As you all may know, the New York State Senate passed a bill (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/new-york-state-senate-passes-expansive-abortion-bill/amp/) allowing mothers to abort their children up until birth, for practically any reason under the guise of the “mother’s health.” Abortion is not only wrong because it denies the child of its most basic, God-given, right to life; the “procedure” erases the final end of the act which created the child in the first place.
Noting the “end of the act” deserves some explanation though, and is what will lead us into a continuation of what it means to truly be pro-life.
The act of sex itself has two essential ends, which are inseparable; unity and procreation. Unity is brought about by the husband and the wife engaging in the act, bringing the two to a fulfillment of their creation. Procreation is the rational end of the act itself, for the unhindered expression is the formation of a new life. You cannot have a non-procreative procreative act or a non-unitive unitive act, these are direct contradictions and thus moral evils.
The evil on the table
Noting the end of this act leads us into the topic of contraception, literally meaning “against conception.” Abortion itself stems from a contraceptive mentality, it is at its core the brutal finality of the thought, where one says “I didn’t want a child in the first place, and because of this I need a way to rid myself of it.” This is also written about by Saint John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae in which he writes
“..the negative values inherent in the “contraceptive mentality”-which is very different from responsible parenthood, lived in respect for the full truth of the conjugal act-are such that they in fact strengthen this temptation (abortion) when an unwanted life is conceived.”
From this same mentality we get the various forms of birth control we have today, among which are condoms and the birth control pill, all of which, are contraceptive devices. While many pro-life Christians will vehemently oppose abortion, other contraceptive options are almost always kept on the table, even though they cause things contrary to the nature of sex and stem from the same mentality that gave us abortion.
These forms of birth control that are so widely accepted are indeed the evils that are left on the table, that we too often choose to ignore when opposing abortion.
The antithesis: pleasure above all
All forms of contraceptives (birth control) deny one or both ends of the act, and in denying one you deny the act itself due to the inseparability its two ends. Contraceptives in general always deny the procreative end of sex. They are deliberate actions directly in opposition to conception.
Condoms though, deny both the unitive and procreative natures. It is a literal barrier between husband and wife as well as a barrier for conception. As such, in denying both ends, its use is illicit and immoral, for morality is what is in accord with human nature.
The pill is in another ballpark though. The birth control pill is designed not only to prevent conception but also prevent implantation; this takes place in 3 stages.
- The pill limits ovulation
- The pill makes insemination more difficult
- The pill makes an inhospitable environment for implantation
Not only is the pill in direct opposition to conception but if conception takes place, it acts against the newly formed embryo reaching its place of growth, acting as an abortifacient (meaning the child that was conceived is quickly aborted almost always unbeknownst to the mother).
This mentality placing pleasure over life, is only ever self-serving, without anyone else in mind. The very act designed to bring human life into existence under the institution of marriage is denied at every angle for nothing more than the fleeting feeling it brings.
Contraception is the very antithesis of a pro-life mentality. It not only turns the outward expression of love between a man and a woman in on itself, but it is at its core a contradiction.
A Holy Legacy 
Out of curiosity, do you and your wife hold these values? You only have sex to procreate AND unify yourselves? Do you believe it’s possible for two people to unify themselves while putting safe and responsible barriers in place for the sole purpose of becoming closer to each other? Have you asked your wife and listened to her fears about bearing children? Have you asked her what it must be like to, in an instant, have your body changed, ready or not? Have you asked her if she’s mentally prepared to bear children? Or did you simply tell her condoms would inhibit your ability to unify yourself with her on your wedding night?
Logically, this is a well written article, but you fail to address the real and valid emotions of people. People have feeling. Sex and contraception isn’t a word game where you can break down the meaning of the words and prove our human acts to be immoral. Real life circumstances and emotions need to be captured because that’s what makes us human.
LikeLike
Liv,
Both my wife and I do hold these values and she agrees completely with them and this article. She is also pregnant right now. It is surely possible to have unity without procreation just as it is possible to have procreation without unity (ie. rape). But in the instance of unity without procreation (since that is your question) it is immoral to actively inhibit the natural end of the act, the creation of a new life is far greater then the feelings of fear a husband and wife may have (this is also denying the natures of the act itself, which is the definition of immorality)
In fact this helps segway into why sex is only licit under the context of Marriage. The philosophical purpose of marriage is nothing more than to further the human race. It creates the ideal conditions for children to be born and raised. As I wrote in my article the natural, uninhibited, end of sex is the creation of a new life. The end isn’t to feel good, or to just bring unity; its the husband and wife’s duty to be fruitful and multiply.
That being said though, if there is a real and good reason to avoid pregnancy, the use of natural means to avoid pregnancy is licit. So that would be using the fertility cycle and determining when the wife is fertile and abstaining from sex at those points. The key is that you cannot actively deny the end. Under the above circumstances you aren’t actively (using a positive means) inhibiting the possibility of pregnancy.
Morality is not dependent on the circumstances or the feelings of the individual. But I am actually moments away from launching a post about that. Thank you for your input and please continue to ask questions!
LikeLike