ROME — The Vatican on Tuesday issued its most authoritative clarification on Pope Benedict XVI’s recent remarks that condoms could sometimes be used for disease prevention, saying that the pope in no way justified their use to prevent pregnancy.
The statement appeared to be a sign of the lingering confusion — and, perhaps, Vatican infighting — over the remarks. Approved by Benedict himself, it said his words had been “repeatedly manipulated” and did not “signify a change in Catholic moral teaching.”
In a book published last month, Benedict said that although condoms were not “a real or moral solution,” in some cases, they might be used as “a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility.” He cited as an example a male prostitute who might use a condom so as not to spread disease.
AIDS activists, especially in Africa, where H.I.V. is rampant, welcomed the pope’s comments, as did some moral theologians. But some conservative Catholics, especially in the United States, feared that it would be misinterpreted as a move to condone condom use.
Tuesday’s statement did not go beyond or contradict two previous clarifications by the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, on the same issue. But it came directly from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the most powerful Vatican office, in what experts said could be a sign of internal Vatican tensions — or a response to criticism.
“I have never seen a communiqué from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that explains the words of the pope after the fact,” said Paolo Rodari, a Vatican expert at Il Foglio, an Italian daily newspaper. “I think it’s unique. And it demonstrates how many complaints and serious criticism the Vatican has received.”
By publishing “Light of the World,” a book of interviews conducted by a German journalist, Peter Seewald, Benedict effectively did an end run around the Vatican’s communications structures — and also around the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which oversees all doctrine.
The Vatican’s new statement said that Benedict’s comments had been misinterpreted and manipulated by those who effectively saw them as permission for more widespread use of condoms, which like all birth control goes against church teaching.
In the book’s German and English editions, the text cites the example of a male prostitute, implying homosexual sex, in which a condom would not be a form of contraception. But the Italian edition uses the feminine form of prostitute.
Last month, Father Lombardi said that the Italian translation was an error, but added that the pope had specifically told him that the issue was not procreation but rather disease prevention — regardless of gender.
In Tuesday’s statement, the Vatican did not touch the gender question. But it said, “The idea that anyone could deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in certain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely arbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought.”
Mr. Rodari said the prefect of the congregation, Cardinal William J. Levada, the highest-ranking American at the Vatican, had most likely not been shown the book before it was published since it consisted of interviews, not official church doctrine.
Father Lombardi said that he could not comment on whether Cardinal Levada had seen the book before publication, but that it “went without saying” that Benedict had approved Tuesday’s statement.
Issued in six languages, Tuesday’s statement, “Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the Trivialization of Sexuality Regarding Certain Interpretations of ‘Light of the World,’ ” was a masterpiece of Vatican nuance. It used technical theological language, while the pope had used a conversational tone in his book.
It said that condom use by a prostitute for disease prevention could not be considered a “lesser evil” because prostitution is “gravely immoral,” and that “an action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed.”
Yet it added that “those involved in prostitution who are H.I.V. positive and who seek to diminish the risk of contagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the life of another even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity.”
Read More
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/22/world/europe/22pope.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
The statement appeared to be a sign of the lingering confusion — and, perhaps, Vatican infighting — over the remarks. Approved by Benedict himself, it said his words had been “repeatedly manipulated” and did not “signify a change in Catholic moral teaching.”
In a book published last month, Benedict said that although condoms were not “a real or moral solution,” in some cases, they might be used as “a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility.” He cited as an example a male prostitute who might use a condom so as not to spread disease.
AIDS activists, especially in Africa, where H.I.V. is rampant, welcomed the pope’s comments, as did some moral theologians. But some conservative Catholics, especially in the United States, feared that it would be misinterpreted as a move to condone condom use.
Tuesday’s statement did not go beyond or contradict two previous clarifications by the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, on the same issue. But it came directly from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the most powerful Vatican office, in what experts said could be a sign of internal Vatican tensions — or a response to criticism.
“I have never seen a communiqué from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that explains the words of the pope after the fact,” said Paolo Rodari, a Vatican expert at Il Foglio, an Italian daily newspaper. “I think it’s unique. And it demonstrates how many complaints and serious criticism the Vatican has received.”
By publishing “Light of the World,” a book of interviews conducted by a German journalist, Peter Seewald, Benedict effectively did an end run around the Vatican’s communications structures — and also around the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which oversees all doctrine.
The Vatican’s new statement said that Benedict’s comments had been misinterpreted and manipulated by those who effectively saw them as permission for more widespread use of condoms, which like all birth control goes against church teaching.
In the book’s German and English editions, the text cites the example of a male prostitute, implying homosexual sex, in which a condom would not be a form of contraception. But the Italian edition uses the feminine form of prostitute.
Last month, Father Lombardi said that the Italian translation was an error, but added that the pope had specifically told him that the issue was not procreation but rather disease prevention — regardless of gender.
In Tuesday’s statement, the Vatican did not touch the gender question. But it said, “The idea that anyone could deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in certain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely arbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought.”
Mr. Rodari said the prefect of the congregation, Cardinal William J. Levada, the highest-ranking American at the Vatican, had most likely not been shown the book before it was published since it consisted of interviews, not official church doctrine.
Father Lombardi said that he could not comment on whether Cardinal Levada had seen the book before publication, but that it “went without saying” that Benedict had approved Tuesday’s statement.
Issued in six languages, Tuesday’s statement, “Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the Trivialization of Sexuality Regarding Certain Interpretations of ‘Light of the World,’ ” was a masterpiece of Vatican nuance. It used technical theological language, while the pope had used a conversational tone in his book.
It said that condom use by a prostitute for disease prevention could not be considered a “lesser evil” because prostitution is “gravely immoral,” and that “an action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed.”
Yet it added that “those involved in prostitution who are H.I.V. positive and who seek to diminish the risk of contagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the life of another even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity.”
Read More
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/22/world/europe/22pope.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
No comments:
Post a Comment