FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Latest article on the Popes condom remarks a little bit of confusion.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Just like the title says the articles all about how some Catholics are saying this is a major shift in the Vaticans birth control policy (ignoring the official stance just like most of us said they would) and those that say its stays the same.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...07858.html

Conservatives at odds with Vatican over condoms

Associated Press

By RACHEL ZOLL, AP Religion Writer Rachel Zoll, Ap Religion Writer – 1 hr 12 mins ago, November 24, 2010

Link to original

NEW YORK – Faced with a changing outlook from Pope Benedict XVI on condoms and their role in preventing the spread of HIV, many prominent conservative Roman Catholics in the U.S. are rejecting the Vatican's own explanation of what the pope said.

Several orthodox Catholics said they would only accept a more formal papal pronouncement. Others insisted that journalists were purposely misrepresenting Benedict's comments. Some questioned whether the papal spokesman, the Rev. Frederico Lombardi, accurately quoted the pope.

Bishops and the experts who advise them were scrambling to make sense of the news.

"It's a mess," said John Haas, president of the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, which advises church leaders, hospitals and Vatican offices. "I'm not ready to say that the pope said what Lombardi said."

The uproar is over comments Benedict made in the new book, "Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times." In an exchange with the author about AIDS in Africa, Benedict said that for some people, such as male prostitutes, using condoms could be a step in assuming moral responsibility because the intent is to "reduce the risk of infection."

At a news conference Tuesday in Rome, Lombardi said Benedict knew his comments would provoke intense debate, and that the pope meant for his remarks to apply not just to male prostitutes, but also "if you're a man, a woman, or a transsexual."

The pope did not suggest using condoms as birth control, which is banned by the Roman Catholic Church, and said condoms were not a "real or moral solution" to the AIDS crisis.

Still, his remarks were a watershed in the long debate among theologians and church officials over the morality of using condoms for disease prevention.

Jenn Giroux, executive director of Human Life International America, which promotes Catholic teaching on contraception, abortion and other moral issues, said more clarification from the Vatican was needed.

"I am watching very carefully, as everyone is right now, before making a final pronouncement," said Giroux, a registered nurse and mother of nine. "We just got something from a spokesperson. As always, we look to church doctrine on statements like this."

Germain Grisez, a prominent moral theologian who advises bishops, said that promoting condoms as protection against disease would be "pernicious" because it assumes a person does not have the capacity to make good, moral choices. He lamented that the pope's comments "can be — and are being — misused to sow doubt about Catholic teaching."

"Many of Jesus' own sayings were misused, and he no doubt foresaw that they would be misused. But he nevertheless said what he thought would lead to salvation those who were open to his teaching," Grisez wrote in an e-mail. "I assume that Pope Benedict's intention in speaking out as he does is similar to Jesus' intention. But Benedict's judgment about what to say may not be as sound as Jesus' judgment was."

Haas, also a moral theologian, said he fielded calls all day Tuesday from bishops confused by what Lombardi had said. Benedict's comments come at a time when bishops in the United States are intensely focused on upholding Catholic orthodoxy on marriage and sexuality.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops did not respond to requests Tuesday for comment.

Philip Lawler, editor of Catholic World News, demanded the resignation of the editor of the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, after the daily printed the pope's quotes on condoms and other topics in a Saturday edition, despite an embargo on the much-anticipated book.

Lawler and many other orthodox Catholics argued that the newspaper undermined the pope by quoting him without the proper context. Lawler stood by his criticism and call for the editor's resignation after Lombardi's news conference Tuesday.

"I think the clarification was confusing and frustrating," Lawler said.

Catholic teaching has never totally barred condom use for protection against HIV and the Vatican has no official, authoritative policy on the issue.

In 1987, the U.S. bishops' conference issued the statement, "The Many Face of AIDS," that stressed limiting sex to marriage as the best protection against the virus, but said public education "could include accurate information about prophylactic devices" to prevent transmission. The document was criticized at the time by conservatives and some Vatican officials.

Years ago, Vatican officials reportedly began studying the topic, with the goal of writing a document on the morality of condom use as protection against AIDS, but no statement was issued.

The pope's comments in a book interview do not amount to an official teaching, a point conservative Catholics made repeatedly and vociferously Tuesday. They argued that the pope was only noting that by using a condom, a person with HIV is displaying some moral sense about the consequences of his behavior.

"I maintain that nothing new has happened, that the church's teaching hasn't changed," said the Rev. Joseph Fessio of Ignatius Press, the English publisher of the book, in a phone interview from Rome.

Yet, the pope's remarks are still seen as significant and must be analyzed and explained by church leaders. U.S. bishops oversee AIDS care programs through local and national Catholic Charities and Catholic Relief Services. In a brief statement, Catholic Relief Services said, "Our current policy holds: we do not purchase, distribute or promote the use of condoms."

Very few U.S. bishops or church officials have commented since the pope's remarks were published last Saturday.

"We're in for a long period of confusion," said Russell Shaw, a writer for the Catholic publication Our Sunday Visitor and former spokesman for the U.S. bishops' conference. "The bishops — and clergy especially — will have to go home now to their own dioceses and whether they like it or not start speaking very clearly about what just happened."
This "pastoral care" stuff ain't working for me.

[Image: sheep10.2.jpg]
Found in the comments section of Father Z's blog.

------------------------------------------

Now that the Pope has apparently expanded his puzzling comments to include heterosexual intercouse, I simply don’t know what to say or think.

Despite all the well-meaning spin and explanations, I feel utterly confused, betrayed and demoralized. It’s like an earthquake has just occurred in the Vatican, and St. Peter’s edifice which I always believed was rock-solid and permanent now has cracks running all through it.

All I can say is that as a mother of six children who has undergone numerous miscarriages, surgeries, sacrifices and difficulties to be open to life and remain faithful to the Church’s teaching on marriage and procreation, I’m exceedingly troubled by the Holy Father apparent endorsement of condom use as the lesser of two evils.

By opening the exception of condom use to heterosexuals where procreation is indeed an issue, are we now to assume that Section 14 (below) of Humanae Vitae is now irrelevant?

“Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good,” it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general.”

--------------------------------------
If the Church's teaching was just made clear several years earlier by Pius XI, why the commission? To study what for 5 years? ... while the use of ABC exploded in the Catholic world...

Humanae Vitae Wrote:5. The consciousness of that same mission induced us to confirm and enlarge the study commission which our predecessor Pope John XXIII of happy memory had instituted in March, 1963. That commission which included, besides several experts in the various pertinent disciplines also married couples, had as its scope the gathering of opinions on the new questions regarding conjugal life, and in particular on the regulation of births, and of furnishing opportune elements of information so that the magisterium could give an adequate reply to the expectation not only of the faithful, but also of world opinion.5

The work of these experts, as well as the successive judgments and counsels spontaneously forwarded by or expressly requested from a good number of our brothers in the episcopate, have permitted us to measure more exactly all the aspects of this complex matter. Hence with all our heart we express to each of them our lively gratitude.

6. The conclusions at which the commission arrived could not, nevertheless, be considered by us as definitive, nor dispense us from a personal examination of this serious question; and this also because, within the commission itself, no full concordance of judgments concerning the moral norms to be proposed had been reached, and above all because certain criteria of solutions had emerged which departed from the moral teaching on marriage proposed with constant firmness by the teaching authority of the Church.

Therefore, having attentively sifted the documentation laid before us, after mature reflection and assiduous prayers, we now intend, by virtue of the mandate entrusted to us by Christ, to give our reply to these grave questions.

7. The problem of birth, like every other problem regarding human life, is to be considered, beyond partial perspectives -- whether of the biological or psychological, demographic or sociological orders -- in the light of an integral vision of man and of his vocation, not only his natural and earthly, but also his supernatural and eternal vocation. And since, in the attempt to justify artificial methods of birth control, many have appealed to the demands both of conjugal love and of "responsible parenthood," it is good to state very precisely the true concept of these two great realities of married life, referring principally to what was recently set forth in this regard, and in a highly authoritative form, by the Second Vatican Council in its pastoral constitution "Gaudium et Spes."
(11-24-2010, 07:32 AM)ggreg Wrote: [ -> ]Found in the comments section of Father Z's blog.

------------------------------------------

Now that the Pope has apparently expanded his puzzling comments to include heterosexual intercouse, I simply don’t know what to say or think.

Despite all the well-meaning spin and explanations, I feel utterly confused, betrayed and demoralized. It’s like an earthquake has just occurred in the Vatican, and St. Peter’s edifice which I always believed was rock-solid and permanent now has cracks running all through it.

All I can say is that as a mother of six children who has undergone numerous miscarriages, surgeries, sacrifices and difficulties to be open to life and remain faithful to the Church’s teaching on marriage and procreation, I’m exceedingly troubled by the Holy Father apparent endorsement of condom use as the lesser of two evils.

By opening the exception of condom use to heterosexuals where procreation is indeed an issue, are we now to assume that Section 14 (below) of Humanae Vitae is now irrelevant?

“Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good,” it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general.”

--------------------------------------

I dunno, maybe your confused because you didn't study enough philosophy?
AB Wrote:I dunno, maybe your confused because you didn't study enough philosophy?

Yes, you're the only one who sees it clearly...

(11-24-2010, 02:52 PM)lamentabili sane Wrote: [ -> ]
AB Wrote:I dunno, maybe your confused because you didn't study enough philosophy?

Yes, you're the only one who sees it clearly...

I have no trouble understanding what the Pope said and I have seen posts from quite a few others who did so also.  There are good explanations making the rounds online from Fr. Fessio, Michael Voris and Janet Smith, all of which have received links from FE.

I can see that this topic may be difficult for people who do not have a theology/philosophy background.  I encourage them to use this as an opportunity to stretch themselves intellectually.
(11-24-2010, 07:05 AM)ggreg Wrote: [ -> ]This "pastoral care" stuff ain't working for me.

[Image: sheep10.2.jpg]

hehe!
(11-24-2010, 03:06 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-24-2010, 02:52 PM)lamentabili sane Wrote: [ -> ]
AB Wrote:I dunno, maybe your confused because you didn't study enough philosophy?

Yes, you're the only one who sees it clearly...

I have no trouble understanding what the Pope said and I have seen posts from quite a few others who did so also.  There are good explanations making the rounds online from Fr. Fessio, Michael Voris and Janet Smith, all of which have received links from FE.

I can see that this topic may be difficult for people who do not have a theology/philosophy background.  I encourage them to use this as an opportunity to stretch themselves intellectually.

While I do agree with you - that the Holy Father can be understood correctly - and while Catholics do have the responsibility to grow in their understanding of the Faith after Confirmation, how many are actually taught about this, and if most aren't, how can it reasonably be expected of them to study philosophy and theology? Even with practicing, faithful Catholics, is it truly possible for all of them to have the time and motivation for such study?

By no means am I trying to make excuses for anyone, but it seems that a herculian effort is needed for Catholics to stay abreast of what's going on and to remain true to the true Faith. Not only is there a liberal media to deal with, but we must also worry about some of our own priests and bishops... it's a lot to ask average Catholics to pick apart the theological nuances of His Holiness. I just wonder if he should try and keep things somewhat simple, so that his message gets to more people and is more easily/clearly understood.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10