Or for people who can't comprehend anything beyond a Maureen Dowd column. Kind of like a print version of MTV, without the binkin-clad women.
Steve | Homepage | 11.26.03 - 11:57 am | #

We must have cinfidence that the sacrifice of Archbishop Oscar Romero will bear fruit for his people. God triumphs is El Salvador, even if it is not in the places where the New York Times goes.

Oscar Romero, martyr of the Faith, intercede for your people, that they may see the Holy Face and come to repentance.
ben | Homepage | 11.26.03 - 11:59 am | #

I find this article troubling on several levels. If the hospital, the priests and catholic workers are defying catholic teaching, in what sense are they catholic?

On another level I, and I suspect, many others are genuinely baffled as to how one helps people who are without most of basic necessities of life and whose culture does not support chastity, etc.

Why should not an HIV+ husband or wife use condoms to prevent the spread of the disease to the healthy partner and to prevent a child from being conceived with the disease? I suppose one could preach chastity but that seems unlikely. I suppose one could say to leave it to God but that seems heartless.

Sigh! I have no answers. Only questions.
cann | 11.26.03 - 12:11 pm | #

"The irony is that no organization does more to help AIDS victims and their orphans than the Catholic Church."

The writer seems to see a paradox here-- why is the Church vehemently creating work for herself? I could see someone arguing that if the Catholic Church pushed abortion, then they could start shutting down orphanages as well.

It's impossible to understand the Church as another human institution. She's in the business of bringing souls to God, which means teaching avoidance of sin, but also being there when the sinner is in trouble (not to imply all people contract AIDS by sin).

Jesus is always among us in his body the Church, teaching the truth and bearing insult for it, while continuing to offer forgiveness and help to those who don't heed the teaching of God.
Adam N | 11.26.03 - 12:34 pm | #

cann,

"I suppose one could preach chastity but that seems unlikely."

My question is why is it so hard to conceive of someone living a chaste life? When two people are married, they are married "for better or for worse." There are vast numbers of people around this world, many of them not Christian who are faithful to wives or husbands who, for whatever reason, can no longer have sex with them, why should this be such an oddity? We are all wounded by original sin, but we are not made slave to our sexual urges thereby unless we consent to such slavery. Christianity is for grownup. We are expected by our Lord to endeavor to control ourselves with the help of prayer and the sacraments; to say that it is "unlikely" that these folks could do what God commands of them is an offence to there dignity.
John Hearn | 11.26.03 - 12:37 pm | #

John,
I wasn't thinking of Christian couples when I wrote about chastity in married life. I was thinking of the impoverished, uneducated and unchurched among whom AIDs is wreaking such devastation.

What I continually struggle with is where one starts to help people whose aspirations may only extend to a roof over their heads and enough to eat. Obviously, one starts there-- but how does one make the spiritually awake life attractive or even possible at the same time one is trying to make the necessities of physical life available?
cann | 11.26.03 - 12:56 pm | #

Do all of those adjectives you list make these people intrinsically less responsive to the Gospel? It is my understanding that it is the rich that have that problem! It is so condescending and so common for those in the first would to see the very poor as little more than animals who can't be expected to have all of the strengths and weaknesses of "ordinary" people. Aids is and other forms of VD are ravishing other, more prosperous populations too, what is their excuse?
John Hearn | 11.26.03 - 1:26 pm | #

cann:

"I was thinking of the impoverished, uneducated and unchurched among whom AIDs is wreaking such devastation."

And don't you think that the right course of action for these people is education about why chastity is the appropriate protection and why the Church's teaching are the best (only?) real option?

Don't forget that the extreme of the situation where a spouse rejects abstinence for the other spouse's sake is in the actions of Michael Schiavo: kill your wife and get a new one.

I agree with John Hearn: abstinence CAN be embraced as a way of life, but educated and uneducated people alike. The idea that it cannot implies that we are beasts with no control and no ethical values.

Sorry cann, but the Bishops are right and the "catholic" workers are the ones to be educated.
Roberto | 11.26.03 - 1:29 pm | #

Is Uganda more developed and enlightened that El Salvador? I have read numerous articles on how their abstinence based policies are the only successful ones in Africa. I think they stress abstinence first, being faithful to ones spouse second, and lastly condoms. ABC's, I think is how it is sold.
Campless | 11.26.03 - 1:41 pm | #

Obviously these hospitals can be catholic in name only . I would encourage people in El Salvador to sue the hospital when they contract AIDS when using a condom which they were told is going to prevent being infected .
Gary | 11.26.03 - 2:57 pm | #

As far as the responses go so far, you are preaching to the choir. I already agree that chastity is a virtue and that it can be practiced by anyone-- anyone who understands and accepts it as God's will and a virtue.

A large proportion of our American population doesn't see that chastity is possible, much less desirable. Why is it so hard to accept that it might be possible for people without education and in a very different culture to find it hard to embrace?

What if it takes a year to educate an HIV+ man to his responsibilities towards his wife? Is she to be endangered while he grows spiritually?

The article that provoked this discussion talks about a hospital dealing with lots of sick people. Since preaching the gospel doesn't usually produce immediately perfect converts, how does one help people with sexually transmitted diseases in the meantime?

This is the dilemma, as I see it, and the one that makes "let them be chaste" seem like a heartless non-answer.
cann | 11.26.03 - 2:58 pm | #

But what is the alternative? Be chaste, we say, as we hand them a condom? Remember that thing about actions speaking louder than words? Which way do you think they would go? Which way would you go if the only religious instructor you had contact with handed you a condom along with his sermon against it? They undermine their own efforts.
c matt | 11.26.03 - 3:11 pm | #

Both articles obscure Catholic teaching. Does instructing eleven and twelve year olds how to place condoms on bananas show more respect for the human person than teaching a responsible attitude towards sexuality?
TomM | 11.27.03 - 9:16 am | #