Christianity and Birth Control

A few years ago, I met two couples both having 10 or more children. They were not Catholic. They came from a reformed back ground, and they do not believe in birth control. At first, I thought these two couples were a little eccentric. There were only a handful of protestants that I knew that did not believe in birth control. However, over the last few years, I have come to find out that many more protestants are leaving birth control behind, and letting God control the womb.

For almost 20 centuries, the Roman Catholic Church taught Western Civilization what to think about human reproduction. (I know the reformation took place in the 16th century, but reproductive thought pretty much stayed the same). In the 4th century, St. Augustine taught that sex was only to be done for reproductive reasons. He did not think that fulfilling ones desires was a Christian virtue, thus reproduction was the purpose for marital sex.

St. Augustine's views continued until the 13th century. Thomas Aquinas taught that there were two purposes for marital sex. The first purpose was reproduction, and the second purpose was for the fulfillment of desires. However, both of these purposes needed to be apart of the act each time. This view point was held by most of Western Civilization into the 20th century. Then it happened; one of the most important events known to human society. The birth control pill was invented. Everything suddenly changed.

Protestant Christians began to rethink the purpose of marital sex. They began to challenge the old notions of Thomas Aquinas. They began to think about family planning. Protestant women demanded more than church history to tell them what they could or could not do. They demanded chapter and verse, and if chapter and verse could not be found they then relied on the Priesthood of the Believer to decide their concept of contraception.

Today, most protestants do not think twice about the pill or other forms of birth control. Some Christians go as far as self sterilization without giving thought whether it is morally right or wrong. Over the counter or surgical, birth control is a major part of most Protestant families. Now the question I must ask is, "Should it be this way?"

There are a few good reasons to rethink birth control. First, the Bible teaches us to be fruitful and multiply. Should we then close down reproduction because we want it that way? Second, the Bible teaches us that children are a blessing. Should we then deny ourselves Biblical blessings because it doesn't fit into our schedule. Third, birth control pills may have an abortive factor. Yes, there is a potential that hormonal therapy (the pill) can trigger a fertilized egg to abort. This is heavily debated. Yet, it is something to think about. Fourth, the pill can cause all sorts of bad side affects for women. Finally, who controls the womb? Should we be in control of the womb or should God be in control of the womb? There are some who believe it is a sin for us to stop what God may give us.

I wrote this column this way to cause us to think. I personally believe in birth control. However, I have thought long and hard about what I believe and why I believe it. The questions I gave above had to be answered before I was willing to allow birth control into my family planning. I will not answer these questions here, because I want each of you to answer them for yourselves. However, I can tell you that I did change my mind about several things that I once took for granted before my study.

I challenge all of you to think about this important subject. I believe most Christians realize that Thomas Aquinas had a point. Sex is for both reproduction and for the fulfillment of desire. However, many Christians have left the first part completely out of the equation. So search hard my friends, and see if you are comfortable with what you are doing when it comes to birth control.

I Feel Funny?!

About seven years ago, I found myself at a farm house outside of Ashland, Ohio. There was a square dance going on in the barn and I was invited. It was sponsored by the Fellowship of Christian Athletes at Ashland University. As the students danced in the barn,I found myself outside in the cool autumn night standing around a small fire with a philosophy professor from the University. This professor was also a pastor of a small non-denominational church in the area. For an hour, we stood and talked about how existentialism affected the modern church. I have never enjoyed a square dance anymore than this one.

Existentialism is a philosophy founded by a 19th century philosopher named Soren Kierdegaard. It is extremely hard to define or explain, but I will do my best to try to make it simple. It basically means that each person must develop and comprehend their own existence. That human beings are completely free and are in control of choices that direct their lives. If this philosophy is carried out, it tends to become very feeling based. The experience of life becomes very valuable to the existentialist. For me, this is where the problem starts.

To make matters simple, from this point on in the post I will deal with the topic of feelings. Over the last 50 years, feelings have become more important than facts and truth. In my opinion, this is the rational outgrowth of existentialism. People are so concerned with how they feel, that reason and rationale have gone out the window.

As a pastor, I am often called into a marriage crisis with the hope that I can help bring reconciliation. Sad to say, when I am called it is often too late. The pastor becomes the last resort. Because of this, I spend much of the time helping one or the other pick up the pieces.

When a marriage is in crisis, the first thing I normally hear from one of the participants is, "I don't feel like I used to." My response has always been, "I don't feel like I did yesterday."

A few years back, my wife had a friend that decided to divorce her husband and move in with another man. My wife received a letter explaining her friends actions. The woman basically justified her behavior by writing that she believed God wanted her to be happy. She is now happy with her new man.

A few years ago, A woman called me to talk about church. She let me know that the church where she was attending wasn't meeting her spiritual needs anymore, and she was wondering if it was time for a change. I asked her what Spiritual needs was the church no longer meeting. Her reply was she just didn't feel good in worship anymore.

I am about to write something that sounds awfully mean, but I believe it to be awfully true. God has never based his decrees and his judgments on the basis of human feelings. As a matter of fact, God is not all that concerned about your feelings. However, He is very concerned about your obedience.

Worship in the modern church is often about feelings. I hear songs about feeling the presence of God. I hear sermons on feeling the Holy Spirit. In my opinion, we are missing the mark. Worship services are not for you. If you receive something out of them, then good, you have been blessed. We worship God. The service is for Him. When we worship, we should make certain that God is the center of all that we do. It is not about us, it is all about Him.

I think it is time that American Christianity return to its Biblical roots and stop feeling for God. The Apostle Paul did not say, "I know what I feel". He said, "I know what I believe". When we do our marriage vows, we do not promise to love, honor, and cherish as long as we feel like it. We make a decision to do it. It is a covenant agreement based on knowledge not feelings.

I know that there is much more on this topic that I could deal with, but I FEEL like finishing and eating dinner. Thus, I will finish this post with one closing thought. Your feelings are probably wrong. Go base your life on the things you know. You may not be as happy, but at least you will be right.

A Weak and Vulgar Society

Two days ago, I was paying for gas at my local convenience store, and a young teenage boy was standing next to me using every foul word that he knew. I looked down upon him with a strong glance of disapproval. He knew that he was offensive, but he didn't care. He continued to cuss and swear straight out of the store and onto his bicycle.

In my perfect world, I would have taken the boy outside and whipped him in front of his friends. I would have told him that we do not use language like that around women and children. He would have said, "I'm sorry, sir. I don't know what came over me." I would have then bought him a coke and a candy bar, and we would all went home happy.

However, this is not a perfect world. If I had done what I desired to do I would still be in jail. I stood there with no options other than to show my disapproval. He knew that no one in the store could stop him, and I am certain by his attitude that mom and dad did not care. Thus, all who were near him were forced to listen to the foulness of a young teenage boy without any legal way to change the environment.

This leads me to another story. I was recently reading an article about Champlain College in Vermont. Students had organized a formal dance. Everyone was to wear black and white. A group of students found this theme offensive. They believed that a formal black and white affair was sexist and hetero-centered. They also stated that the theme may be overtly racist. The school canceled the dance, and held it the next week without a theme.

So how do these two stories relate? Simple, a secular society will always forfeit what is normal and good for what is abnormal and bad. Our nation is becoming more and more secular. As this trend continues, expect our nation to be come more sinful and vile. A great theologian and philosopher named Francis Shaffer once said that what America finds offensive today, they will accept 20 years from now. He was right. Our society will become more and more open to sin and filth as time marches on.

So what is a Conservative Christian to do? First, fight as hard as you can to change it. If you are a post-millenialist, this is easy for you. If you are a pre-millennialist you will have to work at this. You believe the prophesy of the Bible predicts a great falling away. Thus, why should you stop it. Simple, you have a duty to expand the Kingdom of God. You need to be involved in correcting your nation. You need to know what your politicians believe, and you need to know what you believe.

Second, rejoice because you are the salt and light of this world. As America becomes more and more secular, the church becomes more and more defined. When I was growing up, Ohio had blue laws. Our society was much more innocent than it is today. In the future, the true church will look nothing like the world. Certainly there will be secular denominations, but conservative evangelical Christianity will truly be seen as a departure from the norm. This should excite us and motivate us to be stronger believers.

The older I get, the more I sound old. I find myself saying "In my days" an awful lot. The truth is that today is "in my days". We cannot rest on yesterday. We must look to influence our culture today. Yes our society is weak and vulgar, but that doesn't mean we have to be. Take courage, God is on our side. And when God is for us, who can be against us.

Harriet Miers, The Supreme Court, and the Right to Die

President Bush named Harriet Miers as his nominee for the Supreme Court this week. I wish I could tell you a lot about her, but I can't. There are rumors that she is an evangelical Christian. However, I don't know for certain that she is. I do know that she supported Al Gore for President in 1988. I know that she at one time was a Democrat, and now she is a Republican. The New York Times tells us that it was a conversion to Evangelical Christianity that brought about the change in her political views. Yet, this is nothing more than speculation. Simply put, President Bush named a safe candidate with no paper trail. She will pass, because no one knows anything about her. I think this is a shame.

I will not use this post to tell you everything I think about this choice. If you would like to know what I think, read my August 1st, 2005 post. My opinion of this nominee is no different than my opinion of President Bush's first nominee. I think he made a choice out of weakness and not strength.

If Harriet Miers is confirmed, she will rule on one of the most controversial topics in American History. The state of Oregon passed a law, in 1997, allowing doctors the right to assist a terminally ill patient in suicide. This question is an interesting one for most Conservative Christians. The Bible does not allow for mercy killings. Euthanasia is not ethical. Suffering is a part of life. All life is sacred, and to end a life prematurely is wrong.

Now here is the problem. Most conservatives believe in State rights. If state rights are upheld, then Oregon voters can stand by their law. As a matter of fact, it is the concept of State rights that may turn back the onslaught of abortion. What most conservatives want is the court to allow states to decide their own abortion laws. So if the court rules that the federal government trumps state rights, evangelicals win a battle against euthanasia. However, they will then lose a battle against abortion. This is truly a dilemma.

Many evangelicals would argue that if it is morally wrong it shouldn't be law. This would be great if we were a theocracy. However, we are not. There are many things that are morally wrong that are legal to do. Evangelical Christians once outlawed the sale of alcohol by amending the Constitution. This didn't work out to well. The nation changed the Constitution back a few years later.

So should we hope for consistency from the court, or should we hope for morality from the courts. I personally would like consistent morality. However, this probably will never happen. It is also dangerous. For the court is liquid, and can change political opinion with each new justice. When I look at the political structure, I must come down on the side of state rights. This means that if people vote for it, it becomes the law of the land. The only way the federal government could override the law is by passing new amendments to the Constitution. This means that there are huge moral risk. It means that people may vote and make laws that our evil. However, that is the risk of living in a free society. It then becomes the job of the evangelical Christian to teach against evil, and we must hope that good will prevail.