Blairs Glitch Project: Church faux pas on condoms and gays

Tony and Cherie Blair.jpgCherie Blair, Catholic wife of the former British PM and recent convert Tony, in December spoke at the Angelicum in Rome despite some protests over her pro-life bona fides. Now she tells The Times of Malta she is “saddened” by the pope’s recent comments in Africa that condoms worsen the spread of AIDS:

“I think we do have to understand that there is concern about promiscuity. But there’s also a real concern about saving lives and I absolutely believe, and scientific evidence shows, that condoms do save lives. Therefore, when there’s a choice between endangering and not endangering life, we should always choose life,” she stressed in an interview.


Apparently she also winks about how the couple’s youngest, Leo, was conceived:

She recounts how Leo was conceived because she had decided to leave this ‘equipment’ behind during the couple’s visit to Balmoral, the Queen’s residence in Scotland, after a diligent courtier had embarrassingly unpacked her overnight bag during the previous visit.

Mrs Blair has never revealed what this equipment could possibly be, and as she sits back into the sofa in the Phoenicia Hotel’s lounge, her eyes twinkle teasingly.

Will that natural family planning moment be enough to counterbalance the condom crtiique and get her another invite to a pontifical university?


Maybe not, now that husband Tony has weighed in with a critique of the church’s official stance toward homosexuals. Some good insights here:

“Actually, we need an attitude of mind where rethinking and the concept of evolving attitudes becomes part of the discipline with which you approach your religious faith,” Blair said in an interview published in Attitude, a magazine aimed at gays.

Pope Benedict XVI, when he was still a cardinal in 1986, described homosexuality as “an objective disorder.”

Asked about that comment, Blair said “there is a huge generation difference here.”


“And there’s probably that same fear amongst religious leaders that if you concede ground on an issue like this, because attitudes and thinking evolve over time, where does that end?” Blair said.

“You’d start having to rethink many, many things. Now, my view is that rethinking is good, so let’s carry on rethinking.”

Dan Gilgoff at USNews has reax from Bill Donohue–he was Catholic before Blair, you know–who is not pleased:

Blair should put his cards on the table. Does he object to the Catholic Church’s teachings on sexuality, which proscribes sex outside of marriage? If so, we need to know why he rejects the Church’s teachings. For example, does he reject the Church teachings on adultery?

[Hat tip to CWNews.]

Comments read comments(6)
post a comment

posted April 9, 2009 at 9:16 am

It is very easy to decide that our own personnal feelings about any one controversy is ok. It seems that may be why we have decided to put morality and the Church no more than second in our lives,it is a total breech of our faith in Christ to subvert Church doctrine. Just because the Bible is old doesn’t mean we can pick and choose what parts we want to believe or adhere to. A perfect example of this way of thinking is the United States and the constitution. No where in the U.S. constitution does it say that there is a need for or power given to any one to reinterpet the writers original intent, however men& women like Mr.& Mrs. Blair have decided that they are smarter and know better than God and the Church in this case and congress and the the courts in the case of the U.S. constitution. Mr. Blair is right in one way, where will the interpetion stop? It
s already legal in the U.S. to murder babies and to do so with the governments blessing. I’m geting older and am partially disabled am I next? If this is the future, only our faith and adherance to Gods word can save us ,one soul at a time.

report abuse


posted April 9, 2009 at 10:15 am

It certainly appears that progressive/liberal goals are to undermine the Church everywhere and everyway it can. The Slippery Slope is no longer a theory, it is a Syndrome. Just like AIDS.

report abuse

Gerard Nadal

posted April 9, 2009 at 11:14 am

Mrs. Blair:
“Therefore, when there’s a choice between endangering and not endangering life, we should always choose life,” she stressed in an interview.”
Who is the ‘we’ who should ‘choose’ life? If someone wishes to fornicate, why should ‘we’ make ourselves participants in that fornication by helping to attenuate the undesirable consequences of sin? This is entirely contrary to the mandate to preach and teach the faith. Rather, ‘we’ need to be out on the streets proclaiming the benefits of a life lived according to God’s wise design, and pointing to the consequences of going down the alternative road.
This issue is a dead horse on these threads. Basically, those who believe that the Pope should be preaching condom usage are motivated by the highest and noble ideals of care and concern. But such care and concern that makes one a participant in sin by embarking on a road of instruction on the attenuation of sin’s effects is by definition anti-evangelical, anti-Gospel.
In the story of the Prodigal Son, the wayward son needs to bottom out, a Jew who makes his living tending pigs and longing to eat the slop he feeds them with. He comes to an awareness of his sin, arises, goes to his father and confesses his sin. For all of the Pope’s critic’s condemnation of him (and his predecessors and current Bishops) over this issue, they have not attempted to dismiss the mountain of Scriptural references that support the fundamental position of the Church in instructing sinners in righteousness.
Beyond the issue of condoms and disease, the larger issue is one of intimacy and the right use of sex in safeguarding intimacy. Instruction in condom usage works against this by facilitating promiscuity and weakening the Church’s moral authority when it discusses the right use of sex according to God’s wise design. We can’t wink at infidelity in the name of public health and talk seriously about sexual morality.
No one knows this better than Benedict’s detractors-and Benedict himself.
The argument that Papal authority would ensure more widespread, consistent condom usage is laughable. How much has Papal authority helped to curb the fornication at the root of HIV to begin with? If people aren’t waiting for Papal approval to fornicate, it’s doubtful that they’re waiting for Papal approval to use condoms.

report abuse


posted April 9, 2009 at 5:34 pm

I think there is a generation difference here. When Pope Benedict was growing up in Germany, homosexuals were seen as disordered. They were considered just as bad as Jews. They were considered “untermenschen.” Just like the Jews, homosexuals were also put in concentration camps and many even lost their lives. This was the culture that Pope Benedict was raised in. Young people who grow up today in the US and are taught that gay people are OK and just as good as anyone else have different views. If the Pope had grown up in a democratic society where all people were viewed as equal I think that he would have different views on gay people.

report abuse

Old Scratch

posted April 10, 2009 at 2:41 pm

I think you have a point. Let’s not forget that those who were sentenced to concentration camps under paragraph 175, the Nazi era law outlawing homosexuality, were never liberated. They were forced to serve out their sentences by the allies.

report abuse

Old Scratch

posted April 10, 2009 at 3:09 pm

George, I’ve seen your arguments used by a Cardinal against trying to cure AIDS/HIV because finding a cure would encourage sin. I see them mirrored in the Vatican’s condemnation of a UN resolution to decriminalize homosexuality to stop the murder of gays and lesbians by religiously dominated governments.
You’re playing God not leading people to God. You’re ideology is the real abomination.

report abuse

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to and may be used by in accordance with the agreements.

Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Pontifications. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Faith, Media and Culture Prayer, Plain and Simple Happy Blogging!!!   ...

posted 2:38:01pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

Moving on, and many, many thanks... recent vacation and related absences also coincided with an offer from to cover religion for them, as editor Melinda Henneberger announces here in her roundup on the site's very successful first 100 days. That ...

posted 8:29:24pm Aug. 02, 2009 | read full post »

Calvin at 500, Calvinism 2.0
If you thought you knew John Calvin--who turned 500 last week--you probably don't know enough. For example, that he was French, born Jean Cauvin. And if he was in fact scandalized by dancing, he was also a lot more complex than that. I explored ...

posted 11:53:35am Jul. 16, 2009 | read full post »

Apologia pro vita sua...Kinda
 In my defense, I've had computer outages and family reunions and a few days of single-parenthood, which is always a bracing reminder of what many parents go through all the time. And this weekend it's off for a week's vacation. Anyway, ...

posted 10:51:36am Jul. 16, 2009 | read full post »

When Benny met Barry: "I'll pray for you!"
The first word via Vatican Radio and first image (that I saw) via Rocco: Speaking to Vatican Radio, Press Office Director Fr. Federico Lombardi said "moral values in international politics, immigration and the Catholic Church's ...

posted 12:54:28pm Jul. 10, 2009 | read full post »


Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.