Bishop Opposes Vatican Ban on Condoms

[Victor]

What do you guys think? Is this an area that needs further dialogue by the Church?
[url="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5032190&ft=1&f=1004"] South African Bishop Opposes Vatican's Ban on Condoms [/url]

~Victor

[Paphnutius]

Thatis a picture of a bishop? I could not tell!

[onathing1]

Wow.....just wow.

[RemnantRules]

no big suprise that NPR is issuing that...and your right Paph...that's the bishop? hmmm

[Semalsia]

What's a bishop supposed to look like?

[Mrvoll]

[quote name='Semalsia' date='Dec 2 2005, 02:22 PM']What's a bishop supposed to look like?
[right][snapback]808587[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I think that they should look like this and not at Mass dress with the collar and a gold chain.

[rkwright]

I think this is a really tragic situation. The AIDS epidemic in Africa is out of control. I mean the idea behind the 'condom ban' in the Catholic Church is that sex is a life giving act. When viewed that way things that prevent life are against the natural order. But when AIDS enters the picture sex is no longer life giving, but actually just the opposite, it becomes life taking (and if I'm not mistaken it is passed on to the kids? so the life that is created is also taken by the act). In that light would it be morally ok? I dunno

Just a thought...but for me it seems like a wrong answer to a very tough problem. Suffering is part of life, we should learn how to cope with it, not sacrifice our morals to deal with it.

Edited December 2, 2005 by rkwright

[Paladin D]

We have a pretty orthodox bishop in our diocese (Bishop Francis Xavier, Diocese of Richmond), and when he doesn't wear his usual "bishop" vestments, he wears a black suit with a white collar.

I can understand wearing black clothing in extremely hot weather can be a torture (especially in Africa), but why not have a simple white collar?

I'm disappointed to see that a bishop is going against the moral teachings of the Church. Say a Hail Mary for him in your prayers tonight.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Dec 2 2005, 01:51 PM']Thatis a picture of a bishop? I could not tell!
[right][snapback]808559[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
perhaps not for long...


[quote name='rkwright' date='Dec 2 2005, 02:36 PM ']The AIDS epidemic in Africa is out of control. I mean the idea behind the 'condom ban' in the Catholic Church is that sex is a life giving act. When viewed that way things that prevent life are against the natural order. But when AIDS enters the picture sex is no longer life giving, but actually just the opposite, it becomes life taking (and if I'm not mistaken it is passed on to the kids? so the life that is created is also taken by the act). In that light would it be morally ok? I dunno 

Just a thought...but for me it seems like a wrong answer to a very tough problem. [b]Suffering is part of life, we should learn how to cope with it, not sacrifice our morals to deal with it[/b].[/quote]
Precisely.

Thus, condoms are ALWAYS morally unacceptable, regardless the circumstance and situation. We are not animals, we can abstain from sexual relations and it won't kill us.

[Didacus]

[quote name='rkwright' date='Dec 2 2005, 02:36 PM'][snip]

But when AIDS enters the picture sex is no longer life giving, but actually just the opposite, it becomes life taking (and if I'm not mistaken it is passed on to the kids? so the life that is created is also taken by the act).
  [snip]
[right][snapback]808594[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

When the condom is introduc e the sexaul stops being an act ope nto life and thus is no longer life giving.

AIDs would not enter the picture unless one of two things;

Virginity is broken before marriage

Infidelity after marriage



The real break of morality is failing in those two things, not preventing condoms.

In the name of God what is so hard to understand in that?!?!!?

[Didacus]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Dec 2 2005, 03:24 PM'][snip]

We are not animals, we can abstain from sexual relations and it won't kill us.
[right][snapback]808626[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The shocking truth is this:

We do not need sexaul relations in order to live a happy fulfilling life!


Shocking isn't it?!


When exactly did sex go from being an act of love within a marriage - open to life, to sex being about a 'need' like breathing or drinking water!?!?!?

Edited December 2, 2005 by Didacus

[Semalsia]

[quote]But when AIDS enters the picture sex is no longer life giving, but actually just the opposite, it becomes life taking (and if I'm not mistaken it is passed on to the kids? so the life that is created is also taken by the act). In that light would it be morally ok? I dunno[/quote]

If you ask me, it's not morally ok to have sex even with condom, if you have AIDS.

[quote]We are not animals, we can abstain from sexual relations and it won't kill us.[/quote]

I've heard a lot of people in Africa believe that if you rape a little girl you'll be cured of AIDS.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Semalsia' date='Dec 2 2005, 03:58 PM']If you ask me, it's not morally ok to have sex even with condom, if you have AIDS.
[snip]
[right][snapback]808672[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

but isn't it safe sex when using a condom?

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Dec 2 2005, 04:13 PM']but isn't it safe sex when using a condom?
[right][snapback]808687[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Umm, no.

"safe sex" (truly!)= between a man and a woman who are married and were both virgins (entirely) before marriage.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

He might be a bishop without a diocese pretty soon.