God, AIDS, Africa & HOPE

Reflections / Gedanken

07.01.11 How many more “official” clarifications…?

Corrections are always also a sign who holds the power and how institutions are structured. And it is amazing to see how often Vatican departments now have commented and somehow clarified (or corrected?) the statement of pope Benedict XVI.

Here the latest from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – what is of interest to me that I have not heard of any to be seriously taken commentator who mixes the protection of life with the question of “pro-creation”.  Let’s be honest: There is nothing really new in the example of the pope; moral theology came to the same conclusion a long time ago. What is new is the fact, that even ordinary Catholics or priests are now allowed to say it without being threatened by those who deal with moral teaching like dogmatic teachings. Or  accused by those, who are scared to speak their mind because then there is no further career or the position is threatened.

We as the church always stand for the unconditional love of God and the protection of life. There is  no other Christian way….

“Light of the World”.  Regarding certain readings of the text.

Following the publication of the interview-book Light of the World by Benedict XVI, a number of erroneous interpretations have emerged which have caused confusion concerning the position of the Catholic Church regarding certain questions of sexual morality. The thought of the Pope has been repeatedly manipulated for ends and interests which are entirely foreign to the meaning of his words – a meaning which is evident to anyone who reads the entire chapters in which human sexuality is treated. The intention of the Holy Father is clear: to rediscover the beauty of the divine gift of human sexuality and, in this way, to avoid the cheapening of sexuality which is common today.

Some interpretations have presented the words of the Pope as a contradiction of the traditional moral teaching of the Church. This hypothesis has been welcomed by some as a positive change and lamented by others as a cause of concern – as if his statements represented a break with the doctrine concerning contraception and with the Church’s stance in the fight against AIDS. In reality, the words of the Pope – which specifically concern a gravely disordered type of human behaviour, namely prostitution (cf. Light of the World, pp. 117-119) – do not signify a change in Catholic moral teaching or in the pastoral practice of the Church.

As is clear from an attentive reading of the pages in question, the Holy Father was talking neither about conjugal morality nor about the moral norm concerning contraception. This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church and was summarized succinctly by Pope Paul VI in paragraph 14 of his Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae, when he wrote that “also to be excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.” The idea that anyone could deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in certain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely arbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought. On this issue the Pope proposes instead – and also calls the pastors of the Church to propose more often and more effectively (cf. Light of the World, p. 147) – humanly and ethically acceptable ways of behaving which respect the inseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meaning of every conjugal act, through the possible use of natural family planning in view of responsible procreation.

On the pages in question, the Holy Father refers to the completely different case of prostitution, a type of behaviour which Christian morality has always considered gravely immoral (cf. Vatican II, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, n. 27; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2355). The response of the entire Christian tradition – and indeed not only of the Christian tradition – to the practice of prostitution can be summed up in the words of St. Paul: “Flee from fornication” (1 Cor 6:18). The practice of prostitution should be shunned, and it is the duty of the agencies of the Church, of civil society and of the State to do all they can to liberate those involved from this practice.

In this regard, it must be noted that the situation created by the spread of AIDS in many areas of the world has made the problem of prostitution even more serious. Those who know themselves to be infected with HIV and who therefore run the risk of infecting others, apart from committing a sin against the sixth commandment are also committing a sin against the fifth commandment – because they are consciously putting the lives of others at risk through behaviour which has repercussions on public health. In this situation, the Holy Father clearly affirms that the provision of condoms does not constitute “the real or moral solution” to the problem of AIDS and also that “the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality” in that it refuses to address the mistaken human behaviour which is the root cause of the spread of the virus. In this context, however, it cannot be denied that anyone who uses a condom in order to diminish the risk posed to another person is intending to reduce the evil connected with his or her immoral activity. In this sense the Holy Father points out that the use of a condom “with the intention of reducing the risk of infection, can be a first step in a movement towards a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.” This affirmation is clearly compatible with the Holy Father’s previous statement that this is “not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection.”

Some commentators have interpreted the words of Benedict XVI according to the so-called  theory of the “lesser evil”. This theory is, however, susceptible to proportionalistic misinterpretation (cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis splendor, n. 75-77). An action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed. The Holy Father did not say – as some people have claimed – that prostitution with the use of a condom can be chosen as a lesser evil. The Church teaches that prostitution is immoral and should be shunned. However, those involved in prostitution who are HIV positive and who seek to diminish the risk of contagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the life of another – even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity. This understanding is in full conformity with the moral theological tradition of the Church.

In conclusion, in the battle against AIDS, the Catholic faithful and the agencies of the Catholic Church should be close to those affected, should care for the sick and should encourage all people to live abstinence before and fidelity within marriage. In this regard it is also important to condemn any behaviour which cheapens sexuality because, as the Pope says, such behaviour is the reason why so many people no longer see in sexuality an expression of their love: “This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s being” (Light of the World, p. 119).

Filed under: HIV and AIDS, HIV Prevention, Reflection, Society and living environment, , , , , , , , , ,

POZ Magazine: Indonesian Schools Don’t Discuss Condoms

Unwillingness to publicly discuss condoms is impeding Indonesia’s efforts to slow the spread of HIV, the Jakarta Globe reports. Health education courses in Indonesian public schools also don’t include information about sexually transmitted infections, despite the fact that almost half of the country’s estimated 50,352 people living with HIV are young people in their 20s. Government officials say that endorsing condom use might be seen as encouraging casual sex, which would not be accepted by the country’s Muslim majority.

To read the Jakarta Globe article, click here.

Source:

http://www.poz.com/rssredir/articles/Indonesian_Condom_Problem_1_19504.shtml

Filed under: HIV and AIDS, HIV Prevention, Politics and Society, , , ,

POZ Magazine: New Study Challenges Assumptions About HIV Treatment as Prevention

A new Chinese study conducted among heterosexual couples of mixed HIV status found that antiretroviral (ARV) therapy does not substantially reduce the risk of HIV transmission in a real-world setting. The study, published October 1 in the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, and reported by aidsmap, suggests that more data might be needed before rushing to roll out HIV treatment-as-prevention programs around the globe.
Treatment-as-prevention rests on a fairly well-established theory that when ARV therapy reduces an HIV-positive person’s viral load, he or she will be less likely to transmit the virus to sex partners. While this has been noted for nearly a decade, the strategy has received increasing attention in light of recent studies showing a reduction in HIV transmission in both San Francisco and Vancouver, two cities where an increasing number of HIV-positive people have received ARV therapy and the average community viral loads have dropped substantially.

To test this theory further, researchers looked at HIV transmission rates among 1,927 mostly monogamous couples in the Henan province of China, where one of the partners had HIV and the other did not. Many people in this province became infected from tainted equipment used for blood donations.
Surprisingly, the researchers found that there was no statistically meaningful difference in the rate of transmission in the couples whose HIV-positive partner was on ARV therapy (3 percent transmission) compared with couples where the HIV-partner was not on treatment (5 percent transmission).
The study’s authors acknowledge that poor adherence could have contributed to the failure to find that ARV therapy reduced transmission risk. Nevertheless, aidsmap reports that Myron Cohen, MD, from the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill said in an accompanying editorial that the study results “demand a giant pause.”
“Will ART suppress transmission of HIV under ‘real life’ conditions?” he asks. “[I]t seems wise to try and answer this question before we fully deploy a ‘Test and Treat strategy,’ expecting to detect a benefit to the general population.”

Source:  http://www.poz.com/rssredir/articles/hiv_china_prevention_761_19254.shtml

Filed under: HIV and AIDS, HIV Prevention, HIV Treatment, Medical and Research, , , ,

20.12.2009 The Church’s Dilemma in the face of HIV and AIDS

An interesting article from Fr. Joseph,which I found on the net…

XVII INTERNATIONAL AIDS CONFERENCE 2008
ECUMENICAL PRE-CONFERENCE ON AIDS MEXICO CITY

Reflection on informed decision-making as a strategy for the church in the light of the HIV and AIDS Crisis

FR. JOSEPH MPINGANJIRA

‘And just to conclude, listen to these words: “over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, even if necessary against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. This emphasis on the individual, whose conscience confronts him with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups.” These were words by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the present Pope Benedict XVI, expressing very clearly what it means to say that conscience is the highest moral authority’. Christians in Africa have come to identify with the Church more when the church leaders and institutions talk about issues affecting them in their day-to-day life and when they (church leaders and institutions) become engaged in real life questions. Nobody can deny that HIV and AIDS is a world crisis, more so in my continent of Africa, south of the Sahara, my home region. It is a crisis in my country and painfully so, a crisis in my family. As a priest I have personally come face to face with this crisis losing two sisters, a brother, three nephews and four nieces. I have lost friends and people I have dearly served as a priest. These have left children some of whom I know are HIV positive. I still have so many relatives and friends. Some of them are aware that they are HIV positive, some are aware that they are HIV negative and some are HIV (status) ignorant. Most of these are faithful to each other as couples. Some of them are abstaining. As a priest and a friend I encourage them to do so because these principles offer the surest possible protection against HIV infection, even if their attainment seems difficult. But there is another reality that the church ought to face. The response to the epidemic has sometimes been compromised with moral issues. When it comes to the pastoral response to this crisis the church ought to come to terms with the reality. The fight against HIV and AIDS should be approached as a whole, namely, the care, treatment as well as prevention. There is already a lot that the church is doing in terms of care and treatment. As a priest from Malawi, Africa, I believe that each individual as created by God has a right to care, to treatment and the right to prevent oneself. I also believe that each individual has the right to information on HIV and AIDS, information on care, treatment as well as information on prevention on the same and thereby come up with well-informed decision. When it comes to prevention it is not a hidden truth that all the known three, namely, Abstinence, Be faithful and Condom (ABC) are there and working. The fact that we in the church circles advocate for the A and B does not necessarily mean that the C does not work. It does. It becomes easier for some ‘good’ Theologians sitting in big conferences discussing these issues and condemn the C.
In the years leading up to 2005 The Episcopal Conference Malawi discussed sensitively about the problem. In general, they tend to recognize the importance and legitimacy of sexual activity for a discordant couple. They have also brought out the importance of safeguarding the health of one’s partner in marriage, underscoring that marriage does not give one the right to endanger the health of a spouse in any way. But what they have even stressed most is that conscience is the ultimate moral rule and that the couple must act on the basis of what their conscience tells them is correct in their circumstances. This message was put in their (Bishops’) documents that were presented for the Ad Limina visit at the Vatican in 2005. No clear response as a guiding principle was given to them except the teaching of Humanea Vitae (especially § 14). From the Ad Limina visit, like the case before the visit, each Bishop has gone back and presents his own message to the people he is shepherding. Double messages have sometimes been sent thereby confusing people. In some cases some leaders have opted to remain silent on some ways of preventing or controlling HIV and AIDS but have expected an end of the pandemic.
The truth of the matter is that HIV and AIDS has not brought about a sense of immorality, but has rather highlighted existing moral challenges in within our society. The crisis has highlighted cultural practices that churches ought to address. Other issues are: the frequency of multiple partnerships, psychological and financial coercion to have sexual intercourse, the early sexual activity of the young and lack of proper sexuality education, the prevalence of sexual violence by intimate partner, etc. As a pastor doing my pastoral duties in a parish I see these issues differently. I am aware that there is a ‘law’ (teaching) in the church which says ‘no to use of condom’. I am also aware that I am a pastor who has been sent there not to break the ‘law’, but as a pastor I will sometimes do what Jesus did in Mark 3:1-6, namely to ‘break the law’ for the sake of letting some brothers and sisters out there ‘live their life to the full’. The use of C for discordant couples, for instance, is a method that has to be openly taught as a way to prevent oneself; it is a way that I will share with my sisters, my brothers, etc, so that some of them ‘may have life’. If as a pastor I cannot remove the pain from these poor ones of Yahweh, then the least I can do is never to add a gram of pain to their conscience by insisting on the wholesale condemnation to the use of Condoms with contradicting messages.
Moral discussions on the use of condom and other contraceptives as taught in the Humanae Vitae should not be confused with the use of condom in the above case. The teaching of Humanae Vitae based on the intention of God in procreation is not to be applied in the situation of HIV and AIDS. It is not a question of: when to have sex or not but rather life or death (in some instances). In other words, old answers are no longer relevant for the new questions that we have today in the face on HIV and AIDS pandemic. I am aware that some parents and religious leaders have expressed the fear that the discussion of how HIV transmission can be prevented, risk-reducing factors and similar matters with the inclusion of the C might provoke among people the very sexual behaviour that the church seeks to check. This could indeed happen if the information being provided is not positive and prudent. But it would be equally unethical to deny people the desirable alternatives of abstinence and fidelity or indeed deny people information on measures that would protect them against possible HIV infection. A couple where both are HIV negative will not sit in the house and say, “My wife there is HIV out there. We must be careful. We must use condoms to protect ourselves.” NO! What they will say is, “My wife there is HIV out there. We must be careful. We must be faithful to one another.” On the other hand a couple where one is (or both are) HIV positive, will sit and say, “My wife I am (or we are) HIV positive, let us prevent each other. Let’s use a condom. Should I not share this information (for a well-informed decision) with a clear conscience with the people I pray with, the people I serve in the church that I call mine? Many priests and other church leaders that I work with believe that Conscience is an issue of special relevance to the ethical challenges that the AIDS pandemic raises in relation to sexuality.
The Catholic Catechism teaches that conscience must be informed and moral judgement enlightened (1783). It does not stress the teaching role of the church in the formation of conscience but asserts, “In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path” (1785). “The Word of God is a light for our path. We must assimilate it in faith and prayer, and put it into practice. This is how our conscience is formed” (1802). And how many times have nuns, who are doing a very wonderful job in so many of our clinics, helped patients and clients and at the end have told these patients and clients that they (nuns and their institutions) are not allowed to give out condoms but that they go to the next institution where they can get them. All this points to the gap between policy and practice with regard to informed decision-making. Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgement in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgement that departs from them (1799). Nevertheless, a human being must always obey the certain judgement of his conscience (1800). This has been true before HIV and AIDS came and will be true after pandemic is gone. And just to conclude, listen to these words: “over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, even if necessary against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. This emphasis on the individual, whose conscience confronts him with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups.” These were words by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the present Pope Benedict XVI, expressing very clearly what it means to say that conscience is the highest moral authority.
Statements for discussion Ecumenical pre-conference workshop informed decision-making
1) The gap between policy and practice with regard to informed decision-making isn’t a problem as in daily practice (health) people practice – informed decision making-
2) While the church is “a champion” in care and cure it is can be an obstacle in prevention.
3) Informed decision-making is the solution for the Church dilemma’s in prevention.

Joseph J. Mpinganjira

Diocese of Lilongwe,

P. O. Box 631, Lilongwe, Malawi

Filed under: HIV and AIDS, HIV Prevention, Reflection, Society and living environment, , , , , , , , , ,

PlusNews Examines Cases of Hospital-Acquired HIV in Africa – The Body

PlusNews Examines Cases of Hospital-Acquired HIV in Africa – The Body.

Filed under: HIV and AIDS, HIV Prevention, Medical and Research, , ,

Blog Categories

Follow God, AIDS, Africa & HOPE on WordPress.com

You can share this blog in many ways..

Bookmark and Share

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,711 other subscribers

Translation – Deutsch? Française? Espanol? …

The translation button is located on each single blog page, Copy the text, click the button and paste it for instant translation:
Website Translation Widget

or for the translation of the front page:

* Click for Translation

Copyright

© Rev Fr Stefan Hippler and HIV, AIDS and HOPE.
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Rev Fr Stefan Hippler and HIV, AIDS and HOPE with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

This not withstanding the following applies:
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.