Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Washington Post on the evil of contraception
The Washington Post | March 22, 1931 | Editors

Posted on 10/23/2010 1:50:52 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM

Until the Anglican Lambeth Conference of 1930 no Christian denomination had ever said that contraception could ever be objectively right. The Washington Post, in an editorial on March 22, 1931, said of the Federal Council of Churches' endorsement of Lambeth:

“It is impossible to reconcile the doctrine of the divine institution of marriage with any modernistic plan for the mechanical regulation of or suppression of human life. The Church must either reject the plain teachings of the Bible or reject schemes for the ‘ scientific’ production of human souls.

Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee’s report, if carried into effect, would sound the death knell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be ‘ careful and restrained’ is preposterous.”



TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 1930; 1931; abortion; abortions; birthcontrol; calvin; contraception; family; fornication; homosexualagenda; johncalvin; lambeth; lambethconference; luther; margaretsanger; martinluther; moralabsolutes; prolife; sexpositiveagenda; washingtonpost
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-197 next last
Back in 1930, even the secular newspaper editors at the Washington Post understood that the prohibition against contraception constituted "the plain teachings of the Bible."
1 posted on 10/23/2010 1:50:55 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mockingbyrd; BlackElk; ELS; PatriotGirl827; IrishCatholic; Judith Anne; mlizzy; JSteff; ...

Just a little reminder to us from history. Eighty years ago, even secular newspaper editors understood that which the majority of Christians today reject.


2 posted on 10/23/2010 1:53:32 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
When a society has embraced Margret Sanger and complete disregard for human life the issue of contraception seems almost trivial. I thank God that we have the Catholic Church holding steadfast to its principles when so many other churches have caved to popular pressures in order to fill the pews.
3 posted on 10/23/2010 1:59:07 PM PDT by Natural Law ("opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Tempus fugit.


4 posted on 10/23/2010 2:03:00 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Making the best of every virtue and vice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
"Ego enim Dominus et non mutor."
5 posted on 10/23/2010 2:23:05 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

6 “For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.

(The site says it should be “motor,” not “mutor.”)

Very apropos comment.


6 posted on 10/23/2010 2:28:08 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Making the best of every virtue and vice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Thanks. (I went with the Latin Vulgate website "mutor" version.)
7 posted on 10/23/2010 2:34:28 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

I will ping this out in a bit.

Contraception is the gorilla in the room that hardly anyone wants to look at. Even though it’s going “ooga booga” and jumping around....


8 posted on 10/23/2010 2:35:18 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Statements by the Churches and the Secular Press Condemning Artificial Contraception Following the Anglican's Lambeth Conference of 1930

The Lutheran Church

 

*       "Birth Control, as popularly understood today and involving the use of contraceptives, is one of the most repugnant of modern aberrations, representing a 20th century renewal of pagan bankruptcy."

— Dr. Walter A. Maier, Concordia Lutheran Theological

     Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri.

The Methodist Church

 

*       "The whole disgusting [birth control] movement rests on the assumption of man's sameness with the brutes. ... Its [the Federal Council of Churches] deliverance on the matter of birth control has no authorization from any churches representing it, and what it has said I regard as most unfortunate, not to use any stronger words. It certainly does not represent the Methodist Church, and I doubt if it represents any other Protestant Church in what it has said on this subject."

— Bishop Warren Chandler, Methodist Episcopal Church South,

     April 13, 1931.

The Presbyterian Church

 

*       "Its [Federal Council of Churches] recent pronouncement on birth control should be enough reason, if there were no other, to withdraw from support of that body, which declares that it speaks for the Presbyterian and other Protestant churches in ex cathedra pronouncements."

— The Presbyterian, April 2, 1931.

The Catholic Church

 

*       "In order that she [the Catholic Church] may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, she raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through our mouth proclaims anew:  any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin."

— Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930, Section 4,

     Paragraph 4.

——————————————

*       "Since a week ago last Saturday we can no longer expect them to defend the law of God. These sects will work out the very logic of their ways and in fifty or one hundred years there will be only the Church and paganism. We will be left to fight the battle alone — and we will."

— Father Fulton J. Sheen of the Catholic University of America.

     "Comments ..... and Comments On the Report of The Federal

     Council of Churches of Christ in America." The American Birth

     Control League's Birth Control Review, Volume XV, Number 4

     (April 1931), page 143.

————————————

*       "Liberal Protestantism is really (so it seems to us and we speak with all respect for the noble solicitude it displays for human welfare, its passion for the building up of a better order of society) a new religion, but it is no longer Protestantism — it is pagan humanitarianism, it is the creed of social service built on shifting and unstable experiments, but not on the demonstrated facts of materialistic science."

— Editorial from The Commonweal of March 29, 1931. "Comments .....

     and Comments on the Report of The Federal Council of Churches

     of Christ in America." The American Birth Control League's Birth

     Control Review, Volume XV, Number 4 (April 1931), page 142.

 

The Secular Press

 

*       "Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee's report, if carried into effect, would sound the death-knell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be "careful and restrained" is preposterous."

   The Washington Post, March 22, 1931.

9 posted on 10/23/2010 2:39:33 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

When I ran the words through Google, it said, “Do you mean ‘motor’?”

I wouldn’t know ... I read Latin only because it looks like Spanish and French!


10 posted on 10/23/2010 2:40:30 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Making the best of every virtue and vice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

The Anglican Bishop's Contrasting 1920 and 1930 Statements on Contraception

Statement of the 1920 Lambeth Conference

 

--       "We utter an emphatic warning against the use of unnatural means for the avoidance of conception, together with the grave dangers — physical, moral, and religious — thereby incurred, and against the evils with which the extension of such use threatens the race. In opposition to the teaching which in the name of science and religion encourages married people in the deliberate cultivation of sexual union as an end in itself, we steadfastly uphold what must always be regarded as the governing consideration of Christian marriage. One is the primary purpose for which marriage exists — namely, the continuation of the race through the gift and heritage of children; the other is the paramount importance in married life of deliberate and thoughtful self-control."[64]

Resolution 15 of the 1930 Lambeth Conference

 

--       "Where there is a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, the method must be decided on Christian principles. The primary and obvious method is complete abstinence from intercourse (as far as may be necessary) in a life of discipleship and self-control lived in the power of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, in those cases where there is such a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, and where there is a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence, the Conference agrees that other methods may be used, provided that this is done in the light of the same Christian principles. The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception-control for motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."

11 posted on 10/23/2010 2:40:47 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
My years have taught me that the litmus test of a REAL Christian is marriage and birth control. Real Christians stay married till death and have as many children as God sends. They don't use birth control. If I see a person who calls themselves Christian and is divorced and remarried, I know that they are hypocrites. If I see a couple with no children because they use birth control, I know they have not God's Grace.

How many Christians like that do you know?

12 posted on 10/23/2010 3:41:28 PM PDT by verdugo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp; Radagast the Fool; DoctorBulldog; Celtic Cross; Grizzled Bear; ScoopAmma; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

13 posted on 10/23/2010 5:11:30 PM PDT by narses ( 'Prefer nothing to the love of Christ.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

I’m absolurely pro-life and anti-abortion. I am also a Christian who is fairly familiar with the contents of the Bible.

I simply fail to recall the verses or passages that prohibit contrception. And while I follow the reasoning, I am unsure how sound the assumptions are.

I’d be more than willing tolisten to your thoughts, as I could well be wrong


14 posted on 10/23/2010 5:25:03 PM PDT by chesley (Eat what you want, and die like a man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chesley
In 1989 a Protestant scholar, Charles Provan, published a book titled The Bible and Birth Control. Most of his research into historical Protestant views on this subject came from reading commentaries on Genesis 38, in which Onan, who married his deceased brother's wife to fulfill his familial obligation, withdrew from her during intercourse rather than impregnate her. God then killed Onan.)

Martin Luther and John Calvin are recognized as fathers of the Reformation.

Martin Luther (1483 to 1546) - "Onan must have been a malicious and incorrigible scoundrel. This is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest or adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a Sodomitic sin. For Onan goes into 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."

John Calvin (1509 to 1564) - Deliberately avoiding the intercourse, so that the seed drops on the ground, is double horrible. For this means that one quenches the hope of his family, and kills the son, which could be expected, before he is born. This wickedness is now as severely as is possible condemned by the Spirit, through Moses, that Onan, as it were, through a violent and untimely birth, tore away the seed of his brother out the womb, and as cruel as shamefully has thrown on the earth. Moreover he thus has, as much as was in his power, tried to destroy a part of the human race.

Also, John Wesley is recognized as the founder of the Methodism.

John Wesley (1703 to 1791) - "Onan, though he consented to marry the widow, yet to the great abuse of his own body, of the wife he had married and the memory of his brother that was gone, refused to raise up seed unto the brother. Those sins that dishonour the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he did displeased the Lord - And it is to be feared, thousands, especially single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls.

Examining sermons and commentaries, Charles Provan identified over a hundred Protestant leaders (Lutheran, Calvinist, Reformed, Methodist, Presbyterian, Anglican, Evangelical, Nonconformist, Baptist, Puritan, Pilgrim) living before the twentieth century condemning non- procreative sex. Did he find the opposing argument was also represented? Mr. Provan stated, "We will go one better, and state that we have found not one orthodox theologian to defend Birth Control before the 1900's. NOT ONE! On the other hand, we have found that many highly regarded Protestant theologians were enthusiastically opposed to it."

Here are several previous threads on the subject:

The Bible & Birth Control

Protestants and Birth Control

The Protest of a Protestant Minister Against Birth Control

Contraception and Conversion

The Connection between Contraception and Abortion


15 posted on 10/23/2010 5:53:36 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

“mutor” is correct.

“motor” would be “I am set in motion, shaken, stirred.”— a rare verb.
“(non) mutor” is “I am (not) changed.”


16 posted on 10/23/2010 6:07:26 PM PDT by scrabblehack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chesley
Some history of Christian thought on Birth Control:

(Note: The quotes of the early church fathers can be researched in their entirety, courtesy of Calvin College.)

191 AD - Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children

"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." (2:10:91:2) "To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature" (2:10:95:3).

307 AD - Lactantius - Divine Institutes

"[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. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife" (6:20)

"God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital ['generating'] part of the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other purpose than the generation of offspring" (6:23:18).

325 AD - Council of Nicaea I - Canon 1

"[I]f anyone in sound health has castrated [sterilized] himself, it behooves that such a one, if enrolled among the clergy, should cease [from his ministry], and that from henceforth no such person should be promoted. But, as it is evident that this is said of those who willfully do the thing and presume to castrate themselves, so if any have been made eunuchs by barbarians, or by their masters, and should otherwise be found worthy, such men this canon admits to the clergy"

375 AD - Epiphanius of Salamis - Medicine Chest Against Heresies

"They [certain Egyptian heretics] exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption" (26:5:2 ).

391 AD - John Chrysostom - Homilies on Matthew

"[I]n truth, all men know that they who are under the power of this disease [the sin of covetousness] are wearied even of their father's old age [wishing him to die so they can inherit]; and that which is sweet, and universally desirable, the having of children, they esteem grievous and unwelcome. Many at least with this view have even paid money to be childless, and have mutilated nature, not only killing the newborn, but even acting to prevent their beginning to live [sterilization]" (28:5).

393 AD - Jerome - Against Jovinian

"But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?" (1:19).

419 AD - Augustine - Marriage and Concupiscence

"I am supposing, then, although are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. Sometimes this lustful cruelty, or cruel lust, comes to this, that they even procure poisons of sterility [oral contraceptives] . . . Assuredly if both husband and wife are like this, they are not married, and if they were like this from the beginning they come together not joined in matrimony but in seduction. If both are not like this, I dare to say that either the wife is in a fashion the harlot of her husband or he is an adulterer with his own wife" (1:15:17).

522 AD - Caesarius of Arles - Sermons

"Who is he who cannot warn that no woman may take a potion [an oral contraceptive] so that she is unable to conceive or condemns in herself the nature which God willed to be fecund? As often as she could have conceived or given birth, of that many homicides she will be held guilty, and, unless she undergoes suitable penance, she will be damned by eternal death in hell. If a women does not wish to have children, let her enter into a religious agreement with her husband; for chastity is the sole sterility of a Christian woman" (1:12).

Martin Luther (1483 to 1546) -

"Onan must have been a malicious and incorrigible scoundrel. This is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest or adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a Sodomitic sin. For Onan goes into 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."

John Calvin (1509 to 1564) -

Deliberately avoiding the intercourse, so that the seed drops on the ground, is double horrible. For this means that one quenches the hope of his family, and kills the son, which could be expected, before he is born. This wickedness is now as severely as is possible condemned by the Spirit, through Moses, that Onan, as it were, through a violent and untimely birth, tore away the seed of his brother out the womb, and as cruel as shamefully has thrown on the earth. Moreover he thus has, as much as was in his power, tried to destroy a part of the human race.

John Wesley (1703 to 1791) -

"Onan, though he consented to marry the widow, yet to the great abuse of his own body, of the wife he had married and the memory of his brother that was gone, refused to raise up seed unto the brother. Those sins that dishonour the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he did displeased the Lord - And it is to be feared, thousands, especially single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls.

(Examining sermons and commentaries, Charles Provan identified over a hundred Protestant leaders (Lutheran, Calvinist, Reformed, Methodist, Presbyterian, Anglican, Evangelical, Nonconformist, Baptist, Puritan, Pilgrim) living before the twentieth century condemning non- procreative sex. Did he find the opposing argument was also represented? Mr. Provan stated, "We will go one better, and state that we have found not one orthodox [protestant]theologian to defend Birth Control before the 1900's. NOT ONE! On the other hand, we have found that many highly regarded Protestant theologians were enthusiastically opposed to it." )

In 1908 the Bishops of the Anglican Communion meeting at the Lambeth Conference declared, "The Conference records with alarm the growing practice of the artificial restriction of the family and earnestly calls upon all Christian people to discountenance the use of all artificial means of restriction as demoralising to character and hostile to national welfare."

The Lambeth Conference of 1930 produced a new resolution, "Where there is a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, complete abstinence is the primary and obvious method..." but if there was morally sound reasoning for avoiding abstinence, "the Conference agrees that other methods may be used, provided that this is done in the light of Christian principles."

1930 AD - Pope Pius XI - Casti Conubii (On Christian Marriage)

"Any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin."

1965 AD - Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World - Gaudium et Spes, Vatican II

Relying on these principles, sons of the Church may not undertake methods of birth control which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law. (51)

1968 AD - Pope Paul VI - Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life)

Equally to be excluded, as the teaching authority of the Church has frequently declared, is direct sterilization, whether perpetual or temporary, whether of the man or of the woman. Similarly excluded is every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, propose, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible. To justify conjugal acts made intentionally infecund, one cannot invoke as valid reasons the lesser evil, or the fact that such acts would constitute a whole together with the fecund acts already performed or to follow later, and hence would share in one and the same moral goodness. In truth, if it is sometimes licit to tolerate a lesser evil in order to avoid a greater evil to promote a greater good, it is not licit, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil so that good may follow therefrom; that is to make into the object of a positive act of the will something which is intrinsically disorder, and hence unworthy of the human person, even when the intention is to safeguard or promote individual, family or social well-being. Consequently it is an error to think that a conjugal act which is deliberately made infecund and so is intrinsically dishonest could be made honest and right by the ensemble of a fecund conjugal life. (14)

1993 AD - Catechism of the Catholic Church

"The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception)." (2399)

17 posted on 10/23/2010 6:10:55 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp; 185JHP; 230FMJ; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; Amos the Prophet; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

The gorilla in the room from which many people want to avert their eyes. Excellent history of what used to be the cultural norm - contraception was considered anti-family and an offense to God. Contraception meant an open door and welcome mat to sex outside of marriage. Well, they were right.

18 posted on 10/23/2010 7:56:57 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

I wonder why the Anglican Bishop changed his message in ten years. I assume it was the same bishop. What a pansy wimp. Very few people want to admit that contraception is the evil that it is.


19 posted on 10/23/2010 8:00:51 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Thanks.

I’ll have to look more closely into this.


20 posted on 10/23/2010 8:15:23 PM PDT by chesley (Eat what you want, and die like a man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-197 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson