|
Sign up to our Weekly Newsletter.
|
|
From the editor’s deskAids and the lesser evil29 April 2006
The Vatican could no longer ignore the evidence of a serious division of opinion in the Catholic Church about the use of condoms in the fight against HIV-Aids. It was therefore judicious of Pope Benedict XVI to call for a review of the medical and theological issues soon after his election, a review now being undertaken by the Pontifical Council for Health Care. News of the review coincided with the publication of an interview with Cardinal Martini, widely regarded as the principal alternative candidate for the papacy in the conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI a year ago, where he added his voice to those of other senior church figures who have expressed similar views in favour of a limited use of condoms. As he put it in an interview with an Italian magazine, there may be occasions where the use of a condom by a married person to protect their spouse from infection could be the lesser evil.
There are more than 39 million people with HIV, and Aids kills some three million a year. Every measure should be taken to reduce these totals, especially in Africa. The Catholic Church, through aid agencies such as Cafod and missionary organisations, is heavily involved in medical treatment, care for the victims, and care and education of orphaned children of victims. So the charge of callousness on this issue, so readily levelled by Western commentators, does not stand up. Many church leaders also oppose the use of condoms, sincerely convinced that widespread use can be part of the problem rather than part of the solution, on the grounds that it encourages promiscuity. Even those who advocate condom use agree that abstinence and fidelity remain vital in fighting the advance of Aids.
But the real problem for the Catholic Church lies elsewhere. Under the doctrine spelled out in the encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968, any use of condoms, for whatever reason, is immoral. There is no leeway for arguments about a lesser evil; it is irrelevant how effective condoms are against Aids. But it is also well known that in the panoply of Catholic moral teaching, that on contraception is most often disregarded by the faithful. Can the Vatican approve the use of contraceptives in connection with Aids, even in the textbook case of a married couple, without reopening the wider debate? Would that not be interpreted as a retreat from Humanae Vitae? Indeed, has the time come for such a move anyway, with Aids as the catalyst for an overdue development of doctrine? The Pope will be well aware of all these questions.
In 1968 the most persuasive reason advanced in favour of retaining the ban on artificial birth control was that to lift it would signal that the Church could change its mind, and hence undermine its teaching authority. That is ironic, given the damage done to that authority by the furore that followed. Today, however, far from weakening its position, the Church would gain much public credit by admitting that condoms should not be ruled out as a protection against HIV-Aids, even if the practical questions concerning their advisability remain to be addressed. And if that opens the door to wider issues, then so be it.
From the editor’s deskAids and the lesser evil29 April 2006
The Vatican could no longer ignore the evidence of a serious division of opinion in the Catholic Church about the use of condoms in the fight against HIV-Aids. It was therefore judicious of Pope Benedict XVI to call for a review of the medical and theological issues soon after his election, a review now being undertaken by the Pontifical Council for Health Care. News of the review coincided with the publication of an interview with Cardinal Martini, widely regarded as the principal alternative candidate for the papacy in the conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI a year ago, where he added his voice to those of other senior church figures who have expressed similar views in favour of a limited use of condoms. As he put it in an interview with an Italian magazine, there may be occasions where the use of a condom by a married person to protect their spouse from infection could be the lesser evil.
There are more than 39 million people with HIV, and Aids kills some three million a year. Every measure should be taken to reduce these totals, especially in Africa. The Catholic Church, through aid agencies such as Cafod and missionary organisations, is heavily involved in medical treatment, care for the victims, and care and education of orphaned children of victims. So the charge of callousness on this issue, so readily levelled by Western commentators, does not stand up. Many church leaders also oppose the use of condoms, sincerely convinced that widespread use can be part of the problem rather than part of the solution, on the grounds that it encourages promiscuity. Even those who advocate condom use agree that abstinence and fidelity remain vital in fighting the advance of Aids.
But the real problem for the Catholic Church lies elsewhere. Under the doctrine spelled out in the encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968, any use of condoms, for whatever reason, is immoral. There is no leeway for arguments about a lesser evil; it is irrelevant how effective condoms are against Aids. But it is also well known that in the panoply of Catholic moral teaching, that on contraception is most often disregarded by the faithful. Can the Vatican approve the use of contraceptives in connection with Aids, even in the textbook case of a married couple, without reopening the wider debate? Would that not be interpreted as a retreat from Humanae Vitae? Indeed, has the time come for such a move anyway, with Aids as the catalyst for an overdue development of doctrine? The Pope will be well aware of all these questions.
In 1968 the most persuasive reason advanced in favour of retaining the ban on artificial birth control was that to lift it would signal that the Church could change its mind, and hence undermine its teaching authority. That is ironic, given the damage done to that authority by the furore that followed. Today, however, far from weakening its position, the Church would gain much public credit by admitting that condoms should not be ruled out as a protection against HIV-Aids, even if the practical questions concerning their advisability remain to be addressed. And if that opens the door to wider issues, then so be it.
Back to the front page
|
|
In this week’s issue
When the hurt stops and the healing starts Making markets moral Iron and velvet Love in a Catholic climate Someone to talk to A good Lent takes planning South American surprise
Can the Church support abuse victims on its own terms? Elena Curti
Is the Church too slow in recognising that academies are the future for Catholic schools? Christopher Lamb
Goodwin the scapegoat Elena Curti
The pain of being a coeliac Catholic Sr M, guest contributor
The Church's moral obligation to victims of clerical sexual abuse Speeches from this week's conference in Rome
This week in Rome bishops and religious superiors met at the first Vatican-backed symposium devoted to forging a global response to the crisis of clerical sexual abuse that has disgraced ... Archbishop voices 'shame and sorrow' after priest's abuse trial Longley to visit parishes 'damaged' by Walsh
Today, Tuesday 7 February, Bede Walsh, who served as a Catholic priest in the Archdiocese of Birmingham, has been convicted by a jury, following a 10-day trial at Stoke-on-Trent ...
|
|