The Christian Case Against Contraception: Making the Case from Historical, Biblical, Systematic, and Practical Theology & Ethics

by Bryan C. Hodge

Therefore, if there is even a slight chance that a follower of Christ might be guilty of one of the sins of murder, sexual immorality, or idolatry, that person will surely want to explore the claim of this book’s truthfulness in order to worship and seek God’s pleasure.

By “birth control,” or “contraception,” I mean: Any practice, with or without a device, that is intended to be used by an individual involved in the sexual act, in an effort to prevent the climax of that act from creating an opportunity for God to bring forth a covenant child through the natural, created means of the biological processes that He has set in place.

“By choice we are bound by the bond of a single marriage with the desire of procreating.”

“there would be no adulteries, debaucheries, and prostitution of women if everyone knew that whatever is sought beyond the desire of procreation is condemned by God.”

“sexual desire is given to us for the procreation of offspring.”

Let those also be of good cheer who are married and use their marriage properly; who enter marriage lawfully, and not out of uncontrolled lust and freedom [to have sex] without boundaries; who recognize periods of continence so that they may give themselves to prayer . . . who have entered into matrimony for the procreation of children and not for the sake of indulgence.

Indeed, it is something worse than murder and I do not know what to call it; for she does not kill what is formed but prevents its formation.

There are some lawfully wedded couples who resort to this last, for intercourse, even with one’s lawfully wedded spouse, can take place in an unlawful and shameful manner, whenever the conception of offspring is avoided. Onan, the son of Judah, did this very thing, and the Lord slew him on that account. Therefore, the procreation of children is itself the primary, natural, legitimate purpose of marriage.33 Whence it follows that those who marry because of their inability to remain continent ought not to so temper their vice that they preclude the good of marriage, which is the procreation of children.

“due to 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.”

Is it not you who used to warn us to ardently look for the period following purification of the menses when a woman is likely to conceive, and during that time refrain from intercourse, so that a soul would not be entangled in the flesh? From this it follows that you do not think marriage is to procreate children, but to satisfy carnal pleasure. Marriage, as the marriage tablets themselves proclaim, unites male and female for the procreation of children . . . he [who practices the rhythm method of the Manichees] ceases to make the woman a wife, and turns her into a prostitute, who when she has been given certain gifts, is joined to a man in order to satisfy his lust.

In contrast to this, therefore, the Patristic argument is God-centered; it first asks whether God is pleased, and only secondarily concerns itself with whether the self is pleased.

Thomas Aquinas (ad 1225–1274), in his Summa Theologica, condemns sex in marriage when “the natural course of the sexual act is not kept, either by using an unfit organ or because of using other monstrous and bestial purposes for the sexual act.”

Even Geoffrey Chaucer (ad 1340–1400), in the Canterbury Tales, “The Parsons Tale,” includes contraception among the seven deadly sins. Among these are a woman “drinking poisonous herbs through which she may not conceive,” placing “certain material things in her secret places to slay the child,” and unnatural intercourse, which is defined as when a “man or woman sheds her nature in manner or in place so that a child may not be conceived.” Noonan points out that all of these refer to contraception and are distinguished from abortion.

Luther argued from Genesis 1:28 that the command to “be fruitful and multiply” was “a divine ordinance which it is not our prerogative to hinder or ignore.”

Furthermore, he not only shortchanged his brother of his right, but also would rather spill his seed on the ground, than to bring forth a son in his brother’s lineage. . . . I will try to be as brief as propriety allows in discussing this subject. The purposeful spilling of semen outside of intercourse between man and woman is a monstrous thing. Purposely withdrawing from coitus, so that the seed drops on the ground, is twice as horrific. For this is to extinguish the hope of the human family and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring. This wickedness is here condemned by the Spirit in the most severe manner possible . . . as though he had, through a violent and premature birth, tore away the seed of his brother out the womb, and had cruelly and shamefully thrown it on the earth. In this way he tried, as far as he was able, to wipe out a part of the human race. When a woman in some way expels the seed out of the womb, using drugs, then this is rightly seen as an unforgivable crime; and Onan rightfully incurred upon himself the same kind of punishment, polluting the earth with his semen, in order that Tamar might not conceive a future human being as an inhabitant of the earth.

A. W. Tozer (1897–1963) bemoaned the fact that Christians no longer sought God’s desire and purpose when they used contraception.

Calvin, Commentaries on Genesis, 38:8–10, translated from the Latin, since this section, along with any sentence, dealing with the issue in Calvin’s “complete” commentary series has been purposely deleted by the editor, an act which seems to be performed by the publisher within the twentieth century. Cf. the similar omission of the text of Genesis 38 within the Ancient Christian Commentary series on Genesis 12–50, where the editor clearly did not wish to include any comments by the Fathers on the subject. As we have seen, of course, Epiphanius, Cyril, Jerome, and Augustine would have made great entries. This deliberate omission, where editors feel the need to silence the voice of the Church’s greatest teachers on the subject, or where certain authors downplay or even omit the Church’s condemnations of contraception in the past, is a trend among the modern reference works which ought to disturb any thinking reader. Cf. further the odd translation of the word procreationem, “procreation” in the Augsburg Confession, as “male and female” in The Creeds of Christendom, 3:31. It is not known, however, whether Schaff or the revision of his work is to be assigned the translation here.

1. Naturalism supposes the conception of a child to be a mere God-given ability instead of a supernatural event. 2. Hedonism is the pursuit of pleasure of the self for pleasure’s sake.6 3. Romanticism is based on non-Christian assumptions of spirituality and seeks fulfillment of the sexual act through feeling rather than through the purpose revealed in the special revelation of Scripture. 4. Relativism bases itself on naturalism and leaves what one does in the sexual act to the whims of the individual’s experience.