AmericanPapist Comments
There is, of course, only one opinion that really matters. And interestingly, it's also the same source that decides if Cardinal Barrigan will be getting new employment.
Reminds of all the reporting in the sixties as to how Pope Paul VI's encylical Humanae Vitae was going to allow the pill.
doesn't it though? so deja vu...!!!
I don't think the thick media are wrapping their bony heads around the distinctions btw:
1) a cardinal or two with agendas and the papal curia;
2) that a document will be issued and what that document will teach;
3) their a**** from holes in the ground;
4) their wishful thinking from fact;
5) anything that promotes their lefty agenda and the truth.
Just a thought from a distinction-loving Dominican...
Fr. Philip, OP
I can't believe this report. Doesn't anyone on the Internet know that condoms fail big time and there are thousands of protestants living now to prove it. (OK, probably thousands of Catholics too, but I digress.)
How dumb can this be?
I don't go to a certain site you mention anymore. The owner of the site in question is a very tactful pretender to orthodoxy. Just sayin'.
I don't go to a certain site you mention anymore. The owner of the site in question is a very tactful pretender to orthodoxy. Just sayin'.
I assume you mean Amy Welborn (since hers is the only Catholic site — apart from Cardinal Ratings — mentioned or linked to in the post). If you are going to make an accusation like that (albeit slightly veiled), ought you not back it up (if you can)?
The actual interveiw given to I Media was by Cardinal Martini, who is retired and living in Jeruslem. By being retired he is not an active curial member.
Couple of ideas about what this phantom document could say:
1. It is less of a sin for someone with AIDS to have relations with another person with a condomn than without. However, both would be sinful.
2. If this applies at all to married couples where one is infected, it could say that while it would be an objectively grave sin to have relations with a condom, in this situation the circumstances could make it venially sinful, and that the couple could engage in the behavior and still receive communion, however, the Vatican could not advise anything that would be objectively sinful. In many orthodox Pre-Vatican II (just using it as a time reference) moral theology manuals it stated that if onanism was practiced by a couple that could not have another child because of dire health or financial concerns the sin was only venial.
My only problem with this is that this should be handled by sending a notification to the bishops, and then having bishops notify their confessors, who have to deal with these problems. The idea of the Vatican issuing a statement, would make it very easy for the media to misrepresent it, by saying the Vatican is saying it is not sinful at all. I personally can not believe the Vatican would say that there is no sin involved.
michigancatholic seems to have plenty of venom for everything... geez.
Well put, Christopher.
I think the fact that the document is to be issued soon indicates that it will not be permissive. While allowing condom use to prevent AIDS would not necessarily contradict the Church's teaching on contraception, it would be a rather large shift in orthodox moral theology (i.e., no longer regarding ejaculating outside of intact sexual intercourse as sinful in itself). To put it out all of the sudden would cause major problems (not the least of which we are seeing among those of Amy Welborn's commenters who are close to going sedevacantist over this). If such a shift is possible, it would be quite unwise IMHO to do it without laying serious groundwork. Hence if we are getting an answer "soon," the answer is probably going to be "No, it isn't moral to do this."
it would be a rather large shift in orthodox moral theology (i.e., no longer regarding ejaculating outside of intact sexual intercourse as sinful in itself)
Again - this assumes that condom use per se - i.e., even without contraceptive intent - is incompatible with "intact sexual intercourse." That might well be so, but, as I've said, I don't think it's simply self-evident that it's (at this time) Catholic doctrine or that it's otherwise the only possible theological conclusion.
I think the Jesuit is just being a legend in his own mind--his last hurrah maybe. Can't win the papacy the regular way, so he figures he might as well try to chisel it down.....ie using the media to try to create a slippery slope because that's how many people think nowdays. It usually works.
This reminds me for all the world of the brouhaha leading up to Humanae Vitae. If it goes on long enough, it will have the same result as it had for many married couples who wanted to contracept anyway.
michegancatholic,
You still haven't backed up the accusation you made earlier in the thread.
Commenting by HaloScan
