If you ever want to raise peoples’ blood pressure a few points, mention the words “birth control” and “sin” in the same sentence. Besides betraying their allegiances to this family planning technique, this apparent hostility shows a mindset that is quite prevalent among, not only unbelievers, but many Protestants as well. In their drive to oppose the belief that birth control is always sinful, they seem to forget that there are times when it is undeniably sinful.
1) Birth Control In Light Of God’s Revealed Will
Those Christians who support the use of birth control will many times say that “God has laid it on our hearts to plan our family size”. Let’s say for the sake of argument that God does do that. If God were to do the opposite, and impress upon a couples’ heart not to use birth control – and if they went ahead and used it anyways, it would be absolutely sinful. They would be intentionally rejecting the will of God as it has been revealed to them; hence for those individuals, birth control would be a sin.
2) Birth Control In Light Of Reckless Endangerment
Amidst countless studies and heated controversy on both sides, no one can come to a definitive conclusion as to whether or not the normal birth control pill can cause abortions. Many doctors say yes it absolutely can, many say no it absolutely can not (I actually have been convinced that it can and does). For couples who know the post-conceptive dangers posed to embryos exposed to high levels of chemicals, to continue using the pill amounts to playing medical roulette with their unborn children. For those with knowledge of the danger, who continue to use the pill – if conception is achieved and the child is lost to a very early abortion, the death of the child makes the use of that birth control absolutely sinful. The fact that “we can not know for sure” excuses no one from the reckless endangerment of their child.
3) Birth Control In Light Of The Human Heart
Though I will grant (very hesitantly) the fact that some couples may use birth control apart from any explicitly sinful motives, any time that it is used in the context of a faithless, selfish, irresponsible decision -birth control is absolutely sinful. When the human heart (which is desperately wicked above all things) seeks to enjoy the pleasures of the marriage bed apart from the blessed responsibility/opportunity of bearing children, that couple has exchanged the natural use of sex for one that is put in the service of the flesh. Whether this is an individual act of sinfulness, or a lifestyle of “fruitlessness” – if the human heart is not first and foremost seeking God’s purpose for sex – then in these cases birth control is absolutely sinful.
And there may be other times this is true as well. My point here is just to remind us that even those who deny that birth control is always in disobedience to God’s will for families, at the very least must admit that in cases like these, its sinfulness can not be denied. If it appears that these are merely human sins exhibited in the form of birth control, then where is an instance where this does not occur, and how do we know? And that’s my point…
‘BH
15 Comments
January 30, 2008 at 4:53 pm
I would like to invite you to post your reply to an open question to all believers, on my blog:
http://potomac9499.wordpress.com/2008/01/30/an-open-question-to-all-believers/
I am asking in all sincerity, because I do actually want to understand differing view points, and since you seem quite certain of your faith, I feel your input would be relevant.
January 30, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Hank, I’m not trying to be a little “toot” or thorn in your side, but can you provide some scripture to back your points?
January 30, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Give me a few minutes and I will respond. I promise this time!
January 30, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Well I still have but a minute to write. This time I’ll at least give a few thoughts before switching back to my work.
Hank, I have to admit, it seems you get bolder on the subject of birth control each time flex your pen. I know you wrote about it back when Phillip blogged — back before I even knew you! — and gave some good arguments for your position. You’ve been diligent to continually craft out your position. And you’ve stuck with it; I commend you for that.
Now, if I may, a few thoughts:
My initial response to this post is one of confusion. I feel like you aren’t making yourself clear — or perhaps I’m not hearing you clear. Either way, each of your three points are difficult for me to follow, which means my responses will likely come across as rebuffing. They are not intended to.
On number one:
If God were to … impress upon a couple’s heart not to use birth control — and if they went ahead and used it anyways — it would be absolutely sinful.
You are correct in your espousal, but to use this logic in our discussion is inappropriate. Disobeying God’s revealed will is, of course, always sinful in every possible situation or circumstance. This is true of family planning just as it is true of marrying in the first place. If God says “no” or “yes” and you don’t mind, the Bible calls that sin. So to use this argument on an already touchy subject seems more like picking a fight than making a point.
Perhaps your argument would carry more weight if you brought the Scriptures into account. God has not revealed in His Word whether or not non-abortive family planning is sin. What he has made clear, however, is that children are a blessing — to be desired from every married couple. The sin then — the “absolute sin,” as you say — would be disobeying God’s revealed will by spurning the thought of having children altogether.
(I will skip your second point for the sake of time and move to number three.)
When the human heart (which is desperately wicked above all things) seeks to enjoy the pleasures of the marriage bed apart from the blessed responsibility/opportunity of bearing children, that couple has exchanged the natural use of sex for one that is put in the service of the flesh.
I wish you had been more clear on this point. I wish you had distinguished between the couple who longs for children and would receive them with joy if their efforts to plan a family were thwarted by pregnancy, and that of the couple who places children on par with a plasma TV (in other words, discretionary commodities).
But you don’t. And therefore I cannot help but mark your blanketing condemnation off as preposterous. Family planning is not the same as wanting sex without children. It is not, Hank.
Now, as you know, my fiancee and I will use birth control as a means of working toward having the number of children God wants at the time he wants. This is human wisdom enacting the hope of divine revelation, we know. And we are content in this decision.
January 30, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Catechismatic:
Don’t worry about the “tootiness”, I’ve grown used to it by now…j/k. As for the verses:
1) Birth Control In Light Of God’s Revealed Will
- James 4:17 “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” John Gill wrote: “It is a greater sin; it is an aggravated one; it is criminal in him that is ignorant of what is good, and does that which is evil, nor shall he escape punishment; but it is much more wicked in a man that knows what is right and good, and ought to be done, and does it not, but that which is evil, and his condemnation will be greater; see (Luke 12:47,48) . The omission of a known duty, as well as the commission of a known sin, is criminal.”
2) Birth Control In Light Of Reckless Endangerment
- Proverbs 24:10-12 ” Rescue those who are being taken away to death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter. If you say, “Behold, we did not know this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it, and will he not repay man according to his work?” Matthew Henry wrote: “It is not so easy with such excuses to evade the judgment of God; and to the discovery of that we lie open and by the determination of that we must abide. Now, [1.] God ponders the heart and keeps the soul; he keeps an eye upon it, observes all the motions of it; its most secret thoughts and intents are all naked and open before him. It is his prerogative to do so, and that in which he glories. Jer. xvii. 10, I the Lord search the heart. He keeps the soul, holds it in life. This is a good reason why we should be tender of the lives of others, and do all we can to preserve them, because our lives have been precious in the sight of God and he has graciously kept them.”
3) Birth Control In Light Of The Human Heart
- Romans 14:23 “And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” Calvin wrote: “The reason for this condemnation is, that every work, however splendid and excellent in appearance, is counted as sin, except it be founded on a right conscience; for God regards not the outward display, but the inward obedience of the heart, by this alone is an estimate made of our works. Besides, how can that be obedience, when any one undertakes what he is not persuaded is approved by God? Where then such a doubt exists, the individual is justly charged with prevarication; for he proceeds in opposition to the testimony of his, own conscience.”
If these need more explanation, let me know.
January 30, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Wow, talk about a quick and thorough response!
I’m good to go. Looking forward to 11 years from now….you…me..wittenberg…etc. oh yeah!
January 30, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Trav-
Thanks for the commendation brother. I really mean that. And I appreciate you sticking with me through the blog convos, the dinner table debates, and the work day dialogues. It’s been sharpening, and filled with encounters with grace.
To answer your responses/questions, let me first say that this post is of course one in a line of many, and probably would be difficult to just step in on and understand completely where I am coming from. And I know that you’ve read (at least) some of my previous posts on this subject, so if you haven’t yet, continue to bear those posts in mind as you read.
I intentionally crafted point 1 the way I did to start the debate on something we could all agree on – disobeying God is always a sin. The particular example I used however was to contrast our views of God leading couples (much like you and your fiancee ) to pursue birth control, and God leading couples to reject its use. In that hypothetical construct, it is important for this debate to admit that there are “absolute” instances when birth control is sinful. A small bit of hyperbole was not accidental there, and I believe it assisted in setting the stage…
My main emphasis on point one was God’s revealed will to individuals – the leadings of the Holy Spirit, if you will. Hence the James 4:17 connotation. Though you may feel like it goes without saying, sometimes we forget those kinds of things…
As for point 3 – the reason that I did not make the kind of distinction that you are seeking (between those who would joyously be “thwarted” by pregnancy, and those who view children as marital accessories) is because I question the hearts of both. If the former would so joyously receive a child if God decided to “thwart” their family planning, then I question if such family planning is done with a clear conscience. It seems that such a couple is leaving “joyful” room for error, which again, does not seem to be a sign of confident faith in their use of birth control. If such a couple has not been convinced by the absence of a prohibition against birth control in Scripture, and the leading of the Holy Spirit, then why the insecurities?
Furthermore, you said that “Family planning is not the same as wanting sex without children.” The key here, and the reason why I brought it up, is that there are times when that is EXACTLY what family planning is. It is impossible for you to vouch for every heart that every uses it, and in those particular case birth control is absolutely sinful. If it is a single sex act with that “child-less” heart, or years of “responsibility-free” sex – if the heart cries “no children Lord!” then that is a sin. I do not pretend or propose to argue that all family planning is this way, and always this way – rather I make the point that it CAN be this way – and when it is, it is absolutely sinful.
January 31, 2008 at 1:12 am
Travis stole my material: “The sin then — the “absolute sin,” as you say — would be disobeying God’s revealed will by spurning the thought of having children altogether.”
I think this is a no-brainer for me as well.
For a couple to say that they’re not having children until/unless God specifically reveals it to them is like never evangelizing until/unless God intentionally move you.
God has already spoken in both of those instances and to say that God would “lead” a couple to never have kids seems to make about as much since as the person that says God “led” him/her to never evangelize or led him/her dump the spouse for a better model.
Incidentally, and this is somewhat tongue in cheek, I also have a theory with regard to the minimum number of kids a couple should have … 3.
http://gunny93.blogspot.com/2006/04/three-shall-be-number-thou-shalt-count.html
But, I’m open to suggestion/correction.
January 31, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I’d like to respond to point 2, if I may. You rightly point out the irresponsibility of using the pill without regard for the very real possibility of reckless endangerment of unborn children.
How would you view a decision to curtail fertility based on the very real possibility of reckless endangerment, through medication, of an unborn child?
January 31, 2008 at 3:56 pm
English -
I’m not quite sure of the question that you are asking. Is there any way you could elaborate a little further?
Gunny –
I do disagree with you on one point brother. That post is definitely not “somewhat” tongue in cheek…Frankly, I’m surprised you have any cheek left after that one…lol.
Far be it from me to dog metaphors (because the Lord knows how much I like them myself), but you probably could have left out the quip about miscarriages. I don’t know if any couple who has ever experienced a miscarriage would ever have a light heart about it. I know that was not your intention, but those are the kinds of things that we need be mindful of (me included) when we are talking about family and child bearing.
January 31, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Hank,
I just came across an encyclical from Pope Paul VI which you might find interesting. “Humanae Vitae” is all about exactly the philosophy of procreation. Some of his phrasing I found particularly moving. Theres a set of references to Scripture, previous council and documents at the bottom of the page. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Thank you again for this series of posts. Peace!
-Sean
February 1, 2008 at 2:34 am
I’ll go back and have another look, BrotherHank, with fresh eyes about the miscarriage bit.
As one who has yet to recover from our miscarriage in June 2002, I can assure you I see those tragedies as weighty indeed.
Thanks for the perspective, brother.
February 1, 2008 at 5:59 am
Well, Hank, there are other medications besides the pill – things that are unrelated to conception and for entirely different purposes; an example would be perhaps certain heart medications. There are such medications which would have grave and serious effects on unborn children.
Would it be sinful to avoid conception if a wife had to take those medications, would you say?
March 16, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I had to take medicines like that and after a lot of prayer, I made the decision, for the first time in my life, to take measures to avoid having a child. Sometimes I think that maybe I failed because I did not have enough faith to seek a medical alternative, but I also think I should do what I can to take care of the body God gave me so that I can take care of the children He gave me.
March 16, 2008 at 7:02 pm
English and tjsthings –
Sorry it took so long to get back to this comment. It was posted at the beginning of my blogging break last month, and I honestly forgot about it when I got back, until this afternoon when tsjsthings commented.
It should be noted first of all that this is a very rare case, and no argument, either for or against birth control should hinge upon such extremes when we have plenty of material elsewhere to come to a firm moral judgment about the practice as a whole.
With that being said, I think a simple question will provide us with a lot of light in this situation. If a woman was on such medication that “would have grave and serious effects on unborn children” (for instance the kind of heart medicine quoted above) and yet conceived a child despite using birth control — what would be the ethical thing for her to do? Should the woman continue her medical treatment, knowing the reckless endangerment into which she is placing her helpless child? Or would she be ethically bound to protect the child within her from such dangers, no matter the danger to herself?
What I am getting at here, is that our answers to these questions will help to reveal our heart in the matter. It will tell us if we understand the call of parents in relation to the lives of their children.
At this point, I’d like to made a distinction. I am not saying that a woman who is not pregnant and is diagnosed with cancer has no right to undergo chemo-therapy or radiation to cure herself from cancer. There is a major difference between the unintended infertile side effects of curing a disease; and the intended medical effects of a drug that seeks to prohibit conception, but still allows for a child to be conceived under these harmful conditions.
As Christians, we should not be content with such medicine that does not actively take into account the respect we must have for God’s procreative powers. We must remember that science and technology is not coming (necessarily) from a biblical worldview in their diagnosis of our illnesses, nor are their recommendations for treatment. Medicine is good. But as I commented recently on another post, we should take care to distinguish the proper ends of medicine for the healing of our bodies and not the prohibiting of life. Which is yet another reason we should encourage Christian young people with a heart for science and medicine to pursue it to the glory of God.