J
jmjZelie
Guest
:clapping:
- Status
J
JPUSC
Guest
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
2 days ago you would have been correct…
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
I remember reading from the pope a couple of months ago that each month in the year of mercy there would be a new topic a new exhortation of mercy. I can’t find that and am hoping someone else can find it.
I wonder if this is this months “big thing”
I wonder if this is this months “big thing”
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
no, I’m serious. The Pope did not say “artificial birth control” and did not say, “artificial birth control may be morally acceptable in the case of the Zika virus.”
He said 'avoiding pregnancy" (not 'artificial birth control. There is more than one way to avoid pregnancy, such as NFP or even total abstinence) can be morally acceptable. That is quite true; that’s why NFP is moral. He also spoke of Pope Paul VI (and that story itself has no primary sources to indicate that it happened) and the nuns. Nuns do not engage in sex with a partner (which is the case with either married women and their spouses, or unmarried people in fornication). Nuns do not seek sex; sex would be forced on them (rape). So the ONLY people who might be considered comparable to the ‘nuns in the Congo’ would be women who were either consecrated virgins, virgins not intending to marry, and any other woman facing rape, all of whom would need the pill to protect them from RAPE. . . and of THOSE women, to be comparable to the nuns scenario, they would have to be taking a pill with a much higher hormonal compound than the one today, AND they would have to be taking it without the knowledge that it could be abortifacient, and they would have to take it only as a defense against an act of war/aggression. The Zika virus is NOT an act of war.
So no, the Pope did not say artificial birth control like the pill, since Pope Paul VI allowed it once for nuns facing rape in the Congo, is thus morally acceptable in the case of the Zika virus.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
It’s a long thread, but worth reading. The pope was clear about what he said.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
The Vatican spokesman confirmed what all Catholics already knew even if they plead ignorance. That is that contraceptives can be used as a medical treatment based on their chemical hormone property or as self defense in certain extreme cases where rape is involved invoking double effect principle.
T
TMC
Guest
That is exactly what the Pope said.
T
TMC
Guest
Yes, and the Pope cited the zika virus as an example of such a situation.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
We know that unusual and extreme circumstances make situations where double effect principle might apply, theologically difficult. Take for example US gun policy. The unanimous feeling of most Western countries is that owning a gun with the express purpose of killing or threatening to kill an aggressor based on personal interpretation at any given time… is outside the bounds of blameless self defense.
“But as it is unlawful to take a man’s life, except for the public authority acting for the common good, as stated above (Article 3), **it is not lawful for a man to intend killing a man in self-defense, **except for such as have public authority, who while intending to kill a man in self-defense, refer this to the public good, as in the case of a soldier fighting against the foe, and in the minister of the judge struggling with robbers, although even these sin if they be moved by private animosity.” - Summa theologica
The US believes that this intention to kill infused in the actual ownership of a lethal self defense weapon, does not equal ‘intending to kill a man in self-defense’. In other countries, that is exactly what it equals. The Church hasn’t directly commented on the intentionality of the US self defense gun as yet but the fact is that many, many other Christian countries have rejected such a policy according to conscience. It is always going to be influenced by a myriad of unique circumstances at the end of the day. The nuns from the Congo demonstrate such circumstances.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
No he did not.
Please feel free to post what the Pope said. No wait, I’ll do it. From the National Catholic Register:
.
Again, I’ll repeat. The Pope does not say ‘contraception’. He says avoiding pregnancy. There are legitimate ways to avoid pregnancy, such as NFP. He references an event (which itself is not proven as there are no primary sources) that Pope VI approved the use of contraceptives for nuns in a situation in which CELIBATE WOMEN would face an act of war (rape) and at a time when the understanding of how ‘the pill’ works and the composition of the pill itself were quite different.
He does not say that the ZIKA VIRUS is a case where contraception can be used. He says that the Pope Paul VI ‘case’ in which women ‘defended themselves’ from an ACT OF WAR (rape) could encompass the use of a substance which was believed simply to ‘prevent pregnancy’ in women who would never ‘choose’ the ‘marital’ relations. IOW, it was not to protect women from pregnancy PER SE, but rather to defend women from an act of aggression which COULD ‘cause’ pregnancy in some cases!
The Zika virus is not an act of war. The women who might be affected are not being attacked by rapists whose intent is to physically violate ‘any’ woman and who wish to protect themselves so far as possible from consequences of an ACT OF WAR.
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
HD the 200 or so contradictory comments here and the 6000 or so viewings make it clear you are probably the only person in the Catholic world who sees objective clarity in the Pope’s extemporising
.And that’s fine - we faithful don’t need total clarity from his novel extemporising interviews.
He was giving it straight and off the cuff without a legion of moral theologians proof copying his every word for months before releasing his statements.
Thank God for that - at last a real-world Peter not always cossetted and insulated from ordinary Catholics by Papal watchdogs.
We faithful and respectful Catholics know he has the mind and heart of the Church even if we heard what he said. Family life is just like this, we don’t communicate through lawyers but through lots of smoke and noise but we get there.
Lets not take ourselves too seriously over on the spot interviews. Messiness is part of the deal. We all know that. Lets have more of this messiness if it means a truly pastoral Pope of the People.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
The next time I disagree with something pope Francis does, I guess I can just sayHD the 200 or so contradictory comments here and the 6000 or so viewings make it clear you are probably the only person in the Catholic world who sees objective clarity in the Pope’s extemporising
And that’s fine - we faithful don’t need total clarity from his novel extemporising interviews.
He was giving it straight and off the cuff without a legion of moral theologians proof copying his every word for months before releasing his statements.
Thank God for that - at last a real-world Peter not always cossetted and insulated from ordinary Catholics by Papal watchdogs.
We faithful and respectful Catholics know he has the mind and heart of the Church even if we heard what he said. Family life is just like this, we don’t communicate through lawyers but through lots of smoke and noise but we get there.
Lets not take ourselves too seriously over on the spot interviews. Messiness is part of the deal. We all know that. Lets have more of this messiness if it means a truly pastoral Pope of the People.
Awe shucks it was off the cuffs and he obviously doesn’t know what I know…
C
CompSciGuy
Guest
So you, with your Catholic mind, immediately think “oh he’s talking about NFP or abstinence.” But the rest of the world, when they hear “avoid pregnancy” immediately interprets it as as using contraceptives. And why shouldn’t they? Would the Pope even have a reason to say “it isn’t an absolute evil to abstain from sex or practice NFP?” Of course not, and nobody is going to think it. But it is well known that the Catholic Church is against contraceptive use. So when the Pope says it is not an absolute evil to avoid pregnancy, why would anyone interpret this statement as anything other a condonation of contraceptives? Not only is there a severe lack of clarification, he immediately uses an example of nuns in the Congo who were given permission to use contraceptives.
Gee, how could anyone possibly think that the Pope is condoning contraceptive use?
Seriously though, the reporters are not to blame, and neither are the consumers of the media. If there is a misunderstanding, it is totally obvious why.
We need to pray for our pope.
C
CompSciGuy
Guest
So do you think that when the Pope said “Avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil” he was actually saying “Using NFP is not an absolute evil?”
U
Usige
Guest
First, while I respect St Thomas, the Summa is not doctrine. I also don’t see how it is germane to the conversation, but the catechism also disagrees that self defense, even using lethal force, is a sin.
Even at that it deflects from the fact that it appears to be that Pope Francis is allowing for something in extraordinary circumstance that Paul VI said implicitly should not be done (rendering marital intercourse steril). This is called out again in the catechism.
We aren’t talking about celibate nun’s here. We are talking about married people using contraceptives in the case of potential birth defects. If merely an increased chance of human misfortune is a legitimate reason, the perhaps it should be allowed for men or women who can pass on deadly genetic diseases.
Right now I am ranking his statement as fairly low on the spectrum of the teaching authority of the Church. Perhaps on the level of a theological opinion. Humanae Vitae and Casti Connubii are both more in the realm of de fide tenenda (to be definitively held). In those cases de fide tenenda trumps merely theological opinion.
T
TCEL
Guest
I feel hung out to dry and very exposed right now. I think a lot of others are feeling, “At last!”
N
Neithan
Guest
If Pope Francis is saying that couples can use artificial birth control to avoid a pregnancy because the baby might be infected, then he is contradicting what previous popes have said. There are other, legitimate means of birth control.
As far as I know, there are no dogmatic statements here. I’m a journalist and I’ve seen how the media can spread misinformation and disinformation, deliberately, because too many journalists today no longer adhere to the traditional ideal of objective reporting but are advocates for a point of view and push their agenda. Reading what the pope actually said, compared to what reporters say he said, I don’t see that he is actually saying it is OK to use artificial contraception for married couples to avoid a pregnancy. He goes off on a bit of a tangent and compares contraception for self-defence purposes with abortion. Not very clear, and confusing, but that’s become a habit with this pope.
But artificial birth control is not “intrinsically evil.” For something to be intrinsically evil it must be used for an intrinsically evil purpose (like separating procreation from marital relations). Using birth control pills for medical reasons other than preventing a pregnancy should be OK (if someone is not married). I am not a clergyman or expert, though.
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
It means lets not treat his unscripted interviews as tightly worded, theologically precise and triple proof-read Vatican boiler-plate … which is what you seem to expect of any public Papal utterance. Can’t blame you, that’s how its been since the High Middle Ages I suppose.
That is unrealistic and its high time we understood that Popes are human too.
The curtain on the Wizard of Vatican has finally been pulled.
And most of us like it
.- Status