The Pope and the condom conundrum

A group of journalists visited the Meeting Point, a centre in Kampala, Uganda, for those suffering from AIDS. The Centre cares for about 4,000 people a day. These journalists were moved by the condition of the HIV-positive women they were talking to. They decided to do something for the women: they gave them a small box of condoms. One of the women at the centre, Jovine, looked at them and said: "My husband is dying and I have six children who will soon be orphans. What use are these boxes you are giving me?"

The doers and the talkers

Rose Busingye, who directs Meeting Point Kampala, mentioned this incident in an interview with Il Susidiario on March 20. "It is absurd," she added, "to try to respond to her need with a box of condoms.” She was reacting to the controversy that followed the out-of-context quotation form the Pope’s in flight comments about the effectiveness of condom use in the campaigns to fight AIDS in Africa. Many of those who commented on these remarks (including myself) are living comfortably far away from the problem. Rose Busingye lives in its midst and is dedicating her life to help people suffering from AIDS.

Why am I writing about this subject two months after Pope Benedict made these comments? I do so because it seems that the controversy knows of no end. The European Parliament has just voted on a motion to "condemn the recent declarations of the Pope, who has prohibited the use of condoms and has warned that condoms can even bring about a greater risk of illness." The motion was turned down by a vote of 253-199.

The Spanish Parliament is expected to debate another “censure motion” towards the end of May or in June. The motion will most probably be defeated as both the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party and the People's Party have said they would not support the bill.

On the other hand in the beginning of April the Belgian House of Representatives passed a motion asking the country's government to "condemn the unacceptable statements of the Holy Father on his journey to Africa and to protest officially to the Holy See."

It is not very common for so many Parliaments to discuss Popes!

What the Pope really said

Let us backtrack a bit and consider what the Pope really to journalists aboard his flight to Cameroon March 17.

The Pope had said within the context of the interview that "I would say that one cannot overcome this problem of AIDS only with money -- which is important, but if there is no soul, no people who know how to use it, (money) doesn't help.I can say that this problem of AIDS can't be overcome only with publicity slogans. If there is not the soul, if the Africans are not helped, the scourge cannot be resolved with the distribution of condoms; on the contrary, there is the risk of increasing the problem. The solution can only be found in a double commitment; first, a humanization of sexuality, that is, a spiritual and human renewal that brings with it a new way of behaving with one another; and second, a true friendship, also and above all for those who suffer, the willingness -- even with sacrifice and self denial -- to be with the suffering. And these are the factors that help and that lead to visible progress".

The statement of the Pope should be seen within its wider and immediate context. He heads an organisation which provides at least 25 percent of the services and care for people with HIV/AIDS in Africa. He heads a Church and not a state. The role of a church is different from government, which has to legislate and organize for people of all religions as well as those without.

What the Pope is actually saying is that the epidemic will only be seriously tackled if its cause is attacked and not just its symptoms. Those who think that the epidemic can be eliminated by only attacking its symptoms are mistaken though their intention may be praiseworthy. The Pope’s statement on the efficacy of condoms in AIDS prevention campaigns was an interpretation of facts in the field and not a moral evaluation. One can argue whether the Pope’s interpretation of the facts is the best one. Some would say yes and some would say no. However, can one justify the onslaught against him? Isn’t it true to say that the real solution lies in the humanisation of sex?

Divergent opinions

Among the people who think that the Pope’s appraisal of what is happening on the ground is correct, is Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the University of Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies. He told National Review Online March 25 that "the best evidence we have supports the Pope's comments."

"There is a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the US-funded 'Demographic Health Study,' between greater availability and use of condoms and higher -- not lower -- HIV-infection rates," he said.

Green said that when an individual uses a condom thinking it will reduce the risk of exposure to HIV that person may also take part in riskier behavior and take greater chances than one would take without condoms, for example, by having multiple and concurrent sexual partners.

On the other hand, an editorial published in the March 28 edition of The Lancet said the Pope made "an outrageous and wildly inaccurate statement about HIV/AIDS". "The Pope has publicly distorted scientific evidence to promote Catholic doctrine on this issue," said The Lancet.

Cardinal George Pell, archbishop of Sydney, in an article published in the Sydney Morning Herald, last April referred to the British Medical Journal which earlier this year reported: "In numerous large studies, concerted efforts to promote use of condoms has consistently failed to control rates of sexually transmitted infection," even in Canada, Sweden and Switzerland.

What the Pope did not say

The Pope did not get into the specific question of whether in certain circumstances condom use was morally licit or illicit in AIDS prevention, an issue that is still under study by Vatican theologians. The Italian theologian, Franciscan Father Maurizio Faggioni, told Catholic News Service that this is a separate and more difficult question.

In 2006, Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, head of the Pontifical Council for Health Care Ministry, announced that his council had handed in a 200-page study on condoms in AIDS prevention, for further development by the Vatican's doctrinal congregation. Catholic News Service reported that Cardinal Barragan said at that time, that the report included "an enormous rainbow" of theological and moral positions, from theologians who expressed "very rigorous" opinions against condom use even when used as a disease-preventing measure to those who held a "very understanding" perspective.

In conclusion I have a question the answer to which I am not certain about: In our culture is everyone but the Pope entitled for an opinion?