NonCatholics & Contraception

[Atreyu]

How do Protestants square this obvious change in doctrine with Matthew 16 verses 18-19? That says:

18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

[NIV, footnotes deleted]
Catholics use this as an argument for infallibility, and claim that the doctrine of the Catholic Church can never change and has never changed, otherwise the gates of Hades would overcome it. If Protestant churches have had doctrine that has changed - and I think we’ve seen some evidence of that here - then how do Protestants interpret this passage in light of that?

 

[Sgt_Sweaters]

p.e.driver:

So… let me add this to my original question… if it is usually a non-issue (and some have shared their personal thoughts) If these denominations were faced with the issue: Artificial Hormones (the pill, patch, & shot) cause abortions (more per year than in a “medical” facility) how would they react, and would they change their mind? I know most are against abortion… so…?

Finally one thought on NFP… the ends never justify the means.

Like several other of the posters, I never heard a word about contraception growing up (I grew up Church of Christ). It’s a nonissue. Once I actually sat down and thought about it, I realized that I was opposed, and later found out that Mum was too. But if I ever was to bring it up, then the challenge would of course be, “where does it say that in the Bible?” At the time I couldn’t justify it biblically, so I was stuck.

On the second note, I really don’t know how my old church would react to that sort of information. My (cynical) assumption would be that they would be very reluctant to change anything, considering the attitude of convenience that pervades. Maybe I’ll figure out a way to raise awareness in my old church and guage reactions.

 

[kmktexas]

I am Catholic but listen to Christian radio a lot (the Catholic radio signal is too weak to get most of the time. ) in my car. There has been an increasing amount of discussion on the issue of contraception there. I don’t know if this is a reflection of what is going on in many Protestant churches or not. One of the guests was a couple who wrote a book “Open Embrace: A Protestant Couple Rethinks Contraception”. I haven’t read the book but heard the interview. The position is very close to the Catholic one of not holding back anything from one’s spouse - including fertility. They also talked about the abotifacient effects of contraceptives.

It seems to be more of a “movement” than a position of any denomination.

 

[Philthy]

Rand Al'Thor:

That was sarcasm. I know a woman cannot have 100 children. It was an exageration in order to make a point. Hmmm. My guess is that you are not very good at percieving things.

Hi RandAl Thor-

Yes I am stupid so I still do not understand “the point” you were making - would you be so kind as to state it directly so that even an imbecile such as myself could understand it ?

Thanks,

Phil

 

[Angainor]

Rand Al'Thor:

So if NFP (and even marital abstinence???) is evil…

Evil? I think you misunderstood. Family Planning is the responsible thing to do, whether that is accomplished though NFP or contraception.

 

[deb1]

I never heard contraception discussed from the pulpit. I have four kids and we were considered a large family in my previous Baptist church, but I have been told that I have a large family by Catholics.

I have talked to some individual Protestants who believe that they should leave themselves open to God’s will when it comes to the number of children. I knew a family that had nine kids and they were very Protestant. Protestants that follow this belief generally don’t practice NFP.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

Philthy:

Hi RandAl Thor-

Yes I am stupid so I still do not understand “the point” you were making - would you be so kind as to state it directly so that even an imbecile such as myself could understand it ?

Thanks,

Phil

My point was simply that if a couple did nothing to not have children (if they did not use NFP) then most likely they would end up having way more children than they wanted and/or could afford to feed. I know it wouldn’t be nearly 100, but I know of families that have 10-15 children and that is way more than most couples would want to have.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[rjs1]

When I was still a Protestant one of the things that attracted me to the Catholic Church was Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae. I read it and it made so much sense.
The Catholic Church was the ONLY church that had a policy on contraception and that policy actually asked what God would want us to do, not just what WE wanted to do.
The world, especially the secular world, consistently attacked the Catholic Church over its teaching about contraception. The more carnal a person, the more they appeared to hate God, the stronger seemed to be their rejection of the Catholic Church’s teaching about contraception.
These observations made me start to ask myself why it was only this one Church that was teaching this and being constantly attacked by the world for doing so.
It was later that I understood the answer to that question.

 

[p.e.driver]

Angainor:

Evil? I think you misunderstood. Family Planning is the responsible thing to do, whether that is accomplished though NFP or contraception.

Again: The end does not justify the means.

Losing weight if I am unhealthy is the responsible thing to do… I can accomplish that by going on a diet or throwing up after every meal. Which is the evil strategy?

 

[Ahimsa]

Srila Prabhupada, founder of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON, otherwise known as the “Hare Krishnas”) denounced contraception.

 

[Roree]

I have also experienced that most Christians (not just Protestants, but Catholics as well) do not talk much about contraceptive use and are unaware of its evil. Some of the responses I have encountered to the use of contraception among Christians have included that God allows us to us contraception as a medical advancement to enhance our way of living, contraception is not sinful according to the Bible, personal conviction and for others, it’s all they know, they don’t know that it is even a moral issue. Hope this helps.

Roy

 

[Philthy]

rjs1:

When I was still a Protestant one of the things that attracted me to the Catholic Church was Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae. I read it and it made so much sense.
The Catholic Church was the ONLY church that had a policy on contraception and that policy actually asked what God would want us to do, not just what WE wanted to do.
The world, especially the secular world, consistently attacked the Catholic Church over its teaching about contraception. The more carnal a person, the more they appeared to hate God, the stronger seemed to be their rejection of the Catholic Church’s teaching about contraception.
These observations made me start to ask myself why it was only this one Church that was teaching this and being constantly attacked by the world for doing so.
It was later that I understood the answer to that question.

 

[Philthy]

Angainor:

Evil? I think you misunderstood. Family Planning is the responsible thing to do, whether that is accomplished though NFP or contraception.

Out of curiosity, where did you get this idea? Is there a single example you can site from the entire bible that supports this? I can only think of one Scriptural example of someone attempting Family Planning and God killed him on the spot (Onan). Just exactly what are the “criteria” one uses to determine the correct number of children to have? Why would God curse you with more children than you can handle?

Phil

 

[Angainor]

me:

Family Planning is the responsible thing to do

Philthy:

Out of curiosity, where did you get this idea? Is there a single example you can site from the entire bible that supports this? I can only think of one Scriptural example of someone attempting Family Planning and God killed him on the spot (Onan). Just exactly what are the “criteria” one uses to determine the correct number of children to have? Why would God curse you with more children than you can handle?

Human biology is tuned toward a very difficult life. For example, historically, infant mortality rates have been significantly higher than they are now.

If we were living in such a world where invant survival was difficult, then I would say that any kind of family planning would be unnecessary, and sinful.

Modern medicine has changed the equation. Man has tamed nature to the point where infant mortality is no longer the limiting factor on family size that it used to be. That is a good thing, but it also means that man is then responsible for taming nature in order to voluntarily limit family size back down to a more natural level. That means family planning in one way or another.

I have heard of some radical religious sects that reject Modern Medicine. They putting their trust in God and living a natural life. Sometimes I wonder if they are on the right track.

 

[p.e.driver]

Angainor:

Modern medicine has changed the equation. Man has tamed nature to the point where infant mortality is no longer the limiting factor on family size that it used to be. That is a good thing, but it also means that man is then responsible for taming nature in order to voluntarily limit family size back down to a more natural level. That means family planning in one way or another.

So…for example: 200 years ago, God may have given you 15 children but taken away 10 them… so you had the responsibility to conceive those 15… BUT because God may want to give you 15 TODAY and they might actually SURVIVE, you have the responsibility not to conceive all 15, but only 2 or 3?

I think your theory misses the point that only God creates and takes life. But we have to give him the chance. It is not Man’s responsibility to “tame nature”. If the world was over populated God would either provide, or send a plague. How backward that medical advancements are used for selfishness: Extending some lives will aborting others; also through limiting of family sizes. You never know! That 9th child may be the ONLY one who visits you in the nursing home.

 

[Angainor]

p.e.driver:

So…for example: 200 years ago, God may have given you 15 children but taken away 10 them… so you had the responsibility to conceive those 15… BUT because God may want to give you 15 TODAY and they might actually SURVIVE, you have the responsibility not to conceive all 15, but only 2 or 3?

I think your theory misses the point that only God creates and takes life. But we have to give him the chance. It is not Man’s responsibility to “tame nature”. If the world was over populated God would either provide, or send a plague. How backward that medical advancements are used for selfishness: Extending some lives will aborting others; also through limiting of family sizes. You never know! That 9th child may be the ONLY one who visits you in the nursing home.

Thank you for your response. I am somewhat torn on this issue. Your thoughts help me to understand the issue.

“Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” I don’t think it’s right for every couple to have as many kids as their natures would provide and then tell God “OK God, now PROVIDE!” God gave us freewills and with that comes responsibility.