well well well...

[JRKH]

It’s all in good fun James, I’ve been had a few times in the past myself.

Course I shouldn’t make a habit of this as im bordering on the fine line of falling into “trollism”…. … But I just couldn’t resist.

Peace,
TEPO.

I know the feeling…

Just yesterday I saw a thread title “how do you fast” and my first thought was “I hide my dentures”……

Peace
James

 

[edwest2]

I agree that it is morally wrong for gay male prostitutes to use condominiums together, but I think it it’s okay for married couples to use them.

It is not OK for married couples.

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[april32010]

I agree that it is morally wrong for gay male prostitutes to use

condominiums

it a joke son, its a joke

 

[april32010]

I agree that it is morally wrong for gay male prostitutes to use condominiums together, but I think it it’s okay for married couples to use them.

It is not OK for married couples.

its a joke son,i say its a joke

 

[april32010]

I stand here on the horns of a dilemma. Either I dilute a joke by belaboring it, or I risk giving scandal to anyone who does not get the joke. I love a good joke, but I fear to give scandal.

.

i think its too late

 

[TEPO]

It is not OK for married couples.

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[Ana_v]

This again?

Sorry to burst your bubble but the Pope said no such thing, the teaching of the Church has not changed, and condoms are not morally permissible in any circumstance.

Poor reporting by the secular media completely misrepresented what the Pope did say.

Someone on another recent CAF thread, that has to do with semen analysis, stated the that Church permits a married man to use a perforated condom when performing the marital act, for the purpose of obstaining a semen collection that can be submitted for analysis, the justification being that such a condom is open to life.

Is this indeed a permission granted by the Church?

 

[Actaeon]

no,he did not say that .read post 19

You are quite confused. The Pope said no such thing.

Allow me to directly quote what the pope stated:

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.

So, what I said, including the example, was EXACTLY what the pope said… that condoms would be a step in the right direction for people such as male prostitutes. I never said that they were 100% licit, nor did I condone the acts that they would allow. I merely paraphrased the pope himself.

And april, considering that the quote I paraphrased was copy-pasta’d in post 19, I am surprised you were not aware of that.

 

[april32010]

Allow me to directly quote what the pope stated:

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.

So, what I said, including the example, was EXACTLY what the pope said… that condoms would be a step in the right direction for people such as male prostitutes. I never said that they were 100% licit, nor did I condone the acts that they would allow. I merely paraphrased the pope himself.

And april, considering that the quote I paraphrased was copy-pasta’d in post 19, I am surprised you were not aware of that.

And, to be clear, he was saying they were okay for people who are, say, gay prostitutes: where the issue of contracepting was not even present at all. Of course two gay men cannot make a baby, so in that case the SOLE function of condoms is to prevent disease.

he did not say it was ok,and that is what you said.

 

[someperson555]

by what logic?

according to what ive read, the pope allowed contraception between husband and wife if the intention was to porevent HIV.
this makes sense. this is what ive been saying all along. one of my main arguments against the church’s strict condom laws was STDs. but luckily it seems the church caught it’s mistake and changed.
so it follows logical thinking that if a husband and wife wish to avoid STD, then it should be morally licit to engage in contraceptive sex. i believe the church will eventually yield to this. and i believe the church will also eventually allow a couple to use contraception once they have had a few kids.

Jesus said “when a man and a women come together for the puropse of procreation…”. he never said that every sexual act must be procreative.
im tired of traditional catholics trying to pretend that NFP is somehow different from contraception or contraceptive sex.
its not, no matter how you try to rationalise it, it just isnt ANY different.
i hope you know that in eastern orthodoxy and the early church they even forbade NFP. so back then it was either “concieve or be abstinent”. so if youre going to oppose contraception at all costs at least be consistent like the early church fathers were and oppose NFP as well.

 

[april32010]

according to what ive read, the pope allowed contraception between husband and wife if the intention was to porevent HIV.

.

#i then it would not be contraception,it would be prevention.#2 he did not allow it.

 

[april32010]

I merely paraphrased the pope himself.

paraphrase |ˈparəˌfrāz|
verb trans. ]
express the meaning of (the writer or speaker or something written or spoken) using different words, esp. to achieve greater clarity

as i have stated in a another post,i believe the Holy Father speaks with charity and clarity whenever he speaks.

 

[someperson555]

#i then it would not be contraception,it would be prevention.#2 he did not allow it.

a DIRECT quote:
“He said it was acceptable to use a prophylactic when the sole intention was to “reduce the risk of infection” from Aids”

“While he restated the Catholic Church’s staunch objections to contraception because it believes that it interferes with the creation of life, he argued that using a condom to preserve life and avoid death could be a responsible act –**** even outside marriage.****”

now why would he have had to specify that the use of condoms to prevent infection can be licit “even outside of marriage”
because obviously he allowed married couples to use condoms for the prevention of aids.
common sense april32010… common sense

 

[Actaeon]

he did not say it was ok,and that is what you said.

I think you are confused about the difference between okay and morally good (because it appears you are inserting into my post that I said the pope teaches that condoms are licit and morally good). The two are not the same thing.

To say something is a good first step in the right direction towards learning that not all things are permissable (that it is okay) is a far cry from saying that something is morally good and/or licit.

 

[april32010]

a DIRECT quote:
“He said it was acceptable to use a prophylactic when the sole intention was to “reduce the risk of infection” from Aids”

“While he restated the Catholic Church’s staunch objections to contraception because it believes that it interferes with the creation of life, he argued that using a condom to preserve life and avoid death could be a responsible act –**** even outside marriage.****”

now why would he have had to specify that the use of condoms to prevent infection can be licit “even outside of marriage”
because obviously he allowed married couples to use condoms for the prevention of aids.
common sense april32010… common sense

where doe’s he say this?

 

[Actaeon]

as i have stated in a another post,i believe the Holy Father speaks with charity and clarity whenever he speaks.

FYI: Google is not a valid dictionary, because it is a web-compiling program (software with no human check) that draws definitions from unscholarly and unqualified sources (such as dictionary.com, which itself uses unqualified sources). You’d be better sticking to websters, as they have an industry accepted scholarly review of their work.

Merriam Webster’s definition:

para·phrase noun \ˈper-ə-ˌfrāz,ˈpa-rə-
Definition of PARAPHRASE
1: a restatement of a text, passage, or work giving the meaning in another form
2: the use or process of paraphrasing in studying or teaching composition
You’ll note that the definition of paraphrasing includes NO statement that it must be for (or even is made more paraphrase-ish by) greater clarity

 

[april32010]

And, to be clear, he was saying they were okay for people who are, say, gay prostitutes: where the issue of contracepting was not even present at all. Of course two gay men cannot make a baby, so in that case the SOLE function of condoms is to prevent disease.

Such could never be said about a straight pairing, so the point in the OP is moot.

Contraception (not disease prevention) is wrong. It’s not specific to condoms, it’s all about the intent of the action (to contracept)

I think you are confused about the difference between okay and morally good (because it appears you are inserting into my post that I said the pope teaches that condoms are licit and morally good). The two are not the same thin

where did i insert anything,you posted

he was saying they were okay for people

editk just posted,when i saw everything on one post i could see your point.but he didn’t say it was ok even in that narrow instance .

 

[someperson555]

where doe’s he say this?

it was a quote from an article, read it for yourself.
telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/8148944/The-Pope-drops-Catholic-ban-on-condoms-in-historic-shift.html

and from another article:
“In a book to be published this week, Benedict XVI said there could be “justified individual cases” in which condoms could be used, softening Rome’s blanket ban on contraception, one of the most controversial issues facing the Church.”

but it goes without saying that condoms are permissible in under certain circumstances. honestly i arrived at this conclusion before the pope affirmed it. (these are the benefits of being a free thinker)

it seems many people on this forum have a flawed understanding of morality and sin.

 

[Joe_5859]

a DIRECT quote:
“He said it was acceptable to use a prophylactic when the sole intention was to “reduce the risk of infection” from Aids”

“While he restated the Catholic Church’s staunch objections to contraception because it believes that it interferes with the creation of life, he argued that using a condom to preserve life and avoid death could be a responsible act –**** even outside marriage.****”

now why would he have had to specify that the use of condoms to prevent infection can be licit “even outside of marriage”
because obviously he allowed married couples to use condoms for the prevention of aids.
common sense april32010… common sense

I think you misunderstand what a “direct quote” is. You have quoted a secondary source that is talking about what the Pope said. That’s not a direct quote from the pope.

I encourage you to go back and fully read Post #19. April posted the actual text of what Pope Benedict actually said. Please read it. Don’t form your opinions on Catholic teaching based on some news article’s quote of half a sentence out of context.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

it was a quote from an article, read it for yourself.
telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/8148944/The-Pope-drops-Catholic-ban-on-condoms-in-historic-shift.html

and from another article:
“In a book to be published this week, Benedict XVI said there could be “justified individual cases” in which condoms could be used, softening Rome’s blanket ban on contraception, one of the most controversial issues facing the Church.”

but it goes without saying that condoms are permissible in under certain circumstances. honestly i arrived at this conclusion before the pope affirmed it. (these are the benefits of being a free thinker)

it seems many people on this forum have a flawed understanding of morality and sin.

I’m sorry man (or woman), but you gotta admit that you’re completely wrong on this one. The Pope said no such thing, a ton of people here have proven it, and if you think he did approve condoms in certain cases you’re just completely, totally, 100% wrong. I’d explain why but a ton of other posters on this thread already have.

You disagree with the Church, and the Pope, on condom usage, we understand, but please stop putting words in the Pope’s mouth.