Benedict in Benin, on AIDS
Speaking in Benin, Pope Benedict XVI delivered a talk concerning the AIDS epidemic. (John Allen’s report here.) Money quote:
The problem of AIDS, in particular, clearly calls for a medical and pharmaceutical response. This is not enough, however: the problem goes deeper. Above all, it is an ethical problem. The change of behavior that it requires – for example, sexual abstinence, rejection of sexual promiscuity, fidelity within marriage – ultimately involves the question of integral development, which demands a global approach and a global response from the church. For if it is to be effective, the prevention of AIDS must be based on a sex education that is itself grounded in an anthropology anchored in the natural law and enlightened by the word of God and the church’s teaching.
There are a number of notable things about the quotation, (I can’t find the entire document, so please correct me if I interpret out of context.)
1. AIDS is an ethical problem that involves individual behavior, but that defaults to social structures ultimately. The Pope is absolutely on target here. AIDS is not reducible to “boys [and girls] behaving badly,” but is closely tied to social factors like grinding poverty, endemic sexism, lack of education, and, in some situations, governmental corruption that impedes effective delivery of aid. So lack of integral development is the background noise that enables the virus to get a foothold in the first place, and makes it tough to eradicate. (NB: Benin is not especially hard-hit by AIDS in comparison to some other African nations, with an overall prevalence of 1.2% Compare Botswana and Swaziland at about 25%, and the US at about 0.3% The rate of HIV in some high-risk populations in Benin goes as high as 44.7%.)
Poverty? Oh, yes. Benin’s GDP per capita is 198th in the world. Sexism? You bet. Benin is ranked at 7th worst in the world by the World Economic Forum. Illiteracy? Here the gender gap exacerbates an already wretched situation. Literacy in 2002 was 47.9% for men, and only 23.3% for women. So Benin is a poster-child of structural injustice corroding society.
2. Sex education anchored in natural law, enlightened by the Gospel. There are many interpretations about the actual details of such an educational program, but across the Catholic ideological spectrum there are folks arguing for a natural law approach enlightened by the Gospel. Natural law is ultimately a rational argument about the good life for human beings, and the actions or virtues that constitute that good life. Of course, as the Pope said in the previous sentence, really it’s basically a matter of social structures of injustice. His call for chastity is hard to hear in the chaos of poverty and illiteracy, and impossible for disempowered women to achieve for themselves. For women, it’s just not possible to take control of one’s sexual life under conditions of such structural evil. So, sure, on the sex ed, but let’s not take our eyes off the basic problems here.
3. He deemphasizes the condom question. I would infer (optimistically, perhaps,) that “medical and pharmaceutical interventions” would include access to condoms to prevent spread of disease. It just stands to reason. Myself, I’d prefer that he’d just come out clearly in favor of condoms for disease prophylaxis. But what I want to praise here is that the Pope didn’t reduce the problem of AIDS to the question of condoms. Absent real attention to poverty, sexism, and illiteracy, all the condoms in the world won’t stop the disease. Better to let that question be settled prudentially, (and then to respect the experts’ strongly pro-condom stance,) than to let people think that AIDS is reducible to “yes or no on condoms?”
As far as I can tell, the Pope doesn’t actually address sexism in this address. (The Church would have to empower women in its own ranks before the Church’s social-justice calls for empowerment of women in broader society will be heard. Again, it just stands to reason.) But the framing of AIDS in terms of the social sins that drive the pandemic, demanding a global response? I say “Way to go!”
Lisa,
I believe that the Pope’s words were not part of a “talk,” but came from the Apostolic Exhortation, “Africae munus” which is the Pope’s summing up and reflection on the Synod held in Rome in Fall 2009. Benedict signed it and presented it in the Cathedral during his visit to Benin. It may be accessed here:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_exh_20111119_africae-munus_en.html#II._Living_in_harmony
The passage to which you refer occurs in the section entitled “The Protection of Life” (#s 70-78).
Ah! Thanks!
I see that the signing ceremony was not in the Cathedral but in Basilica of the Immaculate Conception of Mary of Ouidah.
The next paragraph also discusses AIDS, but no mention of condoms:
“73. In the name of life – which it is the Church’s duty to defend and protect – and in union with the Synod Fathers, I offer an expression of renewed encouragement and support to all the Church’s institutions and movements that are working in the field of healthcare, especially with regard to AIDS. You are doing wonderful and important work. I ask international agencies to acknowledge you and to offer you assistance, respecting your specific character and acting in a spirit of collaboration. Once again, I warmly encourage those institutes and programmes of therapeutic and pharmaceutical research which seek to eradicate pandemics. Spare no effort to arrive at results as swiftly as possible, out of love for the precious gift of life.[115] May you discover solutions and provide everyone with access to treatments and medicines, taking account of uncertain situations! The Church, indeed, has been pleading for a long time for high quality medical treatment to be made available at minimum cost to all concerned.[116]
Regarding women, that discussion goes on from articles 55 to 59 but talks about equality but “without confusing or conflating the specific character of each”
“57. When I visited Africa, I insisted that: “we must recognize, affirm and defend the equal dignity of man and woman: they are both persons, utterly unique among all the living beings found in the world.”[94] Unfortunately, the evolution of ways of thinking in this area is much too slow. The Church has the duty to contribute to the recognition and liberation of women, following the example of Christ’s own esteem for them (cf. Mt 15:21-28; Lk 7:36-50; 8:1-3; 10:38-42; Jn 4:7-42). Giving women opportunities to make their voice heard and to express their talents through initiatives which reinforce their worth, their self-esteem and their uniqueness would enable them to occupy a place in society equal to that of men – without confusing or conflating the specific character of each – since both men and women are the “image” of the Creator (cf. Gen 1:27). Bishops should encourage and promote the formation of women so that they may assume “their proper share of responsibility and participation in the community life of society and … of the Church.”[95] Women will thus contribute to the humanization of society.
Thanks for that number 57, John Hayes! A good statement, and one we need to hear.
I don’t reallu see much positives in what the pope said. I haven’t read the document, but from what’s been quored here, it seems like old news … he still doesn’t mention condoms, he emphasizes natural law: is this to remind us that he thinks homsexual relationships are disordered, that women, while equal, have their “special nature” that keeps them in theirontologcal place?, he says AIDS is an ethical problem, which I suppose puts it within his realm, but I think that opinion doesn’t really help – helping with poverty and women’s equality would probably save more lives than building more churches. Some links from the past I thought were interesting …
– Seeing is Believing: Questions about Faith-Based Organizations Involved in HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment
– a video, Emily Oster: What do we really know about the spread of AIDS? …. http://youtu.be/xGXt3GUJ-9w
– HIV/AIDS leading cause of death among women ages 15-44, WHO study shows
“I would infer (optimistically, perhaps,) that “medical and pharmaceutical interventions” would include access to condoms to prevent spread of disease.”
I think that interpretation goes way beyond “optimistic.” Somehow, I don’t think the pope had in mind anything like “take 2 condoms and call me in the morning.” More likely, he was referring to drugs and other medical treatments. What’s more important, though, is recognizing the pope as such a source of authority that we want him to agree with us.
Crystal- -
What makes you think that the Vatican has not give a great deal of help in African to combat AIDS? It is my understanding that it has been a leader in that matter. And what all church building are you talking about? Do you think that the Vatican has misspent money on churches that should have gone to the poor? If you want to complain about money spent on new churches, go take a look at what has happened in California.
Hi Ann,
No, I didn’t mean that the church is spending money on buildings that it should be spebding on the poor (although almost 60 million for the Crystal Cathedral seems strange to me :). I just meant that the pope seemed to be saying that the problem of AIDS was an ethical or moral problem that could be fixed through teaching on ethics/morals by the church, while I think that economic and social programs would probably make more of a dent inthe spread of AIDS.
I know the church has helped a lot with AIDS in Africa, but I do think there’s room for improvement. Bishop Kevin Dowling has made some cogent criticisms ….. http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?id=24947991-3048-741E-1288626171072423
Crystal, are you familiar with this?
http://allafrica-sistertosister.org/
I think some of the Catholic initiatives are under-reported.
The problem of AIDS, in particular, clearly calls for a medical and pharmaceutical response.
Why not merely pharmaceutical? What kind of response could he have in mind, that would be medical but not pharmaceutical?
Hi Rita,
No, I hadn’t read of that. Thaks for the link – it sounds very interesting. It’s true – what little I know of the church’s activities in Africa about AIDS comes mostly from reading about Bishop Kevin Dowling’s work. Here’s a PBS news video from a few months ago about the Vatican and condoms and AIDS …. it has a part about Dowling and the women he works with, if you’re interested … http://youtu.be/ChMSyJG__n0
Claire,
Maybe he’s thinking of medical/biological research into the AIDS virus itself, though I assume that the pharmos do some of that too, or perhaps epidemiological research
Claire,
The medical response may suggest mobilizing resources to care for the patients as they are dying. It can be prolonged and terrible.
The notion of “empowerment” is really grating to me. Jesus did not seek to be “empowered”, just the opposite. He came to SERVE. The idea that sacramental matters in the Church should be settled in terms of empowerment rather than service represent a complete surrender to a non-Catholic mentality, in my opinion.
I have long believed that the Church’s Natural Law approach to contraceptian, as in Humanae Vitae, is unconvincing. And during all those years when the Church opposed the use of condoms in the face of aids, that kind of teaching borders on deliberate blindness for the sake of an ideology.
When I was a missionary in South America, we pushed contraception, the heck with what Rome was saying. Thirty percent of our people were starving to death. But we quickly understood how much the culture was involved and the role poverty played. People had large families because that was their form of social security for old age. They needed to have at least six children who could take care of them when they were old, which came all too soon. As soon as people had some sense of a more secure future, they stopped having so many children.
And we learnd the impact of machismo. Men had this crazy theory that homosexuality was a virus they could catch between January and June. The only proof they had that they were not homosexuals was another child. But if the child was a girl, the situation was still in doubt. And so they felt free to have children by other women.