Replies

No, taking Onan's life was for coitus interuptus, and EVERY Christian until 1930 agreed that was the case.

You know that EVERY Christian prior to 1930 agreed to that? HOw? Did you time travel and ask each and every one of them?

Or let me guess.......

If they disagree with you, they aren't Christians, therefore by default, they HAD to have been Christians, therefore the claim can be made that ALL Christians prior to 1930 agreed with you.

How convenient......

Please provide a link or a reference to the writings of any Protestant or any other Christian prior to this past century that said contraception was not sinful. Good luck. I've searched but was never able to find one.

There's a reason for that.

You know that EVERY Christian prior to 1930 agreed to that? HOw? Did you time travel and ask each and every one of them?

Given that 19th century denominations were very outspoken in their moral teachings and that nondenominationalism was unheard of, it's quite easy to check on this data.

John Calvin: I will contend myself with briefly mentioning this, as far as the sense of shame allows to discuss it. It is a horrible thing to pour out seed besides the intercourse of man and woman. 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. When a woman in some way drives away the seed out the womb, through aids, then this is rightly seen as an unforgivable crime. Onan was guilty of a similar crime, by defiling the earth with his seed, so that Tamar would not receive a future inheritor.

Martin Luther: The rest of the populace is more wicked than even the heathen themselves. For most married people do not desire offspring. Indeed, they turn away from it and consider it better to live without children, because they are poor and do not have the means with which to support a household. . . . But the purpose of marriage is not to have pleasure and to be idle but to procreate and bring up children, to support a household. . . . Those who have no love for children are swine, stocks, and logs unworthy of being called men and women; for they despise the blessing of God, the Creator and Author of marriage...But the greatest good in married life, that which makes all suffering and labor worth while, is that God grants offspring and commands that they be brought up to worship and serve him.

John Welsey wrote an entire commentary, "Thoughts on the sin of Onam", to wit: "Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord — and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls."

Saint Augustine: Marital relations even with a lawful wife, are unlawful and degrading when the conception of a child is deliberately frustrated. This was the sin of Onan, and God struck him dead because of it.

The Anglican Communion: 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, under 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 considerations 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 -- Resolution 68, Lambeth Conference of 1920

When the Anglicans apostatized on contraception in 1930, the other churches, and even the Washington Post, were indignant at this new heterodox position that no prior Christians had ever made:

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.