Licit Use for Condoms--to Prevent Spread of HIV?

[PRmerger]

Would it be moral for the Church to advocate use of condoms in order to prevent disease, if the contraceptive intention of condoms was secondary?

Take the use of the Pill for medical reasons. The Church has no objection to its use for, say, endometriosis, as long as the primary reason for using the Pill is not for its contraceptive properties.

From Humane Vitae
"On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.

I posted this question on another thread, and the discussion became whether condoms are actually effective in decreasing the risk of spreading HIV. For this discussion I find those statistics irrelevant.

Let’s just assume, rhetorically, that there’s a condom that is 100% effective in preventing transmission of HIV.

(Someone may claim that the above quote in Humane Vitae states that what is licit is only that which cures bodily diseases. The Pill does not “cure any bodily diseases”, yet it is licit to use for medical reasons. I accept that condoms, also, do not cure anything.)

 

[Seatuck]

Would it be moral for the Church to advocate use of condoms in order to prevent disease, if the contraceptive intention of condoms was secondary?

Take the use of the Pill for medical reasons. The Church has no objection to its use for, say, endometriosis, as long as the primary reason for using the Pill is not for its contraceptive properties.

From Humane Vitae
"On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.

I posted this question on another thread, and the discussion became whether condoms are actually effective in decreasing the risk of spreading HIV. For this discussion I find those statistics irrelevant.

Let’s just assume, rhetorically, that there’s a condom that is 100% effective in preventing transmission of HIV.

(Someone may claim that the above quote in Humane Vitae states that what is licit is only that which cures bodily diseases. The Pill does not “cure any bodily diseases”, yet it is licit to use for medical reasons. I accept that condoms, also, do not cure anything.)

No. The condom would not be treating the primary patient with the disease for anything. It would not be managing any symptom of the patient with the disease as hormonal preparations do for instance in the case of endometriosis. The pill is not being used to prevent the man from catching endometriosis.

 

[redrosetea]

They only way to prevent the spread of aids is abstinence…

 

[Leopard]

It is licit to use a condom to keep water and dirt out of a rifle or shotgun muzzle. There are doubtless many other moral and licit uses.

 

[PRmerger]

No. The condom would not be treating the primary patient with the disease for anything. It would not be managing any symptom of the patient with the disease as hormonal preparations do for instance in the case of endometriosis. The pill is not being used to prevent the man from catching endometriosis.

Why is managing symptoms more moral than prevention of transmission?

 

[Leopard]

Why is managing symptoms more moral than prevention of transmission?

It isn’t necessarily, but in this case case there is another method of preventing transmission with greater effectiveness and no immoral properties - sexual abstinence.

It may be a difficult thing for spouses to accept, but it is part of “in sickness and in health, in good times and in bad times”, and ultimately this sacrifice can be a greater expression of love than sexual expression.

 

[PRmerger]

It isn’t necessarily, but in this case case there is another method of preventing transmission with greater effectiveness and no immoral properties - sexual abstinence.

There are other methods of managing symptoms of endometriosis which do not involve using the Pill. Yet the Church has not required that women seek those therapies first.

 

[Leopard]

There are other methods of managing symptoms of endometriosis which do not involve using the Pill. Yet the Church has not required that women seek those therapies first.

The situations are not parallel. If a physician prescribes a hormonal treatment for endometriosis, that medicine will treat the endometriosis whether that woman is sexually active or not. In other words, the medicine as prescribed is not related to any specific sexual behavior.

Prescribing a condom for the prevention of transmission of disease, however, is directly linked to a specific sexual behavior: sexual intercourse while wearing a condom. A doctor would not prescribe the wearing of a condom for a man who was not sexually active because outside the context of the sexual act the treatment wouldn’t have any effect as to the transmission of disease.

 

[Seatuck]

There are other methods of managing symptoms of endometriosis which do not involve using the Pill. Yet the Church has not required that women seek those therapies first.

There are many priests who would tell a woman to do so. There are many priests who would tell this woman to abstain from the marital act until she was done taking the pill.

You also have to remember that condomistic sex can never be unitive. It prevents the couple from coming together in one flesh. It will never resemble Christs gift to us in the Eucharist . That’s a big problem in the theology of marriage.

 

[PRmerger]

The situations are not parallel. If a physician prescribes a hormonal treatment for endometriosis, that medicine will treat the endometriosis whether that woman is sexually active or not. In other words, the medicine as prescribed is not related to any specific sexual behavior.

Prescribing a condom for the prevention of transmission of disease, however, is directly linked to a specific sexual behavior: sexual intercourse while wearing a condom. A doctor would not prescribe the wearing of a condom for a man who was not sexually active because outside the context of the sexual act the treatment wouldn’t have any effect as to the transmission of disease.

Ok. That explanation sounds reasonable to me. Thanks!