Protestants: defend your use of artificial contraception

[kentuckyliz]

My niece (not a Catholic) has to take the Pill because she is incredibly dysphoric perimenstrually. Blackouts, etc. Her mother was the same way.

They have no moral qualms with it because they belong to a moral-theology-free church.

If this was a devout Catholic family, it would still not be a sin, because she is not using the Pill contraceptively. If there are contraceptive powers, well, that is an unintended secondary effect as long as she does not have that intention. If she were married, she and her husband would practice NFP in spite of being on the Pill, to preserve them from adopting an intention of using the Pill contraceptively and incurring the guilt of that sin.

Analogy: a woman has an ectopic pregnancy and surgery is performed to save her life. An unintended secondary consequence of that surgery is that the child is aborted. There is no moral guilt for the woman or her health care team. This is accepted Catholic moral reasoning.

Now, aside from moral issues, I have qualms about my niece because:

1. The Pill is the easy “solution” and it does not actually treat or cure the underlying problem. I’ve mentioned a clinic in Omaha that can work with her in diagnosing and treating the problem–not just medicating away the symptoms. It’s so much easier for a doc just to write a scrip than to do the work necessary to really get at the problem.
2. She wants to have a family eventually and I am hoping long-term Pill use does not sterilize her as it has some women.
3. She is a female genetic relative to an aunt and grandmother who had ER+/PR+ breast cancer. If she inherited the same potentials, and those became actualized, then the Pill is like gas on a fire to ER+/PR+ breast cancer. It could make an already aggressive and deadly cancer far more aggressive and deadly. Her parents know this information.
4. Even if she doesn’t inherit the ER+/PR+ type BrCa potentials, long-term use (5 or more years within a lifetime) is epidemiologically far more dangerous. Women start the Pill young and use it a long time and we’re surprised when the breast cancer epidemic is reaching into younger and younger women? It used to be an old woman’s disease. Hello, we live in a cause and effect world. Her parents know this information.
5. She is a teenager so her pre-frontal cortex is not fully developed–the ability to anticipate long-term consequences is one of the last things to develop in maturation. So the desire to kill symptoms now is more compelling than lifetime risks. Or, perhaps she thinks the trade-off is worth it. I can’t speak for her parents’ pre-frontal cortexes and ability to anticipate lifetime risks and long-term consequences. Of course they have compassion for their suffering daughter–perhaps the extreme depths of her misery from her symptoms distracts them judging what’s best in the long term. Any parent hates to see their child suffer.

Again, they are in a moral-theology-free church, so even if the daughter decides to also use her Pill contraceptively, I suppose ignorance is bliss and not believing it’s a sin protects them from being morally culpable.

 

[jrose90]

That was an exceptionally good response! Thank you! I always wondered about that.
I hope things work out for your niece.

 

[LutheranDK]

The Catholic Church teaches that artificial contraception (pill, condom, IUD, etc) is a mortal sin.

How are you able to accept condom use, etc? Do you not see it as the seed that led to a bad tree (sexual revolution, huge pornography industry, etc)???

I can not comprehend how Protestants have such varied views on artificial contraception. This might be because I have for most of my Christian life been a Catholic.

One of my basic attitudes in determining right from wrong is:
Do not open doors that the Scriptures do not open
AND
Do not close doors that the Scriptures do not close.

We hear nothing in Scripture about contraception (of course not the word, but not the case in itself, either), either pro or con.
What we DO hear about, is “fornication”, “porneia”, sex before and outside of marriage.

Secondly: Not all forms of contraception are the same!
In short:
Anything that causes the baby to die after conception HAS occurred =
Anything that stops conception from ocurring is in. =

Of course, it is here assumed that we’re speaking within the confines of marriage. Adultery or pre-marital sex is, as I said, a different story.

Sex is NOT a necessary evil, the only purpose of which is to procreate. There is no basis for such a view in the Scriptures.

 

[benedictus2]

One of my basic attitudes in determining right from wrong is:
Do not open doors that the Scriptures do not open
AND
Do not close doors that the Scriptures do not close.

We hear nothing in Scripture about contraception (of course not the word, but not the case in itself, either), either pro or con.
What we DO hear about, is “fornication”, “porneia”, sex before and outside of marriage.

Yes, we do. The passage about Onan. There is a long exchange on this thread where this was discussed. I suggest you go through them.

Secondly: Not all forms of contraception are the same!
In short:
Anything that causes the baby to die after conception HAS occurred =
Anything that stops conception from ocurring is in. =

Not according to God.

Sex is NOT a necessary evil, the only purpose of which is to procreate. There is no basis for such a view in the Scriptures.

And the Catholic Church does not say so either. But sex not in line with God’s will is disordered.

 

[LutheranDK]

Yes, we do. The passage about Onan. There is a long exchange on this thread where this was discussed. I suggest you go through them.

Onan’s sin was not “pulling out” in itself, but that he, by doing so, did not fulfill his duty to his deceased brother, according to the law. Neither is it about masturbation (which in Danish is actually called “onani”, from Onan), though that’s not to say that said practice isn’t sinful, which it is.
Ergo, the case of Onan is useless in this debate

Not according to God.

Correction: Not according to you, or the RCC.

And the Catholic Church does not say so either. But sex not in line with God’s will is disordered.

No arguments there.

 

[benedictus2]

Onan’s sin was not “pulling out” in itself, but that he, by doing so, did not fulfill his duty to his deceased brother, according to the law. Neither is it about masturbation (which in Danish is actually called “onani”, from Onan), though that’s not to say that said practice isn’t sinful, which it is.
Ergo, the case of Onan is useless in this debate

Very wrong.

Your reasoning has been completely debunked many times over.

I refer you to my post 278, 308 and 315 on this thread.

Here are the links to them for easier access
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7384275&postcount=308
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7385280&postcount=315

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7381861&postcount=278

Rev Kevin has not been able to muster a reasonable rebuttal except to re-iterate what you have written above, which is no rebuttal at all.

Correction: Not according to you, or the RCC.

Nope. Not According to God. And for that matter, not according to the Reformers either. The permissibility of contraception is a man made invention dating rather late in Christian history - 1930.

Read this article so you will understand that embracing contraception is actually a sell out on the part of Protestantism.

touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=20-04-020-f

I liken this to saying adultery is okay because Christians have found faithfullness difficult.

 

[LutheranDK]

Very wrong.

Your reasoning has been completely debunked many times over.

I refer you to my post 278, 308 and 315 on this thread.

Here are the links to them for easier access
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7384275&postcount=308
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7385280&postcount=315

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7381861&postcount=278

Rev Kevin has not been able to muster a reasonable rebuttal except to re-iterate what you have written above, which is no rebuttal at all.

Nope. Not According to God. And for that matter, not according to the Reformers either. The permissibility of contraception is a man made invention dating rather late in Christian history - 1930.

Read this article so you will understand that embracing contraception is actually a sell out on the part of Protestantism.

touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=20-04-020-f

I liken this to saying adultery is okay because Christians have found faithfullness difficult.

You know what? If you’re going to try to tell me that I’m wrong about what the Bible says, then do so from the original languages - in this case Hebrew, taking the context into account. Especially post #2 is laughable - making a point out of “the thing he did”, spinning it to suit your need. Basically: Use the Hebrew, or quit pretending to know the Scriptures better than someone who’s devoted himself to studying them. You’ve probably only read something in an apologetics book (not impressed with the strenght of RC apologetics, btw), and then repeat it ad nauseam.
What did Onan do? He denied his brother offspring! The text of Onan is neither about masturbation or contraception, but about Onan failing his responsibility according to the Law. You cannot base an entire moral theology around a twisted reading of ONE verse. Secondly: Securing your deceased brother offspring was not just an “ancient quaint law”. It was the way of securing his bloodline - his name, his family, and to refuse to do so was not just a “Meh…”-issue.
Again: It is NOT God who says that “contraception in all forms and cases is wrong” - it is you, and the RCC.

There is no authority on par with, or above Scripture - including the Christian tradition (which I value greatly). Tradition is not an authority in and of itself - so “what the reformers thought” is of little consequence in this matter, since it is not a matter of doctrine, but of ethics. And in this case, an adiaphoron, where contraception preventing conception is concerned. Do I care whether or not people who’re married use contraception or not? No. Am I saying that they should? No. I’m saying that we cannot put heavier burdens on people than Scripture allows us to! Unless we want to be the kind of spiritual slave drivers whom Jesus so resolutely rebutted.

And if you want to continue to talk to me, you’d best find a less arrogant tone, thank you very much.

Dixi

 

[Curious_Hobbit]

LutheranDK,

The Jews can’t be accused of not knowing Hebrew or taking the Onan issue out of context. The Jews, early Christians, Protestant Reformers, and every Christian up to 1930 interpreted the Onan passage as condemning contraception.

Jews

Jewish Commentary on Onan

“[Onan] misused the organs God gave him for propagating the race to unnaturally satisfy his own lust, and he was therefore deserving of death” (Bereshis: Genesis [Brooklyn: Mesorah, 1980]. 5:1677)

experiencefestival.com/a/…ons/id/1817637

“The Jewish interpretation is that Onan spilt his seed, and therefore was deserving of the death penalty (see e.g. Babylonian Talmud tractate Niddah 13a)”

jewishjournal.com/nation/…trol_20100715/

“Orthodox Jews prohibit males from using contraceptives such as condoms that waste the “male seed,” a teaching derived from Genesis 38:9-10, in which God killed Onan for spilling his seed on the ground during intercourse.”

Church Fathers:

St. Augustine says: ‘For it is illicit and shameful for a man to lie with even his lawful wife in such a way as to prevent the conception of offspring. This is what Onan, son of Judah, used to do, and for that God slew him’ (cf. Gen. 38:8?10)."

John Chrysostom: "Why do you sow where the field is eager to destroy the fruit, where there are medicines of sterility [oral contraceptives], where there is murder before birth?. . . Indeed, it is something worse than murder, and I do not know what to call it; for she does not kill what is formed but prevents its formation. What then? Do you condemn the gift of God and Fight with his [natural] laws? (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]).

Clement of Alexandria: “Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted” (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 [A.D. 191])

Protestant Reformers:

Martin Luther said, “[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him.”

John Calvin said, “The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse between man and woman is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous. For this is to extinguish the hope of the race and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring.”

John Wesley warned, “Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord—and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls.”

Even C.S. Lewis argued in the Abolition of Man that birth control will be the means by which man decides who is and isn’t born instead of God. In Mere Christianity he points out that the high degree of sexual promiscuity in modern times could only happen as a result of the acceptance of birth control.

 

[Curious_Hobbit]

Also, have you read that article benedictus linked you? It was written by a Lutheran and it may be of interest to you. Here it is again

touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=20-04-020-f

 

[rev_kevin]

Very wrong.

Your reasoning has been completely debunked many times over.

I refer you to my post 278, 308 and 315 on this thread.

Here are the links to them for easier access
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7384275&postcount=308
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7385280&postcount=315

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7381861&postcount=278

Rev Kevin has not been able to muster a reasonable rebuttal except to re-iterate what you have written above, which is no rebuttal at all.

Nope. Not According to God. And for that matter, not according to the Reformers either. The permissibility of contraception is a man made invention dating rather late in Christian history - 1930.

Read this article so you will understand that embracing contraception is actually a sell out on the part of Protestantism.

touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=20-04-020-f

I liken this to saying adultery is okay because Christians have found faithfullness difficult.

Throught out history, even the CC has held varying declarations about the beginning of life. For most of the history of the CC, its thinkers viewed immediate animation/ensoulment as impossible, and under the traditional CC doctrine, a male fetus became animated infused with a soul at 40 days after conception and a female after 80 days.
In 1588, Pope Sixtus V mandated that the penalty for abortion or contraception was excommunication from the church. However, his successosr, Pope Gregory IX returntd the church to the view that abortion of an unformed embryo or contraception was not homicide. That was the view until 1869 when Pope Pius IX declared again that the punishment was excmmunication.
Today the Catholic view is that life begins at the time of conception.
My point here is that even the CC struggled with this issue. When does life begin and about contraception usage. It has changed from one Popes view to another Popes view on it. Which Popes are right? Aren’t they infallible when it comes to moral issues? Here are different views from different Popes on this moral issue. Which do you choose? Who knows the next Pope may say contraception is ok. This is not a isssue where God says its wrong and a sin, its mans view.

No where does the Bible command us to procreate. Gid told Adam and Eve and Noah’s family to “be fruitful and multiply” and this command has not been repeated since. Now married couples may decide for themselves to raise a family, how many children they will have, and when they will have them. The Scriptures however do not comdemn birth control. From a Bible point of view, whether a husband adn wife choose to use some nonabortive mathod of contraception is really a personal decision.

 

[mark_a]

From a Bible point of view, whether a husband adn wife choose to use some nonabortive mathod of contraception is really a personal decision.

And just to be clear though Rev, in your view, and in what you teach you congregation, life begins at implantation. Correct?

 

[rev_kevin]

And just to be clear though Rev, in your view, and in what you teach you congregation, life begins at implantation. Correct?

I never said I teach my congregation that. It is my belief, my personal belief from what I have studied. Why u ask?

Out of everything I wrote, this is all you want to comment on?

 

[mark_a]

I never said I teach my congregation that. It is my belief, my personal belief from what I have studied. Why u ask?

Because I do not think you would believe one thing and teach another. I believe you are very sincere in your beliefs, but have really ignored the contraception and pro-life issues.

Out of everything I wrote, this is all you want to comment on?

Well I googled some of the rest of your “information” and the material came from “Catholics for a Free Choice”, which is not Catholic at all. That’s like getting info about Baptists from the “Convention of drunk, dancing. nfp Baptists”.

 

[rev_kevin]

Because I do not think you would believe one thing and teach another. I believe you are very sincere in your beliefs, but have really ignored the contraception and pro-life issues.

Well I googled some of the rest of your “information” and the material came from “Catholics for a Free Choice”, which is not Catholic at all. That’s like getting info about Baptists from the “Convention of drunk, dancing. nfp Baptists”.

Like I said, I don’t teach my congragation about contraception. My congragation is 70 to 90 year old people. I don’t think they would be interested in contraception.

No it didn’t come for Catholics for a fee choice. I googled is contraception wrong. is contraception right. I did not go to the sight you think I did.

 

[mark_a]

My congragation is 70 to 90 year old people. I don’t think they would be interested in contraception.

That sounds like as good a non-theological case against contraception as I’ve heard.

No it didn’t come for Catholics for a fee choice. I googled is contraception wrong. is contraception right. I did not go to the sight you think I did.

I’m sorry about that then, could you link me to your source? I’ll start a pro-contraception favorites file for my own future reference.

Happy New Year!

 

[rev_kevin]

That sounds like as good a non-theological case against contraception as I’ve heard.

I’m sorry about that then, could you link me to your source? I’ll start a pro-contraception favorites file for my own future reference.

Happy New Year!

I went to every site that I searched but I am having a hard time finding it. When I find it I’ll let you know.

Found it.

Gogle When does human life begin
8e.devbio.com/article.php?id=162

 

[mark_a]

I went to every site that I searched but I am having a hard time finding it. When I find it I’ll let you know.

Thanks!! Keep warm!!

 

[rev_kevin]

Thanks!! Keep warm!!

found it look at post 401

 

[benedictus2]

Throught out history, even the CC has held varying declarations about the beginning of life. For most of the history of the CC, its thinkers viewed immediate animation/ensoulment as impossible, and under the traditional CC doctrine, a male fetus became animated infused with a soul at 40 days after conception and a female after 80 days.
In 1588, Pope Sixtus V mandated that the penalty for abortion or contraception was excommunication from the church. However, his successosr, Pope Gregory IX returntd the church to the view that abortion of an unformed embryo or contraception was not homicide. That was the view until 1869 when Pope Pius IX declared again that the punishment was excmmunication.
Today the Catholic view is that life begins at the time of conception.
My point here is that even the CC struggled with this issue. When does life begin and about contraception usage. It has changed from one Popes view to another Popes view on it. Which Popes are right? Aren’t they infallible when it comes to moral issues? Here are different views from different Popes on this moral issue. Which do you choose? Who knows the next Pope may say contraception is ok. This is not a isssue where God says its wrong and a sin, its mans view.

No where does the Bible command us to procreate. Gid told Adam and Eve and Noah’s family to “be fruitful and multiply” and this command has not been repeated since. Now married couples may decide for themselves to raise a family, how many children they will have, and when they will have them. The Scriptures however do not comdemn birth control. From a Bible point of view, whether a husband adn wife choose to use some nonabortive mathod of contraception is really a personal decision.

But that has no bearing on the issue because through out history - as a matter of fact even before Christianity, beginning with the Jews, contraception has been considered evil. Only in 1930 did that change.

We may debate when life begins or when the soul comes into the body, but the plain and simple fact is that God decrees who will and will not be conceived and it is not up to us to decide.

All you are doing now is rationalizing something which** I think you are beginning to realize is indeed a sin.**

I think Rev Kevin that God has convicted you of that truth, that is why you are using arguments that has absolutely nothing to do with whether contraception is or is not evil. The example you mentioned was about the kind of punishment and not whether it deserved punishment.

Allow God to lead. Surrender this to Him, surrender your sexual life to Him and He will not be outdone in generosity.

 

[mark_a]

found it look at post 401

Thanks for the link.

The link is problematic for me though, because as I moved backwards through the links, I see that the websites are sponsored by abortion facilities. The linking of the doctrines of papal infallibility and Immaculate Conception with the issue of life beginning at conception sure seem to put a dividing line between Catholicism and Protestantism on these issues. The jab at Priests for Life arouses my suspicion also.

All in all, the website takes the “Nancy Pelosi” position to the “is abortion evil?” question by answering with “we don’t know when life begins.”

“If we fail to uphold life from the moment of conception to natural death, then the rest of our pro-life stance lacks intergrity.” -Archbishop-elect Peter Sartain.