Pope says condoms sometimes permissible to stop AIDS

Pope says condoms sometimes permissible to stop AIDS

By Philip Pullella
VATICAN CITY | Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:09pm EST


(Reuters) - The use of condoms to stop the spread of AIDS may be justified in certain cases, Pope Benedict says in a new book that could herald the start of sea change in the Vatican's attitude to condoms.

In excerpts published in the Vatican newspaper on Saturday ahead of the book's publication next week, the pope cites the example of the use of condoms by prostitutes as "a first step toward moralization" even though condoms are "not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection."

While some Roman Catholic leaders have spoken in the past about the limited use of condoms in specific cases to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS as a lesser of two evils, this is the first time the pope has mentioned the possibility himself in public.

The Vatican newspaper unexpectedly published significant excerpts from the book on Saturday night, days before extracts were initially due to be made public.

The pope's words appeared to be a major shift in the Vatican's attitude. While no formal position existed in a Vatican document, the majority of Church leaders have been saying for decades that the use of condoms was not even part of the solution to fighting aids.

The late cardinal John O'Connor of New York famously branded the use of condoms to stop the spread of AIDS as "The Big Lie."

Last year, the pope caused an international uproar when he told journalists taking him to Africa that condoms should not be used because they could worsen the spread of AIDS.

The new book, called Light of the World, is made up of Benedict's responses to questions by German Catholic journalist Peter Seewald over a month of meetings at the papal summer residence.

The pope says that the "sheer fixation on the condom implies a canalization of sexuality" where sexuality is no longer an expression of love "but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves."

After the pope first mentions that the use of condoms could be justified in certain limited cases, such as by prostitutes, Seewald asks: "Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?"

The pope answers: "She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more humane way, of living sexuality."

(Additional reporting by Tom Heneghan; Editing by Peter Graff)

Forgiveness_Man wrote:I knew this would be brought up here. It's so funny to see the media making a big deal of what is really NOT news. ...

Not News? This Pope finally countermands what has been an absolute in the Catholic faith for decades and it should not be reported? How would I know to tell my Catholic rentboys that the Pope says they can now use condoms as a disease preventive.

And what about all those priests who had to anguish over going against doctrine if they used condoms with the alter boys?(SNARKASM)

Actually, this isn't much of a big deal as male prostitutes are doing guys and there is no birth control issue. Far surpassing male pros are the females who have insisted on condoms since I was doing Catholic Mexicans in border towns in the '60s. (I surmised they were catholic because they 1. Were Mexican 2. Had a crucifix over the bed 3. Crossed themselves once for every dollar they held in their hands) Now the Pope should just go ahead and tell those Mexican pros that they can do what they have been doing all along - but that is the hypocrisy of most religions - don't shine a light on reality, just perpetuate the lie.

Shale wrote:
Not News? This Pope finally countermands what has been an absolute in the Catholic faith for decades and it should not be reported? How would I know to tell my Catholic rentboys that the Pope says they can now use condoms as a disease preventive. And what about all those priests who had to anguish over going against doctrine if they used condoms with the alter boys?

Marc™ wrote:I'm still tripping off the fact that the pope is saying that it's okay for prostitutes to use condoms. So is the Vatican okaying prostitution?

alan smithee wrote:Regardless, I stopped caring long ago what one particular man wearing a funny hat in Rome has to say about how I live my life.

Forgiveness_Man wrote:Dats why you ain't Catholic.

I honestly don't get why ANYBODY cares. If you're not Catholic, the pope's words clearly won't mean anything to you. If you are Catholic, you'd actually follow what he says. Which makes the fact that people do make a fuss about it all the more baffling.

Forgiveness_Man wrote: ...If you are Catholic, you'd actually follow what he says. ...

alan smithee wrote:

Actually, I am a baptized Roman Catholic. Baptized, First Holy Communion, Confirmation. The works. I just reached an age many years ago where all organized religion stopped making any sense to me so I left The Church. There’s a scene from the film Chariots of Fire where the very devote Eric Liddell, who refused to run in an Olympic race on a Sunday is asked if he had any regrets. He answers something like, “Regrets, yes. But no doubts.” I haven’t had either. See, that's why I wrote, "I stopped caring..."

Forgiveness_Man wrote:

You left the church; hence you ain't Catholic. xD Religions are not something like race that you're born into but something you believe/accept. If you don't accept/believe, you're not really a part of that religion. It's just how it is.

So again, my point remains. If you're not Catholic(included ex-Catholics), the pope's words aren't going to matter to you one way or another, and if you are Catholic, you would take what he says to heart. Thus, the pope's words really have no reason to upset even one single person.

alan smithee wrote:Are you Catholic?

Forgiveness_Man wrote:
... You left the church; hence you ain't Catholic. xD Religions are not something like race that you're born into but something you believe/accept. ...

Shale wrote:

IDK. My friend Thomasangelo Licavoli came from a Sicilian family and he was born Catholic. Even tho we used to joke about the pope and make anti Catholic jokes, and Tom actually ate Sloppy Joe at a sleepover at my house as teens, he was very much Catholic attended mass regularly and married a good Catholic girl.

Every pedophile priest is Catholic (as well as their enabler Bishops who haven't turned them over to authorities but quietly shipped them off to another diocese).

Every murdering Mafioso & Cosanostra is Catholic even tho they secretly break quite a few doctrines of the faith. (And they usually do the most financially beneficial good works for the Churh who asks no questions). In fact, wasn't Mussolini and his G/F Catholic?

Don't try to push that Catholic party line spin here. It don't hold water.

Forgiveness_Man wrote:
...Sure, everyone sins but if you continually and knowingly violate church teaching without even acknowledging your error, you're just not really Catholic.

So yes, it holds quite a lot of water. Pedophile priests and mafia killers are violating Church teaching and have basically excommunicated themselves from the Church...

Forgiveness_Man wrote:He has to ask? xD The man is asking. lol

Shale wrote:OH, Really?I thot excommunication was an official Church function. And all those scofflaws were buried in hallowed Catholic cemeteries so the Church seems to have no prob with accepting them as still Catholic.You try to downplay that the Catholic Church is as much about politics as it is about religion. The Pope is given much international political deference because he is the head of state of the Vatican. So a lot of your arguments seem to be based on your own feelings about the Church rather than on the actual workings of the Church.

Forgiveness_Man wrote: Really! One can excommunicate themselves quite easily. You thought? Hmmmm, not enough apparently. I ain't even getting into the crock of poopoo and biased personal opinion that your second comment is. It's off-topic and so far out of reality that it's pointless to dwell on.

Like all of your arguments are based on what YOU think and not what the church really says? All of my arguments are based on the actual teachings of the church. If you don't agree with church teachings, don't be Catholic. It just amazes me how bitter people get over something they have no reason to care for.

captainbryce wrote:The Catholic Church flip-flops more than John McCain!

Forgiveness_Man wrote:

How is this a flip-flop? The Catholic Church doesn't flip-flop, the media just likes to misrepresent what it says. This is actually NOT a new church teaching. It's how it's been taught for a long time.(Yeah, surprise) But people are just taking it to mean much more than it is. If they actually the time to find out what is actually said instead of media paraphrase, they'd see that the media is merely twisting the facts to get a story.

Forgiveness_Man wrote:How is this a flip-flop? The Catholic Church doesn't flip-flop, the media just likes to misrepresent what it says. This is actually NOT a new church teaching. It's how it's been taught for a long time.(Yeah, surprise) But people are just taking it to mean much more than it is. If they actually the time to find out what is actually said instead of media paraphrase, they'd see that the media is merely twisting the facts to get a story.

captainbryce wrote:I'm not talking about this ONE thing in particular, I'm talking about in general, throughout history. Each Pope inteprets the religion (for everyone else) the way HE likes and chooses which rules are important, which ones to do away with what is a sin, what isn't a sin, etc. It's all subjective and all dependent on HIS intepretation.