Posted on 05/03/2006 12:08:36 PM PDT by siunevada
By BRIAN MURPHY, AP Religion Writer 23 minutes ago
A Vatican study on whether it could permit condoms to battle AIDS has a very narrow scope: married Roman Catholic couples in which one partner has the virus. But its theological underpinnings are centuries old, and could lay the groundwork for an end to the church's blanket ban on contraception.
The principle of "double effect" entered mainstream Catholic debate more than 300 years ago and draws on questions about the "lesser of two evils" raised by theologians such as St. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century. The concepts broadly ask: Can a questionable act be morally justified when the good effect outweighs a bad consequence?
Answering the question with an empathic "yes" are scholars, health professionals and others who want a change in the Vatican's stance that abstinence is the only acceptable way to prevent the spread of AIDS. They have argued for years that condom use as a defense against HIV infection, under specific circumstances, does not contradict the Catholic ban on artificial birth control.
Some groups, including the Southern Africa Catholic Bishops Conference, have even given a tacit nod to condoms for married couples with one partner infected. The Vatican — however tentatively — now could be moving to formally recognize that position.
"It's a reality that's finally moving into a wider arena," said Sister Alison Munro, coordinator of the AIDS project for the Southern African Bishops Conference.
There's no chance the Vatican would fundamentally revise its opposition to contraception, which has been reaffirmed and reinforced since the famous 1968 encyclical "Humanae Vitae." But even the targeted discussions under way are further evidence of Pope Benedict XVI shedding the tradition-bound reputation he earned during more than two decades as the chief doctrinal watchdog for his predecessor, John Paul II.
Benedict, a widely respected theologian, has shown a willingness to re-examine church attitudes toward advances in genetic engineering and in-vitro fertilization. But none approach the sensitivity of whether to open the door — even a crack — for condoms.
"The Vatican is like a submarine. On this one, it has put up its periscope, looked around and submerged again," said the Rev. James Keenan, a moral theologian at Boston College. "It's still not clear at all what — if anything — the Vatican will eventually say on the subject."
Helen Hull Hitchcock of Women for Faith & Family, a traditionalist group based in St. Louis, predicted it could be "deeply confusing" for Catholics if the church made any concessions.
"People would say, `Now wait a minute. If it's OK for this couple to use it, why can't another couple use it,'" Hitchcock said. "We think that it would be very worrisome."
Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, who heads the Vatican's office for health care, would only confirm a "dialogue" is under way as part of a larger examination of bioethical issues. The study on condoms only concerns married couples in which one partner has the virus, his office said.
Notably, there have been no official announcements of an upcoming document or details of the discussions. But a possible signal came last month from retired Milan Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, who was quoted by the Italian newsweekly L'Espresso as saying condoms were the "lesser evil" in combatting AIDS.
Martini, once considered a top papal contender, was not the first Catholic leader to make this connection. The timing, however, was widely interpreted as a hint of the Vatican's leanings.
"Martini was not reprimanded or asked to correct himself," said the Rev. Michael Fahey, a professor of theology at Marquette University. "This seems to say that the Vatican is moving in this direction or at least wants to send a trial balloon."
If the Vatican allows condoms as an AIDS control measure within a marriage, it would open the way for Catholic groups to take a more direct role in anti-AIDS campaigns in ravaged places such as Africa, where the virus is often transmitted from husbands to wives. Catholic charities in Africa offer health care and many other services to AIDS sufferers, but come under sustained criticism for their refusal to distribute condoms.
Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for more than 60 percent of the 40 million people infected with HIV worldwide.
In 2001, more than 30 bishops from southern Africa denounced the use of condoms, but noted that married couples should "listen to their consciences" — widely viewed as recognition the "lesser of two evils" scenario.
The Vatican initially came down hard on such rationales. But it gradually retreated as influential theologians and clergymen made the case that condom use — in cases such as between an HIV-infected person and spouse — would fall under the "double effect" rubric, which says a good intent (not passing the virus) has a bad consequence (using the condom).
The principle is often used to rationalize causalities in a "just war" or a procedure to end a pregnancy to save the woman's life.
The related "lesser of two evils" views boil down to moral damage control. A priest should always advise against doing "evil," but encourage a "lesser evil" if they can't stop the act.
In 2000, Monsignor Jacques Suaudeau of the Pontifical Council for the Family wrote an article in the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, strongly supporting sexual abstinence to control AIDS, but noting specific cases where condom use could be considered a "lesser evil" — including prostitutes in legal brothels.
The idea since has been echoed by even more powerful figures. Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels has said an HIV-positive person would be committing a sin by having sex without a condom.
"Let's hope the Vatican brings some clarity to this issue," said theologian Keenan. "It would finally take the stigma off the condom. Then it's all over. The condom will be freed of this whole, heavy moral debate."
___
Religion reporter Rachel Zoll in New York contributed to this report.
Summary: Condoms, AIDS, and the Vatican By The Associated Press 30 minutes ago
WHAT WILL THE VATICAN SAY? It's unclear when — or even if — the Vatican will issue any statement on condom use in the specific circumstance of a married couple with one partner who is HIV-positive.
WHY THE UNCERTAINTY? The Vatican is not under any obligation to make a formal statement on the issue. Many studies are conducted within the Vatican departments, from scientific issues to theological points, that are never included in public documents.
DOES THE POPE TAKE PART? Pope Benedict XVI is regularly informed about work in Vatican departments, but doesn't necessarily become an active participant with ongoing studies.
I don't understand what you are saying.
>> (estimated between 0.005 and 0.009 for male-to-female transmission, and 0.003 and 0.001 for female-to-male transmission for a single instance of unprotected intercourse) cutting down the number of exposures makes a big difference. Which means that a condom, properly used, can prevent infection for a significant number of people. <<
No, it doesn't, because the condom-failure risks are unlinked while the contraction risks are linked. (I don't know if they are completely independent, but there is definitely some linkage.)
See, the reason the infection rate is so low among heterosexuals is because heterosexual sex normally doesn't provide the AIDS virus with a means of getting within the other person's body. There has to be some open wound for the transmission to occur: a laceration, an ulceration, a tear. These breaches in the epidermal integrity are frequently caused if sexually transmitted diseases are present, or if sodomy occurs. But sometimes they just happen for unknown or undetected reasons.
Now, although some people get one-time breaches, the fact is that most breaches are due to some persistent, chronic, or re-occuring condition. So, in most cases the condoms won't make a difference because the AIDS virus wouldn't get transmitted no matter what. In those cases where transmission is possible once, it is very likely that the transmission is possible often.
That position is based upon your religious zealotry and not on common sense. You have failed to convince me.
In those cases where transmission is possible once, it is very likely that the transmission is possible often.
I'm afraid I'm not clear on what you mean here. Can you explain?
Gee, I thought I was talking about the percentages.
The device has a failure rate regardless of religion. Ask the doctor.
We were. Now we are talking about your religious zealotry.
Gee, no one's ever called me a religious zealot before. Thanks.
Anyway, the AP story was about speculation on what the Vatican might or might not do. Frankly, I don't know why anyone who isn't a Catholic would care one way or the other what the Vatican has to say on the matter. Just look at the numbers on artificial birth control practices of people who call themselves Catholic in the U.S., they don't seem to care what the Church says.
From the public health perspective, I find the campaign for the use of condoms to reduce the spread of AIDS in Africa completely comprehensible and rational. Greatest good for the greatest number using the tools available. I doubt a significant number of those infected with AIDS are practicing Catholics, so what the Vatican has to say doesn't really come into consideration for them. It's a bit of a conundrum that this campaign has been going on for a while now and still seems to be struggling for success.
From the Vatican's moral/ethical perspective which is different than a strictly public health perspective, abstinence is a valid alternative in the equation. From their perspective, they have to consider every individual, not almost everyone. I think when they consider the, admittedly, extremely small number of individuals that are exposed because the device failed, and having been exposed are infected; that will be an insurmountable obstacle from their perspective. Because they consider there is a valid alternative. And because the weakest, most vulnerable, the "least brethren" are, from their perspective, the most important individuals in the world, I don't think they will make any major changes in what they have to say.
My only real opinion is that I don't think the Vatican will make any changes in what they have to say on the matter.
Well, of course not. But then what IS the solution to the spread of AIDS in marriage? Though most spouses have the choice to forego sexual relations with their infected partners, and IMO would avoid it like the plague that it is, Post 50 tells us that some women have no choice.
I would be interested in hearing the views of those who have studied some of the many cultures all over the world.
Obviously some live in a backward world. Whether they can be, or want to be, advanced beyond the only lifestyles they know, is an unanswered question, to me, anyway.
Rather than toy with the idea of okaying condoms to help solve the problem of spreading AIDS, more to the point, IMO, the concerned Church should deal with the destructiive behavior which causes the terrible problem in the first place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.