 |
The Vatican has blood on their hands |
 |
At a concert in Rome on the first of May 2007 the Italian comedian Andrea Rivera declared “The Pope doesn’t believe in evolution and he is right, the church has never evolved”. I was reminded of these words today whilst reading about the reaffirmation of the Vatican’s opposition to condom use by Pope Benedict. The only defence for this position that his spokesman, Federico Lombardi, could offer today was that he was “maintaining the position of his predecessors”.
Unfortunately there was no better argument made by the Vatican as this position is indefensible. Condom use has been proven in numerous studies and in practice to reduce the rate of HIV infection. Today there are over 22 million people in Sub Saharan Africa with HIV and every weapon available is needed to fight this disease that his destroyed lives and communities across the continent.
The Pope’s words are not insignificant, in many villages in impoverished regions across the world, the priest may be one of few literate residents and is therefore a source of authority. The church’s position has affected the policies of health institutions around the world, and is itself a major provider of care for AIDS victims. This continued policy of refusing to accept condoms as an important method of fighting the disease means that surely more people will die. The Vatican has blood on its hands.
The Church’s position is not only wrong in terms of science, we know that for them this is of no concern to them. The Church’s position is also wrong in their judgment of their own laws and scriptures. The biblical texts are often criticized as being contradictory, but they are necessarily so. The scriptures were intended as a guide to life and in our lives we so often have to make choices between two morally difficult propositions. In this case the Church has chosen a disrespect for human life over the sin of Onan. It is a choice that is beyond comprehension.
I myself have very strong feelings about the Pope’s position on this - as well as the Catholic Church’s position.
But you misunderstand or misrepresent the Pope and the Church’s positions regarding science. The current pope for example said:
“This clash [between evolution and faith] is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”
The Catholic Church has historically clashed with scientists, but has come to accept most of it - or at least, most of science as it was understood in the 1960s. The Church always accepts things with a bit of a lag time. In comparison to evangelical Christians and other right-wing groups, the Catholic Church takes a reasonable if a bit outdated stand.
Also - your theological argument is a bit off. Onanism isn’t really seen as the basis for the Church’s policy on birth control anymore. And though the teaching has a basis in Scripture, it is nowhere near as direct as you suggest. Even the arguments of Humanae Vitae are generally considered passe. Pope John Paul II proposed a Martin Buber-inspired criticism of birth control as pope - as a kind of physical lie between partners - that is now one of the main bases for the teaching. But the real base is rather openly acknowledged - that the officialdom of the Catholic Church has a particular theological understanding of what sex is - and that underlies the Church’s mainly consistent teachings on sexual matters for the past two thousand years. To question this now would undermine everything. It’s about protecting credibility.
None of this excuses the pope’s recent comments - which given his general acceptance of scientific facts and theological definitions of falsehoods - are clearly a lie. But your understanding of why it was wrong given the Catholic Church’s internal logic isn’t quite right.
That was unfortunate for me and for everyone who believes in God is to hear that the Roman Catholic Church called the Church.
That is unfortunate that the Pope would call representative of God on earth, as it is far from being so.
The Bible does not contradict, contrary, they are great mysteries that men need to be understood.
Did they ask for forgiveness again for more deaths?
What is apologizing again and again?
The Spirit of God is written in the Bible, guides us to all truth. ” There is definitely a different spirit to that church.
Shame on God and true believers, so call us ignorant.
That gives me grief.
I live in Chile and the Catholic church is strong here, imagine how you do not have the benefit that is Roman Catholic.
The rest of us are embarrassed all the time, but has yet to be.
Saludos desde Chile. Estos temas son muy interesantes y debes ser valiente para hablarlo. Le felicito.
Se?or Joe, el problema es que han muerto millones por malas decisiones tomadas. Estas no son cifras, son almas, tales como la suya o la mia.
La ciencia tambien comete errores pero no toman el nombre de Dios en vano.
Jesucristo, el Se?or, unico representante de Dios en la tierra, vino a sanar y salvar vidas.
Dios permitio la muerte de injustos, no de fieles servidores o peque?os del reino.
George no necesita mas pruebas, es evidente. Los ciegos no ven, tal vez deba usted lavar sus ojos o pedir ver.
Joe Campbell, the problem is that millions have died due to bad decisions. These are not figures, they are souls, like yours or mine.
Science also makes mistakes but do not take God’s name in vain.
Jesus Christ, the Lord, the only representative of God on earth, came to heal and save lives.
God allowed the death of unfair, not loyal servants of the kingdom or small.
George does not need more evidence, it is obvious. The blind do not see, maybe you should wash your eyes or ask to see.
I think you are way off on this whole condom issue. I understood the Pope as meaning that condoms are not the answer. Not saying that they are bad or anything else. Just simply that they are not the answer. If everyone only had sex in marriage AIDS infection would significantly decrease. People would only have one partner in life rather than multiple ones. This would obviously have an affect on AIDS spread. The pope and any believer in the bible might feel this way. Ultimately I do not believe condoms will stop AIDS spread completely, but If we all only had sex in marriage we would do a far better job at stopping AIDS. I think that is more what the pope meant. By the way I am in no way against condoms, I just understand what the Pope meant.
That’s a logic which flies in the face of human nature. It’s liek saying, “If no one was greedy, the financial meltdown never would have happened. Therefore, the slution is greater regulation, it’s just to tell everyone not to be greedy.”
People are going to be greedy, no matter what we say. We need financial structures and rules that account for that. And people are going to have sex outside of marriage, no matter what the church or anybody else says. We need health programs that account for reality, not the way things “should” be.
Let me correct my typos:
(In the first paragraph) - It’s like saying, “If no one was greedy, the financial meltdown never would have happened. Therefore, the solution is not greater regulation, it’s just to tell everybody not to be greedy.”
to Brandon -
That certainly is the most defensible way to look at what the Pope said. But, being a rather literate guy, he could have said that. Instead, he claimed that condoms worsen the problem of AIDS. This is a lie. But one that he finds it necessary to believe/say because it is the only way to justify an irrational and destructive church policy that opposes the use of condoms even in a marriage.
Church doctrine clearly states that it is better for an HIV positive partner to have sex without a condom than with, even within a marriage, because the evil of artificial contraception is “inherent.” This is a ridiculous position that is far from biblical teaching and seems contrary to the experience of the majority of Catholics in the world.
And if we are to look at human nature honestly, condoms are still a much more effective means of preventing the spread of HIV than monogamy. Condoms are 99% effective. A significantly lower percentage of marriages in the history of the world have ever been completely monogamous. Even if only 2% of marriages involved a cheating partner, it would still involve a higher percentage of people being exposed to HIV than if everyone used condoms.
True Jim Moss.
I think you got it.
For now, the world will not stop homosexuality or premarital relations, and HIV will continue even in those couples who are married and have HIV, and infidelity is difficult to curb.
Well my theme but condoms are not the power or abuse of power by the “Church”.
—————————————
Es cierto Jim Moss.
Yo creo que te entendi.
Por ahora, el mundo no va a parar la homosexualidad, ni las relaciones prematrimoniales, y el Sida seguira incluso en aquellas parejas que estan casadas y tienen sida, y la infidelidad dificilmente se frenara.
Bueno mi tema no son los condones sino el poder o abuso de poder de la llamada “Iglesia”.
Thank you for making this information available. I have added a link to my Blog and hope that many others read your erudite words. The Vatican has so much blood…over one million deaths in the crusades so they could get “tithes” from the Eastern Empires, their unholy alliance with Nazi Germany in WW2 - ever wonder why Hitler did not invade the Vatican to gain resources for their War Effort? The Vatican stored the gold of the Nazis and quietly allowed six million Jews to die.
The Vatican openly supported Hitler’s invasion of Russia because it would prove the vision of Fatima, more than twenty million dead there….now they use more subtle means, cutting population means cutting revenue…the Vatican needs the money. More people will live to pay money into their coffers than will die from AIDS before they have had an opportunity to give. Why use condoms and reduce the wealth of the Vatican? No, the popes would never allow that.
Keep writing about the abuses of the Vatican, maybe someday people will wake up and stop sending them money…when they are poor, they may remember what the bible was really teaching.