C
Carmel_B
Guest
I’m troubled that Fr L. apparently mentioned three sexes - Male, Female, and Transsexual. Surely everyone is either male or female?
- Status
B
BobCatholic
Guest
Everyone knows there are four sexes. Male. Female. Yes. No.
B
BobCatholic
Guest
Sextremists are using the lamestream media to push their agenda.
M
Milliardo
Guest
Again, as per the clarification: the use of condoms to reduce the risk of infection is a “first step on the road to a more human sexuality”–emphasis mine. It’s really just a fancy way of saying, “Yeah, homosexual acts are still disordered, but if you’re going to do it, then might as well do it with condoms.” Or to be more blunt, it’s implicitly stating to go ahead and do it. Again, spin it all you want, but that’s the bottomline of it all.
S
sidbrown
Guest
I see a serious problem here also, since in the past we were taught that you always had to be open to life when having sex. But now, is it being taught that you do not have to be open to life if you are afraid of the possiblity of some sort of disease? It seems like this is a big change.
M
Milliardo
Guest
It is a big change, yet many Catholics would rather close their eyes and say to themselves, “This isn’t happening”. Many are wishing (which is all most seem to have here, unfortunately) that Pope Benedict isn’t saying what he is trying to say, or else media somehow got it wrong. However, as per the clarification and even the Pope’s own words after this came out, it seems the Catholic Church has inadvertently opened the door to a more modern–and novel–teaching. As I keep saying, spin it all you want, but the bottomline still remains: something has changed, and you know it but just can’t admit it.
S
sidbrown
Guest
Suppose someone says that they are afraid of giving their wife some disease? Then they are on their way to morality if they use a condom? Is that it? How does it work?
M
Milliardo
Guest
I do not know how it works; before this, if one knows that he is infected then he should abstain from any sexual contact with his spouse. It is not easy, but we commend to God the couple and pray that He give them strength in their ordeal, and by abstinence they as well show to others a type of martyrdom by giving up what they should be doing to the Lord. Of course, with this new thing here I am not sure how it will play out.
M
mhlungu
Guest
We live in a world were people don’t seem to respect sex, to people it is just fun and nothing more. If we don’t change our views on sex we are going to die from AIDS. It scares me when it seems as if the Church has been pushed to except the use of condoms, whatever the reason. We need to start teaching our youth about sex and not leave it to the media to do it.
M
mhlungu
Guest
How it works is you don’t lead a life that will get you infected with this disease. Don’t cheat on your partner, don’t have multiple sex partners, don’t be ashamed to wait before having sex and knowing your status and your partners status. Isn’t this what we were taught when we were younger. We should not wait for the Church to tell us this.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
Dr Jane Smith interview:
Q: So is the Holy Father saying it is morally good for male prostitutes to use condoms?
Smith: 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.
In “Familiaris Consortio (On the Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World),” John Paul II spoke of the need for conversion, which often proceeds by gradual steps: "To the injustice originating from sin … we must all set ourselves in opposition through a conversion of mind and heart, following Christ Crucified by denying our own selfishness: such a conversion cannot fail to have a beneficial and renewing influence even on the structures of society.
“What is needed is a continuous, permanent conversion which, while requiring an interior detachment from every evil and an adherence to good in its fullness, is brought about concretely in steps which lead us ever forward. Thus a dynamic process develops, one which advances gradually with the progressive integration of the gifts of God and the demands of His definitive and absolute love in the entire personal and social life of man. (9)”
Christ himself, of course, called for a turning away from sin. That is what the Holy Father is advocating here; not a turn towards condoms. Conversion, not condoms!
catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=39277&page=2
Fr. Father Federico Lombardi, SJ, Vatican Press Office:
The pope is not reforming or changing the teaching of the church
‘The pope does not morally justify the disordered exercise of sexuality. The pope is not reforming or changing the teaching of the church. It should therefore be clear that the condom is not the solution to the problem.In this statement, the pope’s reasoning certainly cannot be defined as a revolutionary shift.’
catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=39269
- The Pope has not changed official catholic teaching.
- He has not said homosexual acts are justified if you use a condom.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
Millardo did not tell you the truth. The Pope never said homosexual acts are justified with the use of a condom.
- Pope Benedict said that using a condom can be a first step towards thinking about right and wrong and not that it is a step towards rightness. He most definitely did not say that using a condom is ever justified.
- Pope Benedict said that in the intention to reduce infection there may be a step towards a more human sexuality. He most definitely did not say that putting on the condom was a step towards a more human sexuality.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
Why was the Pope’s example a prostitute and not a HIV discordant married couple? Obviously the Pope agrees that condoms are not the answer. He was talking about a prostitute, I beleive he meant a HIV positive prostitute, someone who is on the ground in terms of respect for themselves and care for the people around them. The Pope never spoke about the morality of a condom, he was taking about the intention.
- Catholic teaching has not changed
- The Pope was talking about the intention, he never said a condom was justified.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
What disease? HIV? What is most interesting is that the Pope did not mention HIV discordant married couples at all. If he had, that would of been radical and revolutionary, but he did not. His only example was that of a prostitute, when he was referring to condoms he was talking about the intention, the psychology behind it. He does not say the the action of using a condom is moral. Not that putting on a condom is a first step. Huge difference.
Using a condom in marriage is still immoral.
For info look here: lovingit.co.uk/2010/11/what-pope-benedict-said-about-condoms.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lovingit+%28Catholic+and+Loving+it!%29
A
Abyssinia
Guest
It is the same now, abstinence and fidelity. Catholic teaching has not changed. Pope mentioned nothing of HIV discordant married couple using condoms.
M
Milliardo
Guest
As I keep saying, keep spinning it all you want, it still boils down to one simple thing: homosexual acts are still seen as disordered activity, but if one has to engage in it, then at least do it with condoms. That is the basic message of it all. Also, I believe he did say he only used the example of a prostitute but later he clarified that it applies to heterosexual couples as well. Again, the spin doctors here are working overtime at damage control, but then it is very clear what’s being said. Take out all the fancy jargon, and you get down to what is being said, and it boils down to homosexual acts–disordered activity, but if one engages in it, then do it with condoms. I fail to see why that’s hard to even understand, though it seems many Catholics are still in denial that this is the message being sent. As I’ve posted, the only way the Pope can get out of this mire is to completely retract what he said. It seems though he’s sticking to what he said, and that is unfortunate.
V
vsedriver
Guest
That is the media spin and you have swallowed it hook line and sinker. The Pope was talking about the development of a sense of right and wrong. That the difference between a prostitute that uses a condom and one who doesn’t, shows that they are making a small step toward acknowledging that what they are doing is wrong. That condom use, in some situations, is an outward sign of an individual’s developing moral conscience.
Developing a moral conscience is a good thing, don’t you think?
For the Pope to say that condom use is OK is a mainstream media wet dream and they will stretch that in any way, shape, or form they can get it into. So no, the Pope isn’t saying anything radical in relation to Church teachings on human sexuality.
M
Milliardo
Guest
A prostitute who has a moral conscience will get out of his line and do something else. He using a condom to continue on his work is not developing a moral conscience; it merely means he’s afraid of his own safety and would like to continue on his work by being safe. There is then no morality there; it is still immoral. If he has any sense of morality then he will quit it, period. See what is happening here? In essence, as I keep saying, is that the Pope said that homosexual activity is still disordered, but if one has to do it, then one has to at least use condoms to do so. Where is the morality there? Used to be that the Catholic Church would flat out say don’t do it, period. That’s not the case now. Keep on spinning it, but it will still come out the same–Pope Benedict is sending conflicting messages, and Fr. Lombardi’s clarification didn’t help any. If ever, it only mired the Pope more rather than edify. And no wonder Catholics are so confused about the whole thing now. It isn’t the media, it is the message itself that’s confusing. On the one hand he is saying that homosexual acts are disordered; in the other he says that if one has to do it then at least use condoms to do so. What’s up with that? It’s not clear, it’s not right, and it still goes down to something has been changed. Again, Catholics can put any spin to it, but it still goes down to that.
B
BobCatholic
Guest
Amen.
The sextremist dominated media is brutally efficient in its -]brainwashing/-] propaganda tasks.
There’s a huge reason why the left took over the lamestream media. That is it.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
You are the one that keeps spinning just like them mainstream media. There are no spin doctors, we are only people that are trying to understand what the Pope meant. And the best way to do that is to look at the interview, not the mainstream media’s interpretations.
I believe that the Pope’s point is that a person living the life of a prostitute has failed to recognize the higher meaning and good of sex as an expression of love. The point would seem to be that the use of a condom by a HIV positive individual, in the case of CONCERN FOR THE OTHER PARTY’S WELL-BEING (this is important), may be a SYMPTOM, NOT A CAUSE, of moral reawakening, in realizing the need for responsibility. The point may be that a person in that walk of life in the process of moral reawakening, is likely to try to live by the world’s standard of responsibility before (and even if) they come to understand the need to stop living such a life altogether. This in no way condones condom usage as a good, or even a lesser evil, but only as a possible sign of the change of the INTENTIONS (not the actions) of a person towards the good.
The position of condom usage in marriage is still (and always will be) condemned as:
-it rejects the gift of life
-it prevents the full union of the couple in an act which is meant to express full union.
-condoms are not 100% effective at preventing the transmission of HIV (as even the manufacturers admit). The most basic action of love between spouses is not that they have sex, but concern for the life of the other. The chance of endangering the other’s life is hence not acceptable to actual love.
areluctantsinner.blogspot.com/2010/11/oh-holy-father-what-have-you-done.html
With the statement the Pope is neither condoning gay sex, nor condoning gay sex with a condom. He was saying that recognizing the danger of gay sex to transmit HIV can be seen as a first step toward a greater consciousness of the fact that actions have consequences and thus a step towards moral behavior – which would be the recognition that gay sex is not permissible.
lifesitenews.com/news/about-condoms-the-pope-was-talking-about-sodomy-not-normal-sex/
- Status