to think that the catholic church are bloody immoral and need to be made answerable to the shit they seem to get away with?

[cupcakesandbunting]

I am referring to this; www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11061296

and yes, I am totally aware that the police and government are to blame too but we expect governments and to an extent police, to be corrupt.

I am saying this as a RC too. I am fucking shocked at the amount of revolting crap that the church seem to get away with. Covering up paedophiles/abusers, bombers and who knows what else.

Why are they never made accountable?

And personalising it would be the right way to go onagar? I don't wear my faith on my sleeve (except on here!). I am capable of having a conversation about pretty much most things without bringing religion into it. In fact, I've noticed a good way to get your carefully thought out position on an issue dismissed out of hand is for people to know you have a religious faith. I don't evangelise (at all!), and I suspect most people, except my very good friends, don't know I am a Catholic. I think they assume I have no faith at all. It is generally assumed of scientists I find. Would then, if we were friends, you drop me like a stone if you found out I was Catholic? Just because I was Catholic. I'm sure the idea of some kind of marking out was just hyperbole, but really, given the obvious connections, how very horrible.

And no edam, it is completely bloody impossible to have any repect for the Catholic Church right now.

math: Of course not all African men are Catholic, nor are all the people in all the other places where HIV/lack of contraception is a problem. But there are loads and loads of catholics - a billion perhaps? The "all the other boys are doing it too!" argument is actually not as powerful as you might think . The idea that the Catholic church shouldn't change its stance, because other churches (which presumably Catholics would think were wrong in many other theological ways) haven't yet changed theirs is laughable.

Pointing to a list of atrocities carried out in Africa - which let's remember is a whole continent, sometimes I feel like people talk about it as if it is one place, there is huge variation between countries - is not going to let the Pope off the hook either.

It seems incredible to me that anyone can put this argument. No-one has ever claimed that the Catholic church starting to condone condom use would mean rainbows and puppies for all African women. But this site estimates that 149 million people in Africa (17% of the population) are baptised Catholics. Presumably they hearken somewhat to what the Pope says (and if not, why the hell are we paying for the man to travel the world?) and he's saying don't use condoms, it's the perfect excuse not to use them.

I an honestly aghast as someone said above that the spilling of seed (oh noooo) is considered more heinous than preventing access to condoms in an HIV crisis :(

And it's not that the Catholic Church advocates fidelity and abstinence over condon use in the battle against HIV - it's that the Catholic Church says that condoms do not work. And this is a message - with no scientific basis - that is disseminated to Catholics and non0-Catholics alike.

I think it probably is that it is a good excuse not to use them, as sex outside marriage is of course also forbidden, so sex outside marriage with no condom isn't actually any better than with a condom in the 'good catholic' scheme of things. But the position on barrier contraception seems indefensible to me when in most parish churches you can access training in natural contraception methods. I would suggest that a large number of catholics in developed countries use artificial contraception as a matter of course. I think that the church in Africa should be promoting behaviours that could work to reduce the spread of HIV, as the right and Christian thing to be doing. Now, I don't have a problem with chastity coming into that, but using a condom when you do have sex should too.

Genuine question - how many catholics that you know do use contraception? I assumed (went to RC school, have lots of RC friends) that nowadays in the western world it was accepted, even in RC circles.

Exactly, TFM. Saying "whatever you do, don't use a condom" (including within marriage) is the least helpful thing. And restricting access to condoms for those who would use them is also grotesque.

The catholics I know seem to have on average 5 kids, so without actually asking them about their use of contraception, I would assume there is a bit of a compromise going on here.

Five kids? I wonder if they are the obvious catholics IYSWIM? There are some of those at church, and onagar really wouldn't need his badge to know that they were RC. They are out!! I have two. We use condoms. No one in my family has more than two. Two/three seems about average in my church.

On that matter, bearing in mind that, like many teenagers, catholics are often sexually active before marriage, I know of at least five catholic friends who have had abortions.

I just don't understand the notion that contraception is bad in this day and age. Regardless of HIV, other diseases and fidelity, surely, whether or not you agree with abortion (personally I don't), contraception is a better option?

(sorry, so many commas in there....)

Well, I don;t think the Church necessarily has to take a pragmatic view, so much as a logically consistent one (even if I may disagree with it). As I said, they actively promote natural contraceptive methods, but ban barrier methods. I find that indefensible.

Yeah TFM, exactly. If they were saying "no sex unless babies are the intention" that would be one thing (although IMO mad but still). It's the hypocrisy. It's ok for married heterosexual couples to have sex while trying to prevent pregnancy. But it's not ok for people to use condoms because they prevent pregnancy. Where do they draw the line? Any contraceptive method that is more than 31.357% effective (made up) is against God's Law?

daftpunk - I don't know you. I don't know your posts on other threads. I've no idea if you vote BNP or Labour or RESPECT (nor is it any of my business unless you choose to tell me). I don't look at your posts and think anything at all about the fact that they are your posts. I just read them.

Thank you for the apology re: propaganda.

I don't want to force my ideals on to anyone. But I would like to understand the ideals of others. And I genuinely do not understand the point of not having books with homosexual couples in. Because outside of catholic schools, homosexual couples do exist and one day these kids will leave school. I don't understand why it's not possible to educate children about the diversity in the world, whilst at the same time raising them in your particular faith. In the end wouldn't we end up with more tolerant youngsters who can live alongside one another peaceably, even if they don't agree with one another?

Not having these books seems to create the kind of false environment that makes it very difficult to adjust later on in life.

I don't dislike Catholics. And I don't want to put you down. I do dislike the organisation (or the actions of individual members if you prefer) and I dislike some of your beliefs. If, as I said before, I found them to be harmless and only affecting those who chose to engage with them I would shut up. But I don't.

"You say that condoms are very un-African, and that "many people in Africa are butt ignorant of basic science". Why could this be? Could it be due to the fact that the RC church and other misogynistic and hierarchical organisations such as the Church of LDS have restricted access to education on such matters?"

LOL.

I know there's at least one high school for girls, run by Catholic missionary nuns, in Nigeria, that now has a fully equipped physics lab because the children of my DCs' school and my parish had a massive fundraising effort that paid for it, and for necessary supplies. Hopefully the girls who are students there will not be married off by their families and will be able to continue their studies to professional level.

Missionaries have built hospitals and clinics and trained and equipped travelling nurses and midwives. My OB/GYN years ago did a 6 month stint in Senegal teaching nurses there how to surgically repair vaginal fistulas caused by traumatic unattended deliveries to girls who were far too young to bear babies. They were married off by their families at or before menarche. This problem will disappear when the Pope says it's ok to use condoms? And it's just fine and dandy to marry off a child of 12 because the child's husband will use condoms until they decide to start a family? The idea that African men need some excuse not to use condoms is ridiculous. The reality is that if you are a very poor woman in Africa, your life is worth nothing, and no amount of condom availability will change that.

"Presumably they hearken somewhat to what the Pope says (and if not, why the hell are we paying for the man to travel the world?) and he's saying don't use condoms, it's the perfect excuse not to use them." Why would you assume anyone harkens to the Pope just because of the one-of event of baptism?

"The idea that the Catholic church shouldn't change its stance, because other churches (which presumably Catholics would think were wrong in many other theological ways) haven't yet changed theirs is laughable."

Now where did I say that? If you're going to debate, at least read what I said.

Men who are going to sleep with prostitutes or behave promiscuously are not going to hang on every word the Pope says, in Africa or in the UK or anywhere else. Has the teaching of the Catholic Church given any promiscuous man pause, ever, anywhere?

If the Catholic church stopped telling lies about condoms, it might help to limit the spread of AIDS. I thought telling lies was a sin? And I'm not sure the Jesus I read about in the Gospels would approve of a church acting in a way that results in the suffering and premature death of thousands if not millions of men, women and children.

If the Church would just shut up about condoms - preach that sex should be within marriage but stop opposing condoms - that might help.

Absolutely edam.

I am a practicing catholic and am shocked by the way the Irish Church in particular has been so involved in cover ups. However, as most people would say, if you belive all catholics should leave because of this then you should ask all moslems to stop their faith because of those clerics in London mosques that preached hatred.

I personally believe that the Pope should have got more involved and purged the Church. However, my religion is personal and I believe if everybody took this attitude, religion would have much less effect on politics and hatred. I am not a catholic to preach to others and have to say I have lost a lot of respect for the heirarchy but there are plenty of good law-abiding kind catholics out there as there are others.

By the way I use contraceptives and only have two children. I do not remember the Bible saying that contraceptives should not be used and therefore also disagree with the Pope on this one plus I believe priest should be married. Again, nothing in the Bible about that. That little rule was introduced to control the priests by the Pope at the time.

My sister had a civil partnership last year and I fully supported her and therefore my DCs are very knowledgeable about these types of relationships. I do think the Church needs to start being more open with both the people inside and outside the Church.

Have only read the first page and the last page of this thread and I see it has gone from

"Any Catholics in the modern era who do not renounce their ties with the church are guilty of supporting the rapists"

to a discussion on condoms - so fairly typical of any thread with 'catholic' in the title it seems

I've been to a 'hard core' catholic lecture on birth control, natural family planning and similar issues, and what they actually said was that condoms are not 100% reliable, which is a scientific fact. The primary line and whole theme was in fact that sex should be within marriage. I genuinely think that the church tries to avoid discussions on condoms because it wants to concentrate on putting across it's main message without compromise. The whole philosophy of the church (which I admire) is that we should aim for Christlike perfection. It is never going to say, 'You should really not be having sex outside of marriage, but we know you won't live up to that so this is what you should really do...'

ElephantsAndMiasmas, the church teaches that any artificial means of preventing a new life being formed is wrong. Intercourse between two consenting adults within marriage is always OK, whether it is at an infertile or fertile time. Hence natural family planning (NFP)can be used to prevent the conception of further children if there is a genuine unselfish reason for this. If used properly NFP is an extremely effective method, and I would suggest anyone who suggests otherwise goes and reads up about it!

Fsmail you are completely right that we are all entitled to our own beliefs. However, if you go solely on what the bible says your beliefs are Christian rather than specifically catholic. Not saying this is a bad thing by the way! Just wanted to point it out and make it clear that the catholic church is based on the catechism as well as the bible.

(FreddoBaggyMac, great post.)

Why are artificial, specifically barrier, mathods wrong, and natural methods right FBM? If natural methods are effective, why is it better to do that than use a condom?

With natural family planning you are not doing anything artificial to prevent the forming of a life, you are leaving it up to God to decide whether a baby is created or not and trusting in God. Any other method is turning sex into something performed purely for its own sake which according to church teaching (you may not agree!) ultimately leads to a lack of respect for the act itself and between the partners.

A quote I read somewhere describes it better than I can; "There is a real difference between preventing something from being and choosing not to cause something to be." With NFP the couple simply chooses, for good reasons, not to cause a baby to be. Artificial means of contraception are preventing it.

Another point is that NFP only really works for couples in a long-term loving relationship. It cannot be 'spur of the moment' in the way that artficial methods can. again, you may think that this is a bad thing but it is in line with the idea that sex should only be performed within marriage.