The contraception debate

There is little in Catholic teaching that invites more controversy and public outcry than the Church's ban on contraception. Even within the Church, many Catholics fail to comprehend the reasons for this venerable teaching, often choosing instead to ignore the issue altogether by convincing themselves that sexual relations between a married couple is purely a matter of conjugal privacy and that quite frankly, the pope has no business sticking his nose into their bedrooms.

But in truth, why does the Church insist that contraception is a serious sin that brutalises the sanctity of marriage and attacks the very foundation of family and society?

(At this point, it is important to remember that the Church's teaching about contraception is phrased within the context of marriage, so whether contraceptives are licit in sexual relations outside marriage or not is irrelevant, since the very act of a sexual union outside marriage is morally reprehensible in the first place.)

The answer is not one that is likely to move an atheist or convince a pagan, because at the heart of this teaching lies a profession in the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

Some Christians seem to think that the power and omniscience of God stops at the foot of their matrimonial bed. It is almost as if God is so busy being God, that sometimes a possible conception can utterly escape His attention. Imagine Our Lord turning to a Christian couple and saying, "Whoa, how did that happened? I didn't see that one coming!"

Indeed, if slipping on a condom or popping a pill is nothing less than responsible parenting, why bow before the majestic power of a Creator who leaves no turning of the planets to chance, no detail of a flower to coincidence, and yet whom we imagine to be so overwhelmed with supervising creation that He needs mankind to resort to artificial means so as to ensure that no child is born through oversight?

Many government agencies claim that the only way to avoid a population explosion, particularly in poorer countries that have so little to feed its people, is to promote the greater use of contraceptives or the greater availability of sterilization and abortion clinics. Imagine yet again, Our Lord commanding Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply and then having second thoughts and adding, "Just don't overdo it because I didn't prepare enough resources on this green earth for everybody. So put a cap on it!"

Nowhere in scripture does Yahweh specify a numerical limit to procreation. Instead, the bible abounds with references to children as a tangible sign of God's approval and blessings. As ecological scientists have long discovered, mother earth has the amazing ability to repair herself to provide for all her citizens. If some do not have enough in this world, it is because the many who have more, refuse to share with the many who have less. After all, almost every population control policy regarding the third world are spearheaded by richer countries who continue to exploit the earth, while at the same time insisting that their poorer neighbours learn to make do with less, especially children.

Interestingly, many developed countries that glorified a contraceptive mentality in the last few decades are ironically reaping the empty harvest of a shrinking population, with the growing elderly now far outnumbering new births in society. Coupled with the rise of promiscuity, marital affairs, teenaged pregnancies, abortions and the epidemic proportions of sexually transmitted diseases that result from casual sex, one can hardly refer to contraception as a successful medium of control when its effects upon society seem anything but controllable.

However, the issue for most Christians is not that God would make a mistake in sending them a child, but rather that they themselves may not be ready to accept such a gift. And so when we talk about an unplanned pregnancy, what we mean is that the pregnancy is unplanned when set against the list of ambitions, professional commitments, social and materialistic aspirations that we have already highlighted for ourselves as priorities. A child at this stage would be a spanner in the wheels of our self-fulfillment, a burden and intrusion more than a gift and blessing. In other words, something to frown upon and sigh about rather than celebrate. And the most likely reason for this is because we have lost sight of our original vocation as Husbands and Wives.

Lactantius, one of the Early Church Fathers living in the 4th century said it best: "Some complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in their power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich." (Divine Institutes 6:20 [A.D. 307]

Of course, there are legitimate situations and circumstances where a couple may in fact deem it more advisable to avoid having children just then. In this we must be clear that the Catholic Church is not against family planning, which is really an exercise in responsibility and prudence.

What she condemns is artificial birth control, which although touted in the world as being equally responsible and more effective, is nevertheless rejected by the Church as morally destructive and gravely harmful to the welfare of family and society. Despite that, many people will say that the distinction between natural family planning and contraception is imaginary at best, when in actuality, the difference is a blinding contrast between day and night as we shall see later in this discussion.

There are basically three areas we have to explore if we are to have a decent understanding of this controversial church teaching: namely Scriptural, Moral and Practical.

The first gauge for discovering how close we are to the divine will is to compare our perceptions with the vision of God. How we view children and how God sees them are two different spectrums of reality. We have only to scour the scriptures to find out what the celestial vision is like.

Most Christians are somewhat familiar with the creation story of Genesis, where God made the world and everything in it and saw that it was good. At the pinnacle of that creation was humanity, formed and fashioned in the image of God Himself, who breathed His own spirit upon man and gave him a share in the Divine Life. In making them male and female, the Lord God also commanded them to "be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and conquer it". This same command was also given to Noah and his sons in Genesis 9. To be sure, this wasn't just an order to populate an otherwise empty planet at the dawn of creation nor merely an exercise to restore mankind after the flood; this was the bestowal of a godly gift.

Human procreation is quite different from animal reproduction. It isn’t just an exercise in perpetuating the species as many like to believe. Instead, it is the awesome power to generate another living image of God; uniquely glorious and infused with an immortal soul and an everlasting destiny. When we forget our true dignity as living icons of The Almighty, we risk becoming no more than a natural resource for consumption and exploitation, like everything else on this planet.

This gives us an idea of the majestic destiny we possess by simply being born, not just of man and woman but also of God. It is undeniable that only God can truly create, we simply invent and innovate based on existing structures. But in the conception and birth of a child, the forces of the universe cower in embarrassment at the power that is needed to bring forth another human being. And it is this mysterious power that Our Lord shares with feeble humanity; that from the wellsprings of authentic and responsible love, the bonds of affection between two souls might be so strongly infused with divine love that it actually participates in the life of the Holy Trinity and brings forth a third person complete and whole, flesh and blood, body and soul. That is why all family life is merely a call to reflect the love between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The Sacrament of Matrimony is so mystically powerful that the sacred vows between husband and wife actually draw down supernatural graces from heaven to unite a couple in a way that is otherwise humanly impossible.

"Have you not read that at the beginning, the Creator made them male and female?" asks Jesus in Matt 19, "For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore, what God has joined together, let man not separate."

For in the sexual union, something intimately more binding than pleasure transpires between a man and a woman. After all, the physical act of intercourse itself is a uniting action, joining two bodies in one flesh.

When a husband offers his body freely to his wife, he makes a gift of himself to belong to her in a tangible and concrete way. Likewise, when a wife offers her body to her husband, she accepts to receive him into her life as part of her own self and person. But there is more to this unity than a meeting of passions, there is an exchange and fusion of the heart and soul; the undertaking of a covenantal promise so strong that it is recognised and validated by the judgment seat of God. This sacred bond in turn is so powerfully expressed that nine months later; the physical union of this love is incarnated in a new and extraordinary human being.

(It is no wonder then that casual sex and promiscuity leave one feeling used and fragmented, for what kind of unity can be hoped for when you freely share your body and DNA with countless others? There would be bits and pieces of you all over the place, diminishing your self-esteem and shattering the moral integrity of your person, causing you to ever seek out that elusive moment of true commitment by joining yourself again and again with new individuals, hoping to recover wholeness, but only to discover that the original gift of grace is lost.)

Such a thought should sweep us off our feet in awe, and if it doesn't, it is because our modern capacity to appreciate the gift of life has suffered too many assaults in recent years. For far too long, we have been taught to view life as a commodity, a thing to be exploited and at times, even a burden to be terminated, rather than the sacred and inviolable gift of God. Unfortunately, this culture of death continues to make inroads into our societies, our schools, our families and even our churches.

The mind of God concerning children is undeniably expressed in scripture, and indeed, there are far too many biblical references that point to the sanctity of this blessing than can be adequately covered here. But just to enunciate a few, there is God's promise to reward Abraham's faith with more descendants than he could count; Isaac being only the first fruit of Yahweh's covenantal blessing upon the ancient patriarch. One also has to recall the joys of Sarah, the canticle of Zechariah and the gratitude of Elizabeth and her entire household to know how much the ancient peoples treasured the gift of a child. Psalm 127 calls children a bounty from Yahweh for he "rewards with descendants" - "like arrows in a hero's hands are the sons you father when young."

Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) chapter 3 says that the Lord "honors the father in his children" and "whoever respects his father will be happy with children of his own, he shall be heard on the day when he prays." Vs 3, 5-6.

As if to prove this, the protagonist in the Book of Job was rewarded with a new family of seven sons and three daughters for remaining faithful throughout his painful ordeals. In addition, the old man lived to see "his children and his children's children up to the fourth generation." Job 42, Vs 16. In fact, scripture clearly identifies the gift of children with the grace of spiritual bounty; which is nothing less than a generous sign of God's favour upon man. Our Blessed Lord Himself in the gospels chided His apostles for turning away children, saying that to such belongs the Kingdom of God.

Unfortunately, many young couples today continue to deny the lordship of Jesus Christ in their married lives, fearing instead the "accidental" conception of a child that might disrupt their marital plans and plunge their conjugal bliss into an endless series of parental responsibilities. How the love and blessing of a child can be separated from conjugal bliss is a sign of the times we live in.

Even so, for every couple who fears that dispensing with contraception will most certainly ensure a pregnancy and for every skeptic who thinks that infertility is simply a random fault in biological science, they would do well to recall Leah's story in Genesis 29, "Yahweh saw that Leah was neglected, so he opened her womb, while Rachel remained barren." Envious and frustrated, Rachel turned harshly to Jacob and demanded that he give her a son as well, to which he angrily replied, "Am I to take the place of God? It is for Him to open and close the womb."

We cannot ignore the fact that The Lord of creation is also the Master of life, and it is for Him and through Him alone that conception begins or not at all. If there is one passage in the Bible that clearly condemns the contraceptive mentality, it would be the story of Onan in Genesis 38.

Onan was obliged under Levitical law to provide his brother's widow with children. However, he wasn't too keen to fulfill his brotherly duties by raising up children he could not call his own, so each time that he had intercourse with his brother's widow, he withdrew and "spilled his seed on the ground" as the bible says, "to avoid providing a child for his brother".

By his frequent practice of coitus interruptus, Onan was able to enjoy the pleasures of sex without having to bear the responsibility of the life he could give. But what Onan did was so offensive to Yahweh that he was struck dead by Divine Justice. His "seed" or semen was representative of life and spilling it on barren ground was quite the same thing as ejaculating today into a condom, diaphragm or a pharmaceutically obstructed womb.

Despite this, there are many who argue that Onan's sin was not so much in contracepting as it was in refusing to perform his Levitical duties. This theory however is implausible when we consider what the law itself prescribes as a penalty for anyone refusing to do this. Deuteronomy 25 Vs 9-10 recommends public humiliation and the stigma of being ostracised as proper punishment, yet nowhere does the law insist on the death of the offender.

Onan's case was unique because Yahweh intervened over and above the law by striking the man dead, not because he refused to honour the levitical ruling but because he deliberately chose to frustrate the life-giving aspect of the sexual act.

But if this is true of God's will, then why is it that so many who act thus today remain unscathed by the divine wrath? Indeed, we could ask the same of other grave sins in the world today. After all, why do active homosexual lifestyles and other sexual abominations continue to thrive in modern societies when they were answered with fire and brimstone in the days of Sodom and Gomorra? Why do great sacrileges continue to be offered to the Most Blessed Sacrament in our time when the ancient Israelites were slain by unseen hands for infringes against the Ark of the Covenant? Why do so many adulterous couples sin in plain sight without apparent harm to themselves when Yahweh punished David with the death of his son for stealing another man's wife?

In one word; Jesus, the Son of God who sits at the right hand of the Father interceding for us that we may receive mercy despite our grave sins. If we do not receive our just desserts, it is because the mercy of Christ holds back the justice of God...and gives the sinner time yet to repent. Nevertheless, it is presumptuous to assume that because the penalty for sin is temporarily withheld for the sake of the sinner, the deed is no longer criminal before the courts of heaven.

The second question we must ask ourselves is whether the Church's teaching against contraception is moral. And by "Moral" we do not mean the overwhelming consensus of the majority of people in the world today concerning what is socially or religiously acceptable. Instead, Christian morality must be affirmed and validated by the tradition of apostolic beliefs; what it was from the beginning, what it has been throughout time, and what it continues to be today.

Often, to test the validity of religious claims, one must go back to the beginning. The older, the longer and the more consistent a teaching is among the majority of Christians, the greater the evidence for its authenticity. As such, it always surprises many people to learn that up until 1930, it was not just the Catholic Church that condemned contraception as immoral. Rather, every major Christian denomination believed, taught and preached that contraception was incompatible with Christian living.

That is to say, this traditional teaching was not always exclusive to Catholics, instead there was widespread unanimous agreement among all Christians up until last century that marital contraception was to be opposed as being in conflict with the will of God. But due to political and social pressures, the Anglican Church Of England was the first Christian denomination to abandon its traditional views on this subject, following its majority vote in the Lambeth conference of 1930. Thereafter, the dam burst wide open and one by one, each Protestant denomination followed the Anglican leadership and conveniently forsook what for 1900 years, was the unquestioned doctrinal position in orthodox Christianity.

So in truth, this ancient teaching did not begin with Pope Paul VI and "Humanae Vitae" as some proponents of contraception would like to portray, but rather, this was a Godly teaching taught and upheld by the earliest Christian leaders including St Cyril of Jerusalem, St Augustine, St Jerome, St John Chrysostom and which inspired men like St Clement of Alexandria (202AD) among others to exclaim that "Marriage in itself merits esteem and the highest approval, for the Lord wished men to 'be fruitful and multiply. ' He did not tell them, however, to act like libertines, nor did He intend them to surrender themselves to pleasure as though born only to indulge in sexual relations..... Why, even unreasoning beasts know enough not to mate at certain times. To indulge in intercourse without intending children is to outrage nature, whom we should take as our instructor."

Once again, there are far too many warnings from the ancient Churches to be properly highlighted here, too many other references to the sin of contraception written by the Early Church Fathers, some of whom were direct disciples of the first Apostles but all of whom taught and defended the Catholic position as expressed today. These people lived in the tradition and shadow of the original deposit of faith. To put it bluntly, this is as close to the horse's mouth as you can get.

Even Protestant Reformers like Luther agreed that contraception was immoral, saying: "Those who have no love for children are swine, stocks, and logs unworthy of being called men or women; for they despise the blessings of God, the Creator and Author of marriage." John Calvin described "spilling the semen outside of intercourse" as "a monstrous thing."

No wonder then that the entire Christian world, including the Post-Reformation Churches who bicker and disagree about every other major tenet of the faith, nevertheless all agree on this one curious point - Contraception assaults the spiritual life, is a grave sin against human nature and is deeply offensive to God.

As such, the joys of sex cannot be separated from the life it can give and the reasons are obvious. Once you separate sexual pleasure from procreation, you make sexual pleasure an object and end in itself. And once you do that, you cannot justify prohibition against homosexual/extramarital/premarital sex, promiscuity, incest, bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia, masturbation, pornography, prostitution etc. since you have agreed that sex purely for pleasure is justifiable and hence morally licit and acceptable.

Finally, there is the practical aspect of this teaching to consider.

No sin however small is personal. It may be hidden behind private walls but its implications extend like a blanket of darkness over life itself. Every sin is social in its effects. Every sin affects one and all, although the visible terror of its influence is not always explicit to all. Just as a humble link is but one part of a greater chain, contraception opens the doorway to harmful attitudes and practices, which can gravely endanger a Christian soul and others.

The word "Contra-ception" or "Contrary to Conception" implies a denial of life. And what is a denial of life if not a welcoming of death, which is always the final destiny of sin? (Incidentally, many couples do not realise that many oral contraceptives today are really abortifacients cleverly disguised as precautionary aids. Frequently, they endanger health and are predominant causes of subsequent infertility and birth deformities.) Used often enough, it cultivates an anti-life and anti-children mentality among unsuspecting couples, to the point that it psychologically and spiritually impairs a genuine Christian appreciation for the grace of parenthood.

Anyone who chooses to contracept has already decided that they want to enjoy the pleasures of sex without the hassles of parenthood. That decision is already made, their mindsets already determined and the lines of demarcation already drawn the moment they reach for a pill or slip on a prophylactic. Any other reasoning is just a desperate attempt to ease troubled consciences.

When someone has already decided to reject a certain result, and in that decision takes every available means to avoid such an occurrence, there is also every likelihood that he will either be alarmed or terribly upset should that occurrence result despite his best efforts to avoid it. Now, if that unacceptable "result" is the life of a child, what do you think the reaction of these unwilling parents will be? After all, as scientists and doctors grudgingly admit, artificial contraception is never 100% foolproof as experience has shown.

As is so often the case in such predicaments, if the convenience of abortion can even cast its evil shadow within Christian marriages where the gift of life is not treasured and accepted, how much more can we expect the same in the case of a frightened teenager, a casual sexual liaison or an embarrassing extramarital affair? What becomes of our lives then when a beautiful child is reduced to being the shameful evidence of a depraved lifestyle that is best forgotten, hidden from public and evidentially destroyed as quickly as possible?

But abortion is not the only evil that can proceed from a contraceptive mentality. Contraception by nature and purpose offers maximum enjoyment with minimum repercussions. Take all the sexual liberties you want, after all there is nothing burdensome like a pregnancy to spoil your enjoyment. Adultery, marital infidelity, casual sex, the weakening of genuine love and respect in the face of lust, the monstrous crimes of incest and rampant fornication, the increased risks of sexual diseases that come from promiscuity, all of which St Paul preached as destroying the sanctity and health of family life, and which in very real ways threaten us with being shut out of the Kingdom of God.

After all, if contraception empowers a married couple to enjoy sex without the responsibility that God intends in the sexual union, why indeed should it be restricted to marriage alone when a plethora of sexual pleasures abound outside it? And in the event that a chosen contraceptive fails in its design, what greater abominations shall follow? Abortion, birth deformities, infectious diseases, AIDS, death? What shall we say of the adulterous or unfaithful Christian who brings a sexual plague back into the sacred hearth of his home, endangering his spouse and children?

In fact, the moment a culture of death is introduced into the human psyche of a person, the moral boundaries blur considerably. For instance, if it is legitimate for a mother to take the life of her unborn, what is to stop communities from advocating euthanasia and ending the lives of the elderly, since justification can always be found to support even murder? And if consenting partners have the right to alter the biochemistry of their bodies with drugs in order to render unnatural infertility, why stop there since our bodies can obviously be exploited for other things like cloning and genetic engineering etc?

The possibilities are endless. To gauge the serious influences of contraception, all one has to do is make this simple exercise. Draw a circle with the word "contraception" in it and with connecting arrows and lines, write down a possible "effect" that can proceed from a contraceptive mentality. Do this with each new word and "effect" and you will soon see that a network of sins (some subtle, some more serious) begins to fill the page. Like many lies, contraception hides under the illusion of perceived good, whilst at the same time weaving a web of destruction that slowly wounds the conscience, transforming this harmless link over the years into a chain that binds the user in deeper and more serious sins, of which he cannot free himself save by the grace and mercy of God.

Nevertheless, despite the great wealth of evidence that supports the Church's teaching on this subject, and despite the prophetic wisdom of Popes, councils and saints, many Catholics still refuse to accept this very scriptural, moral and authentic Christian teaching, citing difficulties in family life and financial means.

Yet, the Church is not against family planning. God's command to us to be fruitful does not enslave us to a life of mindless childbearing. Instead, the Catholic Church exhorts her children to be responsible stewards of this great gift of life, which is why Catholics are encouraged to consider natural family planning (NFP). But how is NFP different from contraception you might ask?

For one thing, NFP requires more effort, more thought, more sensitivity and more commitment between couples than contraception, which takes but a moment of passion to decide. But this isn't why the Church recommends NFP as a moral means of planning for children.

The main reason NFP does not contradict Catholic teaching is that it remains open and obedient to the author of all Life, who is the final arbiter and judge of what is good and holy. A couple who plans for a family through NFP has already submitted to the Lordship of Jesus, trusting that ultimately, God knows what is best for them. And in so believing, they undertake the commitment to welcome a child into their lives should providence bless them with such a joy, knowing that human life must always take precedence over human plans.

Artificial birth control on the other hand closes the door definitively on God altogether, not so much in binding the hands of omnipotence as it were since that is impossible, but rather choosing to reject any possibility that God's original intention for the sexual union should find fulfillment according to nature. To choose to contracept is to choose to reject parenthood at all costs. And in so doing, a couple embraces a mentality and consciousness to keep God and the child He might give out of the picture. It is a deliberate choice to rebel against the divine plan for marriage and procreation.

Is NFP a viable means for planning a family? Medical studies have shown that it is just as reliable if not more so than artificial birth control, although it certainly requires more self-discipline, which in a Christian marriage can only bestow a greater appreciation for each other as persons rather than objects of lust, ennobling couples to share a deeper sense of responsible love.

Still, some bristle, some complain, some quietly ignore this holy commandment and yet consider themselves faithful Catholics. And many more indeed would like the Church to change her teaching.

Paul VI knew what tremendous opposition and slander he would receive for preaching this truth - "It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching. There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a "sign of contradiction. She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical.” Humanae Vitae 18.

In short, the Church's doctrinal standard for teaching anything is simple. She does not preach God's truths because they are convenient, neither does she correct her children because of some noble ideal and least of all, does she champion a belief because it is practical to do so.

The Church's teaching against contraception proceeds from one motive alone - she is convinced her teaching on this subject expresses the divine will of God, and as His faithful herald, she must without consideration for herself appeal to the conscience of God's children in obedience to that Divine Will. That is her apostolic duty before Christ our Lord. She cannot speak but with His voice.

Truly, Pope Paul VI said it best: "Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter - only their guardian and interpreter. It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man.” Humanae Vitae 22.

As such, for every Catholic who rails and rants against the uncaring, cruel and dictatorial attitude of Rome towards reasonable Christians, they should check under their marital beds to see if there is a pope, bishop or priest hiding beneath, waiting to catch them in the very act of contraceptive sex. I'm fully confident that they will not find any ecclesiastical bogeyman hoping to entrap them.

Rather, in proclaiming the truth, the Church merely echoes the voice of Christ who is forever solicitous and concerned for His children. The rest remains a matter of free choice between the individual and his conscience, as it always has been between humanity and God. It is hoped that people of goodwill may recognise the perennial wisdom behind this teaching and embrace this holy and Godly warning to their hearts. In the end, the soul must give an account of herself before the Divine Judge. Just as the Church must ensure that her children hear and know the voice of the Good Shepherd, no matter how distasteful it may sound to their egos.

Let us praise God and thank Him for the glorious gift of such brave prophets like Paul VI and John Paul II, who championed the Gospel of Life against the culture of death. We should in fact be proud of belonging to a Church that is founded upon the Rock of Peter rather than the shifting sands of relativism, which is all around us.

Truly, may God give us the strength to follow Him in fidelity and humility...especially when our journeys take us before the narrow gates of salvation.

For as always, the way that is wide and easy leads to destruction.

And death.