Pope Benedict on Condoms in "Light of the World"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Corki
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Corki

Guest
What the Pope really says in his new book.

catholicworldreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=220:pope-benedict-on-condoms-in-qlight-of-the-worldq&catid=53:cwr2010&Itemid=70
The Holy Father is not articulating a teaching of the Church about whether or not the use of a condom reduces the amount of evil in a homosexual sexual act that threatens to transmit HIV. The Church has no formal teaching about how to reduce the evil of intrinsically immoral action. We must note that what is intrinsically wrong in a homosexual sexual act in which a condom is used is not the moral wrong of contraception but the homosexual act itself. In the case of homosexual sexual activity, a condom does not act as a contraceptive; it is not possible for homosexuals to contracept since their sexual activity has no procreative power that can be thwarted. But the Holy Father is not making a point about whether the use of a condom is contraceptive or even whether it reduces the evil of a homosexual sexual act; again, he is speaking about the psychological state of some who might use condoms. The intention behind the use of the condom (the desire not to harm another) may indicate some growth in a sense of moral responsibility.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone has posted Janet Smith’s analysis yet. Now, let’s get some sanity back. 🙂
 
Well I can breathe a big sigh of relief. Just as I thought the gates of hell had prevailed!

Phew!!!

But yeah, the Pope needs to clarify what he said. Like - NOW!
 
Annie39 said:
Verbal or written mental gymnastics. I am furious. This is all over the news. I literally pray that the pope “clarifies” this.
Click to expand...
I kind of share your shock - the dramatic headlines are not helping - but can you please tell me how the explanation offered is anything but reasonable?
 
There is nothing to clarify. Now that the full text of the relevant portion of the interview has been made available here, everyone should be able to read the Holy Father’s words for themselves and understand what he meant.

The sad thing is that without the distortions and attention-grabbing headlines of the mainstream media, all of you could have read this interview and found nothing wrong with the Holy Father’s words, but now your heads have been filled with lies you will have a hard time accepting his intended meaning.
 
JaredR said:
There is nothing to clarify. Now that the full text of the relevant portion of the interview has been made available here, everyone should be able to read the Holy Father’s words for themselves and understand what he meant.

The sad thing is that without the distortions and attention-grabbing headlines of the mainstream media, all of you could have read this interview and found nothing wrong with the Holy Father’s words, but now your heads have been filled with lies you will have a hard time accepting his intended meaning.
Click to expand...
I read that Jared. And I still believe that the pope was at least breathtakingly unwise to make that statement. It has made life for many faithful Catholic more difficult now. I number among those faithful Catholics.

Well, I believe I’ll log off now. I think prayer time may help me put my deep disappointment into perspective.

Annie
 
I hope you find consolation in prayer, sister. I don’t agree with your conclusions about the text, but I can understand how upset you feel. Imagine getting a tweet on your phone from CNN reading “Pope OKs use of condoms.” I worried about this all day and felt the same anxiety and frustration… until I read the text!

Good night and may God bless your prayer time.
 
bobolink said:
Well I can breathe a big sigh of relief. Just as I thought the gates of hell had prevailed!

Phew!!!

But yeah, the Pope needs to clarify what he said. Like - NOW!
Click to expand...
Honestly, when you see it knowing what He meant, it appears quite clear He wasn’t saying Condoms are ok in certain circumstances. I think if it was a Catholic media instead of a secular one, it would have been downplayed in it’s proper context immediately. Instead now, the lies have run rampant especially on the internet. I’m even getting emails and texts from friends asking me about this showing me how quickly it’s spread. Unfortunately, many people cafeteria Catholics included, will for a while, continue to think that the Pope said Condoms are ok under special circumstance which is obviously not what He said.
 
I don’t think he’s saying it’s okay. He is just recognizing that condoms reduce the risk of infection in male prostitution.

Prostitution is when someone is so poor that they need to sell themself in order to make money to live on. It’s not a happy picture, and even the ones who say they’re happy end up feeling depressed/used/degraded somewhere down the road if they even live that long.

It’s not the same as an unmarried or adulterer person who chooses to not use self-control and goes for a condom, or a married couple who can’t wait until the wife’s infertile period… one is more of an issue of being forced to do things, the other is for people who need to learn some self-control.

Learning self-control will defeat AIDS; condoms have a 1 in 12 chance of breakage (if they’re even used at all), so of course disease will spread as long as people continue to behave like jungle animals in heat. HIV/AIDS may be reduced by using condoms, but it will never completely be gone until self-control is learned or there is a cure. And of course when one thing is cured something else comes up, so it’s a never-ending cycle
 
If Benedict XVI’s words are taken out of context as some are claiming, how will the headlines from the secular media shape your church’s teaching? The reason I ask is because somehow after Vatican II, word got out that women didn’t have to veil themselves anymore. I heard or read somewhere that the Vatican never really said that, but just went along with it. Will the Vatican just go along with this?

In Christ,
Andrew
 
Harpazo said:
If Benedict XVI’s words are taken out of context as some are claiming, how will the headlines from the secular media shape your church’s teaching? The reason I ask is because somehow after Vatican II, word got out that women didn’t have to veil themselves anymore. I heard or read somewhere that the Vatican never really said that, but just went along with it. Will the Vatican just go along with this?

In Christ,
Andrew
Click to expand...
I don’t believe so, because the use of condoms is a matter of doctrine not discipline.
 
“There can be single justified cases,” Benedict said, “for example when a prostitute uses a condom, and this can be the first step toward a moralization, a first act of responsibility in developing anew an awareness of the fact that not everything is permissible and that we cannot do everything we want.”

Sorry people…it seems pretty clear to me.
 
Thoughtfulone said:
“There can be single justified cases,” Benedict said, “for example when a prostitute uses a condom, and this can be the first step toward a moralization, a first act of responsibility in developing anew an awareness of the fact that not everything is permissible and that we cannot do everything we want.”

Sorry people…it seems pretty clear to me.
Click to expand...
That wording does not appear in the text of the interview I linked to. The wording is, “There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants.”

Radically different meaning.
 
JaredR said:
That wording does not appear in the text of the interview I linked to. The wording is, “There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants.”

Radically different meaning.
Click to expand...
How? :confused:

In Christ,
Andrew
 
I poked my head in here expecting to see everyone debating the true meaning behind the Pope’s words. Thank God!

I never read the link posted, but the story I read on AP was really great. It really emphasized the fact that the Holy Father was talking about condom use as a sign of growing morality, not as being moral in itself. His focus in his remarks is on the thought process of these people who are choosing “safe” sex over risking infection of themselves and others.
 
Harpazo said:
How? :confused:

In Christ,
Andrew
Click to expand...
The first translation says some cases are justified and leaves it as an independent clause. The “official” translation says there is a basis for some cases being a first step in the direction of moralization. That does NOT say that the use of condoms in these cases is justified.
 
It seems to me that what is said by the pope in the hierarchy of truth and in the hierarchy of moral actions is that at the very bottom of both, namely, homosexual, prostitute, contraception, the caring for another that leads to using a condom is, in this context alone, a step up for this person who makes this choice. It is in this way a turning from a moral path completely opposed to God by one small degree and in that one degree a turning towards God.
 
Harpazo said:
…The reason I ask is because somehow after Vatican II, word got out that women didn’t have to veil themselves anymore. I heard or read somewhere that the Vatican never really said that, but just went along with it. Will the Vatican just go along with this?

In Christ,
Andrew
Click to expand...
Wow, I never knew about this. So are we still supposed to be wearing veils?
 
BryanM27 said:
I poked my head in here expecting to see everyone debating the true meaning behind the Pope’s words. Thank God!

I never read the link posted, but the story I read on AP was really great. It really emphasized the fact that the Holy Father was talking about condom use as a sign of growing morality, not as being moral in itself. His focus in his remarks is on the thought process of these people who are choosing “safe” sex over risking infection of themselves and others.
Click to expand...
Please read the Janet Smith analysis in the OP. The AP story gets it wrong too.

The reason the Pope discusses the example of male prostitution is that, in that case, a condom has NO contraceptive effect. It is simply a way to reduce the spread of infection.

A condom is a piece of latex. It is only immoral in its use. Used as a barrier between a man and woman, it is immoral. Used as an infection barrier where there is no contraception is occurring it is not. You can use it as a water balloon and it wouldn’t be immoral either since there is no contraceptive action. 🙂
 
Corki said:
Please read the Janet Smith analysis in the OP. The AP story gets it wrong too.

The reason the Pope discusses the example of male prostitution is that, in that case, a condom has NO contraceptive effect. It is simply a way to reduce the spread of infection.

A condom is a piece of latex. It is only immoral in its use. Used as a barrier between a man and woman, it is immoral. Used as an infection barrier where there is no contraception is occurring it is not. You can use it as a water balloon and it wouldn’t be immoral either since there is no contraceptive action. 🙂
Click to expand...
If you read the full story, which I know nobody does anymore, they did a great job of putting the quotes into context. I read this story both as a Catholic and a journalist, so maybe I just was able to read into it a little more than non-journalists. Either way, though, this is a rare AP story because I didn’t come away shaking my head at horrible reporting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top