Who Still Fights Against Contraception?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Go back about 50 years and you'll see that Catholics and Protestants stood shoulder to shoulder on the issue of the use of contraceptives during sex. The Catholic Church remains intransigent on this issue, but it seems that most mainline Protestants no longer speak out on this issue. It appears that they have abdigated this issue as one that is personal and requires no censure from the pulpit. This brings up a few questions.

1. If the moral issue of contraceptive use can be recategorized as a personal issue that the church cannot speak on, what trend does this set for other personal behaviors?

2. Is there any significant corner of Protestantism that still speaks boldly and expressly on this issue, not by just having it encoded in their platform, but actively opposed from the pulpit?

3. As the late Blessed John Paul's encyclical on the Theology of the Body beautifully illustrated the Catholic Church's position on contraceptives, can Protestants also form a compelling argument on which once again take a stand against the proliferation of contraceptives?

Also posted on:

The Highway - Discussion Board

Who Still Fights Against Contraception?

Edited June 6, 2011 by Saintmichaeldefendthem1

[MarginOfError]

Go back about 50 years and you'll see that Catholics and Protestants stood shoulder to shoulder on the issue of the use of contraceptives during sex. The Catholic Church remains intransigent on this issue, but it seems that most mainline Protestants no longer speak out on this issue. It appears that they have abdigated this issue as one that is personal and requires no censure from the pulpit. This brings up a few questions.

1. If the moral issue of contraceptive use can be recategorized as a personal issue that the church cannot speak on, what trend does this set for other personal behaviors?

It sets a trend of churches identifying what moral issues they feel are a product of culture and which are a product of eternal consequence.

2. Is there any significant corner of Protestantism that still speaks boldly and expressly on this issue, not by just having it encoded in their platform, but actively opposed from the pulpit?

I don't know of any in my area. Fiannan is the closest example I could give you, but he wasn't Protestant.

3. As the late Blessed John Paul's encyclical on the Theology of the Body beautifully illustrated the Catholic Church's position on contraceptives, can Protestants also form a compelling argument on which once again take a stand against the proliferation of contraceptives?

Not being Protestant, I don't think I'm qualified to answer the question. But I would guess that to do so would require expressly defining the purpose of sexual relations.

[RipplecutBuddha]

As far as official church positions, the LDS church is still opposed to contraceptives, however I can't recall ever hearing of anyone being excommunicated for using them during my lifetime. The other part of the official church position has been "What happens between a husband and wife in the privacy of their own home is between them and Heavenly Father."

What I take this to mean is that the rules have been laid out, and we know what they are. It isn't the job of the LDS clergy to invade the privacy of the members to make sure they're fully obedient. We don't answer to the Bishop, or even the Prophet regarding intimate issues such as this.

As for the shift in protestant faiths, I have seen a similar activity overall in protestant positions. Whether it's right or wrong, I won't say, though I disagree with it personally.

[prisonchaplain]

The OP may well have better results with LDS theology. I am not aware that contraceptive use was ever taboo in my fellowship. On the other hand, I doubt it was much talked about. What was opposed, of course, was premarital sex. Contraceptives might have seemed a "dirty" subject, in that they seemed to encourage promiscuity.

Catholic teaching that God is in control of all life--so much so that we should not use any artificial means to limit birth--is rather unique in the Christian world. For good or ill, a super-majority of American Catholics ignore this particular teaching.

[MarginOfError]

As far as official church positions, the LDS church is still opposed to contraceptives

I don't think that's true, and I'd be interested in knowing what leads you to believe that it is.

[Guest saintish]

As far as official church positions, the LDS church is still opposed to contraceptives.

I couldn't disagree more.

Birth Control

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Children are one of the greatest blessings in life, and their birth into loving and nurturing families is central to God’s purposes for humanity. When husband and wife are physically able, they have the privilege and responsibility to bring children into the world and to nurture them. The decision of how many children to have and when to have them is a private matter for the husband and wife.

Additional Information

God has a plan for the happiness of all who live on the earth, and the birth of children in loving families is central to His plan. The first commandment He gave to Adam and Eve was to “be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” (Genesis 1:28). The scriptures declare, “Children are a heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Those who are physically able have the blessing, joy, and obligation to bear children and to raise a family. This blessing should not be postponed for selfish reasons.

Sexual relations within marriage are not only for the purpose of procreation, but also a means of expressing love and strengthening emotional and spiritual ties between husband and wife.

Husband and wife are encouraged to pray and counsel together as they plan their families. Issues to consider include the physical and mental health of the mother and father and their capacity to provide the basic necessities of life for their children.

Decisions about birth control and the consequences of those decisions rest solely with each married couple. Elective abortion as a method of birth control, however, is contrary to the commandments of God.

Above is "the official" church position and nowhere does it say that the church is opposed to or even discourages contraception. The offical church position, in short, is that it is between the husband and wife to decide when and how many children to have. no where does it say that contraception is against the commands of G_d except for abortion.

[Backroads]

1. If the moral issue of contraceptive use can be recategorized as a personal issue that the church cannot speak on, what trend does this set for other personal behaviors?

Optimistically, the trend would be encouraging intrinsic motivation to take control of one's spiritual and religious life rather than "Whine whine, the church makes me do this, whine whine."

Pessimistically, how far does this go? Could it lead to completely ignoring the rules of the Church and just going with "it feels good"?

At what point does an individual stop listening to church guidelines altogether? At that point are they really a Catholic/Mormon/insert other church?

2. Is there any significant corner of Protestantism that still speaks boldly and expressly on this issue, not by just having it encoded in their platform, but actively opposed from the pulpit?

In my limited experience I know of a few individual congregations.

3. As the late Blessed John Paul's encyclical on the Theology of the Body beautifully illustrated the Catholic Church's position on contraceptives, can Protestants also form a compelling argument on which once again take a stand against the proliferation of contraceptives?

I don't see why not.

[Backroads]

Question: When churches are against contraception, do they take any particular stand on natural family planning?

[Jamie123]

Question: When churches are against contraception, do they take any particular stand on natural family planning?

LOL - for a very funny answer to that question try reading David Lodge's novel "The British Museum is Falling Down".

[Traveler]

It all depends on how contraception is defined. Being celibate can be considered a form of contraception which would make the Catholic clergy and nuns practicing a form of contraception. As far as I know abstinence is an acceptable form of contraception to Catholics. On the other hand many Protestants oppose adoration as an acceptable form of contraception.

I do not think much has changed except that the population growth among Christians has decreased over the last 50 years (generation).

The Traveler

[mnn727]

As far as official church positions, the LDS church is still opposed to contraceptives,

This is NOT a true statement

[Jamie123]

This is NOT a true statement

I'm a little surprised by that statement too. The missionaries told me that the decision whether or not to use contraception was up to individual couples.

[Maureen]

..On the other hand many Protestants oppose adoration as an acceptable form of contraception....

I'm guessing you meant to write abortion.

M.

[LDSJewess]

I think what a married couple mutually decides in the privacy of their bedroom should stay in their bedroom among themselves.

Children need a lot more than the ability to be conceived and born. A cpuple needs to have the personal, physical, emotional and spirtual strength to raise a child properly. There are too many people that become subject to peer pressure to marry too young, have children to early etc: and it can often leave childred neglected, abused, mal noursihed and lacing in the opportunity for their own physical, emotional, educational and spiritual progression.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I'll give you the main thrust of Blessed John Paul's encyclical "Theology of the Body."

In Catholic theology, sexual union is an act of unmitigated self donation between a man and a wife, with the sole purpose of creating a family. Anything that frustrates the procreative purpose of sex, i.e. homosexuality, masturbation, contraceptives, and unnatural techniques (oral, anal) must be considered an impious deviation from that purpose and therefore a sin. Further and more importantly, when the main purpose of sex is supplanted by pleasure and self indulgence, all manner of evil spring forth. It's self-seeking pleasure, in contrast to full self-donation, that leads to affairs, fornication, teen sex, divorces, deviant lifestyles, abortion, broken families, and all other manner of heartache and perversion. When sex is separated from its God given purpose, the results are disasterous and manifold, corrupting an entire society.

But the point of this thread is not the Catholic position, which has remained unchanged, but rather how Protestants used to instinctively understand the evil of contraception but have now abandoned the fight. If this is an example of the turpitude of Christians becoming a personal matter, should we not be disturbed by this trend? Authority unused is authority lost.

[prisonchaplain]

Here's a broad look at the historic perspectives of various religions on the use of contraceptives. Contraception and religion, a short history, by Kathleen O'Grady, at the Museum of Menstruation and Women's Health

[Maureen]

I'll give you the main thrust of Blessed John Paul's encyclical "Theology of the Body."

...Anything that frustrates the procreative purpose of sex, i.e. homosexuality, masturbation, contraceptives, and unnatural techniques (oral, anal) must be considered an impious deviation from that purpose and therefore a sin. Further and more importantly, when the main purpose of sex is supplanted by pleasure and self indulgence, all manner of evil spring forth. It's self-seeking pleasure, in contrast to full self-donation, that leads to affairs, fornication, teen sex, divorces, deviant lifestyles, abortion, broken families, and all other manner of heartache and perversion. When sex is separated from its God given purpose, the results are disasterous and manifold, corrupting an entire society.

So would this "Theology of the Body" consider infertility and age sinful? Is the inability to conceive through sexual intercourse sinful? What about age? Is there scripture that commands a married couple to stop having sex because they are no longer able to conceive due to age?

But the point of this thread is not the Catholic position, which has remained unchanged, but rather how Protestants used to instinctively understand the evil of contraception but have now abandoned the fight. If this is an example of the turpitude of Christians becoming a personal matter, should we not be disturbed by this trend? Authority unused is authority lost.

Maybe Protestants realized that sex between a married couple is more than just for procreating; it's an expression of love.

M.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Maureen

[Backroads]

As far as official church positions, the LDS church is still opposed to contraceptives, however I can't recall ever hearing of anyone being excommunicated for using them during my lifetime. The other part of the official church position has been "What happens between a husband and wife in the privacy of their own home is between them and Heavenly Father."

What I take this to mean is that the rules have been laid out, and we know what they are. It isn't the job of the LDS clergy to invade the privacy of the members to make sure they're fully obedient. We don't answer to the Bishop, or even the Prophet regarding intimate issues such as this.

As for the shift in protestant faiths, I have seen a similar activity overall in protestant positions. Whether it's right or wrong, I won't say, though I disagree with it personally.

is there a source on this?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

So would this "Theology of the Body" consider infertility and age sinful? Is the inability to conceive through sexual intercourse sinful? What about age? Is there scripture that commands a married couple to stop having sex because they are no longer able to conceive due to age?

No, of course there is no sanction against those unable to conceive

Maybe Protestants realized that sex between a married couple is more than just for procreating; it's an expression of love.

M.

Yes, sex serves a dual purpose. What I'm referring to is making the pleasure of sex the ultimate end. When one just wants to get off, they will pursue any means to do so, including infidelity, fornication, homosexuality, masturbation, and beastiality. When sex is between a married couple, it's an expression of love, not self indulgence, to the one person he or she has committed to spending the rest of his/her life with. God made the process of love and procreation very pleasurable indeed, but when that pleasure is pursued above all else, as via the use of contraceptives for example, then it becomes sin.

[RipplecutBuddha]

Okay, okay, I was wrong...I get it...call off the hounds, and tell the guys in the black van across the street they can go home now.

Seriously though, I had thought that was the case. In retrospect, I'm unsure where or when I first thought this, but no matter.

[Maureen]

...."Theology of the Body."

In Catholic theology, sexual union is an act of unmitigated self donation between a man and a wife, with the sole purpose of creating a family. Anything that frustrates the procreative purpose of sex, i.e.... contraceptives,... and must be considered an impious deviation from that purpose and therefore a sin....

But the point of this thread is not the Catholic position, which has remained unchanged, but rather how Protestants used to instinctively understand the evil of contraception but have now abandoned the fight....

...God made the process of love and procreation very pleasurable indeed, but when that pleasure is pursued above all else, as via the use of contraceptives for example, then it becomes sin.

Saint, I'm not sure if this is entirely the Catholic view or your view but, you have a strange way of looking at contraceptives. I see from your profile that you are single. Have you ever been married? I would guess that the majority of married couples wish to have children but many couples do not wish to have children right away (ie honeymoon special) and many couples wish to have the number of children that best fits their family. Having a child once a year is not reasonable or is it always responsible. Contraceptives provide married couples a way for them to plan the size and time of their family. Pleasure from sexual relations with your spouse can happen with or without contraceptives. And if a couple were to have sex for the sole purpose of getting pregnant are they not allowed to take pleasure from it?

M.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Profile needs to be updated. I am happily re-married to the mother of my children.

[mrmarklin]

Like many of the things the Lord has given us, contraception is a tool that needs to be used wisely. We will be judged based on the knowledge we obtain, and how we use it.

I know for a fact, based on many arguments over the years, that from a cultural point of view, many members believe that the Church is against contraception as a matter of principle; citing the first commandment given to man: multiply and replenish.

[prisonchaplain]

It's a common non-LDS perception that you have many children because you are supposed to do so so all the spirits in heaven can gain bodies. Is this total myth, or is there something to it?

[MarginOfError]

It's a common non-LDS perception that you have many children because you are supposed to do so so all the spirits in heaven can gain bodies. Is this total myth, or is there something to it?

That depends largely on which president of the church you've been reading up on.