with this meaning or has misused drugs, he or she still has the serious responsibility not to bring injury to another person. Consequently, anyone who is considered to be "at risk" of having been exposed to the AIDS virus has a grave moral responsibility to ensure that he or she does not expose anyone else to it. This means that such a person who is considering marriage; engaging in intimate sexual contact; or planning to donate blood, organs, or semen has a moral responsibility to be tested for exposure to the AIDS virus and should act in such a way that it will not bring possible harm to another."

* "On the more personal level of the health.care professional, the first course of action should be to invite a patient at risk, or one who already has been exposed to the disease, to live a chaste life. If it is obvious that the person will not act without bringing harm to others, then the traditional Catholic wisdom with regard to one's responsibility to avoid inflicting greater harm may be appropriately applied."
As I said last night, I do not think we have any major problems in our TYM program and I did not plan on having the whole meeting revolve around the issue of HIV. However, the Spirit must have been at work, so I make these statements for clarification as we seek to build consensus in this group. I believe our agreement to examine the the curriculum outlined in the “Theology of the Body” and **fill in the any gaps we find with HIV prevention teaching **(and its ineffectiveness) is a good approach. If it’s not broken, let’s not try to fix it!

Where do I go from here his prevention teaching is CONDOMS:mad:
 
Well I have done some research and it seems to me that we can’t even trust what is put out by our own bishops

Pope Benadict even had something to say about this whenge was a cardinal.

So now that I know my priest is trying to push his left wing agenda how do I respond and where do I go from here
 
Hi Odell -

I am trying to understanding exactly what you need help with. You referenced “underlined” statements, but none appear in your post. In addition, I dont understand your last statement regarding condoms. Would you carefully re-read what you wrote and re-state what you intended to say - is it a question or a statement?

Im not sure, but the very last paragraph that you provided discusses what constitutes moral behavior for someone who has HIV and is intent on engaging in sexual intercourse. I think the speaker is saying that in such a situation, the HIV+ person has an obligation to NOT do harm to the other person. I think he is saying that in such a situation it is more appropriate to use a form of protection than to use nothing at all.
Don’t be confused, however, they are all involve grave matter and the potential for mortal sin:
  • unmarried sex
  • contraception
  • endangering the life of another
    Best: abstinance
Bad: adultery and condom use

Worst: adultery and endangering the life of another through unprotected sex

I think, ultimately, he is simply advocating using a condom over endangering the life of another.
 
Philthy said:
Hi Odell -

I am trying to understanding exactly what you need help with. You referenced “underlined” statements, but none appear in your post. In addition, I dont understand your last statement regarding condoms. Would you carefully re-read what you wrote and re-state what you intended to say - is it a question or a statement?

Im not sure, but the very last paragraph that you provided discusses what constitutes moral behavior for someone who has HIV and is intent on engaging in sexual intercourse. I think the speaker is saying that in such a situation, the HIV+ person has an obligation to NOT do harm to the other person. I think he is saying that in such a situation it is more appropriate to use a form of protection than to use nothing at all.
Don’t be confused, however, they are all involve grave matter and the potential for mortal sin:
  • unmarried sex
  • contraception
  • endangering the life of another
    Best: abstinance
Bad: adultery and condom use

Worst: adultery and endangering the life of another through unprotected sex

I think, ultimately, he is simply advocating using a condom over endangering the life of another.
Click to expand...
Hey Philthy

we are doing a course called theology of the body for teens our priest is saying that the course is some what incomplete and that we need to also teach safe sex

well I have a problem with that as well as one of the other instructors

The priest referenced a article called The many faces of Aids and is using this to convince us of teaching safe sex

Now I have researched this and this is what I have come up with

This is Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger addressing this very article

THE LIVELY DISCUSSION, widened and sometimes distorted by the press worldwide, which followed the publication of the NCCB Administrative Board’s well-known document, “The Many Faces of AIDS,” and in which were involved distinguished representatives of the episcopate, has generated in many of the faithful, and not only in the United States, a good deal of confusion regarding the authentic Catholic position on the moral problems involved. The Holy See wishes, therefore, to express its deep concern that the unity so necessary among the bishops in the teaching of Christian moral doctrine be clearly and publicly demonstrated.

In the first place, and on a more general level, one must keep in mind the problem posed by the worldwide reaction which accompanies certain documents issued by various episcopal conferences. This requires a particular sense of responsibility and prudence in the choice of themes to be treated and in the manner in which these statements are published, not to mention a careful composition of the texts themselves. At least in some cases, when the subjects under discussion are of interest to the universal church, it would seem advisable to consult in advance with the Holy See.

Secondly, regarding the precise moral issue in question here, I want to draw attention to the clarification which appeared in the March 10 edition of L’Osservatore Romano, in an unsigned article entitled “Prevention of AIDS: Christian Ethical Aspect,” and I quote,
Code: 
To seek a solution to the problem of infection by promoting the use of prophylactics would be to embark on a way not only insufficiently reliable from the technical point of view, but also and above all, unacceptable from the moral aspect. Such a proposal for 'safe' or at least 'safer' sex -- as they say -- ignores the real cause of the problem, namely, the permissiveness which, in the area of sex as in that related to other abuses, corrodes the moral fiber of the people.
more on this at us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?fid=Sent&sort=date&order=down&startMid=0&.rand=1368318341&da=0&midIndex=0&mid=1_113318_AJyyo0IAARv5SQJ%2BVQTOJ26G6AQ&f=1&nextMid=1_112962_AJyyo0IAAMIiSQJ7wQcq%2F3DWDrc&m=1_113318_AJyyo0IAARv5SQJ%2BVQTOJ26G6AQ,1_112962_AJyyo0IAAMIiSQJ7wQcq%2F3DWDrc,1_112608_AJayo0IAAW7TSQJ6Swu1PU4eAF8,1_112254_AJeyo0IAARsiSQJ6NgvwXART0kw,1_111900_AJmyo0IAAPH2SQJ54AQM5Fml7jI,1_111547_AJ2yo0IAACQDSQJ50Q6I%2FRFGGIg,

I need help with an E mail that I would like to send back to him and the rest of the group

Really I just don’t know how to address the issue and am needing some help
 
This is another subject I’ve wondered about. Call me a nit whit but I believe that if the kid/adult does it they ought to pay the full consequence of a poor choice. ABC is literally killing us. It’s part of what created this culture of death…abortion in particular. But I would like to see Catholic teaching on this.
 
I get the impression that your priest wants to include the use of condoms as a method to prevent AIDS; am I correct?

***Read *all *of what I’m about to say. don’t jump to conclusions, before you have read it all!

To a certain extent, I agree that those who are going to fornicate *anyway *need to know about condoms, to reduce their chances of catching STDs.

The problem is, how do we include condoms without promoting their use? That’s the tough question. I know from personal experience that saying, “stay chaste, but if you don’t, be safe” doesn’t work. It essentially gives one permission to fornicate, as long as it’s “safe.” It certainly did that for me. :mad:

I would put it in with the section about “why birth control is wrong” (which should be part of the section on why sex belongs in marriage).

Having established why birth control is wrong (and this article should help), I would add something like this, “And there are those who would tell you that condoms also prevent AIDS, herpes, and other incurable STDs. That’s not true. All they do is reduce the chances, and help you to fool yourself into justifying fornication.”

Thus you’ve presented the point about condoms helping to prevent these diseases as part of presenting them as wrong, wrong, wrong!
    • Of course, if your priest condones birth control, too, then you’ve still got a problem. 😦
I’ll pray for you and him.

God bless us all,

Ruthie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top