7,271
edits
Changes
m
While it is true that the issue of non-abortifacient contraception has not been raised at any ecumenical councils or generally accepted local councils, the issue has been raised by some Church Fathers. Where the Church Fathers speak ===Natural Family Planning===Many advocates of the only two methods known to be available that we would recognise as purely non-abortifacient (Natural Family Planning/rhymn method and coitus interruptus), they speak in condemnation (St. Augustine, St Jerome, Clement of Alexandria)<ref>Saint, Bishop of Hippo Augustine (1887NFP)believe it is superior to contraception. "Chapter 18.—Of It is often said that the Symbol of the Breast, and of the Shameful Mysteries of the Manichæans". In Philip Schaff. A Select Library dynamics of NFP (similar to the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers fasts of the Christian Church, Volume IV. Grand Rapids, MI: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.</ref><ref>Jerome, Against Jovinian 1:20, (AD 393) http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/30091.htm</ref><ref>Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (AD 191)</ref>. The only other available method for preventing pregnancy (apart from violent measures such serve as tightly banding the pregnant abdomen or stabbing the uterus) was chemical/herbal. While some of the Fathers' references to such chemical methods seem clearly to refer to their destroying a child that is being formed in the womb after the sexual act that gave rise to it (abortion), others seem to also include the idea that these methods were also used to "sterilise" the womb to prevent this process from being initiated (St John Chrysostom in his 24th Homily on Romans and St. Caeserius of Arles in his first Sermon)<ref>St John Chrysostom, Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]). http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210224.htm</ref><ref>St Caeserius kind of Arles, (Sermons 1:12 [A.D. 522]). </ref>. We should also keep in mind that there was no single prevailing scientific model catechesis for how conception took place in the "Age of the Fathers". There were at least two scientific models of conception: the Hippocratic/Galenic "two semen" model (closer to our own)marital sexuality, whereby both male and female contributed components to emphasizing the childneed for self-incontrol and honoring God-formation, and also given fertility while at the Aristotelian "one semen model", in which same time recognizing the male semen was the only component of the early child-in-formation need for intimacy and was planted in the fertile soil of the womb during sex (the problem of when "human personhood" began was allowing for a separate issue)responsible family planning. No Church Fathers weigh into these scientific debatesNFP is also useful for couples having difficulty conceiving. HoweverAdditionally, those that do mention chemical methods, condemn them, whether taken before sex to prevent pregnancy, or taken after sex to destroy because of the contents awareness of the wombwoman's cycle that it brings it can also help a woman detect health risks manifested through irregularities in the cycle. Thus, all three available Modern methods of preventing pregnancy (coitus interruptusNFP can be used by women with irregular cycles, natural family planning, and herbal/chemical treatments) were condemned at some point as well as by Church Fatherswomen who are breastfeeding or pre-menopausal. With proper use, and none were ever endorsed NFP is as effective as acceptablethe Pill.
The position of the Greek Archdiocese of America was given by the Orthodox bioethicist, Father Stanley S. Harakas: "Because of the lack of a full understanding of the implications of the biology of reproduction, earlier writers tended to identify abortion with contraception. However, of late a new view has taken hold among Orthodox writers and thinkers on this topic, which permits the use of certain contraceptive practices within marriage for the purpose of spacing children, enhancing the expression of marital love, and protecting health."<ref>https://www.goarch.org/-/the-stand-of-the-orthodox-church-on-controversial-issues</ref>==Contraception==
Two dissenting positions areThe position of the Greek Archdiocese of America was given by Harakas:"Because of the lack of a full understanding of the implications of the biology of reproduction, earlier writers tended to identify abortion with contraception. However, of late a new view has taken hold among Orthodox writers and thinkers on this topic, which permits the use of certain contraceptive practices within marriage for the purpose of spacing children, enhancing the expression of marital love, and protecting health."<ref>https://www.goarch.org/-/the-stand-of-the-orthodox-church-on-controversial-issues</ref>
:1) That one of sex's natural purposes is Some would follow the procreation of children (i.e. sex is naturally oriented towards or "for" procreation), and that to actively separate earlier position taken by the procreative aspect Church of sex from its purpose Greece in her encyclical of uniting husband and wife (by natural family planning or artificial contraceptive methods) is to distort it October 14, 1937<ref> Sacred Seed, Sacred Chamber, https://theorthodoxlife[www.wordpressecclesia.comgr/2015greek/05holysynod/18commitees/sacred-seed-sacred-chamberfamily/3.pdf]</ref><ref>Orthodoxy, Contraception, and Spin Doctoring: A Look at an Influential which accepted birth control but Disturbing Articlenot contraception, https://cjshaywardi.com/contraception/ </ref>e. As a result, no methods it accepted abstinence and NFP, but condemned any method of contraception (including natural family family), aside from abstinence, are acceptable.
:2Where some patristic writers speak of NFP and withdrawal (''coitus interruptu''s) That natural family planning alone is an acceptable method , they condemn it (St. [[Augustine of contraceptionHippo | Augustine]] <ref>Saint, because it simply involves abstinence from sex during times when fertility is likelyBishop of Hippo (1887). "Chapter 18. Such is —Of the Symbol of the Breast, and of the opinion expressed by Shameful Mysteries of the Church Manichæans". In Philip Schaff. A Select Library of Greece in her encyclical the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of October 14the Christian Church, Volume IV. Grand Rapids, 1937MI: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.</ref>, St [[Jerome]] <ref>Jerome, Against Jovinian 1:20, (AD 393) http://www.ecclesianewadvent.grorg/greekfathers/holysynod30091.htm</commiteesref>, [[Clement of Alexandria]])<ref>Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (AD 191)</family/3ref>. However, as John Noonan has shown, in each of these cases their position followed from their unbiblical idea, adopted from Stoic philosophy, that sexual desire was evil and thus marital intercourse was only permissible for procreation.<ref>Noonan, chapters III and IV.pdf]</ref>.
While Although some local churches have issued official statements on this issuepatristic references to contraceptive herbs and potions refer to their destroying a child that is being formed in the womb after the sexual act that gave rise to it (abortion), it is not an issue others seem to also include the idea that has been clearly defined by these methods were also used to "sterilise" the entire Churchwomb to prevent this process from being initiated (St [[John Chrysostom]] in his 24th Homily on Romans<ref>St John Chrysostom, Homilies on Romans</ref> and St. [[Caesarius of Arles]]<ref> in his first Sermon)St Caeserius of Arles, (Sermons 1:12 [A.D. 522]). </ref>.
Vocal opponents to There are also individuals who would follow the prevailing Stoic view represented by St Augustine and others, that any form of birth control or contraception other than abstinence is sinful in Orthodoxy today include [incomplete]: Metropolitan [[Hilarion (Alfeyev) that the only permissible act of Volokolamsk|Hilarion marital intercourse is for the purpose of Vololamsk]] [ROC]procreation.<ref> Sacred Seed, Bp. Artemije of Kosovo [SOC]Sacred Chamber, Frhttps://theorthodoxlife. Josiah Trenham, Frwordpress. [[Patrick Henry Reardon|Patrick Reardon]]com/2015/05/18/sacred-seed-sacred-chamber/</ref><ref>Orthodoxy, Fr. John SchroedelContraception, Fr. John and Spin Doctoring: ALook at an Influential but Disturbing Article, https://cjshayward. Peck com/contraception/ </ref> Such individuals follow the typically Latin view that procreation is an essential feature of marriage, and Frwhich privilege the procreative end above the unitive. Patrick DanielsonEastern tradition typically follows St John Chrysostom in holding that procreation is a normal feature of marriage, but not essential to it.
==Birth Control :Marriage does not always lead to child-bearing, although there is the word of God which says, "Be fruitful and multiply, and Contraception==Non-contraceptive methods fill the earth." We have as witnesses all those who are married but childless. So the purpose of family planning (to limit chastity takes precedence, especially now, when the whole world is filled with our kind. At the beginning, the number procreation of children was desirable, so that each person might leave a memorial of his life.... But now that resurrection is at our gates, and/or timing we do not speak of death, but advance toward another life better than the present, the desire for posterity is superfluous. If you desire children, you can get much better children) include abstinence now, a nobler childbirth and a better help in your old age, if you give birth by spiritual labor. :So there remains only one reason for marriage, to avoid fornication, and Natural Family Planningthe remedy is offering for this purpose. <ref>Chrysostom, pp. 85-86.</ref>
===Natural Family Planning===Even many people who accept '''[the "new consensus" position following needs citations and perhaps clarification as outlines above think that Natural Family Planning (NFP) is superior to contraception. It is often said that the dynamics whether each of NFP (similar to the fasts of the Church) serve as a kind of catechesis for marital sexualitythese reject birth control, emphasizing the need for self-control and honoring God-given fertility while at the same time recognizing the need for intimacy and allowing for a responsible family planning. NFP is also useful for couples having difficulty conceiving. Additionallycontraception, because of the awareness of the womanor both)'''s cycle that it brings it can also help a woman spot health risks manifested through irregularities in the cycle.
Modern methods Vocal opponents to the prevailing view of Natural Family Planning differ greatly from the old "rhythm" methodcontraception in Orthodoxy today include: Metropolitan [[Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Volokolamsk|Hilarion of Vololamsk]] [ROC], Bp. Artemije of Kosovo [SOC], Fr. [[Josiah Trenham]], which worked by marking days on a calendar and required a regular cycle length to be effectiveFr. NFP can be used by women with irregular cycles[[Patrick Henry Reardon|Patrick Reardon]], as well as by women who are breastfeeding or pre-menopausalFr. With proper useJohn Schroedel, NFP is as effective as the PillFr. John A. Peck, and Fr. Patrick Danielson.
Besides being ineffectiveWhen opponents of contraception look for biblical support for their position, methods they inevitably point to the story of withdrawal have traditionally been opposed Onan in Genesis 38, claiming that the sin committed by Onan was his commission of ''coitus interruptus''. However, this is an almost exclusively Western reading of the Church text. The only Eastern Father to read the Onan account as overa condemnation of contraception was [[Epiphanius of Cyprus | St Epiphanius of Cyprus]]. [[Origen]] had not done so in his commentary on the passage, <ref>Selections on Genesis, PG 12.129</ref>, nor had [[John Chrysostom | St John Chrysostom]] <ref>''Homilies on Genesis'' 62.1, PG 54.533)</ref>, nor [[Ephrem the Syrian | St Ephrem the Syrian]]<ref>''In Genesim et in Exodum commentarii'', 34.1</ref>. Moreover, according to Noonan, Epiphanius had taken this position “only in the context of his anti-indulgence Gnostic polemic.”<ref> Noonan, p. 101.</ref> It was his friend [[Jerome | St Jerome]] who was to shape the Western (mis)reading of Onan through his [[Vulgate]], which departed significantly from both the Hebrew and Old Latin he used as the basis of his translation. In addition to adding the word for semen which is not in the original, he slants the fleshtext to make it appear that ''coitus interruptus'' was the reason he was punished by God, saying “God slew him because he did a detestable thing". But the Hebrew has only “he did not please God,” and the Old Latin that “he appeared evil before the Lord,” neither of which focuses on the act.<ref>See Noonan, pp. 101-102.</ref>.
Disputed notice
{{Template:Disputed}}
A distinction is implicit here between birth control (or family planning) and contraception. The latter term is usually reserved for those methods which more directly inhibit or act against conception. Non-contraceptive methods of family planning (to limit the number and/or timing of children) include abstinence and Natural Family Planning.
==Orthodox Teaching on Birth Control and Contraception==
==Birth Control==
Non-contraceptive methods of family planning (to limit the number and/or timing of children) include abstinence and Natural Family Planning.
As [[Paul Evdokimov]] wrote, "In the age of the Church Fathers, the problem of birth control was never raised. There are no canons that deal with it."<ref>Evdokimov, p. 174.</ref> The Orthodox bioethicist [[H. Tristram Engelhardt]], Jr., agrees, writing, "Despite detailed considerations of sexual offenses by ecumenical councils, and by generally accepted local councils, and despite a recognition that marriage is oriented toward reproduction, there is no condemnation of limiting births, apart from the condemnation of abortion."<ref>Engelhardt, p. 265. </ref>
The dominant view, represented by the Church of Moscow<ref>https://mospat.ru/en/documents/social-concepts/xii/</ref>, the Greek Archdiocese, the Orthodox Church in America<ref>[http://www.oca.org/DOCmarriage.asp?ID=19]</ref>, and by the bioethicists Engelhardt and [[Stanley S. Harakas]], may be fairly described as the teaching that non-abortifacient contraception is acceptable if it is used with the blessing of one's spiritual father, and if it is not used to avoid having children for purely selfish reasons.
==Methods of Contraception==
===Withdrawal===
===Barrier Contraceptives===
==Bibliography==
*[[John Chrysostom |Chrysostom, St John]]. ''On Marriage and Family Life''. Crestwood: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2003.
*[[H. Tristram Engelhardt|Engelhardt, H. Tristram]], Jr. ''Foundations of Christian Bioethics''. Swets & Zeitlinger, 2000. See especially Chapter Five.
*[[Paul Evdokimov|Evdokimov, Paul.]] ''The Sacrament of Love: The Nuptial Mystery in the Light of the Orthodox Tradition''. Crestwood: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1985. See especially pp. 174-180.
*[[John Meyendorff|Meyendorff, John]]. ''Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective'', second expanded edition. Crestwood: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1975. See especially Chapter Thirteen.
*Noonan, John T., Jr. ''Contraception: A History of Its Treatment by the Catholic Theologians and Canonists''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966.*[[Philip Sherrard|Sherrard, Philip.]] "''Humanae Vitae'': Notes on the Encyclical Letter of Pope Paul VI," in ''Sobornost'' 5:8 (1969).*Zaphiris, Metropolitan Chrysostomos Gerasimos. "The Morality of Contraception: An Eastern Orthodox Opinion," in ''The Journal of Ecumenical Studies'' 11:4 (1974). ''Note:'' http://jonathanscorner.com/writing/contraception/ provides a commentary on Zaphiris 1974 and an "opposing views" piece to the "new concensus".
*Zion, William Basil. ''Eros and Transformation: Sexuality and Marriage: An Eastern Orthodox Perspective''. Lanham: University Press of America, 1992. Chapter Seven is entitled "Orthodoxy and Contraception."