What the Pope really said

George Weigel quotes Janet Smith, a professor at Sacred Heart Major Seminary, who has an interesting analogy to further explain what the Pope was explaining when he was talking about how the use of a condom by a male prostitute might be a sign that the man was taking some kind of basic responsibility for his actions--in contrast to what the theological illiterates in the media said he was saying:

If someone was going to rob a bank and was determined to use a gun, it would be better for that person to use a gun that had no bullets in it [for that] would reduce the likelihood of fatal injuries. But it is not the task of the Church to instruct potential bank robbers how to rob banks more safely and certainly not the task of the Church to support programs of providing potential bank robbers with guns that could not use bullets. Nonetheless, the intent of a bank robber to rob a bank in a way that is safer for employees and customers of the bank may indicate an element of moral responsibility that could be a step towards eventual understanding of the immorality of bank robbing.

Read the rest here.

HT: Francis Beckwith

Does Britain have a Catholic future?

George Neumayr gives a post mortem (should we say a post vitam?) on the Pope's visit to England:

In World War II, Great Britain survived an atheistic assault from outside the country. Today’s “Battle of Britain” comes from an atheistic assault inside it. British culture is crumpling under the growing weight of a fervent secularism that appears religious and an exhausted state religion that appears secular. The once-claimed sturdy Anglican bridge between Christianity and the modern world has largely collapsed, leaving those thrashing around down below it to swim from the Thames to the Tiber or drown.

The Catholic Church in the United Kingdom, to be sure, has her own problems, but, as Pope Benedict’s historic September visit to Britain suggested, the country’s future could end up looking like its distant Catholic past. Pope Benedict stepped into the battle for that future not as a triumphant warrior but as a humble witness to the truth and grace contained in Christ’s Church.

Read the rest here.

More cheers than jeers in Pope's British visit

Pope Benedict's visit to Britain seems to have defied expectations. From all of the bluster in the media and from some anti-clerical groups (is there really a distinction to be made there?), you would have expected mass protests against the Pontiff. What you got instead were larger than expected crowds of supportive Brits who, despite discouragement from the police, showed up in large numbers at the Pope's stops and along his travel route.

The protests, on the other hand, were puny in comparison. And where was Richard Dawkins anyway? He was going to lead all of these angry atheists and call for the Pope to be arrested. I hope he didn't get arrested in the process.

What struck me while watching some of the coverage was the sense of history in the whole thing. The first Pope ever to visit Westminister Cathedral walking by the tombs of Britain's kings and queens, as well as the graves of figures such as Dickens, Robert Browning, and Geoffrey Chaucer. And the visit by the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to the tomb of Edward the Confessor was astounding in its historical significance.

“You have spoken to a nation of six million Catholics, but you have been heard by a nation of over 60 million citizens,” Cameron said.

Indeed.