Consequences of Vatican II
Verbal Acrobatics on Condoms
Lyle J. Arnold, Jr.
On December 15, 2010 in the Paul VI Hall at the Vatican, a scandalous carnival-type act was performed by male acrobatics for Pope Ratzinger and various Prelates. Some 6,000 guests were in attendance, including nuns old and young. The unrestrained delight in their faces was captured on film.
The fleshy performance was not only in itself prima facie reprehensibly inappropriate exhibition for the Vicar of Christ to sponsor. The immorality of this show was multiplied by the first act of the show, a striptease by the acrobats. The black art of striptease places an emphasis on the act itself of disrobing with the single objective of sexual arousal (Wikipedia). In the West the “strip club” is the normal venue where striptease is performed. Hence, the Paul VI Hall has taken on the genus, literally, of a strip club.
The stripping revealed the Apollo-type physiques of the Pellegrini Brothers, four well-known Italian acrobats. A cameo part was played by a young woman clad in skin-tight leather, whose only task was to ceremoniously gather up the cast-off upper clothing of the performers. The Pellegrini Brothers are homosexual-friendly, having lent their fame to the homosexual agenda by performing in the Barcelona Gay Circus. One cannot resist speculation that, with the leather-lady included, the show was engineered to appeal to the lusts of both heterosexuals and homosexuals. A standing ovation was given by Benedict and the Prelates on stage.
A striptease at the Vatican and delighted sisters
This was a circus of pagan Rome revisited, and a sequel most apropos following the November release of the Pope's new book Light of the World, wherein its author countenanced the use of condoms for safe sex when the act is unrelated to reproduction. Obviously a new window was opened to the world,' but Benedict's unrestricted fans were quick to parrot a now-tiresome screed that nothing has changed.
After the Pope's deplorable statement effectively allowing condom use for safe sex, his supporters quickly instituted a campaign of damage control that can only be called more acrobatics, this time in verbal form. Reading the lines of defense of the Pope's permission, one finds a stage team of “conservative” apologists trying to justify the papal statement. It was a new show of acrobatics, this time a performance of verbal pirouettes, back flips and cartwheels that surpassed the Pope's Pellegrini Brothers show.
The general proclamation that nothing changed with his words on condoms is just another repetition of the lie that has plagued Catholics since Vatican II. It is the same introduction and juggling of terms used to justify the novelties of Vatican II.
The Catholic Voice headline, for example, reads: “Condom comments show pastoral concern” (John Travis, Catholic News Service, Dec. 13, 2010, p. 6) The article affirms that “Pope Benedict XVI's comments about condoms represented a ‘normal and traditional’ pastoral application of moral theology.” It pretends to explain the papal statement with a moral theological term called “gradualism,” i.e. the use of a condom as “a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility.”
The general public perception is that something changed...
The same journalist appeals to “moral casuistry, a method that tries to determine appropriate moral responses to particular cases and circumstances.” It seems to me that these statements are nothing but platitudes, with no evidence presented to show any basis in Church teaching.
The article ends with another pirouette of relevance, to wit: “The Pope knows what he is talking about. He is the supreme teacher.” In other words, ‘The Pope is right because he is Pope.’ The reality, unfortunately, is not so simple. St. Paul warns us that even if an Angel appears teaching us something different from the Faith, we should not follow him, but rather the Faith (Gal 1:8). The same applies to a Pope.
For Travis, the Pope's support for the use of condoms “shows pastoral concern,” and it is “traditional.” How can the Pope's concern be anything but a profane sentiment? And since his proclamation introduces something wholly new, it is impossible that it is traditional. Anyone with even one eye open can see that this new papal position regarding condoms is nothing but the application of the age-old cliché, “If you can't be good, be careful.” In issuing this new opinion, the Pope once again showed that the Church is following and joining the modern world.
In my opinion, the most mind-numbing statement is from the Pope's book, Light of the World:
Benedict XVI, with Seewald at the Vatican, defends condom use as a lesser evil
“She [the prostitute] of course does not regard it (condom use) as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be, nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way of living sexuality.”
Let's break this down. Using condoms to prevent a STD is not the solution for leading a moral life. Leaving this aside, let us continue. By committing a mortal sin against the Sixth or Ninth Commandment with the aim of not infecting the accomplice in sin, the sinner supposedly begins to lead a more human way of living sexually.
This statement is so abstruse and convoluted as to be unintelligible. The action of using a condom for safe sex – regardless that the sin committed is one of gravity – would have some merit. Whence comes this merit? By the sinner moving toward being more humanly alive in the way he lives his sexuality.
Not being a moral theologian, I've never heard of “gradualism” as used above. However, I have heard of it in a different sense that applies to a gradual degradation of customs. It was the principle of gradualism that led from the somber first attire for sea bathing among the high French society before 1830 to the use of the bikini in the 1960s. It is the principle of gradualism that likewise explains how the elegance of feminine dress in the 1850s was reduced to today's ubiquitous use of females wearing trousers. As Prof. Plinio points out in his article on Gradualism, “purely and simply, it is a monstrous subversion of the natural order.”
May Our Lady of Prompt Succor utilize the mega-scandals like the ones described above to recruit more soldiers for her army of counter-revolutionaries.
Posted March 7, 2011, 2010
Related Topics of Interest
The Pellegrini Scandal
Who's to Blame for the Pellegrini Scandal?
Benedict on Condoms: A Forgotten Paragraph
Schizophrenia at the Vatican?
Could You Clarify the CDF 'Clarification'?
The Newspeak of Progressivism
Gradualism, the Devious Law for Evil to Progress
Our Lady of Prompt Succor
|Related Works of Interest|
Vatican II | Hot Topics | Home | Books | CDs | Search | Contact Us | Donate
Tradition in Action, Inc. All Rights Reserved