First, it's sad that a Pontiff should be forced into an impasse where he's compelled to say anything about ... condoms. Second, it's sad that the media inevitably takes such comments
out of context, as it recently did, suggesting that the Pope has moderated his position on condoms. Third, it's sad that clarifications inevitably have to be issued to prevent the massif misunderstanding of such comments; but they indeed have to be made.
Dr. Janet Smith capably rises to the unenviable challenge in "
Pope Benedict on condoms in 'Light of the World'" (Catholic World Report, Web Exclusive, November 20, 2010).
Updatehttp://www.youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/8GnJeH-KAjs
Philip,
ReplyDeleteI'm missing something. His Holiness was interviewed by a German journalist and, as I understand it, didn't want to see the questions beforehand. Condoms, being part of the trivialization of marital relations and authentic love - being a direct challenge to Deus Caritas est - are of great interest to His Holiness, in terms of his theological reflections and teaching capacity. No, the book isn't part of the Magisterium, but it is an insight into the incisive mind of His Holiness.
In what sense was His Holiness "cornered" into answering questions about condoms?
The rest shouldn't be surprising, either: how often do the MSM listen carefully and correctly construe much of anything by way of public pronouncements from the Church? Even the WHO is in on the act, but who should be surprised by such things?
News flash: sun rises; McBrien disagrees with Magisterial teaching; Cardinals elect Catholic as pope.
God bless,
Chris
Chris, you ask:
ReplyDeleteIn what sense was His Holiness "cornered" into answering questions about condoms?
Well, clearly he wasn't "cornered" in the sense of being coerced to speak on a subject irrelevant to his concerns as Universal Pastor of the Church, as you suggest. However, is it any less clear that he was "cornered" in the sense that the context of his remarks would immediately (and inevitably) be completely altered by the inflammatory nature of the topic in a public bent on turning his remarks into a discussion of something he had no intention of discussing? No, you obviously agree with that too, from your MSM remarks. Okay then.
To the other Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteOf course his comments were taken from their original context to serve the purpose of those who misquoted him. This doesn't change my point. Why should we be shocked when the MSM misrepresents (either through cluelessness or malice) the words of His Holiness? It wouldn't matter what he had said. As illustration of this, I refer you to this exchange, which actually occured, although I can't quote it exactly:
"Father: Why hasn't our generation received the teachings of the Church on birth control?"
"The teaching of the Church is quite clear: in Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI teaches that contraception is objectively evil ... [still, typing this, all these years later, I can't believe the next piece:] But we don't live in an objective world, so ... " [The rest of the answer blurs into tears and my needing to leave the room from utter disbelief at what I had just heard.]
To quote Fr. Matthew McNeely, FSSP, "text, without context, is pretext". We don't expect a scorpion to stop trying to poison its prey, nor the media to stop misrepresenting the Church. If we do expect such things, it is either because we hope for miracles or because we are ignorant, culpably or not, of the true nature of the media.
Chris