Belgian cardinal says condom may be "lesser evil"

[cappie]

Belgian cardinal says condom may be "lesser evil"

Brussels, Mar. 10 (CWNews.com) - Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Brussels has said that the use of a condom might be a "lesser evil" when it could preserve someone from a deadly disease like AIDS.

In an interview with a Belgian journal, the cardinal said that it is legitimate for government to establish laws that differ from those of the Church on questions such as same-sex unions, prostituion, and contraception.

"I can accept that civil legislation determines the conditions for cohabitation and the rights of homosexual couples," Cardinal Danneels said. He went on to say that he was not willing to accept a civil union between members of the same sex as a marriage. He explained: "If the germ 'marriage' covers all forms of cohabitation-- between a man and woman the same as between man and man-- then the word no longer has any meaning." He suggested the use of another term to describe same-sex unions.

"It is normal that civil legislation, which I respect, will not be completely in accord with my ethical judgment," the Belgian prelate said. While the Church's teaching is clear-- that homosexuality is a disorder-- there is no cause for condemnation or discrimination, he said. Regarding the civil rights of homosexuals, he concluded, he is prepared to accept the government's laws.

Questioned on the use of condoms, Cardinal Danneels said that if an HIV-positive man wishes to have relations with his wife, "she should make him use a condom." Otherwise, he said, the couple might be "adding another sin: homicide." The cardinal reasoned: "A condom, when it is used for the protection of life, is not only a matter in the sexual domain." Cardinal Daneels made a similar statement in a television interview in January 2004. Other influential prelates have adopted similar positions, suggesting that condom use could be justified within marriage to prevent transmission of AIDS. In January 2005, Cardinal Georges Cottier, the theologian to the papal household, told the Italian daily Corriere della Sera that condom use "could be considered legitimate" under those restricted circumstances.

Although the Church clearly condemns the use of condoms as a means of contraception, there has been no definitive statement from the magisterium on the particular question of whether condom use can ever be justified. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is reportedly studying the question of whether condoms might be used within marriage to prevent disease.

[toledo_jesus]

His Eminence disappoints.

[Paphnutius]

1)It is a good thing he admits it is an evil because we are never to commit an evil to that good may come from it.

2) God will never put somoene in a position where one must choose to commit an evil.

Edited March 11, 2006 by Paphnutius

[toledo_jesus]

I'm sorry, since when did sex with a person carrying the plague become expected? Yeah, it's very [b]sad [/b]that someone's wife or husband gets AIDS...primarily because it would no longer be healthy to sleep with them. But get over it. Sex or my health? hmmmm.

If I got AIDS I wouldn't let my wife touch me. I guess not everyone feels that way, or cares. Especially in Africa they don't pay attention and women get AIDS all the time. Maybe that's what the Cardinal is trying to prevent. Hmph.

I just don't like compromises. Muddies the water.

[dspen2005]

can we expect a reprimand of His Eminence?

[Ash Wednesday]

I think Danneels has said things similar to this before. Personally, I'm glad he never became pope.

[journeyman]

I believe I heard/read that this position in the context of Africa and AIDS was said to be less than acceptable
it might even have been here I saw that . . . wanders off to search for thread . . .

. . . wanders back . . . lots of comments, not a whole lot of official statements


[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=42386&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=42386&hl=[/url]
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=43713&hl="]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=43713&hl=[/url]

[kateri05]

yes, a reprimand would be nice.

in any case, many prayers for his Eminence

[Myles Domini]

Daneels says things like this all the time. As they say on the Sopranos 'forgetaboutit'. His era is already passing into history...

[morostheos]

[quote name='cappie' date='Mar 10 2006, 11:33 PM']Although the Church clearly condemns the use of condoms as a means of contraception, there has been no definitive statement from the magisterium on the particular question of whether condom use can ever be justified. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is reportedly studying the question of whether condoms might be used within marriage to prevent disease.
[right][snapback]908536[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Don't overlook this last paragraph guys. Sounds like the Vatican will be saying something definitive on this matter eventually. It's a complex issue, and while my gut reaction is that it's not right, I'll wait to see what the Church says.

[kdewolf2]

I'm not sure what I would say or what I could say to a man dying of AIDS. Perhaps Cardinal Daneels was right to recommend the use of condoms in this particular instance. However, I profoundly disagree with the whole tenor of his remarks. He seems to be suggesting that the Church's ethical and social teachings simply have no bearing on the legislative efforts of the State. The cleavage between Church and State has become an unbridgeable chasm.

Now, I'd have to ask, if the legislature is not held accountable to the magisterium of the Church, at least in the minds of Catholics, with respect to the more "trivial" and divisive matters of marriage and sex, then how will Catholics have any respect for the Church's judgment in the weightier matters of war and peace, or social justice?

Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's," which implies a separation between what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God.

However, St. Paul later clarified, "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience." (Romans 13:1-5)

This shows not only must we obey the lawful government, but the government derives its whole legitimacy and purpose from God, who has instituted government to enforce what is good and punish what is evil, and if reason and natural law do not suffice to show us the difference, the Church which Jesus Christ has founded certainly will. So, we must hold the State accountable. Only faithful Catholics can do so, but how can they if they default from the Church's teachings and simply declare them irrelevant?

I think I'd have to advise the man dying of AIDS to reflect on St. Paul's words in 1 Corinithians 7:29-31: "I mean, brethren, the appointed time has grown very short; from now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the form of this world is passing away." Perhaps he should simply draw aside from his wife and devote himself to prayer.

Sex is ordained for the purpose of reproduction, which is apparently closed to the man dying of AIDS. Condoms would serve no other purpose than allowing a man who has no intention of begetting children (even though he has a very good reason) to have sex with his wife. The Church teaches us we do not have sex simply for our own pleasure (either physical or emotional), but mainly for the propagation of children.

Furthermore, I'm sure that if people began to take the Church's teachings on marriage and sex more seriously we'd see a drastic reduction in AIDS. It's very hard for AIDS to spread when people actually lead chaste and holy lives, declining to engage in sexual relationships apart from the bond of marriage.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='kdewolf2' date='Mar 12 2006, 10:42 PM']  The Church teaches us we do not have sex simply for our own pleasure (either physical or emotional), but mainly for the propagation of children.

[right][snapback]909727[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


so uh...would you say that if a couple isn't ready to have children they shouldn't get married?

J/K

[morostheos]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Mar 12 2006, 11:32 PM']

so uh...would you say that if a couple isn't ready to have children they shouldn't get married?

J/K
[right][snapback]909782[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


oh, please, not that again!

[kdewolf2]

Laugh if you will, but that's what I would reasonably deduce. If you're not ready for children, why marry? For sex? Romance? What, exactly?

But a man dying of AIDS simply cannot have children.

More to the point:

Should he endanger his wife's life and health just so he can enjoy normal conjugal relations?

Consider: condoms are only 90 percent effective. What about the other 10 percent? What if the condom busts? What if the infected semen leaks through the stitching in the latex?

How can someone with AIDS safely have sex with anybody?

[morostheos]

[quote name='kdewolf2' date='Mar 13 2006, 12:34 AM']Laugh if you will, but that's what I would reasonably deduce.  If you're not ready for children, why marry?  For sex?  Romance?  What, exactly?

But a man dying of AIDS simply cannot have children.

More to the point:

Should he endanger his wife's life and health just so he can enjoy normal conjugal relations?

Consider:  condoms are only 90 percent effective.  What about the other 10 percent?  What if the condom busts?  What if the infected semen leaks through the stitching in the latex?

How can someone with AIDS safely have sex with anybody?
[right][snapback]909863[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I can assure you the laughter has nothing to do with the topic at hand, just that delaying marriage for such reasons has been debated on phatmass numerous times and always results in locked threads.