( CNN ) -- If you were to ask a group of Quakers or Mennonites whether it 's OK for police or soldiers to use rubber bullets against rock-throwing children , you would n't be surprised if they said , `` Absolutely not ! '' They are well-known for their commitment to pacifism . But what if you were to put the question this way : `` When soldiers are firing against demonstrators , would it be better if they used rubber bullets rather than metal ? '' `` Obviously it is , '' they would probably say , `` But they should n't be firing at all in the first place ! '' The Roman Catholic Church is well-known for having its own issues with rubber . The answer it traditionally gives to the use of condoms -- an answer that mystifies and outrages so many people , particularly in this age of HIV/AIDS -- is `` absolutely not ! '' So it caused quite a stir in a book-length interview published last week in which Pope Benedict XVI seemed to give a different answer . He stood by his position that condom distribution was not the answer to the AIDS epidemic , which could only really be dealt with by fidelity in marriage and chastity outside of it . However , he surprised many people by acknowledging that were a prostitute to use a condom to prevent infection , that should be seen as a step toward greater moral responsibility . But this different answer is not a sudden change of mind on the part of the Catholic hierarchy . It is the answer to a different question . The pope was not asking himself whether it 's OK to use condoms . He was addressing the following question : `` If someone has already decided to have sex outside a married relationship ( perhaps even outside a heterosexual relationship ) , is it better to do it with or without a condom ? '' It 's obviously better to do it with a condom because , as the pope pointed out , the person is obliged in that situation not to risk infecting a partner or being infected . If the intercourse is heterosexual , the person is further obliged not to risk conceiving a child that will not be brought up in a stable family and might not see the light of day at all . Though the Roman Catholic Church has always been clear in its position on the immorality of intercourse outside of marriage , Pope Benedict has done us all a favor by observing publicly that the use of a condom in such circumstances can be understood as a sign of a burgeoning moral awareness . It is this issue of responsibility that has always been the sticking point . People have presumed that in its condemnation of condom use , the Catholic Church is somehow encouraging irresponsible , unprotected sex . But in fact it 's been discouraging everything except faithful monogamous sex . Its teaching about artificial contraception has only ever been about marriage ; it has never had anything to do with any other kind of sexual activity . Intercourse between husband and wife should always be open to conceiving new life ; therefore , contraception was considered wrong because it was seriously unnatural . The problem is that all condom use came to be thought of as absolutely wrong , not just wrong in marriage . If using condoms were absolutely wrong , then it must be wrong for gay men to use them , too . If it were absolutely wrong , then it must be wrong for fornicating teens to use condoms , too . A disastrous misunderstanding ! However , church authorities have usually avoided the more complex explanations -- no `` maybe , '' no `` in certain conditions . '' That 's because they believe that the public just wants a simple `` yes '' or `` no '' -- and preferably a `` yes . '' They fear that anything other than an absolute `` no '' will be interpreted as an absolute `` yes . '' And , it should be added , they have unjustly censured highly qualified moral theologians who have dared to say `` maybe . '' That a pope has now introduced a `` maybe '' has evoked a flustered reaction . Official clarifications are given that then need further explanation . Churchmen argue over whether what he said is anything new , whether it represents a major policy change or whether it is just really the same old line . In many respects , it is an old line . But the old line was never the simple `` no '' it has so long been thought to be . The Catholic moral tradition has always been much more sophisticated than that . The pope 's statement only seems new . Since the 1968 encyclical letter Humanae Vitae , which reaffirmed the teaching that artificial means of contraception was not acceptable in a marriage , Rome has been trying to hold the line by refusing to deal with `` what if ... '' and `` perhaps . '' In the Catholic tradition , it has always been assumed that those inevitable questions would be dealt with in private conversation between priests and people . Yet for many , that big public `` no '' made them hesitate to engage in such conversations , and the Catholic Church has not shown itself adept at handling the public debate about condoms and HIV . When the pope commented during his African journey last year that condoms were not the solution to AIDS in Africa , he was seen to be just giving the same old knee-jerk Catholic moral response , so out of touch with reality . Yet his comment was based on other observations of a social and scientific nature , and it is to this that he returned briefly in the interview which has caused such a stir . He acknowledges something that has been obvious all along in the Catholic tradition : It is rare to find a moral question that is a simple issue of `` yes '' or `` no , '' so we need to learn moral reasoning and responsibility , not just blind obedience . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Dan Madigan .
Dan Madigan : Catholic church has long had an answer on condom use : ` ` Absolutely not '' He says pope surprised by making Catholics ' condom use more morally responsible . Church teaches : No sex outside marriage , no divorce ; new laws aim at unmarried women . Madigan : Pope 's comments reflect a more sophisticated strain of Catholic moral tradition .