Release of pope's comments on condoms a blunder or apologetic genius?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thoughtfulone said:
This is what the Pope said, and I believe he is in fact leaving the door open for condom use in certain instances.
Click to expand...
He is NOT leaving the door open for ANY use! No worries there.

He in fact said that it is not “a moral solution” but rather he is referring only to the “step” away… “in this or that case” from what are very very grave sins… and that in actually “intending” (though the act is entirely wrong) to try somewhat to avoid killing someone in doing this very grave evil…and though it is not right …the “intention” to try and lessen the chances of killing someone is a “first step” nonetheless …

If a person starts having in his intention “to try to avoid not killing someone” …it is a “first step”…and maybe he will start to see that he should NOT be engaging at all in these sorts of things…start seeing more the value of human sexually and the lives of persons…instead of destroying them both.
 
MilesVitae said:
Why would the use a condom, for the purpose of preventing disease, by two people engaging in a sodomous act be immoral?

The Church condemns contraception. However, a sodomous act is, of itself, not procreative (which is why it is immoral), thus the use of a barrier in such a case (it seems to me) is not a contraceptive act. thoughts, anyone?

(it is NOT THE SAME, however, in cases where infertile or elderly couples, or couples during what is thought to be the woman’s infertile period, are engaging in natural sexual intercourse - in that case they are still engaging in act which is of itself procreative, even if in that particular situation at that particular time, it won’t result in procreation. As such, they cannot use a condom).
Click to expand...
I think that may be what he’s suggesting. In an act of sodomy, there is no contraception going on with the use of a condom; the condom’s use is to prevent infection and may be lifesaving.

In such an instance, sodomy, the condom is morally neutral as an aid to contraception.
 
Newbie2 said:
I think that may be what he’s suggesting. In an act of sodomy, there is no contraception going on with the use of a condom; the condom’s use is to prevent infection and may be lifesaving.

In such an instance, sodomy, the condom is morally neutral as an aid to contraception.
Click to expand...
The book except is now available …and he is not suggesting any of these things.

And he says that the condom use is not moral.
 
Gang, this was a big mistake by His Holiness.

He should have known that publicly going on an academic frolic with secular media would end badly. There are grave, in-your-face calamities at the moment (hemorrhaging Catholic practice, intense secularlization, decline in basic natural institutions [fewer marriages, e.g.], etc.)

This is no time to wonder aloud whether a male prostitute would be ‘moving in the right direction’ by using a condom during his goings on.

What this serves to do is scandalize the poorly catechised masses, dishearten the faithful, and make us look even more irrelvent (most people interpret this as an embrace of cultural norms or a ‘liberalization’ as some have put it.)

Very disappointing to see this.
 
Ron_Conte said:
Specifically, this was said as extemporaneous remarks during an interview.

So it is not an act of the infallible Magisterium.
It is not an act of the non-infallible Magisterium.
It is not even a work of private theology.

Extemporaneous remarks rank even lower than the well-considered words of anyone writing as a private theologian.
Click to expand...
Ron, I agree wholeheartedly. But I think a significant piece of this rotten pie is was this kind of public speculation at all good. Frankly, I’m not sure this question has much use in private moral theological investigation. I mean really, is there time to wonder if a male prostitute, by using a condom, would be mitigating his homosexual sin?

Further, this sounds so absurd to the general public that it will confirm for many that the Church really is just legalistic and creates abitrary splits in hairs better than anyone.

This is the kind of Vatican II spirit that, while usually not malicious, is none the less effective in further thining out the Church of any vibrant faithful.

We find ourselves in a society that is anti-patriarchal, awash in pornography, and punishing to those who make the faith an anchor in life. Therefore I find this kind of academic bantor only another argument that the leadership in the Church is out of touch with on the ground realities.
 
Here’s a decent satire that doesn’t do a half bad job of explaining what Pope Benedict was probably shooting for with his statement. It comes from the blog “Catholicus - diarium in tela”:

mccamley.org/blog/holy-father-tells-terrorists-how-to-plant-bombs
The Holy Father was asked in a recent interview to comment on the behaviour of terrorists who plant no warning bombs in heavily populated areas of cities, close to schools and nurseries. He said it was a bad thing.
Click to expand...
He was then asked if it was better if the terrorist telephoned in bomb warnings so that buildings could be evacuated.
Click to expand...
The Holy Father said that while engaging in such acts of terrorism was always morally wrong, telephoning a warning “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 political issues or demands for justice”.
Click to expand...
Media: “So you’re saying it’s okay to plant bombs so long as you use phone warnings?”
Click to expand...
Holy Father: “No, of course not, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of serious injury or death to an innocent person, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of policital action”.
Click to expand...
In other news, the Pope said male prostitutes who use condoms so as not to spread HIV may show the first step to realizing they cannot just do what they want and that sex outside of marriage has consequences.
Click to expand...
In further news, media organisations get it arse about face as usual.
Click to expand...
 
Bookcat said:
He is NOT leaving the door open for ANY use! No worries there.

He in fact said that it is not “a moral solution” but rather he is referring only to the “step” away… “in this or that case” from what are very very grave sins… and that in actually “intending” (though the act is entirely wrong) to try somewhat to avoid killing someone in doing this very grave evil…and though it is not right …the “intention” to try and lessen the chances of killing someone is a “first step” nonetheless …

If a person starts having in his intention “to try to avoid not killing someone” …it is a “first step”…and maybe he will start to see that he should NOT be engaging at all in these sorts of things…start seeing more the value of human sexually and the lives of persons…instead of destroying them both.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but he knew darn well what he was saying and how it would be interpreted. He is testing the waters and getting people used to the idea little by little.
 
Thank you for posting this! I was disturbed as well about this article, despite knowing that the mass media will twist the Church’s message in any way possible.
 
Here is another quote: “There can be single justified cases,” Benedict said.

I think it’s pretty clear what he is saying here. If he wanted to say it is never acceptable under any circumstances, he would have.
 
But you are allowed to take the pill for health reasons as long as the purpose is for serious health and not contraception…how is this different from condoms?
 
You can actually take the pill to regulate your cycle as many women have irregular cycles thus making NFP virtually impossible to attempt.
 
KingTheoden said:
Gang, this was a big mistake by His Holiness.

He should have known that publicly going on an academic frolic with secular media would end badly. There are grave, in-your-face calamities at the moment (hemorrhaging Catholic practice, intense secularlization, decline in basic natural institutions [fewer marriages, e.g.], etc.)

This is no time to wonder aloud whether a male prostitute would be ‘moving in the right direction’ by using a condom during his goings on.

What this serves to do is scandalize the poorly catechised masses, dishearten the faithful, and make us look even more irrelvent (most people interpret this as an embrace of cultural norms or a ‘liberalization’ as some have put it.)

Very disappointing to see this.
Click to expand...
It is not the pope’s fault that the media is using his book for evil means.

I’m happy I was blessed enough to take a moral philosophy at a faithful Catholic college- so when I saw the headline I wasn’t scandalized. Anyway, I figured it was the media twisting things as usual.

The main point is that the sin of contraception does not take place in a very few situations that a condom could be used. For example, if a rapist asks the victim if he could use a condom, a faithful Catholic could say yes. (This may seem odd, but this actually happens quite often. As rapists will use this as a defense in court that it was consensual.)
 
Thoughtfulone said:
Here is another quote: “There can be single justified cases,” Benedict said.

I think it’s pretty clear what he is saying here. If he wanted to say it is never acceptable under any circumstances, he would have.
Click to expand...
You’re as bad as the secular media. It’s tough enough trying to correct falsehoods that they create regarding the Pope’s words without also having to battle ignorant Catholics all too eager to be angry at our Pope.

Nowhere in HIs quote did he say “There can be single justified cases”.

What He did say was “There may be a basis etc…”

but that was after He said this:

“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 man’s being”

In context, the "There may be a basis" line had NOTHING to do with condoms but more to do with sexuality being treated as a positive value.
 
Every news article and TV news report about the condom thing COMPLETELY misrepresents what the pope said.

BUT, they are also stating when the book goes on sale and implying that it worth reading. I bet it sells like hot cakes.

Genius.
 
Every news article and TV news report about the condom thing COMPLETELY misrepresents what the pope said.

BUT, they are also stating when the book goes on sale and implying that it worth reading.I bet it sells like hot cakes.

What does everyone think? Mistake?? or brilliant way of getting the Catholic position heard (or read)?

Like I said, I bet the book is going to be a HUGE seller.👍
 
Thoughtfulone said:
This is what the Pope said, and I believe he is in fact leaving the door open for condom use in certain instances.

"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."

Peter Seewald: Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?

Pope Benedict: 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.
Click to expand...
I dare suggest the secular journalists who took this excerpt as an endorsement of condom use deliberately twisted its meaning because they know there is a market for those who hope the Pope said condoms are ok. I dare suggest other readers who see the full quote and come to the same conclusion are equally guilty of deliberate misinterpretation.
 
 
I doubt the Catholic Church is conducting some “New Coke” conspiracy. I rather have been cautious about what L’Observatorre Romano puts out there.

You may, however, be correct that the secular media, desirous that the Pope has done a 180 on condom use (for no apparent reason), desirous that such sensationalist headlines will sell news, may end up hurting the very forked-tongued master they serve by misrepresenting the Pope because this could indeed become an opportunity for an apologetic in front of eyes that normally never hear good Catholic apologetics. :rolleyes:
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top