It should be noted that, after the government, no organisation in this country is doing more to handle the appalling results of the Aids pandemic, using both local and foreign funding, than the Catholic Church, led by its bishops.
These men are fully aware of what is going on. They see and know all about the suffering which afflicts their flocks. To pretend otherwise is simply the result of ignorance or ill-will. So how is it that they do not support what is currently regarded as the best way to control the scourge the use of condoms on a large scale?
The answer lies in a frequent occurrence the clash between morals and expediency. The question is not whether or not one agrees with the moral stance adopted by the bishops. They regard what they have said as being their moral duty to proclaim, and they have done just that.
Is it right to denigrate those who do their duty?
Do moral values come into this matter or is any action acceptable as long as it does the job? If so, we lost a fine opportunity to implement such a philosophy some months ago at the outbreak of the cholera epidemic. If we had done the expedient thing and killed off the first few sufferers we could have nipped the whole ghastly episode in the bud. But then we do feel bound by moral considerations and so do the Catholic bishops, even if many do not agree with them. Bernard Pothier, Pinelands
For the past 10 years I have been a passionate Christian campaigner for the use and availability of condoms. I have observed with deep sadness that our young people are receiving a onedimensional message of sex. Sex has become a commodity and the correct use of condoms is seen as a technical asset.
The question that begins troubling me: Where do our young people learn about love? About trust and trustworthiness, these most precious values in life?
I therefore respect the stance of the Southern African Catholic Bishops’ Conference as an attempt to give us back the spiritual dimension of sexuality that we so deeply long for: our dream to love and be loved in a faithful relationship.
Yet the inherent contradiction in the resolution makes it difficult to take this ethical injunction of mutual faithfulness seriously. The ideal of a faithful relationship between two loving partners belongs to the concept of a non-patriarchal world. How then can such an ideal be pronounced by an arch-patriarchal institution like the Catholic Church? Rev Renate Cochrane, Hout Bay
I find your cartoon deeply offensive, as I am sure do many Catholics and non-Catholics. It is vulgar and in extremely bad taste and not worthy of a serious journal such as yours.
As for Pat Hopkins’s letter, well, it is just obscene and beyond serious comment. Your headline on page 17, “Bishops are too late and out of touch”, shows that you are out of touch.
My understanding of the bishops’ comment was that they criticised the indiscriminate distribution of condoms. We witnessed this some time ago when tens of thoudands were dropped from a helicopter on crowds attending some celebration in Pretoria. This sort of thing promotes promiscuity. CPD Ogilvy, Durban
The Catholic bishops are the only public leaders that have given a honest opinion on the causes of Aids and how best to deal with it.
The vast majority of Aids cases are caused by sexual activity. Usually this activity is between partners who have no commitment to one another. Hedonism is often the overriding value.
Along comes our good government and other self-styled public interest
groups and by their words and actions say: “Since the population is so irresponsible and cannot control their sexual urges, we urge you to use these condoms and they are conveniently available everywhere, in schools, in hotels, in offices etc.”
The average person will unfortunately say: “Indeed now I can continue my sexual activity safely with a condom.”
The bishops have questioned this modus operandi and have wisely said: “Hold
on guys, there is something wrong here.”
After this alternative view is raised, the result is condemnation. We have a classical case of looking at the same problem from different paradigms.
There is such a thing as a right action and a wrong action. It is wrong to use the sexual drive for pure selfish gratification outside the bounds of commited love. If people are using it in the wrong way, they need to be told it is wrong and not encouraged to continue the wrong in safety (with condoms).
We in South Africa are sick and tired of being called irresponsible,
sex-crazed individuals who cannot control ourselves and hence are always being advised to use condoms. The majority are faithful to their spouses and many abstain without any adverse effect.
The message to use condoms is simply sending the wrong message to an already morally bankrupt society.
The battle lines are drawn. We either accept the right way or continue with the convenient way, which is unfortunately wrong. The chickens will soon come home to roost and they will hatch dragons that will literally devour us if we continue on this path. JC Muriithi Mwangi, Auckland Park
The bishops make a valid point deserving notice, that declining moral standards and politically correct attitudes have diminished the role of the family in today’s society and that this is a factor in the spread of Aids and needs to be part of the attack on it.
Unfortunately our government and the media are too mute on this aspect of the fight against Aids. The strengthening of moral standards has a special relevance in South Africa today with its high rate of crime and public corruption.
P O’Malley, Knysna
The Christian viewpoint is that regardless of the fact that a condom may provide protection, sex outside of marriage is still sinful.
There is no doubt that abstinence or a faithful marriage would provide a radical but effective solution. Society as a whole has long abandoned even the pretence of holding to the moral ideals of the Bible. The consequence is that there is no choice but to take a pragmatic approach and promote condoms in the attempt to reduce HIV/Aids.
Christians who submit themselves to an absolute moral system can’t be expected to do the same. Chris Burke, via email