Contraception, is it okay ever?

Not being married (or even close for that matter), it\'s really not my concern at this time.

Hi Drevyev, This is how lawyers make their money in the secular world....arguing about the interpretation of a legal text. You see Gen 38 as having one meaning, and I clearly see other points being made. All I know is that there would not be a Greek word surviving today AUNANISMOS (\"Aunanism\" - behaving like Aunan) to describe a general category of carnal sin having to do with the wasting of seed. My bet is that the Church Fathers who coined this word had the best understanding of Genesis 38. Giannis

I suppose it comes to which is more sinful...to allow fallen, failing human beings in marriage (no comment on those outside of marriage--or the Church) to use forms of contraception, at the risk of Onanism (btw, it\'s an English word too), to keep from producing too many children if they cannot govern their sexual passions...or, to allow them to produce too many children to support? Arguing \'standards of living\' can go on all day--much like those secular lawyers you pointed out--but at the end of the day, you have to live where God had you be born. Do I think that Americans, in particular, have too much? Yes, I do. But I also know that to function in the world (which, let\'s remember, we all have to live and function in the world--even the monks!), and in particular, in the world we are born in, we have to play by its rules to a large extent. Our Lord teaches us this when he says \"render unto Caesar what is Caesar\'s, and unto God what is God\'s.\" We do what we have to do in the world, while remembering that we are not OF the world. Children are a great treasure, and we should never forget that; physical intimacy is a great gift, and we should not abuse it. But in the course of human life, a call has to be made in the life of individual Christians, and with their spiritual Father; frankly, its no one else\'s business what advice a spiritual Father gives to his spiritual children. Let\'s keep in mind that God loves us, and exercises that love toward us through the Church, in order to lead us back to him. Believing that everyone can be expected to follow all the \"rules\" all the time, and that that will bring them to salvation, is a great spiritual tragedy. There is an old horse trainer\'s adage about putting to much weight on a young back--and it is totally applicable to those who are young in faith, young in marriage, etc. The Church has always met us where we are...picks us up and walks us back to the Way. Slamming doors on people\'s toes is no way to go about leading them to salvation. Far more damaging to what Orthodoxy is (i.e. a discipline of spiritual therapy) is importing Western, legal-code thinking into it (rule book religion). In other words, let\'s leave decisions on \"yes\" or \"no\" to things like contraception where they belong--case by case bases for couples under the loving care of a spiritual father.

Why are we talking about Western Legalism again? I don\'t get it... I am reading a 4th century saint Nifon\'s biography these days, translated from a 1000 year old manuscript, that has the saint quoting that the reason humans will be condemned on Judgment Day is not because of sinning, but because of NOT repenting. This has nothing to do with Western legalism, but is 100% Orthodox doctrine. When we justify our behavior, this is not repentance, but acceptance, whether it has been done through economia (hopefully to avoid a worse sin) or not. I still think that some people are trying to justify themselves by looking for priests that will tell them what they want to hear, instead of facing their own weaknesses and admitting them, even if it is 70x7 times. Where is the struggle to \"teleiothta\" (perfection) that married life is supposed to help those who chose it attain? There is certainly a disparity between spiritual fathers these days, but by trying to twist meanings and justify ourselves and our passions, we are not struggling to overcome our weaknesses. If you are chosing to use contraception, don\'t try to justify it other than by admitting it is your own personal passion and weakness, and yes, I fully agree that this admission is a confession between you and your spiritual Father. Orthodox brethren...let us be careful...Don\'t Justify...Confess your weaknesses...It\'s the only way to allow Divine Grace to help us through them...(What is impossible for humans is possible for God)...That\'s all I have been warning against here.

Marital relations are a very difficult thing to \"govern\" in the Church. [Obviously, ***ual relations are only lawful for a married couple, so that is how my comments will be addressed]. However, the Church Fathers are very clear on this issue--there is no vagueness in their voice, however had modern scholars might want there to be. St. John Chrysostom says that contraception is a sin equal to abortion! Now there are scholars who say he didn\'t know the difference, but since he spoke about both, and since he was one of the best educated men of his era, this assertion is proposterous. Christ, the Fathers, the Scriptures, the whole Tradition of the Church calls us to break our enslavement to the passions. Contraception is just a way around this, by use of modern (or not so modern) technology. BUT...St. Gregory of Nyssa also says that if a married couple gives in to their carnal passions in regard to their marital relations with one another in a way that is sinful...get ready...it is automatically forgiven by virtue of the Mystery! Beautiful. We should, however, read and acquire the mind of the Fathers with regard to this very sensitive topic. Two good sources are--St. John Chysostom \"On Virginity\" (where he actually goes back and forth between marraige and virginity and praises each, and talks about the struggles of each), as well as St. Methodius \"The Symposium (or The Banquet): A Treatise on Chastity\" (which is the source St. John Chrysostom truly loved, and has a wonderful development of human love and ***uality in a Christian understanding). Priest Matthew

By the way...I am not anti-marraige or anything! I am married with 5 children! Just in case anyone thinks my comments come from some type of Roman Catholic notion of all marital relations being tainted by sin or something. The Mystery of Marraige is given by God, but must be used in the way God designed. Priest Matthew

For those here who do not feel contraception is right, would they say that the only answer to a couple who for real reasons can\'t have children at a certain point in their marriage would be celibacy? In Christ, Andrew

\'Married people should not only avoid contraception, but also \'planning\' the children. They should leave themselves with trustfulness in the hands of God and consider the coming of each child a great gift, godly gift. Children are not sweet breads so that we order them up in the bakery whenever as we want them! And it should not escape as for a moment that man, upon having children, becomes a co-creator with God.\' -Holy Father Epiphanios Theodorpoulos

\'Married people should not only avoid contraception, but also \'planning\' the children. They should leave themselves with trustfulness in the hands of God and consider the coming of each child a great gift, godly gift. Children are not sweet breads so that we order them up in the bakery whenever as we want them! And it should not escape as for a moment that man, upon having children, becomes a co-creator with God.\' -Holy Father Epiphanios Theodorpoulos

semi-off-topic comment: Not everybody is at the same level of faith and trust. Although the lake might be frozen solid, some people will still feel compelled to skirt around the edges to feel safe. When I was working in Ethiopia, it was the mission policy that all missionaries take malarial prophylaxis - and they recommended taking a particular drug. I disagreed with the policy for a number of reasons: 1) the Ethiopian citizens we were working among were not allowed to take prophylaxis 2) telling the people we worked with to \"live by faith\" while we were taking prophylaxis didn\'t sit well with me 3) I didn\'t like taking a drug for which there was no long-term study done to determine any detrimental effects 4) there are other methods of prevention that don\'t involve the use of drugs - which varied according to the prevalence of each different strain of malaria present. The mission decision makers viewed my stance as belligerent, fool-hardy, and \"testing God\". I told them that I believed I was trusting God. Same frozen lake, different skaters.

Well, it would be very strange for the Church which married the couple with prayers about the blessing of children to force the couple into celibacy if they\'re not able to have children. St. John Chrysostom in \"Marriage and Family Life\" writes, IIRC, that married couples unable to have children of their own should not be depressed. There are plenty of people in the world already. Now I can\'t remember if he addressed marital relations on this point, but a marriage, according to St. John, is first and foremost for the couple, then for the children. He hammers the point about not valuing your children above your spouse. Your spouse comes first. You should not worship your children. Etc etc. Fr. John Krestiankin, interestingly, writes a lot of letters about marital issues and canons. Now, I have asked a Greek spiritual father about one of Fr. John\'s points, that spouses should not be more than 5 years apart in age and he said \"We don\'t do that.\" So, take it with a grain of salt, then, that Fr. John (who is widely respected as an authroity in Russia) says that an impediment to marriage occurrs if one potential spouse is known to be unable to have children. And, the thing with abstention from marital relations is that both spouses have to aggree. And, St. Paul says, this should be to devote themselves to prayer for a time, then come back together so as not to leave room for temptation. This point probably cannot be overemphasized in Orthodox circles. I know Fr. John Krestiankin writes a lot of letters to married men and women who want to become monastics. His response is always an unequivocal \"NO!\" followed by, \"What are you thinking?\" And some advice about working to help the other spouse. (Sometimes he\'s even witty--almost saying something like \"Why don\'t you use the rocks in your head to fill up the holes in your husband\'s?\" a la Ann Flanders)

I agree. Although given that there are minors on our membership, it might not be an appropriate discussion on the board. Not all parents agree about what their kids should know by age 13.

Either one really. Financial or health concerns can make it difficult if not impossible for a couple to have a child. Going into a discussion about the place of sexuality in a Christian life seems like a very good idea. You can use this thread to discuss that also, if you would like to. In Christ, Andrew

Depends: if \"contraception\" (my use of quotation marks will be evident here) is of the IUD type, absolutely not OK. It prevents the implantation of an already-fertalized-egg (and therefore a distinct person) and so is a form of abortion, more passive than the type commonly thought of but still. If the contraception does what it literally means (prevent conception, I.e. fertilization of an egg) then I don\'t see anything wrong with it within the confines of \"use it, don\'t abuse it.\"

This is a subject that really is not an issue for me now, in my situation. But the fact seems to be that Roman Catholic theologians like Hans Kung question Pope Paul VI\'s papal encyclical \"Humanae Vitae\" and view it as erroneous On the other hand, Ignatius Press of San Francisco has a book \"Why Humanae Vitae Was RIght\"? I really don\'t know the answer to this. \"In essentials unity, in uncertainties freedom, in all things, love (charity)\" Blessed Augustine of Hippo This seems to be a case ISTM of \"in uncertainties, freedom\". Unless the Orthodox bishops and Patriarchs in Ecumenical Council speak definitively on this for the whole Orthodox Catholic Christian Church, this remains an uncertainty, so it is wrong to say that anyone who uses contraception is either definitively right or definitely wrong. ISTM that one should not produce more children than one can raise responsibly but does lack of artificial contraceptive methods necessarily make certain one will have, say, more than three children. Who these days can afford to have more than 3 children in their family? Take care.