Skip to comments.Pope Benedict says that condoms can be used to stop the spread of HIV (Contraceptives now allowed?)
Posted on 11/20/2010 6:08:23 PM PST by WebFocus
In a break with his traditional teaching, Pope Benedict XVI has said the use of condoms is acceptable "in certain cases", in an extended interview to be published this week.
After holding firm during his papacy to the Vatican's blanket ban on the use of contraceptives, Benedict's surprise comments will shock conservatives in the Catholic church while finding favour with senior Vatican figures who are pushing for a new line on the issue as HIV ravages Africa.
The comments were made in a book-length interview with a German journalist, Peter Seewald. In the case of a male prostitute, says Benedict, using a condom to reduce the risk of HIV infection "can be a first step in the direction of moralisation, 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".
Contraception can be "a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality," the pope says.
Excerpts from the book, Light of the World: The Pope, the Church, and the Signs of the Times, were published yesterday by L'Osservatore Romano, the official Vatican newspaper. The pope's comments follow his controversial assertion in 2009 that the rising tide of HIV in Africa could be made worse, not better, by the distribution of condoms. He was speaking to journalists as he visited Africa, where the majority of HIV fatalities occur.
At the time, Aids campaigners and European governments expressed outrage. Belgium's health minister said the pope's comments "could demolish years of prevention and education and endanger many human lives".
Francis X Rocca, a Vatican expert and correspondent for Religion News Service, said: "This new statement by the pope is very significant, it is going to shake things up.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Only for butt sex apparently....
The pope never said condoms are ok. He is being grossly misquoted.
If you read the other threads on this subject you will see that the conclusion drawn is entirely mistaken. What you would expect from a secular British paper.
My gosh why do people fall for the lies Liberals put out!
The pope said no such thing.
The male prostitute quote in English is prostitute in the Vatican newspaper - so there has been a mistranslation which I am sure you knew about.
I see the Guardian takes the Pope’s nuances and twists them.
“After holding firm during his papacy to the Vatican’s blanket ban on the use of contraceptives, Benedict’s surprise comments will shock conservatives in the Catholic church while finding favour with senior Vatican figures who are pushing for a new line on the issue as HIV ravages Africa.”
First, Benedict’s stance will not shock “conservatives in the Catholic Church”... His stance will shock CATHOLICS who are trapped in a Church that is no longer Catholic, and which is eclipsed by Modernist heretics (The “senior Vatican figures” mentioned in the article.)
Second, a virus is much smaller than the microscopic holes in a latex condom, so condom use will not prevent the transmission of a virus.
Third, there are a great many new STDs that will spread through genital contact, whether a condom is used or not.
Fourth, There is NO CLINICAL EVIDENCE THAT LINKS HIV WITH AIDS... NONE. So the entire argument is a straw dog.
For all my confused Catholic brethren I can only say: Come back to Tradition... Come out of the “Whore of Babylon” and find your way into a traditional Catholic Church that still teaches the true Catholic doctrine, and STILL celebrates the Mass for all time:
And study the only Catholic Bible worth your time:
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
What’s wrong with contraceptives?
This article incorrectly quotes the Pope, and it should be taken down off Guardian. Just lies ...
Better yet — what is wrong with prophylactics?
Read this: Catholic World Report
Or this: National Catholic Register
Both have the actual statement he made in its context.
Then get back with me.
So what did the pope say? That it’s less bad for a male prostitute who uses condoms than for one not to use condoms? I bet he also said it’s best yet not to be a male prostitute at all, but that didn’t get any press.
“Pope Benedict says that condoms can be used to stop the spread of HIV (Contraceptives now allowed?)”
what about for preventing abortion?
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.
Supposedly these are 'HIS' words according to your link...now there was no instruction given as to what humanization of sexuality means....
As a parent I cannot begin to formulate in my mind what was supposedly said in a clear and concise terms to my children. It is like words, words, words, on this hand, and then on that hand, and maybe, perhaps, possibly on and on and on.... 'evil' was not identified as origination but only the results... It is like liberals pouring $$$$ into their 'war' on poverty to keep poverty sustainable.
And that is a fair criticism.
It should be taken in direct contrast to the banalization of sexuality mentioned immediately above:
This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. 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 mans being.
The Catholic Church has, since the time of Christ, taught that sex is to be for unitive and procreative purposes. Unitive = "and the two shall become one flesh" and Procreative = "be fruitful and multiply". The pleasure associated with it is the effect that God built in to encourage married people to do so. (And, yes, I can probably think of more examples than you can where notable people didn't live up to what they should do. That doesn't change the teaching. It just shows where people are fallen). People indiscriminately engaging in sex solely to achieve that effect rather than for its purpose support its banalization.
The humanization of sex is simply placing sex in the human context that God intended for it when He made humans.
Yes, I'd have wished that he would have expounded on that in an interview that was destined to go into a mass publication book for a general audience, but he didn't.
I’m not a Catholic but let’s follow the logic trail for a moment. The Church’s position against contraceptives is for what? That it prevents pregnancies and the pregnancy can be the will of God so who are we to block it from happening?
However, in gay sex, there is no chance of pregnancy but there is a chance of disease transmission. The Church is not in favor of disease transmission and there’s nothing in the Bible about “thou shalt not wear latex” so, so far, there’s nothing about gays wearing condoms that would seem to violate Church teachings.
It is gay sex, itself, that the Church sees as wrong which would be true whether a condom was worn or not.
So, since the condom has two purposes - pregnancy prevention and disease prevention - it would seem to me that the use of condom ought to be okay when there is no chance of pregnancy anyway.
Then again, if any sex outside of heterosexual marriage is considered sin, the only people who could enjoy Church-approved sex with a condom would be when the married heterosexual partner has had her tubes tied or his vas deferens snipped.
At least, that’s how I see it if you follow the logic.
(and yes, I know that condoms aren’t a foolproof way to prevent either pregnancies or diseases. That’s for another debate.)
the only people who could enjoy Church-approved sex with a condom would be when when the married heterosexual partner has had her tubes tied or his vas deferens snipped.
Both examples of sterilization are against Church teaching as is the use of a condom.
At least, thats how I see it if you follow the logic.
Still waiting for the logic to make an appearance.
LOL. The Guardian. Leave it to them to get it completely and totally wrong. But they’re not this stupid. They’re getting it wrong on purpose to sow discord.
He's still following the doctrine of the church.