Posts
I opened up the The Wall Street Journal on November 22nd to find a rather misinformed article on the Holy Father’s latest comments on condom use. The quotes of the Holy Father are cited from a “book-length interview over the summer with the German writer Peter Seewald that will be officially released this week.” Needless to say, they had quotes of those who think the Church is finally accepting condom use alongside the Vatican’s clarifications; a friend posted another story from Zenit on my Facebook wall in which Dr. Janet Smith, an expert on sexuality and bioethics not to mention a consultor to the Pontifical Council on the Family, clarified what exactly the Holy Father meant. Church teaching has not and will never change!The Holy Father’s (not so) controversial quote said: "There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants.”
All he is essentially saying is that the use of a condom might be the first step away from free-for-all sexual activity; the user of the condom (and he cites a male prostitute), might have made one step toward fully understanding his sexuality. The Church is not condoning condom use. All the acts for which they are used are NEVER moral including contraception, preventing a pregnancy between heterosexual couples, and preventing disease among (unmarried) hetero and homosexual couples. It isn’t really the condom at the root of the problem. It’s the actions that make people think the condom is “necessary” in the first place. The ideal sexual situation, the only moral sexual act as taught by the Church, is between a married man and woman. There is no fear of disease or fear of an unwanted child. This scenario provides the greatest of sexual freedoms, giving oneself to the beloved freely, totally, and fully. Why is abstinence until marriage the best option? It is the only way to be entirely free, guiltless, innocent, and pure.
What the Holy Father is doing (and this will be overlooked by many) is reaching out to meet sinners, ALL OF US, where we are as Christ reaches out to us. He is not judging us but reaching out to meet us as the Vicar of Christ on Earth, pulling us up from the muck, and showing that conversions happen by the grace of God and in many situations, by a long process. Dr. Smith explains: “Christ himself, of course, called for a turning away from sin. That is what the Holy Father is advocating here; not a turn towards condoms.”
The Holy Father has done something new: he has gone a step beyond the typical doctrine. He has moved beyond the usual rhetoric and opened a new conversation. This requires, though, that we understand the Church will never change her teaching. The teaching merely acts and the foundation of the new dialogue. In the ever evolving interaction of the Church with the world, we may be entering a new chapter.
Photo from wsj.com.
First of all, I'm glad to have made an appearance as "a friend" in this post! :)
ReplyDeleteOverall, well said, Kellen. Though I wish to challenge, in a way, your argument that "Church teaching has not and will never change." I know what you're getting at: apostolic succession, infallibility, deposit of faith. I'm with you. Perhaps it would be important to define exactly what you mean by “Church teaching,” but to say that it has always and ever will be the same—implicitly or explicitly—is blind ignorance. We humans are too limited, and the Holy Spirit is more dynamic than that! This is not to say that God, who is Truth, changes; rather, the Church's limited (though inspired) understanding of difficult questions and of our own moral agency must be continually directed and refined by the Holy Spirit.
Throughout history, the Church has often refined and developed her understanding of several things. For example, the Church’s involvement in the Crusades and even the “teaching” disseminated at that time regarding “just” war looks markedly different from current official teaching which is actually much more non-violent in its approach. And with regard to sexual ethics, there has been incredible development in the past several decades (thanks in large part to personalists such as Karol Wojtyla) to adopt a positive sexual ethic free of the negativity which dominated sexual morality for centuries. Is there something at the core of these teaching that remains unchanged? Yes! And this is probably what you’re getting at. But looking at how certain teachings have evolved with our understanding and the Holy Spirit’s inspiration, it’s rather difficult to honestly say that teachings haven’t changed and will never change. All I’m saying is that we must be careful when we say “never”!
On that note, I agree that the Pope is not saying here that condom use can be considered moral in this or that circumstance. However, I do believe he is recognizing the pastoral need to reach out and meet people where they’re at (as you said) and could even be laying the groundwork for development in this area of Church teaching. For example, I’ve heard that there is an ongoing discussion in the Vatican about the possibility of the moral good of condom use for married couples who wish to share in God’s plan for their sexuality when one partner is infected with a STI. Ideally, conjugal love should mirror the full, total, free love of God, and in a perfect world neither spouse would be infected. But what about individuals who contracted HIV through a blood transfusion or from their mother during childbirth? It would be morally irresponsible for those individuals to knowingly infect their spouses, but does this deny them marital relationships which, according to Church teaching, necessarily require sexual expression? In the end, the intention matters a whole lot! And if the intention is to prevent infection, could the act be considered morally acceptable though less than ideal? I’m not making an argument one way or another, but this discussion is happening now. And Benedict’s comments suggest that sometimes there may indeed be a “less than ideal,” though acceptable, moral response, a sort of “doing the best with what you’ve got” scenario.
Regardless, the real issue here is that many media are misinterpreting the Holy Father’s statements which, given their mode of delivery, don’t even carry a significant amount of weight in terms of Church authority. We have a lot of work to do in order to evangelize, catechize, and educate the public about what the Church believes and how it works. If these opinions/sentiments were to evolve into something more definitive in terms of Church teaching, it would certainly take a very long time to do so. May the Spirit continue to guide and lead us towards a more abundant life in Christ!