L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Well put!
- Status
C
Cruxis117
Guest
Yes, it does send this message if people are unable to understand what the words âin some casesâ means. This does not mean that it is now okay for all people to use all condoms everywhere. Until the Holy Father or the Magisterium in general makes that statement, there is nothing to fret about.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
I must say, how is this any different than someone saying, âI really, really want to use condoms?â
C
Chukarrushe
Guest
Sophistry at itâs worst. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY what the author states in his summary of Pope Benedictâs words and then read carefully what the pope actually says.
Article writer says this âWhile broadly defending traditional Catholic teaching against artificial birth control, Benedict also suggests that in some limited instances the use of a condom might be morally defensible.â
Pope Benedict actually says is this -
âIn this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality,â the pope says."
Is the pope really saying that at some times it IS morally defensible? NO.
Instead what the pope is stating is that in these people who are doing sinful acts their are good intentions. In this case he is simply stating that people and prostitutes involved in disordered sexual relations have the good intention in trying to prevent infection. Never does he say the use of the condom might be morally defensible - all he says is that the intention of preventing infection is basically a sign of hope; that it is a sign that there is care of the well being of others and perhaps the possibility of being converted more and more into the truth of the catholic faith.
Article writer says this âWhile broadly defending traditional Catholic teaching against artificial birth control, Benedict also suggests that in some limited instances the use of a condom might be morally defensible.â
Pope Benedict actually says is this -
âIn this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality,â the pope says."
Is the pope really saying that at some times it IS morally defensible? NO.
Instead what the pope is stating is that in these people who are doing sinful acts their are good intentions. In this case he is simply stating that people and prostitutes involved in disordered sexual relations have the good intention in trying to prevent infection. Never does he say the use of the condom might be morally defensible - all he says is that the intention of preventing infection is basically a sign of hope; that it is a sign that there is care of the well being of others and perhaps the possibility of being converted more and more into the truth of the catholic faith.
F
fom4life
Guest
What does the Holy Father really say about condoms in the new book?
Janet Smith over at 'The Catholic World Reportâ already has something profound to say on the subject
Janet Smith over at 'The Catholic World Reportâ already has something profound to say on the subject
F
Flame4
Guest
When I first heard this, I was shocked. However, upon calming down, I realized a few things. Firstly, the media never gets it right, expecially when talking about the Catholic Church. So, I want to read what the Pope has to say in his own words and within context before I freak out or anything.
In any case, this is not an official teaching, yes? I hope the Pope clarifies on what he means though.
However, as everyone else is saying, this statment is already having a bad impact. Many people will misinterpret this and think condoms are fine to use now.
In any case, this is not an official teaching, yes? I hope the Pope clarifies on what he means though.
However, as everyone else is saying, this statment is already having a bad impact. Many people will misinterpret this and think condoms are fine to use now.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
An excerpt from Light of the World, Peter Seewaldâs book-length interview with Pope Benedict XVI
From Chapter 11, âThe Journeys of a Shepherd,â pages 117-119:
On the occasion of your trip to Africa in March 2009, the Vaticanâs policy on AIDs once again became the target of media criticism.Twenty-five percent of all AIDs victims around the world today are treated in Catholic facilities. In some countries, such as Lesotho, for example, the statistic is 40 percent. In Africa you
stated that the Churchâs traditional teaching has proven to be the only sure way to stop the spread of HIV. Critics, including critics from the Churchâs own ranks, object that it is madness to forbid a high-risk population to use condoms.
The media coverage completely ignored the rest of the trip to Africa on account of a single statement. Someone had asked me why the Catholic Church adopts an unrealistic and ineffective position on AIDs. At that point, I really felt that I was being provoked, because the Church does more than anyone else. And I stand by that claim. Because she is the only institution that assists people up close and concretely, with prevention, education, help, counsel, and accompaniment. And because she is second to none in treating so many AIDs victims, especially children with AIDs.
I had the chance to visit one of these wards and to speak with the patients. That was the real answer: The Church does more than anyone else, because she does not speak from the tribunal of the newspapers, but helps her brothers and sisters where they are actually suffering. In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.
As a matter of fact, you know, people can get condoms when they want them anyway. But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen. Meanwhile, the secular realm itself has developed the so-called ABC Theory: Abstinence-Be Faithful-Condom, where the condom is understood only as a last resort, when the other two points fail to work. This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also a part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of manâs being.
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. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.
Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?
She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.
catholicworldreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=221
ope-benedict-xvi-discusses-condoms-and-the-spread-of-hiv&catid=53:cwr2010&Itemid=70
From Chapter 11, âThe Journeys of a Shepherd,â pages 117-119:
On the occasion of your trip to Africa in March 2009, the Vaticanâs policy on AIDs once again became the target of media criticism.Twenty-five percent of all AIDs victims around the world today are treated in Catholic facilities. In some countries, such as Lesotho, for example, the statistic is 40 percent. In Africa you
stated that the Churchâs traditional teaching has proven to be the only sure way to stop the spread of HIV. Critics, including critics from the Churchâs own ranks, object that it is madness to forbid a high-risk population to use condoms.
The media coverage completely ignored the rest of the trip to Africa on account of a single statement. Someone had asked me why the Catholic Church adopts an unrealistic and ineffective position on AIDs. At that point, I really felt that I was being provoked, because the Church does more than anyone else. And I stand by that claim. Because she is the only institution that assists people up close and concretely, with prevention, education, help, counsel, and accompaniment. And because she is second to none in treating so many AIDs victims, especially children with AIDs.
I had the chance to visit one of these wards and to speak with the patients. That was the real answer: The Church does more than anyone else, because she does not speak from the tribunal of the newspapers, but helps her brothers and sisters where they are actually suffering. In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.
As a matter of fact, you know, people can get condoms when they want them anyway. But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen. Meanwhile, the secular realm itself has developed the so-called ABC Theory: Abstinence-Be Faithful-Condom, where the condom is understood only as a last resort, when the other two points fail to work. This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also a part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of manâs being.
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. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.
Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?
She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.
catholicworldreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=221
ope-benedict-xvi-discusses-condoms-and-the-spread-of-hiv&catid=53:cwr2010&Itemid=70
J
jerryson
Guest
Yes he did
Um yeah, no disagreement here
Letâs see now: I donât advocate aborting a rape child since it was not the childâs fault, but for you to call that a âgiftâ is a depraved and sick sado-masochist thought. You think rape is so lovely and wonderful, go and talk to some rape victims, or go experience it yourself and come back to me and tell me how much fun you had. Serial killers have often claimed that they were âhelpingâ their victims and were doing âgoodâ for society. Itâs people like you that make us Catholics looks like total sexual hypocrites and masochist freaks to the rest of the world and I am sick of being associated with this kind of nonsense you are advocating.
F
Flame4
Guest
^ A child from God is always a gift. I think that is what the poster meant. Not that rape is a giftâŚ
I
irishpatrick
Guest
So then, let us clarify a bit further. The Pope was asked this question:
Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?
The Pope gave this reply:
She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.
Sorry, but that answer seems to be an affirmative to me.
C
Chukarrushe
Guest
Sophistry at itâs worst. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY what the author states in his summary of Pope Benedictâs words and then read carefully what the pope actually says.
Article writer says this âWhile broadly defending traditional Catholic teaching against artificial birth control, Benedict also suggests that in some limited instances the use of a condom might be morally defensible.â
Pope Benedict actually says is this -
âIn this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality,â the pope says."
Is the pope really saying that at some times it IS morally defensible? NO.
Instead what the pope is stating is that in these people who are doing sinful acts their are good intentions. In this case he is simply stating that people and prostitutes involved in disordered sexual relations have the good intention in trying to prevent infection. Never does he say the use of the condom might be morally defensible - all he says is that the intention of preventing infection is basically a sign of hope; that it is a sign that there is care of the well being of others and perhaps the possibility of being converted more and more into the truth of the catholic faith.
READ Abyssiniaâs excerpt, thank you for that
Article writer says this âWhile broadly defending traditional Catholic teaching against artificial birth control, Benedict also suggests that in some limited instances the use of a condom might be morally defensible.â
Pope Benedict actually says is this -
âIn this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality,â the pope says."
Is the pope really saying that at some times it IS morally defensible? NO.
Instead what the pope is stating is that in these people who are doing sinful acts their are good intentions. In this case he is simply stating that people and prostitutes involved in disordered sexual relations have the good intention in trying to prevent infection. Never does he say the use of the condom might be morally defensible - all he says is that the intention of preventing infection is basically a sign of hope; that it is a sign that there is care of the well being of others and perhaps the possibility of being converted more and more into the truth of the catholic faith.
READ Abyssiniaâs excerpt, thank you for that
I
irishpatrick
Guest
The child is the gift, not the rape.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
So then, let us clarify a bit further. The Pope was asked this question:
Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?
The Pope gave this reply:
She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.
Sorry, but that answer seems to be an affirmative to me.
J
jerryson
Guest
No, a child is a human being with full human rights, but that does not always make it a âgiftâ. STDâs can be given to you from the same procedure as making a child but I donât see anyone calling those âgiftsâ. A âgiftâ is something given to you with positive intentions, rape is the opposite.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
A life received is always a giftâŚalways. The act behind that gift might be horrible.
C
Chukarrushe
Guest
I
irishpatrick
Guest
E
edwest2
Guest
I
irishpatrick
Guest
J
jerryson
Guest
You obviously fail to understand the definition of the word âgiftâ
- Status