| Facts of Life: Chapter 21: Contraception: The Historical Teaching of the Christian Church on Contraception |
 |
 |
 |
The Historical Teaching of the Christian Church on Contraception.
"Contraception cannot be an expression of total self-giving, because in contraception, something is done to oneself to destroy the power to conceive a child. That same selfishness that wants to prevent the child by contraception will grow until it wants to kill the child already conceived. We must fight selfishness with a true, generous and sacrificing love." — Mother Teresa of Calcutta.[59]
From the Beginning. From the time of its founding, the Christian Church has universally condemned contraception. Athenagoras, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, Barnabas, St. Basil the Great, Caesarius, Clement of Alexandria, Ephraem the Syrian, Epiphanius, St. Jerome, St. John Chrysostom, Hippolytus, Lactantius, Minucius Felix, Origen of Alexandria, Tertullian, and the assembled Bishops at the First Council of Nicaea were some of the Early Church Fathers who wrote and spoke against contraception.[60] As the various Protestant denominations formed, their founders and leaders also condemned contraception in the most forceful terms imaginable. John Calvin called the sin of contraception "condemned" and "doubly monstrous" and saw abortion as "a crime incapable of expiation." John Wesley said contraception is "very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections." Martin Luther called those who used contraceptives "logs," "stock" and "swine."[61] Virtually every leader of every Protestant denomination condemned contraception explicitly in sermons and writings. These included
The Fatal Mistake. Until 1930 all Christian churches were unanimous in their opposition to artificial means of birth prevention. The first crack in the dam was Resolution 15 of the Anglican Bishop's Lambeth Conference of August 15, 1930, passed by a vote of 193 to 67. Figure 21-11 shows the pertinent part of this Resolution. For purposes of contrast, the statement of the Lambeth Conference ten years earlier, which condemned contraception unequivocally, is also shown. Those who examine this statement carefully will clearly recognize the familiar semantic tools of the pro-abortion movement. Notice that Resolution 15 sounds smooth, firm, and compassionate. Notice also that it places no real limits on the Christian, but instead leaves any action at all up to him and his conscience. Notice also that the allowable 'methods' are not defined by Resolution 15. Notice also that the term 'Christian principles' is not defined. Using the same logic expressed by this Resolution, abortion — and even infanticide — could easily be justified if the "conscientious" individual thought that the child would be a burden or an inconvenience in any way. This is a profound and rapid change from the statements promulgated by the Lambeth Conference as recently as 1908 and 1917, which labeled artificial contraception as "demoralizing to character and hostile to national welfare." Pro-life Anglicans clearly recognized the danger to their church long ago. C.K. Millard vividly illustrates the primary anti-life tactic of infiltration and subversion as he warned against pro-contraception agitators;
Although many Malthusians are rationalists, they are well aware that without some religious sanction their policy could never emerge from the dim underworld of unmentioned and unrespected things and could never be advocated openly in the light of day. To this end birth control is camouflaged by pseudo-poetic and pseudo-religious phraseology, and the Anglican Church is asked to alter her teaching. Birth controllers realize that it is useless to ask this of the Catholic Church but as regards the Church of England, which makes no claim to infallibility, the case is different, and discussion is possible.[63]
Figure 21-11
The Anglican Bishop's Contrasting 1920 and 1930 Statements on Contraception Statement of the 1920 Lambeth Conference
-- "We utter an emphatic warning against the use of unnatural means for the avoidance of conception, together with the grave dangers — physical, moral, and religious — thereby incurred, and against the evils with which the extension of such use threatens the race. In opposition to the teaching which in the name of science and religion encourages married people in the deliberate cultivation of sexual union as an end in itself, we steadfastly uphold what must always be regarded as the governing consideration of Christian marriage. One is the primary purpose for which marriage exists — namely, the continuation of the race through the gift and heritage of children; the other is the paramount importance in married life of deliberate and thoughtful self-control."[64] Resolution 15 of the 1930 Lambeth Conference
-- "Where there is a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, the method must be decided on Christian principles. The primary and obvious method is complete abstinence from intercourse (as far as may be necessary) in a life of discipleship and self-control lived in the power of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, in those cases where there is such a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, and where there is a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence, the Conference agrees that other methods may be used, provided that this is done in the light of the same Christian principles. The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception-control for motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."
Just as pro-abortionists used the "hard cases" to impose abortion on demand — and just as they are now being used to lobby for euthanasia on demand — they were used to pave the way for easy access to contraception. In December 1936, during a hearing on the constitutionality of the Comstock Act before the Federal Court of Appeals, testimony by Dr. Frederick C. Holden urged that contraceptives be made available for the following "hard cases:" When the mother had tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, epilepsy, mental retardation; if the children were "improperly spaced;" or when the family could not properly provide for the children.[65] The United States Federal Council of Churches (now the National Council of Churches) had been waiting eagerly for a particular church to take the lead in "modernizing" Christendom's stand on birth prevention. In March of 1931, the FCC endorsed "the careful and restrained use of contraceptives by married people," while at the same time conceding that "serious evils, such as extramarital sex relations, may be increased by general knowledge of contraceptives." The reaction of many to the statements by the Anglican Church and the Federal Council of Churches was immediate and forceful. In the early 1930s, priests and ministers from the Catholic Church and other denominations were not afraid of being labeled "judgmental," "backward," "bigoted," "narrow-minded," or "out of touch with mainstream American society." The churches had not yet given up their right — and their duty — to be forceful voices in the public square, and they were not yet intimidated into a timid silence by atheist and anti-life groups. These churches predicted that easy access to artificial birth control would lead to abortion and the destruction of the family. It is fascinating to read these decades-old statements by major Christian churches and the secular press, and to realize how precisely current events have fulfilled their prophecies. The writers, all experienced students of human nature, understood the 'slippery slope' concept, and also clearly recognized that we had taken the irrevocable first fatal step. The pro-contraception stand by the Federal Council of Churches was condemned by virtually all major churches, as shown in Figure 21-12.
Figure 21-12
Statements by the Churches and the Secular Press Condemning Artificial Contraception Following the Anglican's Lambeth Conference of 1930 The Lutheran Church
* "Birth Control, as popularly understood today and involving the use of contraceptives, is one of the most repugnant of modern aberrations, representing a 20th century renewal of pagan bankruptcy." — Dr. Walter A. Maier, Concordia Lutheran Theological Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri. The Methodist Church
* "The whole disgusting [birth control] movement rests on the assumption of man's sameness with the brutes. ... Its [the Federal Council of Churches] deliverance on the matter of birth control has no authorization from any churches representing it, and what it has said I regard as most unfortunate, not to use any stronger words. It certainly does not represent the Methodist Church, and I doubt if it represents any other Protestant Church in what it has said on this subject." — Bishop Warren Chandler, Methodist Episcopal Church South, April 13, 1931. The Presbyterian Church
* "Its [Federal Council of Churches] recent pronouncement on birth control should be enough reason, if there were no other, to withdraw from support of that body, which declares that it speaks for the Presbyterian and other Protestant churches in ex cathedra pronouncements." — The Presbyterian, April 2, 1931. The Catholic Church
* "In order that she [the Catholic Church] may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, she raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin." — Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930, Section 4, Paragraph 4. —————————————— * "Since a week ago last Saturday we can no longer expect them to defend the law of God. These sects will work out the very logic of their ways and in fifty or one hundred years there will be only the Church and paganism. We will be left to fight the battle alone — and we will." — Father Fulton J. Sheen of the Catholic University of America. "Comments ..... and Comments On the Report of The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America." The American Birth Control League's Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 4 (April 1931), page 143. ———————————— * "Liberal Protestantism is really (so it seems to us and we speak with all respect for the noble solicitude it displays for human welfare, its passion for the building up of a better order of society) a new religion, but it is no longer Protestantism — it is pagan humanitarianism, it is the creed of social service built on shifting and unstable experiments, but not on the demonstrated facts of materialistic science." — Editorial from The Commonweal of March 29, 1931. "Comments ..... and Comments on the Report of The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America." The American Birth Control League's Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 4 (April 1931), page 142.
The Secular Press
* "Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee's report, if carried into effect, would sound the death-knell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be "careful and restrained" is preposterous." — The Washington Post, March 22, 1931.
Go to Next Topic: The Teaching of the Catholic Church on Contraception
Return to Contraception Table of Contents
Endnotes for “The Historical Teaching of the Christian Church on Contraception” [59] St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan (c. 339-397), Hexameron, 5.18.58; Athenagoras of Athens, letter to Marcus Aurelius in 177, Legatio pro Christianis ("Supplication for the Christians"), page 35; St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354-430), De Nuptius et Concupiscus ("On Marriage and Concupiscence"), 1.17; Barnabas (c. 70-138), Epistle, Volume II, page 19; St. Basil the Great, First Canonical Letter, Canon 2 (A.D. 374); Caesarius, Bishop of Arles (470-543), Sermons, 1.12; Clement of Alexandria, "The Father of Theologians" (c. 150-220), Christ the Educator, Volume II, page 10. Also see Octavius, c.30, nn. 2-3; Ephraem the Syrian, De Timore Dei, page 10; St. Jerome, Letter to Eustochium, 22.13 (A.D. 396); St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Romans 24 (A.D. 391); Letter of Barnabas 19 (A.D. 74); Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies (A.D. 228); Lactantius, Divine Institutes 6:20 (A.D. 307); Minucius Felix, Octavius, 30 (A.D. 226); Origen of Alexandria (185-254), Against Heresies, page 9; Tertullian, Apology, 9:8 (A.D. 197), and The Soul, 25,27 (A.D. 210). The original quotes are given in "The Fathers Know Best: Contraception." This Rock, January 1996, pages 40 to 42. [60] The original quotes are provided in Charles Provan. The Bible and Birth Control [Monongahela, Pennsylvania: Zimmer Press, 1989]. [61] Anglican C.K. Millard, The Modern Churchman (1919), as quoted in Patrick F. Fagan. "A Culture of Inverted Sexuality." The Catholic World Report, November 1998, page 61. [62] The original quotes are provided in Charles Provan. The Bible and Birth Control [Monongahela, Pennsylvania: Zimmer Press, 1989]. [63] Anglican C.K. Millard, The Modern Churchman (1919), as quoted in Patrick F. Fagan. "A Culture of Inverted Sexuality." The Catholic World Report, November 1998, page 61. [64] Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in Father A.S. Antonisamy. Wisdom for All Times: Mahatma Gandhi and Pope Paul VI on Birth Regulation. Family Life Service Centre, Archbishop's House, Pondicherry 605001 India. June 1978. Quotes are taken from D.G. Tendulkar (Editor). The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volumes 2 and 4. Published by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. [65] Morris L. Ernst and Alexander Lindsay. The Censor Marches On [New York: Doubleday, Doran, and Company, Inc., 1940], pages 162 and 163.
|