Birth Control and Christian Faith

Introduction

The subject of birth control has been controversial in the eyes of Christian faith for a considerable amount of time. In order to build the correct background of the discussion, one must first understand how the bible views children and conception. Passages like Genesis 33:5 reinforce the value of children as gifts of God, and frames childbearing as a miracle. Contrary to this notion, however, one would struggle to find a full admonishment of not having children in the Bible. Furthermore, the Bible does not have a specific view of contraception. Deuteronomy 25:5-6 describes the story of Er, Tamar and Onan, which can be seen as the only potential condemnation of birth control. However, one of the primary focuses of that story is Onan’s intent in not conceiving children, not the desire itself. As a result, an argument can be made in that Christianity would not condemn birth control if its intention were morally right.

Birth Control in Christianity

Moving on to the main topic of discussion, many religious figures and scholars have had discussions regarding birth control use. According to present research, the perception of birth control from a Catholic perspective differ between nations, having a different impact on the development of family planning efforts¹. This outlook demonstrates the contested nature of the question, as well as the variety of ways in which Biblical teachings can be used in religious communities. Medically required birth control becomes more morally acceptable due to its connection with personal wellness. In particular, an argument can be made using the Catholic Double effect principle. This theory supposes that a morally negative effects are permissible, as long as they are side-effects of a generally positive act². In addition, the negative effects should be an unintended but inescapable part of the process.

Alternatively, one can seek the opinion of previously appointed Catholic authorities in order to define the moral value of birth control. For this, Humanae Vitae and the assertion of the Pope Paul VI can be used. According to the Pope, artificial birth control is inherently wrong, regardless of its application³. This decision can be viewed as the word of the moral authority on the subject, condemning the use of contraception. However, it should be noted that the Catholic community itself is extremely divided on the subject. According to the documents of the Papal commission, the church was internally divided by the Pope’s declaration, with some accepting it as the truth and others condemning it⁴.

Conclusion

Overall, it can be re-stated that the Catholic church, and faith as a whole, does not have a solid definitive stance on birth control, as it is determined on the basis of intent⁵. In the case of wanting to prevent a pregnancy from a rape, as is example with Congo nuns, the church generally applies the double effect theory, where the prevention of rape pregnancy is considered to morally outweigh the implications of using contraception⁶. In instances where birth control works to prevent pregnancy-driven health complications, however, the church is likely to think otherwise. If sexual acts are separated from their purpose as a tool for procreation, the church cannot consider them morally good⁷. Those with health complications most likely would be advised to abstain from intercourse instead.

Bibliography

“Contraception – Christian Ethics.” BBC. Last modified 2009.

“Humanae Vitae: 50 Years of the Catholic Ban on Birth Control | Harriet Sherwood.” The Guardian.

Devine, P. E. “The Principle of Double Effect.” The American Journal of Jurisprudence 19, no. 1 (1974), 44-60. doi:10.1093/ajj/19.1.44.

Dummett, Michael. “The Documents of the Papal Commission on Birth Control.” New Blackfriars 50, no. 585 (1969), 241-250. doi:10.1111/j.1741-2005.1968.tb06046.x.

Ignaciuk, A., and L. Kelly. “Contraception and catholicism in the twentieth century: Transnational perspectives on expert, activist and intimate practices.” Medical History 64, no. 2 (2020), 163-172. doi:10.1017/mdh.2020.1.

Morris, J., and K. Arora. “Should clinicians challenge faith-based institutional values conflicting with their own?” AMA Journal of Ethics 20, no. 7 (2018), 630-636. doi:10.1001/amajethics.2018.630.

Smith, Janet. “Contraception, Congo Nuns, Choosing the Lesser Evil, and Conflict of Commandments.” Catholic World Report – Global Church News and Views.

Footnotes

1. A. Ignaciuk and L. Kelly, “Contraception and catholicism in the twentieth century: Transnational perspectives on expert, activist and intimate practices,” Medical History 64, no. 2 (2020): xx, doi:10.1017/mdh.2020.1.
2. P. E. Devine, “The Principle of Double Effect,” The American Journal of Jurisprudence 19, no. 1 (1974): xx, doi:10.1093/ajj/19.1.44.
3. “Humanae Vitae: 50 Years of the Catholic Ban on Birth Control | Harriet Sherwood,” The Guardian. Web.
4. Michael Dummett, “The Documents of the Papal Commission on Birth Control,” New Blackfriars 50, no. 585 (1969): xx, doi:10.1111/j.1741-2005.1968.tb06046.x.
5. “Contraception – Christian Ethics,” BBC. Web.
6. J. Morris and K. Arora, “Should clinicians challenge faith-based institutional values conflicting with their own?,” AMA Journal of Ethics 20, no. 7 (2018): xx, doi:10.1001/amajethics.2018.630.