Holes in the Condom Debate: What the Pope Really Said

When The L’Osservatore Romano breached an embargo yesterday and decided to go full steam ahead with the release of some partial excerpts of Pope Benedict’s new book, Light of the World: The Pope, The Church and The Signs Of The Times, the media went all a frenzy over comments the Pope made pertaining to the use of condoms.


Needless to say, before his new book has even hit the shelves it has stirred much controversy all across the media. Did the media get “it” right this time? Is this a BIG DEAL or much ado about nothing? Is this Pope Benedict’s personal opinion? If it is his personal opinion, does it depart from Church Teaching? I have read articles from various media sources across the internet including that of both Jimmy Akin and Dr. Janet Smith. Both Akin and Smith have posted very well written articles on the matter and both clarify the pontiffs statements. The media has twisted the Pope’s words (which isn’t that surprising) to fit their own cause of remaking a long held principle of the catholic Church, claiming that the Pope said that the use condoms can be justified in some cases. That is not what he said.

First, I would like to point out that this is an interview book and this is not a Church encyclical or anything of the sort. Second, the Pope can have private opinions which may be wrong, and he even points this out in his book. Jimmy Akin emphasizes that The L’Osservatore Romano did a major disservice to all the public, Catholic or not, by releasing excerpts which fail to show the entire context of Pope Benedict’s statements.

Here is text from the Pope’s book:

Seewald: . . . In Africa you stated that the Church’s traditional teaching has proven to be the only sure way to stop the spread of HIV. Critics, including critics from the Church’s own ranks, object that it is madness to forbid a high-risk population to use condoms.

Benedict: . . . In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. [EMPHASIS ADDED] Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease. As a matter of fact, you know, people can get condoms when they want them anyway. But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen. Meanwhile, the secular realm itself has developed the so-called ABC Theory: Abstinence-Be Faithful-Condom, where the condom is understood only as a last resort, when the other two points fail to work. This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also a part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s being.

Jimmy Akin points out that the Pope’s overall argument is that condoms will not solve the problem of AIDS. Akin reiterates this:

1) People can already get condoms, yet it clearly hasn’t solved the problem.

2) The secular realm has proposed the ABC program, where a condom is used only if the first two, truly effective procedures (abstinence and fidelity) have been rejected. Thus even the secular ABC proposal recognizes that condoms are not the unique solution. They don’t work as well as abstinence and fidelity. The first two are better.

3) The fixation on condom use represents a banalization (trivialization) of sexuality that turns the act from being one of love to one of selfishness. For sex to have the positive role it is meant to play, this trivialization of sex—and thus the fixation on condoms—needs to be resisted.

Here is the statement which the media devoured and seized upon:

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality. (EMPHASIS ADDED)

Jimmy Akin points out that Pope Benedict says “may” and not “is”. Then, Pope Benedict goes on to reiterate that “it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.”

Janet Smith has posted excerpts from the Pope’s book. I am posting a couple of those excerpts below.

 The Pope stands by his “controversial” remarks that he previously stated on the use of condoms to prevent AIDS: “that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.”

Pope Benedict stated: “I had the chance to visit one of these wards and to speak with the patients. That was the real answer: The Church does more than anyone else, because she does not speak from the tribunal of the newspapers, but helps her brothers and sisters where they are actually suffering. In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.”

Pope Benedict is correct in stating that condoms will not solve the problem of AIDS. Condoms lessen, but do not eliminate, the risk of transmitting HIV, thus they do not make sex truly safe. 
I encourage you to take a look over at The American Catholic where lively chatter has been going on covering the latest controversy.


An interview with the Pope does not change the teachings of the Catholic Church regarding condoms or otherwise.

Cross-Posted at Teresamerica

Catholic Culture Clash 8-26-10

I just happened to be talking about civility when debating politics, sociology, and theology on blogs when I came across this article on civility in public discourse (or lack thereof) at our educational institutions.

Patrick Lee and Robert P. George set the record straight as to when fertilization begins for those who are confused as to when fertilization actually begins.

Here are 15 reasons to use Natural family Planning.

It is pointed out here that some on the Left have even ceded that Obamacare won't reduce health care costs.

Bishop Ochoa seems to rebuke an Orthodox priest who espoused Church teaching on homosexuality, homosexual acts. This Orthodox priest basically told his community of El Paso like it is with regards to Church teaching on homosexuality, in a straightforward manner and didn't pull any punches.

When Obama rebuked and called out the Supreme Court Justices at the State of the Union Address and I was appalled at how publicly he did this. Nothing of this kind has been done during prior SOTU addresses in our past.  It was highly inappropriate and low-class of him to do so like he did.  Was Obama saying that all types of groups have no right to freely speak on political matters and/or contribute to political campaigns?  Aren't groups madeup essentially of many individuals gathering for a sole or primary purpose?  So, what's the beef with individuals coming together to support and donate money to a politician or a political group?  If Obama really is against ALL GROUPS funding political campaigns why isn't he calling out the unions?  Is he only against those groups who fund political campaigns on the Right or for Republicans? 
Here is an article revealing how the unions are outspending corporations 3 to 1.

The Vatican has earmarked more euros in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Elderly Woman funds abortions for others-murders of innocents. How sickening. This is appalling.  She said its 'all about the child'.  It is so immoral, unethical, against God and backwards thinking for this woman to think that murdering an unborn child is 'all about the child, helping the child, and calls abortion 'a blessing'. This is just so wrong on so many levels.

The Obama admin Reduces Funding for Faith-Based AIDS Programs

While I don't believe that individuals or organizations should be totally reliant on the government for funding I also don't think getting some help from the government is wrong either. I really hope they figure out about getting additional funding for the AID's patients. My prayers are with those that are HIV/AIDS patients undergoing treatment and also those who help aid in their treatment. With help from God, I hope and pray that they attain the additional necessary funding soon.

VIENNA (CNS) -- Large reductions in funding for AIDS work around the world are putting at risk the lives of people who depend on faith-based organizations for care, treatment and support, warned Catholic activists and others participating in the XVIII International AIDS Conference.

Results from a rapid assessment of 19 faith-based organizations working on AIDS in poor countries was conducted in June by the Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance, which announced the results at a July 21 news conference.

The study found that all but two of the agencies surveyed were already experiencing at least a flat-lining of funding. Some had already been forced to make cutbacks in the past six months while others had been warned that cuts in funding levels are about to be announced.

Becky Johnson, the researcher who compiled the report, said funding cuts to faith-based groups could devastate poor areas of the world, such as sub-Saharan Africa, where such organizations provide up to 70 percent of health care and HIV-related services.

U.S. Maryknoll Father Richard Bauer, executive director of Catholic AIDS Action, a program of the Namibian bishops' conference, expressed concern that he may soon be forced to chose who lives and who dies.

"We provide support for over 14,000 orphans, and this cut in funding forces me to ask which child I have to say no to. What are the criteria? Is it the poorest kids, the HIV-positive kids, do we do psycho-social assessment, or what?" Father Bauer asked. "The donors say I've got to cut 20 percent, and I need their help in figuring out where. But when I ask, they respond with deafening silence."

Father Bauer's largest single funder is the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, created in 2003. The priest said PEPFAR has told him to expect a decline in funds through 2015. That cut is rumored to be 20 percent, Father Bauer said, while the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, another major donor, has indicated that he will soon lose an initial 10 percent, with more cuts likely to follow.

"PEPFAR wants to fund the government because they see that as more sustainable. Excuse me, but the government of Namibia came into existence only in 1990, whereas the church has been there for hundreds of years. If you're really interested in sustainability, then fund the church," Father Bauer told Catholic News Service.

The phrase "Treatment 2.0" debuted in Vienna, pushed by people such as Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and former U.S. President Bill Clinton as code for doing more with less, for being smarter in carrying out programs. Yet Father Bauer said it does not apply to his programs.

"Everyone is talking Treatment 2.0 and that we have to be smarter. In some of the larger NGOs and government programs, they can do that. But faith-based organizations like the one I work with have no padding in the budget. We run things on a shoestring. Out of a sense of justice and integrity I never padded our budget. It's already bare bones. I put in there just what I needed to provide services," he said.

"Yet we just got a 17 percent increase in our electricity cost. There's a petrol increase. And salaries have to go up at least 5 percent a year if we want to keep qualified staff. My fixed costs are going up, and the funding is going down. Yet they say, 'Be smarter.' Well, I give them my budget and say, 'How do I do that?' Because I don't have the answer," he said, adding, "I think the faith-based organizations have been smarter all along." CONTINUED