Protestants and Contraception

[graceandglory]

My understanding is that before 1930, every Christian denomination, without exception, condemned contraception as immoral. Luther called it “far more atrocious than incest and adultery.” Calvin called it “monstrous.”

Here is a link to those and other quotes made by Protestants: catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9704word.asp

However, today many Protestant denominations allow contraception.

My question is twofold:

1. What is the justification (if any) for this 180 degree reversal of teaching?
2. If there is such justification, where can I find support for this in the Bible?

Please note what this thread is **not **about:

It is not about any doctrine other than contraception.

It is not about the Catholic Church’s stand on contraception and whether or not Catholics follow it. I’m interested only in what the official teaching is here, not whether members of any Christian faith, Catholic or Protestant, follow those teachings.

It is not about whether or not contraception is a good thing. It is about whether or not justification can be found for a reversal of teaching about contraception.

Please restrict your discussion to answering my two questions. Anything else will be considered off topic, and I may ask the moderators to remove such posts as per the forum rules. Let’s have a nice, civil discussion. I’ve often wondered about these questions, so I’d like to see plenty of response.

The “bible believing” protestants use one proof text to justify their use of contraception.
“The marriage bed is undefiled.” Hebrews 13:4
That means (to them) that anything goes.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Yes, you need to yet document that EVERY denomination before 1930 officially had a position condemning all forms of contraception as “immoral” and after 1930, they “reversed” and did a “180” in that official denominational position.

So far, you have suggested that ONE denomination did this (well, one province of one denomination), I think you’re point is still baseless…

Your propensity to substitute individuals for denominations undermines your own position. I can quote lots of Catholics who believe that contraception is NOT immoral - and yet I have a hunch you’d insist that is moot vis-a-vis the official position of The Catholic Church - well, then, you need to apply the same rubric toward Protestant denominations. And your propensity to quote a individual as having a position as revealing a REVERSAL is simply silly. TAKING a position does not in ANY sense imply a reversal of an earlier position, a “180.”

Will you document your premise?

.

I have already given you what I have. I gave you six websites that, as you pointed out, repeated what I said in my OP. That is called ***corroboration. ***

---

If you don’t like the way I worded the OP, fine. If you don’t want to participate in this discussion until you get what you consider proof, fine. Then you can stop participating, because I’ve given you what was my understanding–as I stated in the OP. In fact, I began the OP with "It is my understanding . . . " and then I later stated I had based that upon what I had read.

You’re not getting anything more than that, so you might as well quit asking.

 

[Kay_Cee]

The “bible believing” protestants use one proof text to justify their use of contraception.
“The marriage bed is undefiled.” Hebrews 13:4
That means (to them) that anything goes.

Huh. My translation says “Let marriage be honored above all and the marriage bed be kept undefiled, for God will judge the immoral and adulterers.” (NAB)

I’m not seeing it as a support for contraception. Sounds like this is about chaste love within marriage.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Apparently American Josiah has a great deal of difficulty in accepting rather extensive documentation.

Let’s try it this way.

According to documentation (which has been thoroughly provided above and need not be repeated). . .at the very least, according to the most ‘legalistic’ interpretation, those Protestant groups existing as of 1930, judging by both their teachings (written and oral) in so far as those teachings, sermons, and writings are available, when it comes to the question of Scripture in reference to the topic of contraception, held to the position that contraception was morally wrong.

Now as our dear Josiah is attempting to breathlessly inform us that ‘his’ group 'never had a statement on the topic". . .gee, does that mean that, say, unless the Methodist group actually comes out and states that X is a sin, they never teach it is? So we can do what we want provided it isn’t on the ‘thou shalt not’ list according to the 2009 “Methodist contract”?

Of course, the Wesley brothers and their successors may have taught (and in fact did teach)that contraception was morally evil, but that won’t bother Josiah! Because it doesn’t matter what ‘one’ or a ‘few’ may have said once, he will sputter until Doomsday that since it isn’t written down in letters of gold and reiterated at one’s baptism etc., that it isn’t a ‘teaching’ of the Methodists regarding contraception.

Of course he still has not been able to demonstrate that any Methodist preacher prior to 1930 actually taught that contraception was anything BUT an evil. Isn’t that surprising? I mean, if there was no actual ‘consensus’ by the Methodists, surely the topic had people going pro and con. It’s not like it wasn’t widely discussed. So where are all the people teaching that contraception was neutral or good? IF Josiah is right in his contention that the Methodists had ‘no set teaching’ there should be PLENTY of evidence in the works of the Methodist leaders in 1930.

WHERE ARE THEY?

 

[AmericanJosiah]

I gave you six websites that, as you pointed out, repeated what I said in my OP. That is called corroboration.

Repeating the same premise is not documentation of it’s correctness…

"It is my understanding . . . " and then I later stated I had based that upon what I had read.

1. Does truth matter at all to you? When a Protestant copy/pastes some website (even 6 of them) that say whatever about The Catholic Church or Catholics or Catholicism, do you regard it as good, sound and right to copy/paste that in perpetuity without any regard as to whether it is true or not? If you reject this practice in others, shouldn’t you rejected it of yourself?
2. It might be good for you to realize that not everything found on the internet is a documented fact. And your spreading such - without any regard for whether it is fact - is called “gossip” in The Catholic Church. It’s a violation of the Eighth Commandment.
3. However “innocent” your copy/paste MAY have been in the opening post, you are now fully aware that you have documentation PERHAPS for AT MOST one province of one denomination. That rather destroys your whole premise and you now must realize you were mistaken in your premise.

.

 

[AmericanJosiah]

According to documentation (which has been thoroughly provided above and need not be repeated). . .at the very least, according to the most ‘legalistic’ interpretation, those Protestant groups existing as of 1930, judging by both their teachings (written and oral) in so far as those teachings, sermons, and writings are available, when it comes to the question of Scripture in reference to the topic of contraception, held to the position that contraception was morally wrong.

Wrong.

What has been “shown” is that 6 individuals before 1930 held that contraceptives were morally wrong. It has not been shown that ANY denomination held that position. I can quote you a LOT more than 6 Catholics who do not believe that the Pope is infallible - so, it is therefore true that The Catholic Church officially holds to the position that the Pope is not -under any conditions - infallible? Nope. You seem to be confusing personal opinions with official denominational positions. Apples and oranges. For both Protestant denominations and for The Catholic Church.

Of course he still has not been able to demonstrate that any Methodist preacher prior to 1930 actually taught that contraception was anything BUT an evil.

Moot. You perhaps might be able to find 150 Methodists from some point in history that beleived the world is flat - that does not mean that was EVER the official position of The Methodist Church. I can find you a lot of Catholics who believe that contraception is just fine - does that mean it is the official position of The Catholic Church that contraception is just fine? You are confusing individual opinions with denominational positions. Apples and oranges, as you well know and as you naturally would insist if we were discussing anything in Catholicism.

WHERE ARE THEY?

EXACTLY! Where is the documentation for EVERY denomination before 1930 being officially condemning of all forms of contraceptions as immoral? WHERE ARE THEY?

.

 

[graceandglory]

Huh. My translation says “Let marriage be honored above all and the marriage bed be kept undefiled, for God will judge the immoral and adulterers.” (NAB)

I’m not seeing it as a support for contraception. Sounds like this is about chaste love within marriage.

Kay Cee, I’m Roman Catholic now.

YES, I agree with you. All of us are called to chastity within or outside of marriage. This is, however, the proof-text I was taught when I questioned it as a protestant. (I was raised Catholic so I had issues with the contraceptive mentality of my protestant brothers and sisters.
This is what was taught in several churches (I went to three during the time I was married). This is also what was discussed in my young mothers clubs that I attended, which were also protestant. This view was supported by Dr. James Dobson, as well as my X-FIL, who married us. I NEVER bought into the contraceptive mentality, it bothered me then, and is one of the main reasons I “reverted” back to my Catholic faith.

 

[Angelo_Michael]

Well, here’s the problem. In the parable of the pearl, the man sells what he already possesses, and he uses that money to buy the pearl. So it is the man, not God, getting rid of what he had (sin) and using the proceeds from that as his currency to buy the pearl. But in order for him to sell what he has (sin), it would have to have some value, wouldn’t it? So wouldn’t that be saying that sin has value?

Isn’t it a better interpretation that the man sees something more valuable than anything else, so he’s willing to get rid of everything that is a lesser good to obtain that one priceless good? For example, there’s nothing wrong with watching football on TV. It is in fact a good thing, something enjoyable. But it’s better to spend time praying or doing good works than watching football on TV, and a man who chooses the greater good is closer to the Kingdom than a man who doesn’t.

As for the parable in your quote above, isn’t that saying God will deal with us the way we deal with others?

I don’t see how either parable or the quote about King David relates to contraception, much less supports the use of it. I mean, do you honestly think contraception was what Jesus had in mind when he gave us those parables?

Could we please stick to discussing my OP? This is going off topic fast. Thanks!

I do not agree that I have replied [significantly] off the topic of your/the OP.

It appears to me that we have differing opinions as to any potential interpretation(s) of certain parables/scriptures.

I feel that I have made my point clearly, (and validly), enough; and that the questions you are asking, along with the superfusion of your interpretation(s) of the same parables, may ultimately have led to some confusion as to my intent, or the validity of my position, as relevant to your/this thread.

Primarily for this reason, I will not respond further to this thread, recant my statements here, nor answer any [more] of the questioned you have posed in relation to my position(s).

I apologize for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Kay Cee, I’m Roman Catholic now.

YES, I agree with you. All of us are called to chastity within or outside of marriage. This is, however, the proof-text I was taught when I questioned it as a protestant. (I was raised Catholic so I had issues with the contraceptive mentality of my protestant brothers and sisters.
This is what was taught in several churches (I went to three during the time I was married). This is also what was discussed in my young mothers clubs that I attended, which were also protestant. This view was supported by Dr. James Dobson, as well as my X-FIL, who married us. I NEVER bought into the contraceptive mentality, it bothered me then, and is one of the main reasons I “reverted” back to my Catholic faith.

Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I realize you’re Catholic and that you are graciously supplying the verses you were taught in the past.

My responses were for the sake of any lurkers who might think those verses support the use of contraceptives, not to open a debate with you.

I apologize for the confusion. Mea culpa.

P.S. My computer isn’t working at all. I am using my daughter’s laptop. My access to this forum may be severly limited for the next few days.

 

[Libertarian_FL]

Simple answer is a question does X form of birth control equate to abortion that is ending the life of a concieved child or not?

If it doesn’t this would be condoms, barrier methods, the pill and others its not wrong since the sperm and egg do not join to produce a child and if it happens then its God’s Will to get past the defenses.

Go supercommando sperm!

Some like IUD’s can kill a fertilized egg so that is wrong and a sin, murder of an innocent. Like some I do accept abortion to save the mothers life, cases of rape and incest which are all rare and are up the morality of the parents and their own struggles on these hard cases. But in these cases there is no moral position in the Bible expressly against a married couple avoiding pregnancy by keeping the genertic compnents from doing their business. A child for me and many protestants only exists at conception and that is backed by science and common sense.