This photoshopped picture, swiped from a hate-filled site, is actually quite the catechetical tool in light of the recent dust-up on the Pope’s comments about condoms.
New York’s Archbishop Timothy Dolan said something rarely uttered in public during an interview published on November 22 in the New York Times. From the article, which can be read here:
“The Pope didn’t say, ‘Oh good, you should use a condom,’ ” Archbishop Dolan said, referring to a controversial comment the pope made in a book that is being released worldwide on Tuesday.
In the book, the pope said that a male prostitute who used a condom to prevent the spread of AIDS might be taking a first step toward moral responsibility. Some Catholic analysts claimed that the pope was floating a possible exception in the church’s ban on birth control. But Archbishop Dolan said the church could not simply change its doctrine.
“You get the impression that the Holy See or the pope is like Congress and every once in a while says, ‘Oh, let’s change this law,’ ” he said. “We can’t.”
Those last two words hang in the air, pregnant in their implication.
“We Can’t”.
In truth, bishops are bound, not free, as Paul alluded to in his letter to the Ephesians, chapter 4:1-6.
1 As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2 Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
A prisoner for the Lord. ONE Lord. ONE Faith. ONE Baptism.
The moral law comes from God, not man. That is why the Pope speaks infallibly in matters of Faith and Morals, because as the Apostle Paul tells us, there is but ONE Faith. The Pope speaks infallibly when he speaks as the voice of the Apostolic Successors (the Bishops) on a topic dealing with faith and morals. Their job is to hand on the faith that was revealed to them. Consider some of the admonitions of the Apostle Paul to one of the first of the Apostolic Successors, the young Bishop Timothy:
2 Timothy 1:13-14
” 13 What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.”
1 Timothy 1:3-4
” 3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith.”
1 Timothy 4:11-16
“11 Command and teach these things. 12 Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity. 13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching. 14 Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through prophecy when the body of elders laid their hands on you. 15 Be diligent in these matters; give yourself wholly to them, so that everyone may see your progress. 16 Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.”
1 Timothy 6:20-21
” 20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21 which some have professed and in so doing have departed from the faith.”
2 Timothy 1:6-7
“6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. 7 For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love and self-discipline. 8 So do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner. Rather, join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God.”
2 Timothy 4:1-5
” 1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.”
They are bound, not free.
“We Can’t.” are two of the most truthful, humble, and powerful words ever spoken by a Bishop. Prisoners for the Lord.
So long as they remain bound, we are authentically free.
Yes! That is exactly what I wrote about earlier this month! The Pope is not as “powerful” as people think!
http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2010/11/pope-is-not-as-powerful-as-you-think.html
Thank you for the excellent reminder.
Wonderful insightful Blog (as usual!!) And I love the article about what Archbishop Dolan said… he is sooooo wonderful! Hubby and I think he ought to be the next Pope!! Thanks so much for all you do!
As a Catholic who can count on my fingers the times I have NOT used contraception, I have read with great interest all the different views of what the Pope meant, but I have no dog in this fight — my dogs are all out playing in the yard, so to speak. Heh.
I really enjoyed this interpretation of what the Pope meant:
http://simchafisher.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/bless-the-lord-o-my-sole/
L.,
Did you mean to link to this post, which is below the one you linked to?
http://simchafisher.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/la-blabbatore-romano/
Sue and Leila-
Thanks!
Leila, I thought of your post when I read this!
I compare the comments about condoms to a person I know currently going through RCIA, but still living with a boyfriend, partying, and not raising her son. She has been told those things are not right and that they will create more problems in the future for her and for people she loves. However, it’s not a reason to ban her from RCIA but rather to pray that she continues to go and allows the experience to help her see the truth, find faith and the courage to keep travelling towards Heaven for the rest of her life. We are all on a journey.
As a convert myself I know that it is a journey and I know that a year from now I’ll look back and see that I’ve grown in faith and understanding too.
Just thoughts,
Stacy
No, I did not.
Read the one I linked to — it will be clear at the end.
For what it’s worth, here’s my own take on “what the Pope meant:”
Condoms are like needle-exchange programs for drug addicts.
Zero-tolerance people don’t support these programs. They do not condone anything that doesn’t explicitly stop the immoral behavior of substance abuse.
However, there is evidence that they do help prevent the spread of disease: http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/66
No one would call use of illegal injectable drugs licit — however, there are many who support needle-exhange programs to prevent the spread of disease, and save lives, and hopefully become the first step on addicts’ road to recovery.
This is what I think the Pope meant about male prostitutes and condoms.
And I do hope he says more!
L you can have your own “take” on what the Pope said.
The fact is that Benedict has not changed anything.
Condoms like any other form of contraception are seriously sinful for all Catholics, in part because they thwart the gift of new life from God.
Mary Catherine, what is your take on what he meant? Why do you think he said what he said?
“In the book, the pope said that a male prostitute who used a condom to prevent the spread of AIDS might be taking a first step toward moral responsibility.”
This is a correct interpretation of what Benedict said.
Sadly, I think Benedict’s problem is that he has largely misjudged the intelligence of most of the media and is unaware of just how ill educated most Catholics in the West are regarding their faith.
One cannot expect people who are not following the church teaching on sexuality and morality and who likely haven’t even bothered to try to understand the reasons behind what their religion teaches to understand even remotely what he’s talking about. Catholic teaching on sexuality is a way of life. If you aren’t living by this you are not a practicing Catholic. It is not a set of rules.
I believe this is at the root of misunderstanding what Benedict teaches.
In your own words, not quoting someone else, what do you think the Pope meant to say?
You are quite articulate at describing how others are misunderstanding the Pope’s words, but what is your understanding of what he said?
Would it be better if condoms didn’t exist? (Okay, that’s a separate question.)
May I jump in here, gentle scholars?
Benedict was addressing the issue of love and sanctifying grace, not public health. He is already on record as stating that condoms are not terribly efficacious re: failure rates, and that reliance on these as a means of facilitating fornication can only aid in the spread of disease in the long run.
B16 was talking about the sense of responsibility toward another and chose the example of a male prostitute BEGINNING that journey by using what THAT person PERCEIVES to be an aid in preserving the life of another from the negative effects of their behavior.
The discussion is located within the frame of reference of the prostitute, and not a suggestion that condoms are indeed efficacious.
L, that quote summarizes EXACTLY what I feel the pope to have meant.
Thus, there is no use my paraphrasing it.
I quite agree with what you have said Dr. N. Benedict was talking about a spiritual journey. Since most people today give little thought and effort to the spiritual life, in fact likely believing the spiritual life to be nonexistent, the focus was on physical health.
Benedict is not stupid. He has access to a scientific academy and the problem of condoms has been investigated thoroughly. They do not work. The public health approach in AIDS has been very different from that of any other disease which has been to modify behaviour to avoid the risk. In the case of AIDS, handing out a condom merely encourages the behaviour with the added penalty of actually increasing the chance of infection.
I think however, that the media saw this as a chance to deliberately twist Benedict’s words for their own agenda and also to try to humiliate him. (We all know how the Catholic church is suppose to be such a backward organization.) But I also believe that for many of these people the depth of Benedict’s thinking IS completely lost on them. They are so far from the truth because they are no longer seeking the truth.
I think it’s very simple.
There are two aspects to condom use–prevention of pregnancy and stopping disease. So at one end of the spectrum, no disease is possible, and prevention of pregnancy is the sole end of condom use. The Church has always been clear this is wrong. At the other end, pregnancy is impossible (a man having sex with other men) and disease is very likely (prostitution likely means many partners and little discernment, and an ongoing commitment to continue the immoral lifestyle). So as a thought experiment, he was considering the merit of condoms to prevent disease, with the birth control aspect removed from the picture. He concluded while this still would not be an unmitigated good–the failure rate Mary Catherine mentioned makes it likely that disease would still be transmitted–it could (Benedict generously opined) be a beginning of a journey toward righteousness for the prostitute.
L, why do you claim you are Catholic when you do not follow the teachings of the Catholic Church? I am more Catholic than you, but would not have the temerity to call myself Catholic until and unless I were following the teachings of the church.
Jessi — I don’t claim to be a Catholic, I am one. Anyone baptized a Catholic is a Catholic.
However, since I reject so many teachings of Church, I am a dissenting Catholic, a “cafeteria” Catholic, a Catholic who is not (and will likely never be) in full communion with the Church.
Why do I bother? Your guess is as good as mine!
Then I guess I am a Catholic too.
Well, you can call yourself what you want, and others can call you whatever they want. There’s a blogger who says she’s “Catholic — not ‘Catholic, but…’”
I, on the other hand, am classic “Catholic, but…”
And some people, no doubt, see me as…..”Catholic butt.”
Gentles All,
I am the only perfect Catholic that you’ll ever meet
Okay, now that I need confession…
Baptism is one’s birth certificate into the family. So, what is left are varying degrees of obedience ad fidelity, of faith and hope. I’ve done more than my fair share of sinning in life, as have many others. That hasn’t, nor does it, make me “less” Catholic than anyone else. It HAS made me a more colorful Catholic.
The issue here is one of faith, and what one understands of the structure of the Church. That’s the point. If our fidelity causes us to look askance at others because of their sin, of what use is such fidelity. It’s what St. Paul was getting at in 1 Corinthians 13 when he said, “I can speak with the tongues of angels, but if I have not love, I am a noisy gong, a clanging cymbal”.