Vatican Shifts Grounds on Condoms
The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, told reporters Tuesday that he asked the pope whether he intended his comments to apply only to men. Benedict replied that it really didn’t matter, the important thing was that the person took into consideration the life of another, Lombardi said.
"I personally asked the pope if there was a serious, important problem in the choice of the masculine over the feminine," Lombardi said. "He told me no. The problem is this: ... It’s the first step of taking responsibility, of taking into consideration the risk of the life of another with whom you have a relationship."
"This is if you’re a man, a woman, or a transsexual. ... The point is it’s a first step of taking responsibility, of avoiding passing a grave risk onto another," Lombardi said.Is this guy playing with a full deck?
I am beginning to wonder if Rev. Federino Lombardi's basement is loaded with communications from Boston about cronyism, corruption, abortion contracts and a 'non-discrimination policy' or the Boston crew went over to the Consistory and has hijacked the communications office like they did 66 Brooks Drive!
Women who last week had the back up of the Holy See that moral responsibility when you are infected with HIV is to abstain from risky sex no longer have that shelter. There is nothing moral or responsible about risking sex with a condom when you have HIV.
The breakdown of the culture already include assertions that the objections of Bishops to give out condoms go against the Pope.
Dr. Haas has spoken up about pouring gasoline on the fire by Lombardi HERE.
Dr. John Haas suggested the spokesman might have misunderstood the Pope’s meaning when he told a press conference Nov. 23 that the Pope would condone condom use not only by male prostitutes, but also by women and even “transsexuals.”
As controversy over the condom issue continued for a fourth day in media reports and in comments from international agencies dealing with the AIDS crisis, Haas told CNA, “We ought to let the Pope speak for himself."
The idea that it's in the bailiwick of the Pope to start giving out advice on how to drunk drive safely, rob a bank with dignity for human life or how women should acquiesce to sex with a leper because he's he is holding a condom in his hand makes me want to hear it from his mouth too.
6 comments:
Seewald's Take: Benedict XVI Misunderstood by Many
Author Tells What It's Like to Interview the Pope
By Anita S. Bourdin
ROME, NOV. 23, 2010 (Zenit.org).- The author of the new book-interview with Benedict XVI showed visible disappointment that the text has been reduced by the media to a misrepresentation of a few statements on condoms.
What the Pope's talking about in the interview is the "future of the planet," Peter Seewald said, discussing "Light of the World: The Pope, The Church and The Signs Of The Times," available today from Ignatius Press.
The German author decried a "crisis of journalism" when he presented the book today at the Vatican.
He referred to the media flurry spinning through the world since Saturday, when L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican's semi-official newspaper, published several excerpts from the interview. One of the texts released was from the end of the 10th chapter, when Seewald asked the Pontiff two questions on the fight against AIDS and the use of condoms. Those statements have been taken out of context or falsely presented in headlines around the world.
"Our book," the author said today at the presentation, "speaks to the survival of [our] planet that is threatened; the Pope appeals to humanity -- our world is in the process of collapse, and half the journalists are only interested in the issue of condoms."
Seewald insisted that the Pope was promoting a "humanization of sexuality" and posed the deeper question: "Does sexuality have something to do with love?"
For the Bavarian writer, excessive concentration on the issue of condoms is "ridiculous." Meanwhile, he reflected, the issue of transforming the world that the Pope proposes is forgotten.
Seewald affirmed that the Holy Father presented a wide-ranging panorama in the six hours of interviews conducted last July at the papal summer residence in Castel Gandolfo.
But he urged getting to what's important in a book such as this: discovering what the Pope does and says. That is the "gift" of this book, the author suggested: being able to "hear his voice," see the way he interprets his pontificate, "to live" beside him in a very personal way.
Giant among men
Benedict XVI might be placed in the category of the "small popes" when compared to the "great popes" like John Paul II, the author reflected. However Seewald does not hesitate to speak of him as a "giant" -- because of his ideas, his authenticity and capacity for dialogue.
The German author -- who rediscovered his Catholic faith in dialogue with Cardinal Ratzinger in the '90s -- explained that he worked without any censorship from the Pope, who allowed him to write freely and only offered "clarifications."
The journalist expressed his admiration for the Holy Father, with his "elevated point of view" as a "brilliant intellectual," and his "spiritual strength," as well as his "simplicity."
"Seewald's Take: Benedict XVI Misunderstood by Many"
It's just a misunderstanding! Ha ha ha ha!
Remember the Emily Litella sketch on the 1970's Saturday Night Live? She's the little old lady who would read her editorial while completely misunderstanding the subject, and when Jane straightened her out, she'd smile and say, "Never mind!" Maybe Pope Prophy can dig up an Emily to tell us all, "Never mind!"
Jerry
Go baste your turkey........
Dear Anon,
Do you imagine that the damage can be undone by some campaign to correct the supposed misunderstanding? And I say supposed because I'm willing to give Pope Benedict the benefit of the doubt, namely, he's not an old professor lost in abstractions. He knows he is charged to feed the little lambs, not to lead them to ponder potential good intentions of sodomites using latex. He certainly had an inkling of how this would spin in the world press, but probably imagines it will have a positive outcome. And, to borrow his convoluted thinking, it's the intention that is significant, right? Like the sodomite, the pope is moving in the right direction merely because he is well intentioned. Don't be worried, then about the increased disease, or souls being led into Hell. Just focus on clearing up any misunderstandings.
Ok, so whenis the media going to pick up on this one? Ha, never.
Pope, in book, says homosexuality incompatible with priesthood
Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, holds a copy of the pope's book as he speaks about it during a press conference at the Vatican Nov. 23. (CNS/Paul Haring)
By John Thavis
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- In his new book, Pope Benedict XVI strongly reaffirmed church teaching that homosexual acts are "disordered" and said homosexuality itself is "incompatible" with the priesthood.
The pope's comments came in his new book-interview, "Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times," which was published Nov. 23.
The interviewer, German journalist Peter Seewald, asked the pope whether the church's teaching that homosexuals deserve respect isn't contradicted by its position that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered."
The pope answered: "No. It is one thing to say that they are human beings with their problems and their joys, that as human beings they deserve respect, even though they have this inclination, and must not be discriminated against because of it."
"At the same time, though, sexuality has an intrinsic meaning and direction, which is not homosexual," he said. "The meaning and direction of sexuality is to bring about the union of man and woman and, in this way, to give humanity posterity, children, a future."
The pope said the church needs to hold firm on this point, "even if it is not pleasing to our age."
He said it was still an open question whether homosexual inclinations are innate or arise early in life. In any case, he said, if these are strong inclinations, it represents "a great trial" for the homosexual.
"But this does not mean that homosexuality thereby becomes morally right. Rather, it remains contrary to the essence of what God originally willed," he said.
When Seewald said that homosexuality exists in monasteries and among the clergy, even if not acted out, the pope responded: "Well, that is just one of the miseries of the church. And the persons who are affected must at least try not to express this inclination actively."
"Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don't want to get married anyway," the pope said.
The pope cited a 2005 Vatican document that drew a sharp line against priestly ordination of homosexuals. He said the document emphasized that homosexual candidates cannot become priests because their sexual orientation interferes with "the proper sense of paternity" that belongs to the priesthood.
The pope said it was important to select priestly candidates very carefully, "to head off a situation where the celibacy of priests would practically end up being identified with the tendency to homosexuality."
Thanks for posting that, Anon. It won't get airplay because it's not big news like the prophy thing.
While it's generally good, I don't get the "must not be discriminated against" part. That's not consistent with the horror the Church holds for this offense. Hear Pope St. Pius V:
(Constitution Cum primum, 1566) “Having set our minds to remove everything that may in some way offend the Divine Majesty, We resolve to punish, above all and without indulgence, those things which, by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures or by most grievous examples, are most repugnant to God and elicit his wrath: that is, negligence in divine worship, ruinous simony, the crime of blasphemy, and the execrable libidinous vice against nature. For which faults peoples and nations are scourged by God, according to his just condemnation, with catastrophes, wars, famine, and pests ... Let the judges know that, if even after this, our Constitution, they are negligent in punishing these crimes, they will be guilty of them at divine judgment and will also incur our indignation ... If someone commits that nefarious crime against nature that caused divine wrath to be unleashed against the children of iniquity, he will be given over to the secular arm for punishment; and if he is a cleric, he will be subject to analogous punishment after having been stripped of all his degrees [of ecclesiastical dignity].”
Post a Comment