Is the Pope right about condoms?

First things first dear WHYS people, I suggest you consult the BBC Rome correspondent David Willey on this issue of “male” prostitute which I (as an Italian to English translator and therefore fluent Italian speaker) have also checked on the web edition of L’Osservatore Romano the Vatican newspaper. There is no mention whatsoever of the actual gender of the prostitute in question “una prostituta” is grammatically and semantically feminine, therefore the concept of male prostitute would have to be flagged and it is not. The only other possibility is that, since the interviews for the book were undoubtedly conducted in German, something may have got lost in the translation into Italian, although in German the same gender rule applies to this word.
Somewhere along the line the UK media seem to have distorted this message and despite David Willey having brought this up most authoritatively on one of yesterday’s WS news programmes, it would appear this error is still being perpetuated.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

It is my impression that the prelate changed nothing, but simply made the traditional position of the Church clearer. As I understand it, the Church prescribes that sex is to be performed only in wedlock. Under this condition, the use of condoms is forbidden because sex between spouses is supposed to be connected to the miracle of conception. That being said, if one is to sin and procure sexual intercourse outside marriage, he/she is already acting outside the prescription of the Church, and so it would be socially irresponsible not to act in coherence with that choice. In short, if you are already committing one sin (sex outside marriage) it makes more sense to commit another (use condoms) than to endanger everyone's health. There is nothing new there.

What he appears to be saying reminds me of an old Motto.
"Once You've eatan the Poison, you'd may aswell lick the plate"

If your a prostitute, or having sex out of wed lock etc. You're already a sinner so you'd may aswell use a condom, and reduce the chances of infecting or impregnating (which could then lead to an abortion which is even worse for the catholics.)

For once what he's saying makes a degree of sence, but ofcourse we all knew that becuase we've been living in the 21st Century and they are only just thinking the way we where in the 70's.

There hasn't really been a change. The Church (and religions in general) consider sexually transmitted diseases to be the consequence of immorality; the solution to which is abstinence and failtfulness. Seeing as people are ignoring the Church and persisting in immorality, a condom would minimise the harm done to others. Someone consciously making a decision to reduce the harm on others is adding a moral dimension to the decision-making process, which is a step forward towards a moral lifestyle. It is not the condom itself that is important here, it is the individual's intentions to avoid harming others and giving sexual intercourse more respect which is being encouraged as a step in the right direction.
The danger is that this message is being packaged by the media as a papal justification for condoms.

Apparently the Pope’s early trials with condoms were a success. It will take him a few more attempts to get more data and eventually approve the use of condoms for other alternatives.
We should all thank the Pope for his revelations and look forward to more revelations to come.

If one considers things pragmatically, the Pope is 100% right on that statement.Condoms in some way offer protection against contraction of STD's though not 100% safe.
But I differ in opinion with the Pope in moral sense, there could be no justification for ''fornication'' unless otherwise the Pope is trying to create a new sense of morality.In order to live a moral life,one must do away with fornication besides,the Bible does not condone prostitution.

I'm not entirely sure why anyone thinks the Pope should be applauded for this so-called departure from his usual stance on the use of condoms. It is just plain irresponsible to condemn people for or forbid people from protecting themselves, regardless of whether the intercourse is taking place within or outside of wedlock. period.

You're asking if he should be applauded for saying it?
I don't know. I guess you'd have to ask the relatives of all the millions who have contracted HIV and died because it wasn't said decades ago.

Who cares what the pope thinks? It has been scientifically proved that condoms reduce the chance of spreading AIDS by 80-97%.
http://www.aids.org/topics/aids-factsheets/aids-background-information/what-is-aids/safer-sex-guidelines/condoms

So if the Pope is suggesting that he agrees with the esixting science, good for him. Finally he is learning something that almost everyone else in the world already know.

So my message to the pope "welcome to the real world!"

An extremely difficult balancing act for the Pope. As head of the Roman Catholic Church he is the guardian of conservative views and especially on sexual matters. He has to walk a tight-rope; any sign of sexual liberalisation could seriously question the rigid stance taken by his predecessors. But this is the moot point: shouldnt the Catholic Church move with the times? Failure to do so could result in Catholics asking themselves whether the Church is relevant in the 21st century?

Why do people expect religions to accomodate their personal wants? If you don't like the rules of catholicism, don't be one. It's really that simple.

Do you expect Islam to change because you want to drink whisky and eat pork?

Do you expect judaism to change if you want to eat lobster or a cheeseburger?

"Is the Pope right about condoms?"

If you belief in the Catholic Church (fundamental different from believing in God), the Pope is always right - no discussion necessary.

If you do not believe in Catholic Church, there will be no reason to be interested in the viewpoint of the Pope - just figure out yourself what is right and what is wrong.

yeah! He deserves, though its taken too long. May he now give in to other timely issues such as making celibacy voluntary to priests.

This issue has got rather confused. Condoms where originally invented as a contraceptive, and therefore are against Vatican dogma on the prohibition of birth control by anything other than what we used to refer to as “Vatican Roulette” (withdrawal) so before the arrival of AIDS, condoms were ranked along with the birth pill, coil etc.
With the advent of AIDS, the condom is being promoted as a barrier against sexually transmitted infection but just as other fundamentalist Christian sects are trying to sell abstinence as the answer, despite the fact that many women in Africa and Asia have no choice in the matter of whether or not they have sex, the Vatican has, up to now, condemned condoms on both fronts, both as a contraceptive and as way of being “punished” for sex outside marriage, just as unwanted pregnancy used to be the pre-pill “punishment”.
Personally I consider insisting that people have kids they don’t want and/or can’t afford (even within “holy” matrimony) is very bit as socially irresponsible as having unprotected sex in these days of AIDS. So its business as usual at St Peter’s.

The Pope's comments sound like he and Alan Greenspan went to the same school of non-speak, i.e. precisely selected words presented in a long series of prepositional phrases whose antecedents those phrases are intended to describe are left to the interpretation of the reader. A man intending to clarify does not employ non-speak to do it, however a man intent to cover his own tail does. For those Catholics who take hope that the Church is seeing the light in regard to solutions for modern dilemmas, prepare yourselves for disappointment. For those Catholics who take responsibility in their own hands whether the Pope declares it more of a sin or less of a sin, keep doing what your doing - and do it with a clear heart. Your courage is more heroic in action than your Pope sounds like he can muster as leader of his flock.

I am not Catholic so the Pope's views don't guide my life. I think most of the Catholics in the states practice birth control and have for years. The Pope and I usually don't usually agree on issues. But I recognize him as a man who serves God.

What I find particularly insidious about the Pope’s example is the implied analogy that anyone who has sex outside marriage is a prostitute, thus potentially sending out an even more discriminatory message and adding to the social stigma and exclusion so many AIDS sufferers already have to bear, also given that many women are infected by their own husbands.
Whether the “prostitute” is male (as the UK press seem to think) or female, although in the former case I suppose the birth control argument doesn’t apply, this is anything but “humanising” the approach to sex. Human beings have been given (by God or evolution?) a strong desire to have sex, and while curbing ones instincts may well be good for society, or even the soul, wherever that may be located, issuing unilateral “thou shalt nots” is anything but a human approach, which makes we wonder what became of all that compassion and mercy Jesus apparently taught.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The Pope has not made a U-turn nor has he said anything contrary to Catholic teaching.

I think it is important to first of all point out the Pope was speaking as a well read and respected Catholic scholar. This was not official Church teaching.

First of all the church frowns on condoms, because it is felt they promote promiscuity. The church teaches abstinence except for marriage and fidelity whilst in it. However, this is not the reason condoms are banned. They reason is condoms are a CONTRACEPTIVE. Intercourse according to Church teaching is to create life and therefore using a contraceptive is a sin. Hence the ban.

Now this may be controversial, but the Church view Homosexual acts also as sin. However the Church do not feel there is any chance of life being created in an Homosexual union. Now whether they are right or wrong they deem all Homosexual acts as a sin. However, to use a condom in such an act cannot be called CONTRACEPTION. Therefore in this case whilst the the Church may regard the Homosexual act as a sin the use of the condom is not an ADDITIONAL sin. Now in the case of Heterosexual sex outside marriage things are different. Firstly intercourse outside marriage is in itself a sin. However, using a condom destroys the chance of life and is CONTRACEPTIVE. Therefore you are committing TWO sins.

The Pope went on in the case of the Homosexual act using the condom is not an ADDITIONAL sin and therefore could be the first step in having a more 'humane view' on sex.

Again I stress condoms are prohibited, because they stop the CHANCE of LIFE.

In addition the Pope and the Church is not there to be relevant or to conform to 21st Century thinker. The Church belief in a God, who is absolutely GOOD. A GOOD God is PERFECT and perfection cannot be altered. To change your morals, because they are unpopular will lead to great trouble. The Church does not make doctrine based on whether people will like it or not. They simply make doctrine based on what they hold to be true.

Yes, there are a lot of question marks, whilst the Pope says in certain instances condoms may be used, to prevent perhaps from HIV, who is to know a person who has HIV, common sense dictates one should use a condom whenever he feels there may be a risk. Does religious instructions dictate whatever a person must or must not do?, If there is to be some credibility, how can the Catholic Church with the Pope as its head put right to all the sextual abuses by several of their Priests against young boys in the past, so far only a drop in the ocean has been revealed. In Reality the Pope is not saying very much only stateing a partial use of condoms can be acceptable, however not acceptable for contraception. There is nothing thats conclusive in what he has said.

The Pope already knew about condoms well before he was "right about condoms".
At least 60% of the population knows that condom use is the right choice for disease and pregnancy prevention and have known this for decades. The other 40% are foolishly waiting for the Pope or Imam or other direct line to god to tell them it is ok. Why is it so hard for so many religious leaders to accept the realities of the world they live in. Honesty with ones self and others is a the cornerstone of any faith and is seriously undermined when its leaders seem to waiver on issues and stubbornly remain out of touch with the progress of the world.

It's wonderful that this Pope has come around by seeing too the needs of it's members, that meet the demands of the current times and societal problems.

You surely mean the pope has finaly understood the principle and fucntionality of the condom?

Is the Pope right about condom use?

No one in my jungle uses a condom! But then it is a jungle which has nothing to do with souls and humanity...

The Pope and the Catholic Church promote abstinence and have been against the use of condoms. As the highest of Catholic priests the Pope has to follow these teachings.

How can the Pope know anything about condoms except from what he is told by his advisors? If all his advisors are Catholic too then how can they know anything about condoms too? If they did then they would be in violation of the doctrine of the Church they represent!

At the risk of repeating myself and being bounced off by the moderators, where did this “male” prostitute interpretation come from? It is most certainly not in the Italian as published on the Vatican newspaper website, I won’t bore you all with a linguistic analysis of why it cannot possibly refer specifically to the male gender, granted that there may be a touch of ambiguity about whether it could cover both males and females, but, unless someone has a transcript of the original German (which I’d like to see) this is just plain inaccurate reporting.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Those religion dinosaurs of the Vatican and other religion establishments seem to forget that the sexual energy in young people is uncontrollable, synonymous to an avalanche outbreak or volcanic explosion.
Teenagers behave like unguided sexual missiles, abstinence is something strange to their moral vocabulary.
The use of condoms seems to be the best way out—the only way to mitigate and prevent many types of sexual diseases and unintentional pregnancy.
Those religion establishments should realize that we live in an age of technology, that produces results, not on an era of factitious theology that is far from reality.
Whoever, invented the condoms should be granted the Noble price for good sexual behaviour—if such a price exists.
On this issue the Pope has stepped forward on the right direction, but has long way to go.