Cardinal favours condoms to stop AIDS (leading candidates to succeed Pope John Paul)

The Guardian via SMH ^ | January 14, 2004 | John Hooper in Rome and Andrew Osborn in Brussels

[dead]

A Belgian cardinal who is among the leading candidates to succeed Pope John Paul has broken the Catholic church's taboo on the use of condoms, declaring that, in certain circumstances, they should be used to prevent the spread of AIDS.

Godfried Danneels was careful to say he preferred abstinence as a means of prevention, but added that if someone who was HIV-positive did have sex, failing to use a condom would break the sixth commandment, thou shalt not kill.

His comments are a further sign that the ailing Pope may be losing some grip on the more liberal wing of his immense church. Shortly after being named a "prince of the church" last September, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, of Scotland, said the ban on contraception should be debated, along with such issues as priestly celibacy and homosexual clergy.

In an interview with the Dutch Catholic broadcaster RKK, Cardinal Danneels said: "When someone is HIV-positive and his partner says, 'I want to have sexual relations with you', he doesn't have to do that . . . But when he does, he has to use a condom."

He added: "This comes down to protecting yourself in a preventive manner against a disease or death. [It] cannot be entirely morally judged in the same manner as a pure method of birth control."

The cardinal's argument emphasises the importance of human life, the very factor that Pope John Paul has long evinced as justification for a ban on all forms of contraception.

The Catholic church teaches that abstinence, including between married couples, is the only morally acceptable way to prevent the spread of AIDS.

Cardinal Danneels's views clash with those aired last year by Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, the Vatican's top adviser on family questions. The Colombian cardinal claimed that condoms could not halt HIV because it was small enough to pass through them. He said relying on them to prevent infection was like "betting on your own death".

Those remarks were condemned by, among others, the World Health Organisation, which said condoms reduced the risk of infection by 90 per cent.

In 2000, Cardinal Danneels caused consternation in the Vatican by suggesting that popes should not remain in office until they died but have limited terms.

Cardinal Danneels, 70, and Archbishop of Brussels and Mechelen,

has also called for flexibility and leniency for Catholics who divorce and then remarry without obtaining a church-sanctioned annulment, and has said he advocates women playing a larger role in the church.

[chachacha]

And the hot, firey, bottomless pit, keeps getting deeper.

Not to worry, there's plenty of room along side those that advanced those who stand in the gay pulpits.

[Alberta's Child]

. . . failing to use a condom would break the sixth commandment, thou shalt not kill.

Either the article is wrong, or the cardinal is a f#cking moron -- the Sixth Commandment is as follows: "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

[Romulus]

among the leading candidates to succeed Pope John Paul

The editors of the Guardian check the mail every day, wondering where their ballot can be.

[dead]

LOL! The NY Times wonders also.

[Malacoda]

Well, at least he's shown his true colors and guaranteed that he won't be elected.

[reed_inthe_wind]

"A Belgian cardinal who is among the leading candidates to succeed Pope John Paul"

I guess he didn't want the job.

[johnb2004]

All heresy begins below the belt.

[cajungirl]

think about it. Married people get aids from either preexisting sexual activity or from blood. Now in the context of marital sex with a spouse with aids, would you be opposed to condom usuage.

[johnb2004]

Yes. The act of contraception is intrinsically evil One may never commit an intrinsically evil act even if some limited good may come from it.

[gathersnomoss]

....in certain circumstances, they should be used to prevent the spread of AIDS.

It hasn't helped yet, cardinal. In certain circumstances, when you step in front of a fast moving bus you will not get hurt.

Let's all just step around the issue and pretend that it does not exist, something similar to the sexual abuse that has occured in the catholic church in the past.

[johnb2004]

"Cardinal Danneels, 70, and Archbishop of Brussels and Mechelen,


has also called for flexibility and leniency for Catholics who divorce and then remarry without obtaining a church-sanctioned annulment, and has said he advocates women playing a larger role in the church."

It should also mention that the cardinal tends to place himself above the Church and Christ, depending on the issue of course.

[cajungirl]

So if your spouse contracts aids from a blood transfusion, what are you going to do. The condom would be for protection from a killer disease, not contraception. If you can honestly say you would either become celibate within marriage or risk getting aids for what you see as an absolute, well, that is just dandy.

[johnb2004]

I do not know that it would be dandy, but it would be doing the will of Christ. Did He not say to pick up your cross and follw me?

[cajungirl]

Christ never mentioned condoms if you ask me. But that is just my opinion. I find it strange that one would face a choice of celibacy in marriage or risk to a disease that kills and find that in religion.

[johnb2004]

Christ never said anything about abortion or many other things. So What? He left a living authority. That is not my opinion, that is God's will.

[Ciexyz]

I've read that the Archbishop of Paris (the son of Jewish parents who died in the Holocaust, a man who converted to Catholicism) is also one of the leading candidates to succeed John Paul II.

[johnb2004]

I guess only the Holy Spirit knows who will be the next pope. I hope for Pell or Arinze.

[sinkspur]

Bishop Kevin Dowling, bishop of Rustenberg, South Africa, also favors allowing the use of condoms in the context of marriage in Africa.

In some tribes, refusing sexual relations to a marriage partner can result in physical punishment.

From an article in NCR last week:

Dowling said he endorses the “ABCs” of abstinence, being faithful to one partner and living in a committed relationship, but noted that this is only possible in a “regular” or freely chosen partnership. When someone is forced into prostitution in order to eat or when a woman cannot refuse her spouse and transmission of the AIDS virus is likely, the bishop said, she ought to be able to safeguard her life by using a condom and microbicides.

Wearing a condom to protect one’s life or the life of one’s partner is not the same as using it to prevent new life, Dowling said. When used to shield the body from the AIDS virus, a condom is not a contraceptive, he added, and thus does not conflict with traditional church teaching.

Dowling said he is encouraged by support he has received from theologians. The Southern African bishops’ conference remains firmly opposed to their use, but the bishops have “opened the door” a crack in the case of “discordant couples,” he said, allowing a partner to make “an informed choice” if the other partner is infected with the deadly virus.

There might be some applicability of the principle of double effect here: the woman uses the condom to save her life. That is the primary use. The fact that it also serves as a contraceptive is a secondary effect.

[sinkspur]

I do not know that it would be dandy, but it would be doing the will of Christ. Did He not say to pick up your cross and follw me?

You think a spouse has to expose themselves to the risk of death in order to fulfill the marital relationship? In some cases, these women HAVE NO CHOICE.