Pope: Condoms Can Be Justified in Some Cases

[Rebekka]

My father's wife was married previously though her first husband died. Her first husband had a vasectomy and years after this vasectomy he had another child, my step sister. As you may know, they test after a vasectomy to make sure the man is sterile and they continue testing every year in some cases to be sure. That was their situation and the girl is his daughter. This is a miracle that my step mother recognizes in her life.

Ah, OK, thanks for explaining - I misread that, because you said "this person is my father's wife and my step sister." I was all of a sudden thinking of Oedipal family relationships...

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Ah, OK, thanks for explaining - I misread that, because you said "this person is my father's wife and my step sister." I was all of a sudden thinking of Oedipal family relationships...

You are welcome. I am glad you asked because others were probably confused by my post as well.

 

[Davidnic]

What greater evils did he have in mind, could you give me a quote?

He said: "If you expel prostitution from society you will unsettle everything on account of lusts."

Basically that without that outlet society may spiral to deeper levels to satisfy their desires.

Not a Church approved view, but then again St. Augustine is not infallible.

Incidentally Aquinas (even though he held prostitution to be evil) also advocated the social tolerance of prostitution to avoid greater evils. Quotes below from here: link

Given this strong condemnation of fornication and prostitution, it would seem obvious that Aquinas would want to engage every force against them, especially civil law. Oddly enough he does not. Instead he notes that the state should allow fornication and prostitution to exist for the sake of the common good.

Relying on the well-known passage from Augustine's De ordine, Aquinas advocates tolerance of prostitution by noting: "Accordingly in human government also, those who are in authority rightly tolerate certain evils, lest certain goods be lost, or certain evils be incurred: thus Augustine says [De ordine 2.4]: If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust."

If these social practices were to be suppressed, the public reaction might be such as to threaten the peace of society. Remember, Aquinas already maintains (1) that prostitution is a species of lust that is one of the capital vices that wreak the greatest havoc on the human soul and leads to other sins; (2) that it is a mortal sin that threatens the proper rearing of children and by extension threatens the common good of society; and (3) that it violates the natural law and matrimonial union. How then could one tolerate such an evil, particularly a natural law thinker such as Aquinas? Is Aquinas compromising on his principles or playing utilitarian?
​

To be clear, I and many others disagree with the above, but two great theologians do make the argument. Now many others oppose it as contrary to human dignity in a way that can not be justified by common good.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I wonder if Aquinas might be inferring that without prostitutes that some may force themselves on others to satisfy their lusts and cause greater harm.

 

[Fantine]

“In such a case, the Pope does not morally justify the disordered exercise of sexuality,” the spokesman explained. Rather, the use of the condom to lessen the danger of contagion may be “a first act of responsibility” and “a first step on the path toward a more human sexuality” rather than acting to put another’s life at risk.

I found that statement really interesting, because in many (if not virtually all) cases, people who practice birth control are trying to take a "first act of responsibility" (not bringing children into the world whom they are unable to adequately care for) and, in cases where a woman's health is at risk, for the purpose of not putting another's (the female partner's) life at risk.

In the case of teens using condoms, is not that "first act of responsibility" a way for them to mature into a path toward a more human sexuality rather than opting for early parenthood which, statistics show, will mean that most of them will never finish high school and be poor for the rest of their lives?

I am not disputing that abstinence is a better course, but for those who are already sexually active, maybe their use of condoms is a "first act of responsibility."

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I found that statement really interesting, because in many (if not virtually all) cases, people who practice birth control are trying to take a "first act of responsibility" (not bringing children into the world whom they are unable to adequately care for) and, in cases where a woman's health is at risk, for the purpose of not putting another's (the female partner's) life at risk.

In the case of teens using condoms, is not that "first act of responsibility" a way for them to mature into a path toward a more human sexuality rather than opting for early parenthood which, statistics show, will mean that most of them will never finish high school and be poor for the rest of their lives?

I am not disputing that abstinence is a better course, but for those who are already sexually active, maybe their use of condoms is a "first act of responsibility."

Blessed are the poor.
Being poor is not a bad thing and arguably it is better than being rich.

 

[Davidnic]

I found that statement really interesting, because in many (if not virtually all) cases, people who practice birth control are trying to take a "first act of responsibility" (not bringing children into the world whom they are unable to adequately care for) and, in cases where a woman's health is at risk, for the purpose of not putting another's (the female partner's) life at risk.

In the case of teens using condoms, is not that "first act of responsibility" a way for them to mature into a path toward a more human sexuality rather than opting for early parenthood which, statistics show, will mean that most of them will never finish high school and be poor for the rest of their lives?

I am not disputing that abstinence is a better course, but for those who are already sexually active, maybe their use of condoms is a "first act of responsibility."

except that is not the kind of situation the Pope is referring to and to take it there is conditionalism and proportionalism, which the Church has already condemned in this situation.

Remember he is addressing this in the context of the condom is not a contraceptive in such a case...like when it is male to male. He is not saying it is ever a moral solution for those who can conceive. Even though we can argue and extend the logic the Pope used (if I read the full quote right) to the transmission of disease, we can not extend it to conception. Because to do so places the child in the role of prevented disease and that can not be done.

Really until we get the full statement in context all this is futile. Now I read the full quote but I have not, and will not, until tuesday, see the full context.

But the Vatican has already clarified that the statement in no way extends to the use as a contraceptive as you suggest can be done responsibly. That line of thought is directly condemned.

 

[epiclesis]

It may be a sign from God or it may be a medical mistake.

If you see this as a sign from God, do you see other surgeries that failed as a sign from God that the surgery was a mistake, too? And on the other hand, is a pregnancy as a result from rape a sign from God that He thinks the rape was a good idea? When is something a sign from God and when isn't it?

Yes, that's exactly what I said... rape is a good idea.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Yes, that's exactly what I said... rape is a good idea.

I think that when a woman is raped and becomes pregnant that she has a great opportunity to save a life by keeping the baby. And in this charity, this love, that baby may grow up and be a great Saint. After all, many goods have come even from evils in the past. God is able to shed light where there was once darkness. That child in the raped mothers womb could be the key to her Salvation.

 

[Fantine]

I was referring to people's motivations.

I think that most people who use condoms or practicing birth control are exercising that same sort of "responsibility" that Pope Benedict referred to in the situation of the gay prostitute.

And so if they are doing so in an effort to be "responsible" perhaps it will lead them at some point to a deeper understanding of human sexuality....

And perhaps those who never do so will have multiple children with multiple partners and complicate their lives (and their children's lives) so much that it may be several generations (if ever) for anyone in their household to develop that "deeper understanding."

If you have ever been the parent of a sexually active teen or young adult who also practiced birth control, did the fact that they were using birth control make you sleep better or worse at night? Did you feel that their misguided attempt at "responsibility" made it more likely or less likely that they would eventually have a stable lifestyle that allowed them to develop a more mature view of human sexuality?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I was referring to people's motivations.

I think that most people who use condoms or practicing birth control are exercising that same sort of "responsibility" that Pope Benedict referred to in the situation of the gay prostitute.

And so if they are doing so in an effort to be "responsible" perhaps it will lead them at some point to a deeper understanding of human sexuality....

And perhaps those who never do so will have multiple children with multiple partners and complicate their lives (and their children's lives) so much that it may be several generations (if ever) for anyone in their household to develop that "deeper understanding."

If you have ever been the parent of a sexually active teen or young adult who also practiced birth control, did the fact that they were using birth control make you sleep better or worse at night? Did you feel that their misguided attempt at "responsibility" made it more likely or less likely that they would eventually have a stable lifestyle that allowed them to develop a more mature view of human sexuality?

My 20 year old daughter who is having sex and using contraceptives is Lost. She is worshipping Satan and does not realize she is on her way to Hell unless she changes her ways. It makes me feel sorry for her to think she is sacrificing eternity in Heaven for simple pleasures that will result in pain and suffering for eternity unless she is saved.

When a child of yours sins you pray for them. You tell them the Truth. You hope that they will change and turn to God. But you know that they will not change unless they choose to.

 

[Davidnic]

Abstinence is the attempt at responsibility. Condoms the excuse to have sex that people try to give teens and others.

You can have a heart operation by going to a doctor or you can have it on the kitchen table done by the next door neighbor even thought you could go to the doctor.

Is the latter responsible because it is the attempt to fix the heart problem? Or is it something stupid that a responsible adult should advise against because it is a false answer?

The logic of: "They will do it anyway so give them a condom to be responsible" is a false one. Not only because consistent sex with a condom with the possibility of failure still runs the risk of pregnancy far more than just not having sex. And the habit of sex then become acceptable and normal and they just keep having it until the condom fails and they are desensitized to the emotional and personal dimension of sex at the same time.

Condoms billed as responsibly for teens is a false answer that leads to more problems.

 

[Imperiuz]

If you have ever been the parent of a sexually active teen or young adult who also practiced birth control, did the fact that they were using birth control make you sleep better or worse at night? Did you feel that their misguided attempt at "responsibility" made it more likely or less likely that they would eventually have a stable lifestyle that allowed them to develop a more mature view of human sexuality?

You are missing the point. You shouldn't be sleeping good at night if your child is regularly committing a mortal sin. You don't get a more "mature" view of human sexuality by using contraceptives, you get a more perverted and egocentric view of it. And you don't get a more stable lifestyle if you don't realise that sex wasn't made for enjoyment.

 

[benedictaoo]

well from this POV it would seem like it would be ok to use condoms for any homosexual act, not just the example the Holy Father gave us of the male prostitute

He is not arguing it's okay... it is a loaded trick question... like how they use to try to trick Jesus.

A gay man using a condom is irrelevant because the act is already perverted and condemned.

You know, if we want to give it to folks straight up- and not be afraid to tell it like it is, using a condom in a marriage or between heterosexuals is rendering the act much like sodomy anyway...

The pope is saying if gay men are actually considering another person besides themselves, by using a condom, to not give them a deadly disease, then that's a start in the right direction that life is more then just themselves.

But for now, gay men and hookers of any kind and the ppl who will pay them- ain't a one of them are in for anyone other then themselves.

The pope was addressing the dehumanizing part of gay/prostitution and that them using a condom is a little shred of hope that they are actually for once, thinking of someone else besides themselves by wanting to use a condom if they know they have AIDS.

 

[Rhamiel]

He is not arguing it's okay... it is a loaded trick question... like how they use to try to trick Jesus.

A gay man using a condom is irrelevant because the act is already perverted and condemned.

You know, if we want to give it to folks straight up- and not be afraid to tell it like it is, using a condom in a marriage or between heterosexuals is rendering the act much like sodomy anyway...

The pope is saying if gay men are actually considering another person besides themselves, by using a condom, to not give them a deadly disease, then that's a start in the right direction that life is more then just themselves.

But for now, gay men and hookers of any kind and the ppl who will pay them- ain't a one of them are in for anyone other then themselves.

The pope was addressing the dehumanizing part of gay/prostitution and that them using a condom is a little shred of hope that they are actually for once, thinking of someone else besides themselves by wanting to use a condom if they know they have AIDS.

not "ok" but it would not make the act of sodomy any more or less sinful
it is still a horrible sin that crys out for to heaven for vengeance, but the condom does not really play a factor one way or the other

 

[benedictaoo]

But the Pope has said that condoms are not effective in the battle against HIV. And that that hasn't been reported by the positively giddy press, is a disservice to all and leads all sorts of people (who don't seem to know the Catholic teachings) to jump to the idea that condoms are indeed effective tools in the fight against HIV.

Can you imagine... "I have full blown AIDS... but I'll wear a condom".

What idiot would think they would be protected?

 

[benedictaoo]

not "ok" but it would not make the act of sodomy any more or less sinful
it is still a horrible sin that crys out for to heaven for vengeance, but the condom does not really play a factor one way or the other

No it doesn't. And it is and why condom use is bad when used by heterosexuals because that is what they are trying to do... make it like a act of sodomy.

The pope was saying the idea of them using it means they are actually being thoughtful ppl... what a concept.

He was not saying, I condone them to be used in this context.

Just that it's a little shred of hope that a gay person (or any person) who hooks, and who has AIDS is willing to use one because they are thinking of their Jon not being infected.

All he is saying is he sees hope in mankind thinking of someone else's life for a change, no matter how small the hope is.

 

[Rebekka]

He said: "If you expel prostitution from society you will unsettle everything on account of lusts."

Basically that without that outlet society may spiral to deeper levels to satisfy their desires.

Not a Church approved view, but then again St. Augustine is not infallible.

Incidentally Aquinas (even though he held prostitution to be evil) also advocated the social tolerance of prostitution to avoid greater evils. Quotes below from here: link

Given this strong condemnation of fornication and prostitution, it would seem obvious that Aquinas would want to engage every force against them, especially civil law. Oddly enough he does not. Instead he notes that the state should allow fornication and prostitution to exist for the sake of the common good.

Relying on the well-known passage from Augustine's De ordine, Aquinas advocates tolerance of prostitution by noting: "Accordingly in human government also, those who are in authority rightly tolerate certain evils, lest certain goods be lost, or certain evils be incurred: thus Augustine says [De ordine 2.4]: If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust."

If these social practices were to be suppressed, the public reaction might be such as to threaten the peace of society. Remember, Aquinas already maintains (1) that prostitution is a species of lust that is one of the capital vices that wreak the greatest havoc on the human soul and leads to other sins; (2) that it is a mortal sin that threatens the proper rearing of children and by extension threatens the common good of society; and (3) that it violates the natural law and matrimonial union. How then could one tolerate such an evil, particularly a natural law thinker such as Aquinas? Is Aquinas compromising on his principles or playing utilitarian?
​

To be clear, I and many others disagree with the above, but two great theologians do make the argument. Now many others oppose it as contrary to human dignity in a way that can not be justified by common good.

Thanks for the quotes.

I disagree with Aquinas and Augustine, too.

 

[Rebekka]

Yes, that's exactly what I said... rape is a good idea.

I didn't say that you said that - I asked you a question.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Thanks for the quotes.

I disagree with Aquinas and Augustine, too.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7451655-7/#post54356007
Did Augustine retraction concerning Peter and the Rock?