Vatican: The Church's Teaching on Condoms Hasn't Changed

Vatican: The Church’s Teaching on Condoms Hasn’t Changed

ReligionNovember 2010 • Views: 29,432

Yesterday, the Pope’s comments about condoms caused a huge international stir, because it seemed like he was signaling a change in Catholic policy.

So today the Vatican rushed out another statement to clarify that when Pope Benedict said it might be OK for male prostitutes to use condoms, he meant only male prostitutes: Pope’s comments don’t change church teaching.

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican on Sunday cautioned that there is nothing “revolutionary” in Pope Benedict XVI’s startling assertion that condom use in exceptional circumstances can be a responsible act in the fight against the spread of HIV.

The Holy See’s chief spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, issued a statement stressing that the pope’s comment in a book being published Tuesday neither “reforms or changes” church teaching, which forbids use of condoms and other contraceptives.

Jump to bottom

58 comments

SanFranciscoZionist Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:08:34am

I believe they are correct--this is very much in line with what's been said for the past several decades.

Obdicut Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:08:49am

Sometimes the pope and the hierarchy seem more obsessed with sex than sixteen year old boys are.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:12:22am

The Church is against AIDS yet opposes condoms. How can one get more hypocritical? This is the example of when there is no practical reason behind the religious practice, when such a practice is harmful and when it would not have existed if not for religion.

Darth Vader Gargoyle Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:13:05am

re: #2 Obdicut

Sometimes the pope and the hierarchy seem more obsessed with sex than sixteen year old boys are.

I know I want my advice on sex from a bunch of old virgins.
//kinda

Ghazicide Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:13:47am

Sex for anything other than procreation, evil. Unless....

I don't need to go there.

What, me worry? Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:14:52am

Every sperm is scared.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm gets wasted, God gets quite irate.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:16:12am

re: #6 marjoriemoon

Every sperm is scared.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm gets wasted, ~~God~~ Pope gets quite irate.

A more realistic version ;-)

What, me worry? Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:17:21am

re: #7 Sergey Romanov

A more realistic version ;-)

lol It's confusing isn't it? Homosexual sex is bad. Unless you use a condom and are a prostitute, then... eh... not quite so bad?

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:18:35am

re: #8 marjoriemoon

lol It's confusing isn't it? Homosexual sex is bad. Unless you use a condom and are a prostitute

Or a priest... (judging by the previous behavior of the Church towards the pedo-scandals.)

Darth Vader Gargoyle Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:20:10am

Dear Catholic Church,

Matthew 7:5
You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

What, me worry? Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:21:32am

I'm sorry, I have to do it.

Youtube Video

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:25:38am

re: #11 marjoriemoon

Good thing you did. I haven't seen MoL yet. Gotta do it.

Obdicut Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:37:14am

Meanwhile, in reality, about 80% of American Catholic women use birth control.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:37:18am

There are a lot of moving parts to these incomplete stories, and a lot of simplification on the part of the spokesclerics. I can't speak to much of what Catholics hold firm since Vat II, but there are two ideas behind the condom=evil bit. Condoms are morally neutral--I've seen them used to keep water out of rifle barrels with no complaint from the chaplain. Thus it is only the use of condoms to prevent little Catholics and heathens that causes a problem. The use for infertile male-male screwing doesn't then add to whatever cosmic outrage the screwing might entail. (In the 60's, that would probably also have been the case for an infertile hetero couple trying to keep down STDs.) The other catch (XXII) is that use of condoms or eating kielbasa on Friday would have been a sin, not of sexual irregularity, but of disobedience to a churchly dictate--a completely different kind of sin. Gonna getcha coming or going, straight or bent.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:38:33am

re: #8 marjoriemoon

lol It's confusing isn't it? Homosexual sex is bad. Unless you use a condom and are a prostitute, then... eh... not quite so bad?

See above--Just quite so bad, but not worse for the accessories.

Ghazicide Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:44:06am

I don't think it's too thread early to go slightly OT:

The party that wins Asian voters may benefit for decades
A poll published last week held a glimmer of hope for the California GOP: Asian voters, unlike other minorities, are willing to consider Republican candidates.

Strangely enough nothing is said about how the Asian community will view creationism and anti science AGW sentiments in the GOP. The only consolation for the GOP is along homosexuality issues those two minority groups share similar anti-gay values.

However, they seem to be more worried about environmental issues than whites:

Latinos, Asians more worried about environment than whites, poll finds

For example, 50% of Latinos and 46% of Asians who responded to the poll said they personally worry a great deal about global warming, compared with 27% of whites. Two-thirds of Latinos and 51% of Asians polled said they worry a great deal about air pollution, compared with 31% of whites.

The GOP has little chance of winning any minority voting blocks except for on homosexuality issues. In the big picture of things gay rights will be behind financial and environmental issues for these groups, net loss GOP. Creationism is a serious wildcard that could make it lopsided: hispanics are heavily christian but I'm not sure if they really believe in creationism.

GOP = toast in CA.

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:52:45am

So let me see if I have this right...

Heterosexual couple = condoms are evil, since they prevent conception

Male prostitute = condoms are okay, since they prevent disease

What a bunch of incoherent, ridiculous nonsense from a church hierarchy still stuck in the Dark Ages. I read things like this and it only reinforces my belief that I did the right thing in walking away from the Catholic Church a long time ago. =P

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 10:56:26am

re: #16 BigPapa

The Catholic Hispanics (still the majority) won't get any push from their priests over creationism. The gay issue will slam into theology and machismo. I don't know if there is any single direction Asian Americans would historically lean--too diverse a group, with differing forces like immigrant vicitimization and anti-communism driving them.

Killgore Trout Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:01:19am

We're due to get some snow over the next few days. I can't recall a snow this early since I've been here.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:01:59am

re: #19 Killgore Trout

We're due to get some snow over the next few days. I can't recall a snow this early since I've been here.

Global Cooling.

AK-47% Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:05:05am

re: #20 Decatur Deb

Al Gore!!!

What, me worry? Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:08:18am

re: #12 Sergey Romanov

Good thing you did. I haven't seen MoL yet. Gotta do it.

Oh yes. It's deliciously irreverent.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:10:07am

We've drawn an advert from an official Catholic apologist site.

What, me worry? Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:13:24am

re: #16 BigPapa

Strangely enough nothing is said about how the Asian community will view creationism and anti science AGW sentiments in the GOP. The only consolation for the GOP is along homosexuality issues those two minority groups share similar anti-gay values.

I'm feeling awfully naughty on this glorious Sunday afternoon.

I guess they never hear of rice queens?

Ghazicide Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:15:39am

re: #18 Decatur Deb

The issues of AGW and creationism will probably not match up well between the GOP, Asians, and Latinos. Especially AGW.

I'm shocked the Dems haven't hammered on the Big$ connections between the denial industry and the GOP. A well focused onslaught by special interest money on these two issues could really damage the GOP, especially in CA with these two ethnic blocs.

Ghazicide Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:16:26am

re: #24 marjoriemoon

I'm feeling awfully naughty on this glorious Sunday afternoon.

I guess they never hear of rice queens?

Neither have I but it sounds Fabulous!

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:26:32am

re: #25 BigPapa

The issues of AGW and creationism will probably not match up well between the GOP, Asians, and Latinos. Especially AGW.

I'm shocked the Dems haven't hammered on the Big$ connections between the denial industry and the GOP. A well focused onslaught by special interest money on these two issues could really damage the GOP, especially in CA with these two ethnic blocs.

There have been a lot of anomalies since the presidential election and the rise of the TPs. How in the hell does Young Earth Creationism take hold in Texas, Louisiana, and Alaska? Half their economies depend on freakkin' Geology.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:30:19am

re: #27 Decatur Deb

Unfortunately there are YEC geologists who switch their views like gloves, when necessary. Marcus Ross and Andrew Snelling come to mind.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:35:44am

Moving up a thread, it's where all the cool science kids sit.

Canucknghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:39:25am

re: #28 Sergey Romanov

Unfortunately there are YEC geologists who switch their views like gloves, when necessary. Marcus Ross and Andrew Snelling come to mind.

Compartmentalization allows most of us to do what is necessary in times or places of stress, but it also allows YECs working in areas that in most cases would draw the mind away from the idea of a young Earth to rationalize the structures they see in the context of a great flood.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:45:34am

re: #30 b_sharp

There's that and there's schizophrenia.

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:46:38am

re: #28 Sergey Romanov

YEC geologists

IMO, that's an oxymoron. How can someone be a scientist -- and a geologist, no less-- and believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old. That makes no sense. They'd have to ignore all the evidence right in front of them.

LotharBot Sun, Nov 21, 2010 11:58:16am

re: #17 Lidane

Heterosexual couple = condoms are evil, since they prevent conception

Male prostitute = condoms are okay, since they prevent disease

What a bunch of incoherent, ridiculous nonsense...

Pedantic note: it would be incoherent if the rules didn't match the underlying principles (prevent disease; don't prevent conception). That's not the problem here; the rules do obviously match the principles. The problem here is that the principles are wrong. "Ridiculous" is an appropriate term; "incoherent" is not.

Canucknghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:00:23pm

re: #32 Lidane

IMO, that's an oxymoron. How can someone be a scientist -- and a geologist, no less-- and believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old. That makes no sense. They'd have to ignore all the evidence right in front of them.

They interpret it in light of their beliefs as part of the Noahic flood myth. It is a case of the belief leading the interpretation rather than the evidence leading the interpretation. They are not scientists.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:04:15pm

re: #34 b_sharp

They interpret it in light of their beliefs as part of the Noahic flood myth. It is a case of the belief leading the interpretation rather than the evidence leading the interpretation. They are not scientists.

Did a couple years of grad-school archaeology in KY. Most big digs assigned a hapless RA to explain to visitors: "No, we don't think that stratum is actually The Flood."

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:14:46pm

re: #33 LotharBot

Regardless of my word choice, his entire argument still makes no damned sense:

a.) He's essentially saying that male prostitutes are the only ones who spread AIDS, which is a flat lie. We have decades of proof to the contrary.
b.) His entire philosophy on sex can be completely boiled down to Beyonce's "Single Ladies". It's a catchy song, but not how most people live their sex lives.
c.) He's barely acknowledging the benefits of condoms while keeping them verboten for the majority of people who could benefit from them.

As usual, the Vatican is still at least 100 years behind the rest of the world.

Canucknghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:25:47pm

re: #36 Lidane

As usual, the Vatican is still at least 100 years behind the rest of the world.

Time to close the Vatican down, sell the real estate and decentralize the money and the power.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:29:18pm

re: #37 b_sharp

Time to close the Vatican down, sell the real estate and decentralize the money and the power.

Are you familiar with the Swiss Guard's uranium enrichment program?

Canucknghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:30:06pm

re: #38 Decatur Deb

Are you familiar with the Swiss Guard's uranium enrichment program?

Do tell, do tell.

Canucknghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 12:33:03pm

BBML

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 1:30:40pm

At least in the original Italian version, there is no "male" qualifier of prostitute.

“Vi possono essere singoli casi giustificati, ad esempio quando una prostituta utilizza un profilattico, e questo può essere il primo passo verso una moralizzazione, un primo atto di responsabilità (...)“

I'm an agnostic but I think this makes a difference. The "male" only crept into the translations.

Decatur Deb Sun, Nov 21, 2010 1:36:03pm

re: #41 Mark Winter

Good catch. The prostitute instance is only one example of an array of possibles.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 1:44:55pm

It changes the logic. What he says it that there may be occasions where the use of condoms is a more "moral" action than not using one.

Prostitution is a sin. Prostitution without condoms may be a greater sin, because it may kill. So Prostitution with condoms is - relatively speaking - a more "moral" and "responsible" act than without.

This may be a small step but it's different from what John Paul II held. It may enable the next Pope to go further.

Charles Johnson Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:08:28pm

re: #41 Mark Winter

At least in the original Italian version, there is no "male" qualifier of prostitute.

“Vi possono essere singoli casi giustificati, ad esempio quando una prostituta utilizza un profilattico, e questo può essere il primo passo verso una moralizzazione, un primo atto di responsabilità (...)“

I'm an agnostic but I think this makes a difference. The "male" only crept into the translations.

No, Pope Benedict was specifically talking about male prostitutes. The quote:

Benedict said that for male prostitutes — for whom contraception isn’t a central issue — condoms are not a moral solution. But he said they could be justified “in the intention of reducing the risk of infection.”

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:42:39pm

re: #43 Mark Winter

This may be a small step but it's different from what John Paul II held. It may enable the next Pope to go further.

Please. Benedict is and has always been to the right of JP2. He was the man's High Inquisitor, for crying out loud. He was the guy who enforced the strictest possible interpretation of the rules, then he became Pope.

The man isn't paving the way for anything to be liberalized in the Church now, or in the future. The cardinals and theologians he's installed are among the strictest, most conservative ones you can find. You seriously think a hierarchy like that is going to modernize anything? Good luck with that.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:42:46pm

Charles, I tried to check what he really said, but there seem to be conflicting versions.

The Italian version only speaks of "una prostituta". Since there is no male version of "prostituta" in Italian, it would need a qualifier in Italian if the term was meant to ONLY design male prostitutes.

So it would be interesting to know at what point the "male" came into play. It is NOT in the original Italian versions, but I note that the English and some German reportings have the "male". The first German reportings do not have the male and say "Prostituierte" (which means both sexes)

Could it be a conflict in the Vatican? There is no audio available.

Actually I think the version without the male makes more "sense". Why should only male prostitutes be allowed condoms and not male couples?

I don't think it's correct to reduce the Catholic version of "sex and love" to making babies. What this Pope and others have been saying for some time is that love is more than sex. Love should be moral, and this includes corporal love. The Church doesn't hold the view anymore that sex ONLY serves the purpose of procreation, but that Love (including the corporal part of it) should be a moral, responsible action. Sex with condoms (so they say) fosters "immoral" and "irresponsible", "casual" sexual relations.

Again, I'm an agnostic. But given the fact, that in some very Catholic nations the word of the Pope still has consequences I believe it's important.

And I believe that the Pope's concern is about "responsibility for others" as a moral act. Using condoms can be seen as being irresponsible, because it enables people to have casual sex. But there are instances in which the use of condoms may be more responsible than not using one.

And that's a line of thinking that future Popes may work on.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:48:22pm

re: #45 Lidane

Lidane, the Soviet Union ruled by Chernenko seemed to be absolutely hopeless.
Then came Gorbachev.

You may think that Benedict is "more to the right" than John Paul II. I'm not sure of that.

He's certainly no reformer. But his very small steps may make things easier for a Pope who really is.

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:50:08pm

re: #46 Mark Winter

And that's a line of thinking that future Popes may work on.

Except they won't. For all your apologetics for the Vatican, you're forgetting that the ban on condoms and all forms of artificial birth control extends to married couples as well. For the Vatican, all sex that is not open to conception, especially within marriage, is immoral and selfish.

The fact that Benedict is saying that male prostitutes can use condoms because it helps prevent infection not only reinforces the lie that only male prostitutes spread AIDS, but it ignores the vast majority of married, straight Catholics who are using condoms and birth control anyway.

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:51:54pm

re: #47 Mark Winter

The idea that there will be a Pope who is a reformer at any time in the next several decades is laughable. Keep dreaming.

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:54:26pm

re: #44 Charles

No, Pope Benedict was specifically talking about male prostitutes. The quote:

Ha ha!

[Link: blogs.reuters.com...]

Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:57:11pm

re: #50 Sergey Romanov

Ha ha!

[Link: blogs.reuters.com...]

Probably something lost in translation.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:57:43pm

re: #48 Lidane

Lidane, I knew why I had to stress the fact so much that I'm an agnostic. I am definitely NOT an apologetic for the Vatican.

And why shouldn't there be a reformer in the Vatican at some point? The next Pope will probably come from a Third World country.

Let's see. Let's face it, the Catholic Church is under attack from two sides: The "Liberals" in Europe or the U.S. and the Evangelic Sects in Africa and South America.

They will need to reform or they won't survive this century.

Lidanghazi Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:07:01pm

re: #52 Mark Winter

Lidane, I knew why I had to stress the fact so much that I'm an agnostic. I am definitely NOT an apologetic for the Vatican.

You claim agnosticism, yet offer up every defense of the Vatican. Sorry. I don't buy it.

And why shouldn't there be a reformer in the Vatican at some point? The next Pope will probably come from a Third World country.

You clearly haven't been paying attention. Many of the cardinals and bishops from many Third World countries hardliners (see: Brazil). Even if someone comes from the Third World and becomes Pope, that's no automatic guarantee of any sort of reform. Liberation theology is considered a heresy by the Church. Anything less than strict adherence to the teachings of Church doesn't get you elected Pope.

The idea that the Holy See would choose someone who doesn't follow the most stringent version of the faith to lead the Church is laughable. Won't happen. Ever.

They will need to reform or they won't survive this century.

People have been saying that since Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door. If they've survived the Protestant Reformation, they'll damn well survive a bunch of people disagreeing with their backwards views on sex and birth control.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:09:26pm

re: #51 Sergey Romanov

Since I am German I may be able to clarify that.

Indeed, "ein Prostituierter" could mean both: a male prostitute or a prostitute of both sexes. I'm inclined to believe that the Pope meant the latter.

Why? If he had said "eine Prostituierte", he would have specifically said "a female prostitute" (this German term excludes the masculine form)

That's why in German a male prostitute is usually named "eine männliche Prostituierte".

"ein Prostituierter" (which is a male gender) is far less common. The word exists but it is almost never used. In German the male version would encompass the female version. So this is what you would say if you wanted to specify bother genders without a qualifyer.

Italian and English do not have these possibilities, so they will always need a qualifyer.

Lombardi, in his statement, does NOT clarify the "male" issue since he doesn't even mention it.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:16:59pm

re: #53 Lidane

Lidane, I'm a scientist.
Scientists check facts.
I checked the language, that's all.
And I pointed out the ambiguity.
That's what scientists do.

This hasn't got anything to do with defending a reactionary institution.

"Even if someone comes from the Third World and becomes Pope, that's no automatic guarantee of any sort of reform."

No, of course not. But even Gorbachev started out as an apparatchik of the Communist Party.

Mark Winter Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:41:24pm

re: #42 Decatur Deb

Good catch. The prostitute instance is only one example of an array of possibles.

Indeed. I have the full quote in German now (since the interview was conducted by German journalists I guess the Pope replied in German):

«Es mag begründete Einzelfälle geben, etwa wenn ein Prostituierter ein Kondom verwendet, wo dies ein erster Schritt zu einer Moralisierung sein kann, ein erstes Stück Verantwortung, um wieder ein Bewusstsein dafür zu entwickeln, dass nicht alles gestattet ist und man nicht alles tun kann, was man will. (...) Aber es ist nicht die eigentliche Art, dem Übel der HIV-Infektion beizukommen. Diese muss wirklich in der Vermenschlichung der Sexualität liegen.»

So the prostitute (male or both genders) is only ONE example of cases which justify the use of a condom.

So that is different from JPII view that condoms are evil, period.

Nemesis6 Mon, Nov 22, 2010 4:02:17am

Pope Benedict XVI's throne is one of iniquity. He's an all-around evil man, there's not much else to say.

lostlakehiker Tue, Nov 23, 2010 8:25:28pm

Recent developments clarify what the Pope meant to say. News article

In the book, "Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times," Benedict was quoted as saying that condom use by people such as male prostitutes indicated they were moving toward a more moral and responsible sexuality by aiming to protect their partner from a deadly infection.

His comments implied that he was referring primarily to homosexual sex, when condoms aren't being used as a form of contraception.

However, questions arose immediately about the pope's intent because the Italian translation of the book used the feminine for prostitute, whereas the original German used the masculine.

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.

"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.

Those comments concluded the press conference, and Lombardi took no further questions about how broadly this interpretation could be applied.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Vatican: The Church’s Teaching on Condoms Hasn’t Changed

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud