IS THERE A BIBLICAL BASIS FOR THE CHURCH’S TEACHING AGAINST CONTRACEPTION?
Yes. The 38th chapter of Genesis tells the story of Judah, his sons, and
Tamar. One of the sons, Onan, practiced the sin of
contraception–withdrawal in this case–with Tamar, and the Bible tells us
that God slew him because he had done an abominable thing (Gen. 38:10).
It is recognized today that Judah, Onan, and another brother were all
guilty of violating an ancient Eastern brotherhood law called the law of
the Levirate. However, the punishment for violating that law was very mild
and is spelled out in Deuteronomy 25:5- 10. Judah himself admitted his
guilt (Gen. 38:26). It is therefore clear that the special punishment
meted out to Onan was not just for the violation of the Levirate but
rather for the way in which only he had sinned–his contraceptive behavior
of going through the motions of the covenantal act and then “spilling his
seed” (Gen. 38:9).
This interpretation is backed up by the only incident in the New Testament
where immediate death is the punishment for sin–the deaths of Ananias and
Saphira who went through the motions of a giving act but defrauded it of
its meaning (Acts 5:1-11).
ARE THERE ANY OTHER BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO BIRTH CONTROL?
Probably yes. In the New Testament, it is possible that the Greek
“pharmakeia” refers to the birth control issue. “Pharmakeia” in general
was the mixing of various potions for secret purposes, and it is known
that potions were mixed in the first century A.D. to prevent or stop a
pregnancy. The typical translation as “sorcery” may not reveal all of the
specific practices condemned by the New Testament. In all three of the
passages in which it appears, it is in a context condemning sexual
immorality; two of the three passages also condemn murder. (Gal. 5:19-26;
Rev. 9:21, 21:8). Thus it is very possible that there are three New
Testament passages condemning the use of the products of “pharmakeia” for
birth control purposes.
QUOTE]Throughout her history the Catholic Church has maintained a clear, forceful, and consistent position in her teaching about the essential evil of contraception. After surveying the Church’s historical teaching on contraception, Paul VI’s Minority Commission offered the following statement:
Code:
One can find no period in history, no document of the Church, no theological school, scarcely one Catholic theologian, who ever denied that contraception was always seriously evil. The teaching of the Church in this matter is absolutely constant. Until the present century this teaching was peacefully possessed by all other Christians, whether Orthodox or Anglican or Protestant.11
In 1931, the year after the Lambeth Conference opened the doors to contraception for the Anglican Church, Pope Pius XI issued his encyclical Casti Connubii (“On Chaste Wedlock”) in which he reiterated the Church’s long-standing opposition to contraception, while explaining that, for right reasons, it is permissible to confine conjugal acts to known periods of infertility.
In 1980, at the Synod of Bishops, representatives of national hierarchies from around the world addressed the issue of contraception. After giving the matter careful consideration, the bishops professed their agreement with Humanae Vitae and Vatican II’s Gaudium et Spes on contraception. John Paul II ratified their statement and, reflecting on the significance of the matter at hand, stated:
Code:
Consideration in depth of all the aspects of these problems offer a new and stronger confirmation of the importance of the authentic teaching on birth regulation reproposed in the Second Vatican Council and in the Encyclical Humanae Vitae.12
Scholars have provided highly detailed and lengthy argumentation that the Catholic Church’s teaching concerning contraception has been infallibly taught by the ordinary magisterium under the conditions articulated by Vatican II in Lumen Gentium 25.13 Moreover, if the Church had been wrong throughout the centuries on an issue of such fundamental importance as contraception, how could she maintain her claim to being the authentic interpreter of Christ’s teachings?
In July of 1987, at a conference on responsible procreation, John Paul II reminded participants that the Church’s consistent teaching has been vigorously expressed by Vatican II, Humanae Vitae, Familiaris Consortio, and Donum Vitae. He went on to say “The Church’s teaching on contraception does not belong in the category of matter open to free discussion among theologians. Teaching the contrary amounts to leading the moral consciences of spouses into error.”14 In the words of one bishop: “The Church has not changed its teaching against contraception. What is more, the Church cannot change its teaching against contraception. Because the Church sees that teaching as based on God’s moral order.”15
**
.
) because you will have an understanding about where we come from.