What is meant by contraception?
Contraception is a kind of behavior whose
context is the conjugal life of a married couple. So we are not talking about
sexual relations of two unmarried persons because then we would talking instead
of fornication or adultery.
Contraception is any action by which the
married couple intentionally renders their conjugal act unfruitful by any means
whatsoever. It involves the decision to do the marital act but also the
decision to intentionally deprive it of its capacity to transmit life. The
method that is used does not make any difference: the couple might use the
pill, a diaphragm, a condom, spermicide, IUD, or withdrawal and in all these
cases the marital act will be contraceptive.
A special case of contraception can
happen in the case of a couple who intentionally exclude having children from
their married life without any serious reason for doing so and have marital
relations only during the infertile periods of the wife. Apparently this kind
of behavior is natural family planning; but it really is another form of
contraception.
Contraception is a moral evil. We can
understand contraception better if we contrast it to the true human good to
which it is opposed. It is really opposed to two human goods: responsible
parenthood and marital chastity. The two are related to each other. Responsible
parenthood demands the practice of marital chastity and this latter facilitates
very much the practice of the former.
In the case of the couple that excludes
having children for no serious reason these persons are not practicing
responsible parenthood. Even if they use natural family planning they will
still be doing something evil because their actions go against a true human
good.
In the case of the couple that uses
artificial means of contraception, they are deciding to have marital relations
instead of the possibility of abstaining since they have used certain means to
make the act unfruitful and so they consider it “safe”. Here aside from not
practicing responsible parenthood there is also typically the choice of not
practicing self-discipline over the sexual urges and hence the lack of
chastity.
What again is the natural law?
It has been the claim of the Catholic
Church that its teaching that contraception is evil is part of the natural law.
And so, it will make sense to ask what this natural law is when we talk about
contraception.
Natural law is nothing else than our very
same reason that tells us what acts or kinds of behavior are good or evil.
Then, moreover, it tells us that good must be done and evil must be avoided. It
is our reason that tells us that lying, killing persons, hurting others,
disrespecting people are evil actions and that we should not do such actions.
And it is also our reason that tells us that truthfulness, honesty, working
well, respecting others, helping others are all good actions and we must do
such actions. We come to have these ideas spontaneously, meaning that no formal
syllogism is needed to arrive at such a conclusion as to kill an innocent
person is evil. But even if we do not perform any syllogistic reasoning to know
this idea, our practical reason can see the reasonableness of such proposition.
What again is human nature?
Natural law is said to be based upon human
nature. The typical understanding is this: our human nature is what tells us
the principles of the natural law. This will need a little explanation because
this point is not as clear as it seems at first sight.
We can understand human nature in the
physical sense: a man is made of flesh and bones, organs and tissues, nerves
and brain, bodily systems and functions. This is what the medical doctors
study. Of course, knowing how the body functions will make us know what is good
for our health and what is harmful. And so we avoid certain foods or handling
certain contaminated materials because they are not good for our health. This
is a kind of law we follow but this is not yet the natural law we are talking
about here.
The human nature we are talking about as
the basis of the natural law is man’s nature as being a person, a rational
individual. Being a person he has a specific dignity, a quality that demands
that he be respected. Being a person, he is reasonable, that is he tends to act
according to reason. And so the natural law we are referring to is what is
reasonable for man, what accords with his reason. In the end, what is
reasonable for a person is what contributes to his full development and his happiness.
Why is contraception said to violate natural law?
Contraception as we defined it goes against
two human goods as we have said. By saying this we are also saying that it goes
against reason and reasonableness. And whatever goes against reason and reasonableness
will go against the true good for man and against the natural law.
By choosing contraception, a married
couple purposely renders their marital act unfruitful. Presumably the couple
wants the benefit of sexual pleasure without the supposed burden of having a
child. By any reasonable standard this way of acting is irresponsible. Our
actions have natural consequences. If we eat fatty foods we raise our
cholesterol levels. If we give in to laziness and don’t do our jobs, then we
can get laid off. Any person will agree that someone who does something or
omits doing something should be responsible and face the consequences. To have
a sense of responsibility is a basic quality of any normal and upright person.
Irresponsibility harms persons and society. Contraception promotes
irresponsibility in parenthood. In fact it is the denial of parenthood.
Very much related to irresponsibility
involved in contraception is the lack of chastity. By choosing to do
contraception the couple chooses not to abstain from having
marital relations so as to avoid a conception. The choice of not abstaining has
its roots in the decision not to control one’s sexual urges when there is a
reason for doing so. This is the lack of chastity.
Chastity is a very important personal good.
Its absence has tremendous repercussions not only for one’s personal life but
also for the life of a family and the society in general. One just has to
realize that at the root of crimes like rape and adultery, and social maladies
like broken families, separation, divorce, juvenile delinquency is precisely
the lack of chastity.
Are there any exceptions? Dangerous pregnancies? Too many children already? Gays using condoms?
Contraception is said to be intrinsically
evil. This means that the principle “contraception is evil” does not admit of
exceptions. In a similar way other principles of the natural law like “killing
an innocent person is evil”, “lying is evil”, “fraud is evil” do not admit of
exceptions. Imagine if these principles of the natural law admitted exceptions,
there would be chaos in our society.
The problem of spacing the births of
children, assuming the couple has good reasons for doing so will not constitute
a reason for admitting the practice of contraception because there is a
reasonable way of proceeding if the goal of the couple is to space the next
birth. The reasonable way of acting is to practice periodic continence.
Many years ago, it was claimed that the
methods available for the practice of periodic continence were so unreliable and
unpredictable that these methods placed an onerous burden and strain on
conjugal relations. Those days are over since the current scientific and
medical knowledge about female fertility makes determination of the wife’s
fertile days very accurate.
The question of homosexual relations is a
different issue altogether. Their practices cannot be classified as
contraceptive because they are naturally unnatural and unfruitful.
Why can’t it be sex for the sake of sex? Can’t married couples enjoy sex just for the sake of sex?
If we reflect is a little bit about the
differences between the male and female person especially as regards their
sexual organs, we come to the conclusion they are configured excellently for
the transmission of life. Any person who learns about the intricacies of the
union of the sexual gametes and the ensuing conception of life will be awed at
the tremendous complementarity and complexity involved in the entire process.
And so it is reasonable to conclude that the sexual union has for its purpose
the transmission of life.
But since man is not just an animal but a
person, the sexual union for him and her is not just a physical and biological
event. It is also expressive of the married love of husband and wife. It is the
sign of their love and self-giving. From the personal point of view, the
conjugal act is an act of total self-giving, where each person gives the other
the totality of his personhood. Now part of that personhood is the husband’s
masculinity and the wife’s femininity and this includes one’s fertility. A
silent sign and witness of this exchange is the husband’s seed being left in
the womb of the wife. Naturally a concomitant of the exchange is the intense
sexual pleasure that is given and received.
From this standpoint, we can see that
contraception makes the conjugal act cease to be an expression of total
self-giving because each one’s fertility is not given because of a deliberate
choice of the will. The act in fact ceases to be a conjugal act. Both parties
are aware that they have chosen to enjoy the marital act but deliberately
depriving it of its relation to fruitfulness. This is what happens when they
perform sex for the sake of sex.
What is difference of contraception with NFP?
I have asked married couples that same
question: what difference would it make for you if you took pills or if you
practiced NFP. They always answer the same way: oh, there’s a whole world of
difference. With pills you don’t have to practice abstinence or self-control.
With NFP you have to practice self-control. I think that answers the question.
It comes from the couples themselves.
Although it might seem that there is no
difference between contraception and NFP because the premises are the same (the
marital act is performed) and the conclusions are the same (there is no
conception), the difference does not lie in the mechanics of the entire process
but in the choice of the will of the couple. The couples that practice NFP have
decided to practice a virtue: marital chastity.
But we also have to remember that aside
from chastity the other virtue demanded by natural law for married persons is
responsible parenthood. If a couple decide to use NFP but with the purpose of
not practicing responsible parenthood (meaning they do not want to have
children without serious reasons) then their choice will also go against the
natural law. It will also be evil.
But isn’t it true that NFP is merely last resort? Please explain.
NFP is the only naturally viable option for
married couples who want to space the birth of their children. It is the only
option that is morally sound.
Some critiques of this idea claim that
NFP is evil because it inhibits the “spontaneity” of the couples and introduces
a “wedge” in their relations which is the calendar.
This criticism equates evil with the lack
of spontaneity and so we can say it equates goodness with spontaneity.
Furthermore, the assumption here is that what is spontaneous is what is
natural. It is easy to realize that not all spontaneous acts in a person are
reasonable and good for the person. Any spontaneous action in a person will
still have to be subject to the governance of reason for the action to be truly
good. One’s emotions or feelings, for example, are spontaneous events. People
say: I could not help fall in love with her. We know of many cases where people
have regretted being carried away by their emotions or feelings.
As to NFP putting a wedge between
couples, this claim is denied by many couples who bear witness to living very
satisfied married lives while practicing periodic continence.
What would be possible sanctions for violating natural law with contraception?
The sanctions for the practice of
contraception are what we can call the “natural sanctions” for contraception
and these are patent to all.
Because contraception goes against life
at its beginnings, its natural offspring is the certain attitude or mentality
that does not respect life and so we have the so-called culture of death. This
is the culture that has gripped the old world: Europe and North America. When
people do not see anymore that abortion is clearly murder then you have the
culture of death in full force.
We already said that contraception also
promotes the lack of responsibility and chastity among persons. The social
consequences of these vices are also obvious to any reasonable person.
