Pope condones contraceptives for zika outbreak?

[Micosil]

Don’t post here often, but in light of recent cringeworthy news maker Francis… this summarises my thoughts on him perfectly:

“Peter the Roman, who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations, and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills * will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The End.”*

Yes, that’s what they said when Benedict XVI’s quotes were also mangled, distorted and spun by the media. Guess what. Rome is still there…

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Yes, that’s what they said when Benedict XVI’s quotes were also mangled, distorted and spun by the media. Guess what. Rome is still there…

 

[mafh]

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but there is no moral objection to the birth control pills themselves, if they are taken by a celibate woman? Or even if you are married and taking the pills for a non-contraceptive purpose (as prescribed to treat certain gynecological or endrocine problems for instance), then they are ok, even if though there is a contraceptive side effect? So, it is the purpose for taking the pills, and not the pills themselves that is either licit or illicit?

 

[TMC]

I am sorry to hear of your past experiences. But life is not simple. The Church doesn’t have a list of every situation and say X is wrong and Y is right. Some options when confronted with situations you describe is to seek advice from the National Catholic Bioethics Center or talking with your pastor.

I agree. Religion and morality is a serious topic and engages serious complexities, like most of life. There are few blacks and whites - we have to do our best at navigating the grays. Anyone who has raised children knows that what works in one situation does not work in another, and what is right for one child is not necessarily right for another. Why would morality be simpler than other aspects of life?

 

[TMC]

But to be clear, the Holy Father is only condoning abstinence and NFP… NOT condoms, pills, or other forms of ABC?

Is this the way everyone reads it?

No, I don’t think that is the way anyone is reading it. That reading would not make sense. The Pope referred to the nuns in the Congo, which was an instance where the Church approved of using birth control, so it makes most sense that he meant something similar here.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Different language, but a while back, Cardinal Turkson used the words “birth control” but he meant natural family planning, not artificial birth control: aleteia.org/2015/12/10/cardinal-turkson-clarifies-birth-control-climate-change-comments/

This is a very important article! Excerpt from:

What did Pope Francis actually say about contraception?

Numerous news outlets suggested that the Pope was introducing a change – or at least a softening – in previous teaching.

However, Dr. Melissa Moschella, a philosophy professor at The Catholic University of America, suggested that this may not be the case.

When talking about avoiding pregnancy in connection with the Zika virus, the Pope may not necessarily have been implying artificial contraceptive use, but may have been referencing Natural Family Planning, she said.

Normally, if a married couple faces a serious reason to avoid pregnancy, the Church teaches that they may do so through Natural Family Planning, a process that involves identifying a woman’s fertile periods and abstaining from sexual activity during those times.

Moschella also explained that in the Africa case referenced by Pope Francis, the dispensation for the nuns was “not really an exception if you understand the rule.”

The case in question took place in the early 1960s, when the Vatican granted a dispensation to religious sisters living in the Belgian Congo who were in grave danger of rape due to civil unrest to use oral contraceptives.

“In the case of rape, the person who’s raped – from the moral perspective – has not engaged in a sexual act,” Moschella said. Rather, rape is an act of violence and a “violation of the woman’s body without any free choice or acceptance on her part.”

“(I)n the sense, the sperm that’s been introduced as a result of the rape is a kind of further intrusion, unwelcome and non-voluntarily allowed into the woman’s body. So it’s a further kind of intrusion of the violence.”

To understand the distinction, the professor continued, one must first understand the purpose of human sexuality and why the Church opposes contraception.

“(W)hat sex means, from the Catholic perspective, is I give myself totally, completely to you in the kind of relationship that would be fulfilled by having and bearing children together,” she explained. “And if you do that while at the same time intentionally holding back your fertility, in a sense you’ve contradicted what it is that you’re doing with your body. It’s kind of like nodding yes while thinking no, kind of lying with your body language.”

As a result, birth control is immoral because it violates the very nature of sex – trying to engage in sex without the natural possibility of pregnancy.

“But that doesn’t happen in the case of rape,” Moschella stressed. “In the case of rape, there has been no voluntary sex act on the part of the woman.”

As a result, birth control would be viewed not as an immoral contraceptive measure seeking to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of sex, but rather part of an act of self-defense, as the women seek to resist the act altogether.

This is also, she noted, why some actions – such as the use of spermicide or attempts to delay ovulation if it has not yet occurred – may be acceptable even after instances of rape, as long as they do not involve the risk of killing an already-formed human embryo.

However, Moschella said that this is “really different” from the situation surrounding the Zika virus.

“(I)n cases of Zika virus, you’re talking about women who are voluntarily engaging in sexual relations and then using contraceptives to prevent those voluntary sexual acts from being fertile. And that does contradict the meaning of the sexual act, and so involves a kind of lack of integrity that’s harmful to the person and harmful to the relationship

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

But to be clear, the Holy Father is only condoning abstinence and NFP… NOT condoms, pills, or other forms of ABC?

Is this the way everyone reads it?

The pope clearly referenced ABC when he invoked the nuns in Africa. The man is not ignorant or senile. If he wishes to clarify what he meant or feels he is being misrepresented I’m sure there will be microphones waiting

 

[JPUSC]

Do I really have to have this level of sophistication to remain Catholic? So what I taught my daughters and practiced myself as a simple Catholic teaching is not a simple Catholic teaching? I need this level of nuance to teach it and defend it?

When a gynecologist told my daughter that she should have taken birth control pills to have prevented her gynecological problems that resulted in her infertility we were wrong to have rejected that out of hand? We were in the end to blame?

So couples who are in anguish over likely birth defect issues vs. the prohibition against birth control have tortured themselves over nothing? And people who defended the Church’s position on the use of condoms to prevent AIDS are now in the position of comparing the dangers of contracting a death dealing disease unfavorably to the dangers of conceiving a child with a birth defect?

How far are we from retreating to the “inner forum” on birth control to join those in the “inner forum” on divorce?

It has always been difficult to explain and uphold the Catholic position on birth control. It is more difficult today. And more difficult still to explain why the Pope has made this necessary.

AMEN.

 

[awsiukiewicz]

What about questioning someone’s faith,a wall,sorry but it’s my understanding that these individuals are entering illegally…breaking the law,nothing to do with legal immigration,contraception is ok,? What,prevent disease,ok for politicians to ok or vote in favor of same sex so called marriage,what,how are we going to defend this rhetoric,who are we to judge,bully for him,blessing couples marriages whose prior marriage has never been annulled,when are the church leaders,those who still adhere to Chuch teaching going to stand up,

 

[Weeorphan]

Pope Francis has been a disturbing figure some three years now, speaking without the careful circumspection of former Popes John Paul and Benedict. His recent comment on using artificial birth control to prevent Zika abnormalities is typical of his offhanded manner. To say it is not a papal decree doesn’t mitigate the heavy offical effect (good and bad) on Catholics. We hear only careless, mixed messages from him, and that’s a tragedy…

Personally, I perceive Pope Francis is not sophisticated enough for the important role he plays. He seems to me like a buffoonish character in an overlong, slapstick French farce.

That said, one wonders if any other man could criticize the Mexican bishops as worldly.
Or exemplify the spirit of poverty by dwelling in a cheap apartment rather than the Vatican.

Concerning artificial birth control (AFB), few Catholics are using natural family planing (NFP) or chaste abstinence to plan their families. His comment is reasonable to those very many Catholics in Brazil and elsewhere who won’t be agonizing over use of AFB to prevent birth defects.He enjoys popular appeal for a variety of reasons But that may not be good…

The problem, as I see it, his appeal to popularity is like a typical politician who says what the majority of lukewarm Catholics and hedonists want to hear. Unlike Pope Benedict who thought it best to prune the Church so it bear better fruit, Pope Francis has the opposite intent…to repopulate the empty pews at any cost, even if it bruises the unsullied faithful.
He seems to be democratizing the Church, not unlike the Lutherans and Anglicans have.

This leaves the remnant minority of true, practicing Catholics quite disturbed by his flippant statements. Let’s have faith the Holy Spirit rectifies this conflicted situation post haste.

 

[SamDash]

I agree with everyone who says the Pope’s words were twisted. But that’s not really the point.

This seems to happen regularly with Pope Francis, yet I don’t remember this being an issue with his two predecessors. Then again, I don’t remember them acting like ordinary politicians, allowing reporters to pepper them with questions, while giving short, pat answers.

Whatever Francis’ strengths might be, communicating succinctly with reporters is not one of them. I do wish he would stop the “press conferences” and the extemporaneous speeches.

 

[clem456]

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but there is no moral objection to the birth control pills themselves, if they are taken by a celibate woman? Or even if you are married and taking the pills for a non-contraceptive purpose (as prescribed to treat certain gynecological or endrocine problems for instance), then they are ok, even if though there is a contraceptive side effect? So, it is the purpose for taking the pills, and not the pills themselves that is either licit or illicit?

The substances are not evil, the intent is the thing.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I agree with everyone who says the Pope’s words were twisted. But that’s not really the point.

This seems to happen regularly with Pope Francis, yet I don’t remember this being an issue with his two predecessors. Then again, I don’t remember them acting like ordinary politicians, allowing reporters to pepper them with questions, while giving short, pat answers.

Whatever Francis’ strengths might be, communicating succinctly with reporters is not one of them. I do wish he would stop the “press conferences” and the extemporaneous speeches.

You think the pope us unable to speak clearly on issues like contraception?
Does he lack the ability to have access to clarify? Do you think he is unfit to be a head of state?
How were his words twisted in this case or his words against trump?

 

[Vouthon]

Personally, I perceive Pope Francis is not sophisticated enough for the important role he plays. He seems to me like a buffoonish character in an overlong, slapstick French farce.
.

That is a most uncharitable statement. I don’t think I’ve ever read or heard of a practising Catholic directing such a remark towards a reigning Pontiff in my entire life.

You are actually calling the Holy Father a “buffoonish character”? Expressing doubts and concerns in a respectful manner is legitimate but using such profane language about the Pope…

 

[Biggie]

I am sorry to hear of your past experiences. But life is not simple. The Church doesn’t have a list of every situation and say X is wrong and Y is right. Some options when confronted with situations you describe is to seek advice from the National Catholic Bioethics Center or talking with your pastor.

Thank you but my past experience is not one which should evoke sorrow. I have no confusion or regret over the decisions we made raising and teaching our children, confident of the Church’s teaching. I had no need to consult anyone.

This does not relate at all to what the Pope opined today by drawing an implied comparison between an obscure instance where contraceptives were permitted a group of chaste nuns facing the likelihood of rape - and the peoples of nations possibly exposed to a remote risk of conceiving a child with a birth defect. For that he need not have consulted a list of X’s and Y’s but applied traditional Catholic morality, just as it has been applied to the question of condoms and AIDS in Africa or to persons with the possibility or even likelihood of bearing children with birth defects.

 

[LongingSoul]

Pope Francis has been a disturbing figure some three years now, speaking without the careful circumspection of former Popes John Paul and Benedict. His recent comment on using artificial birth control to prevent Zika abnormalities is typical of his offhanded manner. To say it is not a papal decree doesn’t mitigate the heavy offical effect (good and bad) on Catholics. We hear only careless, mixed messages from him, and that’s a tragedy…

Personally, I perceive Pope Francis is not sophisticated enough for the important role he plays. He seems to me like a buffoonish character in an overlong, slapstick French farce.

That said, one wonders if any other man could criticize the Mexican bishops as worldly.
Or exemplify the spirit of poverty by dwelling in a cheap apartment rather than the Vatican.

Concerning artificial birth control (AFB), few Catholics are using natural family planing (NFP) or chaste abstinence to plan their families. His comment is reasonable to those very many Catholics in Brazil and elsewhere who won’t be agonizing over use of AFB to prevent birth defects.He enjoys popular appeal for a variety of reasons But that may not be good…

The problem, as I see it, his appeal to popularity is like a typical politician who says what the majority of lukewarm Catholics and hedonists want to hear. Unlike Pope Benedict who thought it best to prune the Church so it bear better fruit, Pope Francis has the opposite intent…to repopulate the empty pews at any cost, even if it bruises the unsullied faithful.
He seems to be democratizing the Church, not unlike the Lutherans and Anglicans have.

This leaves the remnant minority of true, practicing Catholics quite disturbed by his flippant statements. Let’s have faith the Holy Spirit rectifies this conflicted situation post haste.

How differently we see him. I believe with my whole heart that Pope Francis has an important purpose concerning the will of God. He is different in that he constantly encourages conscience examination with sharp observations and intuitions and that usually ticks some people off no end. You see it in family counselling all the time. Some people can’t take feedback about their behaviours.

It constantly makes me wonder what’s his motive for this new way of guidance? I think very much that we are meant to be thinking ‘end times’. Not as in doomsday is around the corner… but as in being part of an era of end times. We need to start thinking about how we are going to recognise the returned Christ. We’ve been warned that there’ll be pretenders claiming to be He. So how are we going to know?

When Christ came the first time… He was very odd and antithetical to those who thought they were well theologised. He even ticked them off immensely. How did people know He was who He said He was? There must have been a certain type of instinct. A well enough groomed conscience that they recognised Him that way and trusted enough to follow.

To me, it seems obvious that we need that instinct also to recognise Him when He comes again. Pope Francis is building up the collective conscience by his whole approach. Like Moses, sometimes he laments his lacks and limits but he would know that as Cardinal Newman once said… the conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ. Each of us has the capacity to hear and understand God from within a well formed conscience.

I don’t really understand the attitude that isn’t willing to contemplate that Pope Francis is doing Gods work in a powerful way. There is no yardstick to measure someones articulation and academic prowess to know if they convey Gods will. Moses was a noted bumbler and complained several times that we know of to God about choosing him to be this great leader with such a limitation with words that he had.

Lets give the Pope a hearing without judgement and caution. He’s got a good track record as a faithful Catholic.

 

[JPUSC]

Pope Francis has been a disturbing figure some three years now, speaking without the careful circumspection of former Popes John Paul and Benedict. His recent comment on using artificial birth control to prevent Zika abnormalities is typical of his offhanded manner. To say it is not a papal decree doesn’t mitigate the heavy offical effect (good and bad) on Catholics. We hear only careless, mixed messages from him, and that’s a tragedy…

Personally, I perceive Pope Francis is not sophisticated enough for the important role he plays. He seems to me like a buffoonish character in an overlong, slapstick French farce.

That said, one wonders if any other man could criticize the Mexican bishops as worldly.
Or exemplify the spirit of poverty by dwelling in a cheap apartment rather than the Vatican.

Concerning artificial birth control (AFB), few Catholics are using natural family planing (NFP) or chaste abstinence to plan their families. His comment is reasonable to those very many Catholics in Brazil and elsewhere who won’t be agonizing over use of AFB to prevent birth defects.He enjoys popular appeal for a variety of reasons But that may not be good…

The problem, as I see it, his appeal to popularity is like a typical politician who says what the majority of lukewarm Catholics and hedonists want to hear. Unlike Pope Benedict who thought it best to prune the Church so it bear better fruit, Pope Francis has the opposite intent…to repopulate the empty pews at any cost, even if it bruises the unsullied faithful.
He seems to be democratizing the Church, not unlike the Lutherans and Anglicans have.

This leaves the remnant minority of true, practicing Catholics quite disturbed by his flippant statements. Let’s have faith the Holy Spirit rectifies this conflicted situation post haste.

 

[SamDash]

You think the pope us unable to speak clearly on issues like contraception?
Does he lack the ability to have access to clarify? Do you think he is unfit to be a head of state?
How were his words twisted in this case or his words against trump?

I think many people are not particularly good at speaking or communicating clearly.

As for Trump, I suspect the Pope barely has any idea who he is, and is responding to caricatures of Trump he has been fed in Mexico and by the other leftists who seem to have his ear.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Stop freaking out over these two sentences from Pope Francis

catholicnewsagency.com/blog/stop-freaking-out-over-these-two-sentences-from-pope-francis/

 

[ToTheWest]

Someone should introduce the Holy Father to Sudoku so he can play that on his flights rather than talking to reporters.