The Vatican newspaper has betrayed the Pope

by Phil Lawler, November 22, 2010

Pope Benedict has not changed the Churchs teachings, or even intimated that they might be subject to change.
The o!y "ather has not ca!!ed #or a ne$ debate on the mora!ity o# contraception. e has not suggested that
condom use might sometimes be mora!!y justi#iab!e.
%et today mi!!ions o# peop!e around the $or!d be!ieve that the Ponti## has changed Church teaching, has opened
the &uestion o# contraception #or debate, and has justi#ied condom use in some circumstances. o$ did that
happen'
%et again, Pope Benedict has been bad!y served by his pub!ic(re!ations sta##. )n this case, the *atican
ne$spaper, LOsservatore Romano bears most o# the b!ame #or a tru!y disastrous ga##e.
An exciting book project subverted
The stories that are dominating media coverage o# the *atican this $ee+ can be traced to an intervie$ in $hich
Pope Benedict ,*) responded to &uestions #rom the -erman journa!ist Peter .ee$a!d. That intervie$ $as the
basis #or an e/citing ne$ boo+, Light of the World , $hich is due #or pub!ication this $ee+.
The boo+ is the 0rd such co!!aborative e##ort bet$een the Pope and .ee$a!d. But it is the #irst since Benedict
,*) assumed the Chair o# Peter, and the notion that a reigning Ponti## $ou!d submit to a boo+(!ength intervie$
is a sensation in itse!#. 1eaders $ho e/pect something very specia! #rom such a boo+ $i!! not be disappointed.
Light of the World is indeed sensationa!.
2s an intervie$er .ee$a!d does his job $e!!. e respect#u!!y but persistent!y pressed the Pope to e/p!ain his
thin+ing on a host o# issues, many o# them controversia!. Pope Benedict, #or his part, is candid and !ucid,
presenting his thoughts $ith that simp!e c!arity that ma+es him such a great natura! teacher. )n Light of the
World the reader $i!! #ind the Ponti##s honest thoughts on topics such as3
the nature o# papa! in#a!!ibi!ity and Petrine authority4
the rea! reason #or !i#ting e/communications on the traditiona!ist bishops o# the
.ociety o# .t. Pius ,4
the !imits o# dia!ogue $ith )s!am4
the possibi!ity o# a papa! resignation4
the message o# "atima4
the day(to(day !i#e o# the aposto!ic pa!ace4
the true causes o# the se/(abuse scanda! and the prospects #or re#orm.
5n every one o# these topics, this reader #ound the Popes remar+s re#reshing!y honest and thought(provo+ing.
The o!y "ather o##ers a number o# #ascinating reve!ations, a!ong $ith an enormous amount o# pro#ound
theo!ogica! re#!ection. The boo+ is, again, sensationa!.
Those o# us $ho received advance copies o# Light of the World $ere to!d that the text was under a very strict
embargo. We were forbidden to uote from it, cite it, or even make any specific reve!ations about its
content unti! the #orma! !aunch o# the boo+ this $ee+. .uch embargos are not unusua! in the $or!d o# pub!ishing
6a!though the pub!ishers $ere unusua!!y stern about it in this case7, and pro#essiona! journa!ists routine!y honor
them.
Then, incredib!y, the *aticans o$n ne$spaper vio!ated the embargo. Betraying the pub!ishers and brea+ing
trust $ith a!! the other journa!ists $ho $ere #u!#i!!ing their promises, LOsservatore Romano reproduced a
passage #rom the Popes intervie$. 2nd not just any passage. The *atican ne$spaper reproduced8$ithout
e/p!anation or comment8a passage in $hich Pope Benedict re#!ected on the possibi!ity that in some e/treme
cases, the impu!se to use a condom might sho$ a #!ic+ering o# unse!#ishness in a serious!y corrupted conscience.
9oreover, LOsservatore bro+e the embargo, and pub!ished the e/cerpt, during a $ee+end $hen the *atican
$as happi!y distracted by a consistory. 2t a time $hen Church !eaders shou!d have been ce!ebrating a joyous
occasion8the e!evation o# 2: members to the Co!!ege o# Cardina!s8top *atican o##icia!s $ere scramb!ing to
e/p!ain the Pope"s words, $hich had been pub!ished premature!y and outside of their proper context.
The !aunch o# Light of the World shou!d have been another joy#u! occasion. ;ith appropriate p!anning, the
pub!isher $as poised to introduce the Popes boo+ $ith a major pub!icity campaign. No$ that pub!icity8$hich
might have o##ered an accurate and #avorab!e portraya! o# the Popes boo+8$i!! be near!y !ost in the de!uge o#
misin#ormation current!y s$eeping across the $or!d.
What the Pope said#and did not say
5# a!! the passages that might have been cu!!ed out o# the boo+, LOsservatore Romano chose some specu!ative
remar+s by the Ponti## on the subject o# condom use. 2ny capab!e journa!ist shou!d have rea!i<ed in advance
that these remar+s $ou!d be misinterpreted8especia!!y $hen they $ere presented out o# conte/t.
)n the passage that LOsservatore pub!ished, Pope Benedict $as not bac+ing a$ay #rom ear!ier statements, in
$hich he had said that the distribution o# condoms is not the proper $ay to #ight the spread o# 2)=.. 5n the
contrary, the Pope was defending that stand$ "ar #rom retracting his previous $ords, the o!y "ather $as
e/p!aining and e!aborating on them.
)n that conte/t, $hen .ee$a!d pressed him on the &uestion o# $hether condom use might ever be advisab!e, the
Pope rep!ied3
There may be a basis in the case o# some individua!s, as perhaps $hen a ma!e prostitute uses
a condom, $here this can be a first step in the direction of a mora!i%ation, a #irst assumption
of responsibi!ity, on the $ay toward recovering an awareness that not everything is a!!owed
and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not rea!!y the way to dea! with the evi!
of &'V infection. That can rea!!y !ie on!y in a humani<ation o# se/ua!ity.
;hen .ee$a!d as+ed #or a c!ari#ication, the Pope uick!y added that the (hurch can never regard condom
use as a real or moral solution.
Notice that in his hypothetica! e/amp!e, the Pope spo+e o# a male prostitute, presumab!y invo!ved in
homose/ua! acts. .o the uestion of contraception#the main reason for the (hurch"s opposition to
condoms#was removed from the euation. This prostitute is engaged in pro#ound!y immora! acts. The
Pope does not suggest that the use of a condom wou!d make his prostitution !ess immora!4 he says on!y that
by recogni<ing the imperative to protect his se/ua! partner, the theoretica! prostitute is ma+ing a sma!! step
to$ard proper mora! reasoning.
ere the Pope $as ma+ing a theoretica! point, not a practica! one. e $as not teaching, but e/p!aining a point.
e $as not spea+ing $ith authority8in #act, ear!ier in the boo+ he had e/p!ained $hy nothing the Pope says in
an interview shou!d be regarded as authoritative8but specu!ating. )othing in what the Pope said, or the
way he said it, ref!ects any change in the (hurch"s teaching.
)n her he!p#u! e/p!anation o# the Popes $ords, >anet .mith observed that the Holy Father is not making a
point about whether the use of a condom is contraceptie or een whether it reduces the eil of a homose!ual
se!ual act" again, he is speaking about the psychological state of some who might use condoms. To p!ace
the Popes specu!ative remar+s about the ma!e prostitute in the proper conte/t, .mith o##ered an ana!ogy o# her
o$n3
)# someone $as going to rob a ban+ and $as determined to use a gun, it $ou!d better #or that person
to use a gun that had no bu!!ets in it. )t $ou!d reduce the !i+e!ihood o# #ata! injuries. But it is not the
tas+ o# the Church to instruct potentia! ban+ robbers ho$ to rob ban+s more sa#e!y and certain!y not
the tas+ o# the Church to support programs o# providing potentia! ban+ robbers $ith guns that cou!d
not use bu!!ets.
*ourna!istic incompetence
)# it is not the task of the Church to give sa#ety tips to ban+ robbers and homose/ua! prostitutes, $hy did the
Pope o##er that e/amp!e' )n the conte/t o# a !engthy conversation, $ith a sympathetic intervie$er, it is easy to
see ho$ the Pope might have been tempted to$ard specu!ative remar+s. But in the $ee+s bet$een the time o#
the intervie$ and the date o# pub!ication, did no one at the *atican recogni<e the !i+e!ihood that the Popes
$ords $ou!d be yan+ed out o# conte/t' =id any authoritative *atican o##icia! vet the te/t o# the intervie$, to
ensure that the Popes ans$ers to .ee$a!d $ere not subject to con#usion and?or misinterpretation' )# not, then
this ponti#icate is no$ su##ering #rom another se!#(in#!icted $ound. .ure!y any capab!e journa!ist $ou!d have
recogni<ed the potentia! #or troub!e, immediate!y upon reading the Popes $ords. 2nyone a!ert to the rhythms
o# everyday pub!ic debate $ou!d have been ab!e to $arn the Ponti## that his subt!e distinctions about the
mora!ity o# condom use $ou!d be !ost upon the secu!ar media. >e## 9i!!er ma+es a $itty re#erence to the
@-inger #actorA3 the tendency o# journa!ists, $hen they encounter a mention o# condoms, to b!oc+ out a!!
other $ords. .ecu!ar journa!ists, reading the Popes $ords in the #ate#u! paragraph above, $ou!d as+ themse!ves
on!y $hether the Ponti## $as a!!o$ing #or the possibi!ity o# condom use, and conc!ude that he $as. .o
inevitab!y the Popes statement $ou!d be seen as opening a !oopho!e in Church teaching.
%et it $as the *aticans o$n journa!ists, at LOsservatore Romano, $ho put the Popes $ords in print $ithout
any proper introduction, any e##ort to put the Ponti##s thoughts in conte/t. The Popes statement $as bound to
stir up troub!e4 its premature pub!ication in the *atican ne$spaper e/acerbated the prob!em.
)n past months LOsservatore Romano has o#ten embarrassed the *atican, $ith pueri!e artic!es gushing about
the merits o# 9ichae! >ac+son, the Beat!es, and The Simpsons . But this editoria! b!under is #ar more serious.
;ith its gross mishand!ing o# this very serious issue, the Vatican newspaper has given rise to a wor!dwide
confusion on a very important mora! issue#damage that it may take years of painstaking work to undo.
Ironically, the messae of this ood and !rilliant "ope has !een ho!!led nearly as much !y the !afflin
failures of some of his o#n aides as !y unfriendly coverae from the #orld$s media, $rites 2rchbishop Char!es
Chaput #or %irst Thins . "or the $e!#are o# the Church, these pub!ic(re!ations debac!es must end.
;hy did LOsservatore Romano vio!ate journa!istic norms, ignore obvious dangers, and print a potentia!!y
e/p!osive statement out o# its proper conte/t' ;as the editor hoping to stir up a ruc+us, and push sa!es o# Light
of the World regard!ess o# the pastora! cost' ;as he hoping to stir up a ne$ debate on condom use8something
the Pope $as &uite obvious!y not see+ing' 5r $as the editor b!ind to the dangers o# pub!ishing this e/cerpt'
Whatever the answer might be, he has demonstrated that his editoria! judgment cannot be trusted. 2s a
necessary first step to address the continuous pub!ic+re!ations bung!ing at the Vatican, ,iovanni -aria
Vian, the editor of L#$sseratore %omano shou!d be asked to resign.
http3??$$$.catho!iccu!ture.org?commentary?artic!es.c#m')=B:C: