How Many are Broken-Hearted by the Pope's Imprudent Condom Remarks

A friend sent me the following email today:

Hi Mary Ann,

I understand and share your distress at the imprudence of the pope’s remarks to an interviewer re use of certain prophylactic devices: that stabbed-in-the-back feeling J. Don’t know if you saw Smeaton’s to-the-point remarks on the matter, at http://bit.ly/dX4j90 (John Smeaton is the head of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children in the U.K.):

This week especially, my heart breaks for my children and for my grandchildren; my heart breaks for the children of Britain and for children throughout the world. My heart breaks as I witness leading figures in the Vatican fomenting universal confusion on Catholic teaching on the use of condoms following Pope Benedict’s interview on that subject in the new publication: "Light of the World”. …
I address now the successors of the apostles, the Catholic bishops of the world. As the leader of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, the oldest pro-life organization in the world, I especially address you, Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, and through you, the bishops of the world.

“Countless children, perhaps my own grandchildren, will be deliberately corrupted as a result of the exploitation and misrepresentation of your interview about condoms by opponents of Catholic teaching within the Catholic Church. As a result of the worldwide media’s perception of your interview, and as a result of policies and legislation enacted on the basis of a false representation of Catholic teaching, the corruption of young children and the destruction of countless children in the womb will go hand in hand. Countless women will be exploited by selfish or insensitive or brutal husbands and boyfriends, as a result of the confusion generated in the mass media by opponents, within the Church, of Catholic teaching on the use of condoms."

Thanks to Jon for sending this. I'm posting a link to John Smeaton's blog (see blogroll on right). And may all our shepherds keep a more careful watch over their tongues with a sharp awareness of the potential to mislead and scandalize the flock.

Vatican Damage Control on Pope's Condom Statement

It's a fact of life that exceptional cases make bad law. They also make bad spiritual generalizations. Unfortunately, those with an agenda will use the pope's recent statement about an exceptional, individual situation to make broad generalizations that aren't true. It's already happening with headlines about the pope approving condoms for gays. And the inevitable question is, "Well, if gay prostitutes can use condoms to prevent AIDS, why not married couples where one spouse has AIDS? or fornicating couples, for that matter?" And what about other incurable STDs like herpes? 

There are plenty of difficult sexual situations that invite lowering the moral bar. Can the elderly married couple dealing with erectile dysfunction practice mutual masturbation? How about a married couple late in pregnancy? Obviously, there's no contraceptive intention in either case.  What if the woman is still in her child-bearing years but her husband can't perform? Do they have to live in a Josephite marriage with no hands-on relations? I'm sure there are plenty of wounded vets who would like to know.

The pope's comment opens a huge can of wiggling worms in sexual matters. And the irony is that it was absolutely unnecessary. Does anyone really believe AIDS-infected gay prostitutes care what the pope thinks? Do they need his permission to use condoms to protect their partners? Unfortunately, the world will see the pope lining up with Planned Parenthood and gay activist groups urging "safer sex."

To be honest, I'm in mourning. I've spent most of my adult life defending Church teaching on Humanae Vitae, and I will continue to do so. But I feel like the pope just made it a lot harder. Here's what I said in a comment on an article at LifeSiteNews today. The author was "explaining" that the pope was talking about sodomy not normal sex, but it still left me scratching my head:

So let me get this straight. An AIDS infected homosexual engaging in gay prostitution is showing his moral concern for himself or his partner by using a condom while he commits sodomy; but a married couple where one is infected with AIDS is committing a mortal sin of contraception? Or is it only if the couple can potentially become pregnant? Are the post menopausal married woman and her husband allowed to use condoms to prevent spread of disease?
It seems to me that the pope’s statement absolutely undermines the Church’s teaching on contraception. If the infected sodomite is to be seen as exercising concern for the other by using a condom, how can the infected married couple not be seen in the same light? Or is their marital act with a condom, because of the contraceptive aspect, now seen as more immoral than sodomy with a condom that shows the gay couple’s concern for one another. I’m baffled and heartbroken.

As someone who’s spent a lifetime defending Humanae Vitae, I feel like the rug has been pulled out from under me. I feel like I’m on the wrong side of the looking glass at the Mad Hatter’s tea party.

The Vatican knows the pope's comment created a firestorm and they've gone into damage control mode. [See Vatican Rushes to Clarify Pope's Comments in Book ] What the fallout of this imprudent papal comment will be on the Church remains to be seen. Please pray for the pope and our poor suffering Church. And I'd appreciate a few prayers for myself as well. It's hard enough to fight those coming straight at you. But it's doubly hard when you have to watch your back.