Posted on 07/31/2013 8:36:12 PM PDT by Morgana
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA, July 31, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Two days after saying he found nothing sinful about sex-change operations, televangelist Pat Robertson said contraception is “a very important part of humanity” that would prevent the birth of too many Appalachian “ragamuffins.” He also said that Natural Family Planning violated the provisions of the Old Testament.
On today's episode of the 700 Club, a woman asked whether the use of birth control is sinful, something about which Catholics and Protestants disagree.
When Robertson's co-host, Wendy Griffith, said not all families could afford to have multiple children, Robertson replied, “That's the big problem, especially in Appalachia. They don't know about birth control. They just keep having babies.”
“You see a string of all these little ragamuffins, and not enough food to eat and so on,” he said, “and it's desperate poverty.” Pat Robertson discusses NFP on today's 700 Club. Pat Robertson discusses NFP on today's 700 Club.
“I'd say yes, birth control is absolutely an important thing for people to use,” he added, saying contraception “is a very important part of humanity.”
Robertson said that “birth control in the Protestant churches has always been permitted,” because they “feel that the care and rearing of children is a tremendous obligation.”
However, the 83-year-old host had negative words for the Natural Family Planning method. “Our good friends in the Catholic Church forbid the use of birth control but they allow people to use what's called 'rhythm,'” he said at the beginning of his answer. “If you read the Old Testament they were forbidden to have sex while women were having their menstrual period, and the Catholic Church is telling women to do just that, and it's OK.”
The Bible discouraged men from having sexual relations with a woman during her menstrual cycle – or touching her – in Leviticus 15:19-33, a provision taken up by Judaism and Islam.
However, Robertson went on to tell another writer later in the segment that eating pork, which is banned in Leviticus 11:7 and Deuteronomy 14:8, is not a sin.
“Where do people get all these things?” he asked. “This is ridiculous.”
The Protestant Reformers opposed artificial contraception, something not embraced by Protestants until the Anglican Communion's Lamberth Conference in 1930.
Pro-life activists point out that many forms of “birth control” – including the morning after pill, the IUD, and hormonal birth control pill – may cause a chemical abortion by blocking the implantation of a newly conceived child.
My grandfather once said "Never trust a preacher who owns more than one suit."
Pat Robertson is yet another example that shows my grandfather was correct.
Thank you for your response, that was very helpful. Also, I think he errors in saying something like it is the “rhythm method”.
a woman asked whether the use of birth control is sinful, something about which Catholics and Protestants disagree.
________________________________________________________________________
This isn’t true, as a protestant I do not agree with using birth control. I get sick of broad statements.
The only similarity between “rhythm” and scientific NFP is that both can be used to avoid pregnancy by not having sex at the time the woman is fertile. Training for all the modern NFP methods strongly discourages “calendar watching,” because the information from physical and even emotional signs is much more indicative of the state of the reproductive cycle.
Rev. Robertson does not show much respect for people’s ability to make responsible choices or sacrifices. I don’t know if this reflects his theological beliefs or something personal about himself, but he tends toward the “We’re just animals” view of humanity, from what I’ve seen.
“This isn’t true, as a protestant I do not agree with using birth control. I get sick of broad statements.”
You are rare! I have got into knock down fights with protestants over the use of birth control. Mind you I used to be Baptist and they (the church I was in) thought it was okay.
“My grandfather once said “Never trust a preacher who owns more than one suit.””
I’ve never heard that before but it sounds reasonable.
Remember what my Mom said about giving to your church. At least you know where the money goes.
Yep, I haven’t forgotten that. I agree.
Pat says they don’t need to be breeding, but God says “Be fruitful and multiply” and tell us that He will provide for us better than the birds of the air and the beasts of the field. I think Pat’s opinion has been superceded :)
I’m shocked.
Paul didn’t change the Word of God. Did he rewrite Leviticus? Nope. He had a vision, a revelation, and he passed that on to us, as prophets are often instructed to do.
When Noah and his family were given a concession to eat meat after the flood, did Noah change the word of God? Or did God see fit to change what laws he held them to? Is that not within the purview of God? Is His sovereignty limited in that respect? If so, who has placed that limit on Him?
It is true that the OT forbid that, only for Israelites, but it was part of their “cleanliness” laws. A women who was menstruating was ritually unclean, so, for example, she could not enter the temple during that time, and was even supposed to live outside the home, in a tent or other seclusion, so as not to transfer her uncleanliness to her family members. The prohibition against sex was part of that effort to maintain ritual purity, not a moral law.
Since the laws about ritual purification were judged to be unnecessary after Christ, Pat should know that citing such a law for Christians is a really bad argument. Also, an inconsistent one, unless Pat also wants menstruating women to camp out in the yard, and doesn’t want people with excema or psoriasis to be allowed in church.
It’s sad that at the age of 83, a man still doesn’t understand what a menstrual “cycle” actually is. Not rare, perhaps, but sad.
I’m protestant and I don’t like birth control either. It’s the first step towards separating sex for procreation from sex for recreation, and it paves the way for abortion, radical feminism, and all the evils that come with those things.
I don’t know if it would be feasible to outlaw it or anything, but it’s certainly something Christian churches should be discouraging.
Because too many senile idiots still send this moron money. It’s all about money.
I searched it a while ago, and it seems there are quite a few Protestant and other non-Catholic Christians around that agree with you as well about the theology and negative effects of allowing artificial birth control within marriage. Invariably they seemed to be very conservative, at least as far as their faith goes. I’m kinda surprised we don’t see more on FR.
I bet you couldn’t find one Catholic or any other type of Christian that is all for things like ‘gay marriage,’ female pastors/clergy, gay leaders in relationships, and abortion but also thinks birth control within marriage should be prohibited by their faith. At least I’ve never seen it or heard about it.
Freegards
Yes, I agree it is probably a very conservative position. One doesn’t start out thinking that birth control is bad, you have to be able to recognize the other, more obvious evils that it is related to, before you see that the trail leads back towards birth control. So, if you didn’t care about abortion, divorce, homosexuality, children outside of marriage, etc, then you would probably never see why an objection would be raised to birth control
Did you always believe this or did it come to you eventually? The reason I ask is that there are a lot of conservative Christians, at least as I ‘ve observed on FR, that would disagree with these conclusions about birth control within marriage.
There are only a very few Christian groups as far as I can tell that didn’t change their view on this after 1930 or so. Even the Orthodox allow it under some circumstances, but there seems to be some dispute, at least in some areas.
Freegards
“I’m protestant and I don’t like birth control either.”
It is so rare that I meet protestants who are! I mean this. I once got into an argument with some Baptists who said they would not donate money to missionaries who came to their church because they had 10 kids! I told them that it was a good thing the country they were sent to did not have Margaret Sanger’s evil Planned Parenthood for the missionaries to obtain an abortion but they felt the missionaries should “abstain from sex”. Yea right like married folk should really do that!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.