Where in the Bible does Christ forbid contraception?

[MonFrere]

“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” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (A.D. 191).

“To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature.” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:95:3 (A.D. 191).

This answer won’t be complete but it may add a point or two. Often, the Early Church Fathers, we highly educated people of the time. They were familiar with Greek and Roman philosophy. They we not hesitant to take elements of Greek and Roman philosophy and use it to support the “deposit of faith” given to the apostles by Christ. I think the two quotes demonstrate threads of the long development of “natural law” which was spoken with great clarity by St. Thomas Aquinas in Summa Theologica. Natural Law theory has origins with the Greeks several centuries before Christ. St. Paul seems to have been familiar with it as he alludes to it in principle in the early chapters of Romans. Because of this I see a consistency with the Early Church Fathers taking natural law principles and applying them to Christian practice. I think the Church’s teaching on contraception is a good example of “faith and reason” working in tandem with each other. If properly understood one can see how it nicely weaves into biblical texts with no contradiction whatsoever and is a proper view of man working out his life in harmony with the natural order - faith and reason.

MonFrere

 

[Todd_Winkels]

This thread, with the Bible verses and info from the Church Fathers are a real revelation to me! (I’m in RCIA)

This is an answer to so many questions…wow. So, so helpful…I’ m so happy!

 

[Bishopite]

Our adult son wants to know where in the Bible that Christ taught that contraception is immoral. I realize that Jesus did not directly address this subject, but I think our son wants to know when the Church first taught this. Can anyone assist me, please?

I could easily give you verses that support the idea of contraception being immoral but the best way to explain the immorality of contraception is by explaining the natural moral law or what’s known as the natural law. Paul speaks of it in Romans 2;14-16 in that the gentiles who didn’t have the OT law which pointed out ones sin, still obeyed the “law written on their hearts” which means they knew right from wrong; that murder was wrong as we see with Cain murdering Able before the law was given. Everyone with proper faculties knows some sense of right from wrong because God it was written on their hearts.
But I would tell your son that the Bible isn’t an exhaustive book on every moral issue see John 21:25 where even Jesus’ words and actions weren’t all written down. Some issues are explicit and others are implicit and yet the Bible is a cohesive whole even if Jesus didn’t address a particular issue.
Without confusing you, the natural law is what God established in creation because it reflects His eternal immutable truths.
An example of this is food. The primary purpose of food is nurishment to our bodies; sure there are secondary and tertiary purposes of food; it tastes good, smells good and looks good, but without nurishment from food, our bodies will die.
Now, if we eat a meal, and then go into the bathroom, stick our finger down our throat and throw up to avoid the calories, we violate the natural function of that food, we deprive it of its primary function. We also engage in an act called bulimia which is a pyschological dysfunction (even by the worlds standards).

With contraception it follows the same principal, for to violate the primary purpose of the mans seed frustrates its natural and primary function and this is wrong because it violates the primary purpose of the marital imbrace (the primary purpose of Gods moral law); that is to procreate. Without procreation, our society doesn’t continue and eventually dies off (it takes 2.7 people to continue another generation without falling into negative population) just like without nurishment from food our bodies die too.
That procreation is the primary purpose of the marital act and using contraception violates it means we have engaged in an act that violates the natural moral law God has established as an eternal truth and doing so is like eating and then throwing up the food to avoid the calories; trying to have our cake and eat it too!
A question for those who practice contraception yet still engage in the marital embrace is:
If you aren’t going to Chicago, why are you taking the train?

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

I don’t know if you’ll find any convincing bible verses to help you. But I find looking at this issue in the context of marriage and sacraments really helps…

The Groom Jesus gave His body completely (to the point of death) for His Bride, The Church.

Likewise, in our sacrament of marriage, we should give our bodies completely to our spouses - and not contracept them.

More info (by Dan-Man916, Feb '06):
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1300922#post1300922

 

[Spirithound]

I don’t think that specific scripture (Onan) would be enough to cling to why contraception = an abortion mindset. I am against birth control, but just wanted to point out that I don’t find that scripture a compelling enough support to the Church’s stance on contraception…

Firstly, contraception does not necessarily equal abortion. Only abortifacient drugs qualify as both birth control and abortion. That being said, contraception such as a condom is wrong because it is a lie. 1 Cor 7:4 (paraphrased) says that a wife has authority over her husband’s body, and he over hers. As a married couple, you owe your partner your whole being, not “everything but your sexuality”.

 

[MonFrere]

SMALL POINT

I’ve not read all the replys to this post. But the question implies a “sola scriptura” paradigm – that every question a Christian may have if found in the Bible.

So, maybe part of the answer this mom gives her son is not only the scriptural references but also the fact that Jesus came to establish a Church and he gave that Church authority (and protection from error) to make decisions concerning faith and morals.

MonFrere

 

[BlaineTog]

MonFrere:

I’ve not read all the replys to this post. But the question implies a “sola scriptura” paradigm – that every question a Christian may have if found in the Bible.

Yeah, I mean, this is a Catholic forum, what the heck are we doing talking about the Bible?

The key to understanding all questions of sexual morality is understanding the sexual act itself, and not in the vagaries of “natural law,” but in the specific sense of what exactly it means to have sex.

Sex is an absolute joining of two people together in an expression of love. Sex causes two people to become one person. However, it isn’t a joining like a key in a lock, but rather like two glasses of water poured into one glass. It isn’t just that they shouldn’t be separated afterwards, but that they can’t be separated. The very idea of separating them is a logical absurdity.

In the case of contraception, you’ve effectively caused a denial of the sex act by making this joining impossible, as if you had a layer of saran wrap separating the third glass down the middle and then pouring each other glass into each other container. You have prevented the joining, and in a sense reduced the sex to a mockery, a lie. It’s like claiming that placing two apples on a table next to each other causes them to become one apple, when it clearly doesn’t.

 

[MonFrere]

The key to understanding all questions of sexual morality is understanding the sexual act itself, and not in the vagaries of “natural law,” but in the specific sense of what exactly it means to have sex.

The Early Church Fathers made a clear connection between natural law and contraception. The Church has ALWAYS used philosophy to strengthen it’s understanding of theology. Transubstantiation is a prime example. Natural Law is vague because it isn’t part of our “intellectual tools” in our 21st century.

I think I remember Pope John Paul II encouraging the Church to use Natural Law theory as a tool to help our secular materialistic society to understand religious concepts when an overt mentioning of Scripture wouldn’t be the most effective way of reaching all peoples in society today. One can speak of natural law to prove a point. Some concepts of natural law (e.g. contraception) can be “proven” without any discussion of religion at all. The Church has many ways at its disposal to bring people to truth.

Bishopite has an excellent post on explaining the natual law position a few posts up from this one. Contraception is hard to nail down using SCRIPTURE ALONE.

MonFrere

 

[Stratiotes]

Anthony Percy’s little book, Theology of the Body Made Simple is quite good on this subject. The idea of contraception is drawn from the idea of the dignity of human beings. It may not be self-evident at first and it is rather difficult to explain in a soundbite such as this forum but that book is one of the most brief yet convincing I have seen on the topic. Since it is less than 100 pages, it is not a frightening thing to ask your teens to read it. I think it will help a lot in understanding the deeper issues at stake.

On the sola-scriptura presupposition, I agree with the others who would ask why it has to be in the Bible. But, on the other hand, I think it is - because the dignity of the human being is there and that implies it…get the Percy book and I really think it will give you some good tools for sharing with your kids and friends.

 

[BlaineTog]

The Early Church Fathers made a clear connection between natural law and contraception. The Church has ALWAYS used philosophy to strengthen it’s understanding of theology. Transubstantiation is a prime example. Natural Law is vague because it isn’t part of our “intellectual tools” in our 21st century.

Oh I agree. I’m not arguing against “natural law,” just against stopping at shouting out the phrase, since it’s vague to modern ears. I’m pretty sure I basically just explained what natural law means with respect to sex, though I could be mistaken.

 

[mercygate]

In the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, Paul gives a perfect argument about all of Catholic teaching on sexuality: marriage, purity, same-sex engagements, and you can easily read contraception as part of the big picture. He basically lays out the natural law view.

Look at creation, he says. Even a barbarian can see what it reveals about God and about substituting the creature for the creator. Paul expands into a discussion that equates sexual deviance with idolatry and speaks against women who exchange “natural relations for unnatural.” Hmm. Although the context is same-sex frolics, I do not consider it a stretch to consder contracepted sexual relations as falling under the umbrella of “unnatural relations.”

 

[bill210]

Peace to you. I would like to point out a fact to you rather than enter into a biblical discussion because a debate will not satisfy your requirements but maybe this will help. Until the mid 1900,s every Christian denomination was united in their stand against contraception as being against God,s law or natural law as some would have it called. Bottom line;it was a sin. Only the Catholic Church has remained steadfast in this truth.
One Pope of those days [please forgive that I,m not sure which one] wrote that if contraception was accepted then a great increase in immorality would follow including abortion, marital infidelity, adultery,and homosexuality. This would bring about the denigration of the family and open the door to euthanasia as well. We see all these things now including previously unheard of STDs which are most assuredly associated with this immorality.
God bless.
Bill

 

[KephasAugustine]

One Pope of those days [please forgive that I,m not sure which one] wrote that if contraception was accepted then a great increase in immorality would follow including abortion, marital infidelity, adultery,and homosexuality. This would bring about the denigration of the family and open the door to euthanasia as well. l

Do you mean Pope Paul VI and Humane Vitae?

Maybe not, I have yet to read the whole thing (I’ve only skimmed it), I’m just taking a shot.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

Do you mean Pope Paul VI and Humane Vitae?

Maybe not, I have yet to read the whole thing (I’ve only skimmed it), I’m just taking a shot.

Yep, that’d be the one…

Pope Paul VI was right when he wrote in his 1968 Papal Encyclical, Humanae Vitae: “It is also to be feared that the man, growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.”

More info:
home.inreach.com/bstanley/vitae.htm

 

[Todd_Easton]

Our adult son wants to know where in the Bible that Christ taught that contraception is immoral.

I think it was where Jesus said, “Let the children come and do not hinder them” or something like that around Matthew 19.

 

[Newbie2]

Christ accepted the Hebrew scriptures condemnation of contraception, as in the book of Tobit:

So this passage shows that sinful lust within marriage equals having no love for children within marriage. That would clearly condemn contraception.

Christ is never quoted or referred to as condemning contraception in Scripture. I’m quite sure you are correct that he was/is against the practice, but the Tobit quotation methinks is more isagetical than exogetical.

“This is my body which will be given up for you.”

Supports condemnation of contraception? More isagesis, methinks.

The pill is an abortificant. Abortion in the eyes of the church = murder.

Yes, but all acts of contraception are not abortion.

I do not consider it a stretch to consder contracepted sexual relations as falling under the umbrella of “unnatural relations.”

Methinks many theologians would.

It’s an error to assume that all teachings of the authentic Christian have to be directly spoken by Jesus, isn’t it?

Yes, there are several instances of good teachings in Scripture that Jesus didn’t directly speak of.

SMALL POINT

I’ve not read all the replys to this post. But the question implies a “sola scriptura” paradigm – that every question a Christian may have if found in the Bible.

So, maybe part of the answer this mom gives her son is not only the scriptural references but also the fact that Jesus came to establish a Church and he gave that Church authority (and protection from error) to make decisions concerning faith and morals.

Contraception is hard to nail down using SCRIPTURE ALONE.
MonFrere

Methinks these are two excellent answers.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Good point on sola scriptura.
Also did anyone tie in

Romans 1:26-27 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also** abandoned natural relations** with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.Specifically this passage condemns homosexual relations, but the rationale is because they abandoned the natural function of the person. Men are to be with women and the event must be natural.

 

[doglover]

Thanks to everyone for your help in my discussions with our son.

For those who have not read all the threads, our adult son no longer believes in God.

The last discussion we had involved contraception. Since my husband and I have promoted Natural Family Planning since before our son was born, one of the discussion points of our last talk was that our son did not see the difference between Natural Family Planning and contraception. That’s when our son asked me “Where in the Bible does Jesus forbid contraception?”. I know that Christ did not address this topic specifically, but I turned to the forums in the hope that members of Catholic Answers forums could help me to find some sort of connection from the Bible.

I am open to more comments! God bless you for your help!

 

[Swamp_Yankee]

I have been fruitful and multiplied, but, does the church and or God expect my wife and I to field our own baseball team? Responcible birth controle does not seem unreasonable to me. I agree that many uses of contraception, like anything else can be misused. If you all don’t mind I’d like to open this topic up a little by asking, are Priests in violation of the “be fruitful and multiply” comand by being unmarried and chaste? Paul’s opinion on this kind of life seems directly opposed to Gods comand. Not a critisism, but an honest question. I have all of the respect in the world for good priests.

 

[doglover]

Matthew 19:12 (New International Version)

“For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”