Pope states condoms aren't the answer to HIV

[logician]

Condoms are effective when people use them, and only when they use them properly and that is not happening. In any case those that are not Christian can do whatever they please, nobody is forcing abstinaence on them, is it?

Your argument is against yourself, the main reason condoms DON'T work is lack of education in their use, which is CAUSED by the efforts against family planning and safe sex practices by the Catholic church and others.

 

[emiliano]

You miss the point, Emiliano (btw, I am Luis, not Lucho or Luisa).
Of course I don't have to agree with the Pope. There was never any doubt about that.
Then again, neither do I have to refrain from denouncing his mistakes. That other people feel guilt about doing so is quite irrelevant, and incidentally, more than a bit worrysome in itself.

OK Luis, have a look at the Ugandan experience and you will know That he is not mistaken, abstinence before marriage, wait for maturity to take that step, and chastity/fidelity after marriage works, those already infected are in another situation, they will die off and will not reproduce if either method is chosen. If you are a Christian, you obey the authority of God's Moral Law, btw we are advised to avoid the company of pagans, the Godless and heretic.

There is definitely NO need for me to be Catholic in order to attain the right of criticizing his policies. If for no other reason, because I will live in the same world where the Catholics that will probably attempt to follow his so-called advice also live. When their troubles multiply as a result, I will unavoidably suffer the consequences along them. That alone is enough to grant me the duty and the right to cry foul when need be.

Just don't have sex with infected Christian, you will help them to stay abstinent and they will help you by staying separate, they don't really need your condoms, they are in penance. And I grant you that it is not easy, but I can assure you that it is worthy. God's kingdom is worthy.

Actually, while I do support that campaign, I am more worried about the Pope's irresponsible statements themselves. Free condoms are a good thing, but their importance pales by contrast.

That is you personal opinion, our is that abstinence is more effective in treating the sick body and soul.

Simply not true, sorry. Sexual education is FAR more effective, and lacks most of the dangers of abstinence preaching.

The sexual education that is been dished out this days encourages risky sexual practices, the use of condoms to have a premature start in sexual activities is another area of troubles. But I grant you that good sexual education is good, what our children a getting is rubbish.

And denounce the bejeezus out of that irresponsible so-called authority, yes. I agree with that.

You have the the right to criticize anything and everything and so does the Church

Foolhardiness is not always an indication of courage, much less of knowing what one is doing.

Opinion, you are entitled to them, I don't think highly of the free condoms givers, in fact I have a very low opinion of them.

Actually, it seems that the Church would accept me, far as I can tell. It is me who have no interest in paying homage to a Church that makes a point of losing its way.

You don't know much about the RCC do you? The first time that you utter your opinions you will stop been a Catholic and you do well not wanting this.

One must wonder why it simply does not happen with other people, then...

What do you recon? The church is none the poorer for it, IMO the RCC is one of the Churches that have stated the course, it continues been the strongest pillar of Christianity.

 

[emiliano]

Your argument is against yourself, the main reason condoms DON'T work is lack of education in their use, which is CAUSED by the efforts against family planning and safe sex practices by the Catholic church and others.

But the church attend to it area of expertise, it teaches/educate in virtues, abstinence, the other lot has to attend to their, to purchase, distribute and educate people on their correct usage, don't expect Catholic/Christian to teach you or you children these things, btw the topic is abstinence vs condoms, for Christians is abstinence and consider that this involves people with HIV.Family planning? in respect to these people the aim at present is to breed them out of the gene pool. The RCC works to help this people to die with some dignity, they take care of the orphan that result from this and we pray for a cure, the godless can go around given free condoms and teaching the proper way of using them, the Church is too busy, this thing is not slowing down.

 

[challupa]

It is my opinion that if something is not working then we should change things so that it does work. That also includes all religious beliefs that no longer serve us. We will only see changes when our beliefs concerning the problems change.

 

[Charity]

The Pope is confined by his religion and i am sure that if he could think for himself he would undoubtedly see the logic of condoms,asking people to abstain from sex is just unrealistic and naive and obviously comes from people who do not experience sex.
All the Pope needs to say is its ok to use a Condom,its that simple and leave the morals of it to each individual just as we have advertisments on the TV about responsible sex and using a Condom to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STDs ,people are not stupid,if they are shown the real facts they can make their own educated choice and not a load of gibberish.

Thank you my point exactly.....

 

[Charity]

Your argument is against yourself, the main reason condoms DON'T work is lack of education in their use, which is CAUSED by the efforts against family planning and safe sex practices by the Catholic church and others.

Thank you Logician, I agree with you....burying one's head in the sand won't make the problem disappear.....

 

[Imagist]

OK Luis, have a look at the Ugandan experience and you will know That he is not mistaken, abstinence before marriage, wait for maturity to take that step, and chastity/fidelity after marriage works,

Actually, looking at the Ugandan experience shows very much the opposite. HIV transmission rates have skyrocketed since the implementation of Uganda's abstinence-only programs.

The sexual education that is been dished out this days encourages risky sexual practices, the use of condoms to have a premature start in sexual activities is another area of troubles. But I grant you that good sexual education is good, what our children a getting is rubbish.

I have had a lot of premarital sex, and have greatly enjoyed every bit of it. Also, I have never been harmed by that experience, specifically because of the education that you are calling rubbish. I knew about condoms and the pill, and I have used both numerous times with a 100% success rate so far. In fact, the success rate with these "risky sexual practices" is nearly 99.9% for everyone who uses them. Compare this to unprotected sex, which is more likely to happen with abstinence only education.

 

[England my lionheart]

But the church attend to it area of expertise, it teaches/educate in virtues, abstinence, the other lot has to attend to their, to purchase, distribute and educate people on their correct usage, don't expect Catholic/Christian to teach you or you children these things, btw the topic is abstinence vs condoms, for Christians is abstinence and consider that this involves people with HIV.Family planning? in respect to these people the aim at present is to breed them out of the gene pool. The RCC works to help this people to die with some dignity, they take care of the orphan that result from this and we pray for a cure, the godless can go around given free condoms and teaching the proper way of using them, the Church is too busy, this thing is not slowing down.

Yes they take the orphans and turn them into not using Condoms frightened to death of hellfire adults so it goes round and round.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Pope's comment can be interpreted differently, I think he is talking on the population level, and about the current forms of distribution programs, not individual condoms, if you believe he is, then we will have to agree to disagree until/unless he clarifies his position...

It doesn't help the matter of interpretation that there are apparently subtly different wordings of the Pope's quote floating around in the press. I went Googling to find out exactly what he said and discovered this. IIRC, some quote him as saying the ambiguous "it increases the problem"... which would refer to the distribution of condoms, allowing for the issue to be with the distribution specifically or with the condoms themselves. However, other articles quote him as saying "they increase the problem", which would seem to point to the condoms specifically.

Still, I think there's probably limited benefit in poring over the minute details of an off-the-cuff response to a reporter's question. Everybody misspeaks a little from time to time and the two wordings are close enough that the intended meaning could have been either one, regardless of what he actually said.

 

[challupa]

Actually, I believe it is what he DOESN'T say that speaks the loudest. He does not try to correct the inaccuracies that have been spouted by the church by his clergy and in his silence he then condones them. It is his place as a leader of his church to make sure the world is getting an accurate picture of his organization if he wants it to be understood properly and seen as credible.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually, I believe it is what he DOESN'T say that speaks the loudest. He does not try to correct the inaccuracies that have been spouted by the church by his clergy and in his silence he then condones them. It is his place as a leader of his church to make sure the world is getting an accurate picture of his organization if he wants it to be understood properly and seen as credible.

I get the impression that Benedict is much more concerned with precision and accuracy in his statements on doctrine than he is about what impressions those statements leave with people.

I remember the whole flap over his comments (or rather comments he chose to quote) about Islam. If you looked at his statement in detail, you could see that when you looked at it all together, it was in accordance with Catholic doctrine. It wasn't necessarily in accordance with tact, but it was in accordance with doctrine. However, the statement that was "correct" still made for some pretty bad sound bites; my impression was that the Pope had a sort of academic disregard for that aspect of things.

 

[Alceste]

I get the impression that Benedict is much more concerned with precision and accuracy in his statements on doctrine than he is about what impressions those statements leave with people.

I remember the whole flap over his comments (or rather comments he chose to quote) about Islam. If you looked at his statement in detail, you could see that when you looked at it all together, it was in accordance with Catholic doctrine. It wasn't necessarily in accordance with tact, but it was in accordance with doctrine. However, the statement that was "correct" still made for some pretty bad sound bites; my impression was that the Pope had a sort of academic disregard for that aspect of things.

What about actions? Does appointing Cardinal Trujillo, the infamous "condoms are nets" moron, say anything to you about the Pope's concerns about accuracy?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What about actions? Does appointing Cardinal Trujillo, the infamous "condoms are nets" moron, say anything to you about the Pope's concerns about accuracy?

The efficacy of condoms isn't a matter of doctrine.

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

Again, I have to restate, after having read a decent amount of the works of Benedict, he is not a dull minded individual. In fact, he is obviously very intelligent with a keen philosophical mind. He is one of the most proficient theologians in the Catholic Church at present, with a significant grasp of the problems posed by modernity not only to Christianity, but to the whole human spirit. His relationship to modernity as such is not the simple binary of some of his papal predecessors. It is far more nuanced. There is a reason that, in his youth, he was understood to be a kind of progressivist. Circumstances have changed since that time, of course, and he is today seen as something quite the opposite. But either category, I think, is falsely applied to him. If one merely follows the media narrative of "God's rotweiler", I think the complexities and even deeply rooted [Catholic] humanism of this man will be missed.

Secondly, I agree with Penguin that his academic nature probably is part of his media problems. The recent Bishop Williamson affair, I think, demonstrated this. [as did his letter of response show his gentle heart]

Beyond that, I must remind everyone that the Catholic Church is a complex institution. We tend to think that everything some bishop or priest says ends up on the desk of the Pope, and despite the centralization of the Church achieved in Rome, you must understand that the Pope does not spend his day eavesdropping on all the clergy or reading media articles which, practically by compulsion, are unable to understand religion anyways. He has his own duties to the spiritual care of his diocese, his ceremonial and symbolic roles and his work as a teacher of the faith. The bishop of Toronto, Canada holds the same valid orders as the Pope. The Papacy, as an institution, exists as a final guarantee against the corruption of the deposit of faith. Its existence does not mean the absence of arguments and discussion within the Church at large. The Papacy is the instrument of final appeal.

Finally, many people miss the Catholic elevation of office over persona, which is very contrary to our current cultural moment. Even politically speaking, the mixture of pop culture, hollywood and civil office can be seen to be somewhat characteristic of today.
I will certainly admit that we have foolish bishops and priests. I myself disagree with many-a-priest and God knows the quality of our sermons these days. The office of priest or bishop does not mean one stops being a sinner- or even a fool, unfortunately. The endurance of the Catholic system is that it never gambles itself on charisma. This is how we survived the Renaissance Popes. The very basic concept of the Church is that of an undefiled and divine entity entrusted to sinful and broken people. Many have held a sacred office whom we suspect had damnation over their heads.

All of this is very inconvenient in an age of mass media and big business corporations, with their PR campaigns and their swift ability to give a single, trade-marked and clean image to their public for consumption. The Church is an ancient, medieval and modern institution, all at once.

Personally, I think the Pope's statement's regarded the distribution of condoms, and was not at all an endorsement of any statements that condoms are laced or are "nets". He was simply responding to a question he was asked, likely by someone who wanted to hear a scandalous answer to sell the papers. This should not deduct from the fact that this was his answer, he was not tricked into saying it. But the accussations of maliciousness,deliberate falsity, I think, are unfounded. Slander him with superficial comments on his face, call him "Pope Palpatine", what have you. But is anyone willing to admit that they, perhaps, actually wish to see a nearly-evil figure in the Pope?

Do many of us "moderns" not actually need the narrative of the ancient oppressions trying to reassert themselves against the new emancipations, as much as those who "cling to a more pristine past" need the narratives of the total corruptions of intellectual, moral and even technological progress?

I think something far more than a question of a Catholic bishop and condoms is going here, and that very few are quite as objective as they may think.

 

[challupa]

Again, I have to restate, after having read a decent amount of the works of Benedict, he is not a dull minded individual. In fact, he is obviously very intelligent with a keen philosophical mind. He is one of the most proficient theologians in the Catholic Church at present, with a significant grasp of the problems posed by modernity not only to Christianity, but to the whole human spirit. His relationship to modernity as such is not the simple binary of some of his papal predecessors. It is far more nuanced. There is a reason that, in his youth, he was understood to be a kind of progressivist. Circumstances have changed since that time, of course, and he is today seen as something quite the opposite. But either category, I think, is falsely applied to him. If one merely follows the media narrative of "God's rotweiler", I think the complexities and even deeply rooted [Catholic] humanism of this man will be missed.

Secondly, I agree with Penguin that his academic nature probably is part of his media problems. The recent Bishop Williamson affair, I think, demonstrated this. [as did his letter of response show his gentle heart]

Beyond that, I must remind everyone that the Catholic Church is a complex institution. We tend to think that everything some bishop or priest says ends up on the desk of the Pope, and despite the centralization of the Church achieved in Rome, you must understand that the Pope does not spend his day eavesdropping on all the clergy or reading media articles which, practically by compulsion, are unable to understand religion anyways. He has his own duties to the spiritual care of his diocese, his ceremonial and symbolic roles and his work as a teacher of the faith. The bishop of Toronto, Canada holds the same valid orders as the Pope. The Papacy, as an institution, exists as a final guarantee against the corruption of the deposit of faith. Its existence does not mean the absence of arguments and discussion within the Church at large. The Papacy is the instrument of final appeal.

Finally, many people miss the Catholic elevation of office over persona, which is very contrary to our current cultural moment. Even politically speaking, the mixture of pop culture, hollywood and civil office can be seen to be somewhat characteristic of today.
I will certainly admit that we have foolish bishops and priests. I myself disagree with many-a-priest and God knows the quality of our sermons these days. The office of priest or bishop does not mean one stops being a sinner- or even a fool, unfortunately. The endurance of the Catholic system is that it never gambles itself on charisma. This is how we survived the Renaissance Popes. The very basic concept of the Church is that of an undefiled and divine entity entrusted to sinful and broken people. Many have held a sacred office whom we suspect had damnation over their heads.

All of this is very inconvenient in an age of mass media and big business corporations, with their PR campaigns and their swift ability to give a single, trade-marked and clean image to their public for consumption. The Church is an ancient, medieval and modern institution, all at once.

Personally, I think the Pope's statement's regarded the distribution of condoms, and was not at all an endorsement of any statements that condoms are laced or are "nets". He was simply responding to a question he was asked, likely by someone who wanted to hear a scandalous answer to sell the papers. This should not deduct from the fact that this was his answer, he was not tricked into saying it. But the accussations of maliciousness,deliberate falsity, I think, are unfounded. Slander him with superficial comments on his face, call him "Pope Palpatine", what have you. But is anyone willing to admit that they, perhaps, actually wish to see a nearly-evil figure in the Pope?

Do many of us "moderns" not actually need the narrative of the ancient oppressions trying to reassert themselves against the new emancipations, as much as those who "cling to a more pristine past" need the narratives of the total corruptions of intellectual, moral and even technological progress?

I think something far more than a question of a Catholic bishop and condoms is going here, and that very few are quite as objective as they may think.

I agree with a majority of your points made here. I will need to think about the ones I disagree with. Thanks for the insights.

 

[logician]

The real question is why does the pope, i.e. the Catholic church feel it needs to make any statement about birth control methods, etc., the are only digging their philosophical grave deeper.

 

[challupa]

The real question is why does the pope, i.e. the Catholic church feel it needs to make any statement about birth control methods, etc., the are only digging their philosophical grave deeper.

Well the Catholic Church isn't any different from most religious organizations in that way. Islam does the same thing with their beliefs too. It has become very taboo to question religious beliefs and viewpoints. I don't think any organization should be exempt from scrutiny and if something clearly needs to be changed because it no longer serves the greater good of all, then it should be changed. We live in a world where we interact with all types of cultures and religions on a daily basis. It is no longer like it was before airplanes, internet and radio. Our world has shrunk and now we need to recognize the importance to work together instead of put roadblocks up in each others way.

 

[Charity]

The real question is why does the pope, i.e. the Catholic church feel it needs to make any statement about birth control methods, etc., the are only digging their philosophical grave deeper.

Once again I agree with you logician.....An informed public can make their own decision based on what they feel is right....Why should any religious make a statement of such a personal nature.....Or keep it within their own denomination and not make a media circus out of it......

 

[emiliano]

It is my opinion that if something is not working then we should change things so that it does work. That also includes all religious beliefs that no longer serve us. We will only see changes when our beliefs concerning the problems change.

Too right! The free condom campaign is failure, Why are they not going for the A that works? I refer you to Dr. Green's findings and the Ugandan Abstinence campaign, our faith works and you will find that out when you leave this earthly passage, God's Salvation plan does not need any changes because is perfect, it will always result in eternal life in God's kingdom, God doe"s not need your advise. He says the word and is done. no sincere repented sinner will be turn away.

 

[emiliano]

The real question is why does the pope, i.e. the Catholic church feel it needs to make any statement about birth control methods, etc., the are only digging their philosophical grave deeper.

You should start a thread on the contraception issue, this is about the HIV spreading.