Pope says condoms are ok in some cases
#41
(11-20-2010, 11:09 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: A lot of the posters on this forum have trouble actually reading and comprehending, fishtards.

My impression was more that they were pleased to have an excuse for some Pope bashing so they didn't care about finding our if it were true.  That bothers me more than the media being dishonest/ incompetent (which I have had plenty of opportunity to get used to.)  One would think that Catholics would at least give the Pope the benefit of the doubt or perhaps reserve judgment rather than  leaping to condemn him.  Shameful!
Reply
#42
(11-20-2010, 11:24 PM)winoblue1 Wrote: Sometimes it is better to remain silent than to try to make escoteric points that people can't fully grasp or that get morphed when the media spin reports it.

The Pope has a long-standing working relationship with Seewald going back to before he became pope.  Seewald is not hostile and wrote a fair and positive book based on interviews with the Pope.  The points are not so esoteric that a person of good will and moderate intelligence could not understand them.  The news media took a reasonable statement from a reasonable book and distorted it beyond recognition.  And nothing the Pope says or does is safe from being treated similarly.  There is no amount of prudence and no course of action that is going to stop the secular media from doing this  They hate Catholic teaching.
Reply
#43
Janet Smith has a good commentary on this which is being spun the wrong way for sure:

We must note that the example that Pope Benedict gives for the use of a condom is a male prostitute; thus, it is reasonable to assume that he is referring to a male prostitute engaged in homosexual acts. The Holy Father is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense; an awakening that sexual pleasure is not the highest value, but that we must take care that we harm no one with our choices.  He is not speaking to the morality of the use of a condom, but to something that may be true about the psychological state of those who use them.  If such individuals are using condoms to avoid harming another, they may eventually realize that sexual acts between members of the same sex are inherently harmful since they are not in accord with human nature.  The Holy Father does not in any way think the use of condoms is a part of the solution to reducing the risk of AIDs.  As he explicitly states, the true solution involves “humanizing sexuality.”
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=220:pope-benedict-on-condoms-in-qlight-of-the-worldq&catid=53:cwr2010&Itemid=70

C.
Reply
#44
(11-20-2010, 11:35 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(11-20-2010, 11:24 PM)winoblue1 Wrote: Sometimes it is better to remain silent than to try to make escoteric points that people can't fully grasp or that get morphed when the media spin reports it.

The Pope has a long-standing working relationship with Seewald going back to before he became pope.  Seewald is not hostile and wrote a fair and positive book based on interviews with the Pope.  The points are not so esoteric that a person of good will and moderate intelligence could not understand them.  The news media took a reasonable statement from a reasonable book and distorted it beyond recognition.  And nothing the Pope says or does is safe from being treated similarly.  There is no amount of prudence and no course of action that is going to stop the secular media from doing this  They hate Catholic teaching.

Yes yes, but my point was that the Holy Father should be aware and anticipate that the media is against him and the Church. Why give them fodder for their mischief? That is the point. It is like he intentionally is feeding them...

Remember sometimes it is better to say "Yes Yes and No No,, the rest is from the Evil One."
Reply
#45
(11-20-2010, 09:23 PM)ggreg Wrote: .

I think the prophecies at La Sallette were onto something.  Certainly looks that way.

I agree.
Reply
#46
From the LA Times:

"According to Maguire, Catholic teaching makes a distinction between acts that are "intrinsically evil" and those that are "discussable." The former category, he said, includes abortion, the torture of children and nuclear war. Benedict's comments appear to place condom use solidly into the latter category, which would make it possible for it to be considered acceptable as a lesser evil. That could open the door for it to be considered for broader application than just in cases involving prostitution."

This is the problem.  This comment will not be viewed either on its face or the intent of the Holy Father.  Immediately modernists and postmodernists see this as an opportunity to now expand the Pope's comments to lesser evils and broader applications, the classic reading against the grain for its hidden meaning.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/...8518.story

Reply
#47
(11-20-2010, 09:14 PM)mcwhite Wrote: As a long-time active member of the pro-life movement I must admit being crestfallen and feeling a sense of betrayal.  My feelings are not important, but this is a massive blow to the pro-life movement.

So true and sad. But I console myself by knowing at least the Pope is out there working hard to stop the pedophiles in his Church ::)
Reply
#48
(11-21-2010, 01:05 AM)Lietrum Wrote: From the LA Times:

"According to Maguire, Catholic teaching makes a distinction between acts that are "intrinsically evil" and those that are "discussable." The former category, he said, includes abortion, the torture of children and nuclear war. Benedict's comments appear to place condom use solidly into the latter category, which would make it possible for it to be considered acceptable as a lesser evil. That could open the door for it to be considered for broader application than just in cases involving prostitution."

This is the problem.   This comment will not be viewed either on its face or the intent of the Holy Father.  Immediately modernists and postmodernists see this as an opportunity to now expand the Pope's comments to lesser evils and broader applications, the classic reading against the grain for its hidden meaning.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/...8518.story

Exactly it doesnt matter what the Pope actually said its how it will be spun the Pope should have known better.
Reply
#49
The funny thing is that the same people that keep accusing the Pontiff with "the Pope should have known better" are the same ones that would never stop defending Bishop Williamson when the media tries to spin what he says.

NEWS FLASH. The media distorts and lies about what the Church teaches. ???

I am still waiting on my official female lectors.  :pazzo:
Reply
#50
Yeah I defend Williamson he's more Catholic than the Pope could ever pretend to be.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)