In a previous post, I mentioned Planned Parenthood and Birth Control in the Light of Christian Ethics, written by the Rev. Dr. Alfred M. Rehwinkel (CPH, 1959). Some of Bioethike’s readers are aware of this resource, which served as a watershed in the reversal of historic teaching on contraception in The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod.
Those same readers, however, may not be aware that an article on the same topic appeared in the May 1951 edition of The Cresset: A Review of Literature, the Arts and Public Affairs.
Founded in the 1930′s under the auspices of the International Walther League, The Cresset was led by a “Who’s Who” of notable Lutherans: O.P. Kretzmann, editor, O.A. Dorn, managing editor, and editors Theodore Graebner, Walter A. Maier, Walter A. Hansen, A.R. Kretzmann, among others.
Some fifteen years later, The Cresset editorial staff, which at that time included Kretzmann, John Strietelmeier, Paul Bretscher, Hansen, A.R. Kretzmann, Theodore Kuehnert, Jaroslav Pelikan, and others, came to believe that a university setting was most appropriate for the periodical. To wit, an agreement was reached with Valparaiso University, and with the May, 1951 edition a new Cresset was born. (You can access today’s Cresset online here.)
It’s in this first edition published in partnership with Valpo that ”What About Planned Parenthood?” by Sue Wienhorst (pp. 12-22) appeared.
While I won’t examine Weinhorst’s entire article here, I did want to point out one quote then contrast it with others from Luther and orthodox Lutheran writers. In a section addressing objections to birth control, Weinhorst pens,
The command to ‘be fruitful and multiply’ was spoken first at a time when there were only two human beings and again when there were only eight. Furthermore, it is not essentially a command but a promise of blessing. Moreover, this promise was given also to the bestial creation. Besides a married couple may practice planned parenthood and yet ‘Be fruitful and multiply.’ Finally, the words, ‘Be fruitful and multiply,’ if they are to be taken as a command, must be read within the context of ‘and have dominion over the earth,’ a command which may be negated where population rises to the point that it makes man a problem to himself. (1)
First, presumably due to the ”population bomb” (think 1950′s ”Red Scare”), Weinhorst asserts that the command to procreate is no longer valid. Phillip Melanchthon:
[The adversaries] say that in the beginning, the commandment was given to populate the earth. Now that the earth has been populated, marriage is not commanded! See how wisely they judge! Human nature is so formed by God’s Word that it is fruitful not only in the beginning of creation, but as long as this nature of our bodies exists. (2)
Second, Weinhort resorts to voluntarism when it comes to man’s participation in procreation. A longer passage from Luther:
’Be fruitful and multiply,’ is not a command. It is more than a command, namely, a divine ordinance [werck] which it is not our prerogative to hinder or ignore. Rather, it is just as necessary as the fact that I am a man, any more necessary than sleeping and waking, eating and drinking, and emptying the bowels and bladder. It is a nature and disposition just as innate as the organs involved in it. Therefore, just as God does not command anyone to be a man or a woman but creates them the way they have to be, so he does not command them to multiply but creates them so that they have to multiply. And wherever men try to resist this, it remains irresistible nonetheless and goes its way through fornication, adultery, and secret sins, for this is a matter of nature and not choice. (3)
And C.F.W. Walther:
A chief purpose of matrimony is that thereby the Christian church is expanded and edified. (4)
Third, Weinhorst attempts to detach the word “blessing” from fecundity. Again, Luther:
Here [Genesis 1:21-22] one can observe what the blessing really is, namely, the increase. (5)
Fourth, if the promise was given also to bestial creation, would said beasts be following God’s divine command were they not to procreate? Weinhorst gives the impression that, for her, the “image of God” in man is more of the ability to reason than of concreated righteousness, which is the Lutheran position.
Fifth, may we also practice occasional adultery if we are chaste the rest of the time? May we occasionally steal if we for the most part seek to preserve the goods of our neighbor? Is the goodness or sinfulness of any act based on its frequency?
Finally, does not post lapsum man still possess dominion, although greatly weakened, over the earth? Again, Luther:
For the Word of God which created you and said, ‘Be fruitful and multiply,’ abides and rules within you; you can by no means ignore it, or you will be bound to commit heinous sins without end. (6)
I hope this small exercise shows the importance of comparing contemporary religious documents with the Scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions, and the writings of orthodox Lutheran theologians. We’ll talk more about that in future posts.
1. Sue Weinhorst, “What About Planned Parenthood,” The Cresset (Minneapolis: Walther League, May 1951): 41.
2. Phillip Melancthon, Apology XXIII:8, Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, second edition (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006): 211.
3. Martin Luther, “The Estate of Marriage,” Luther’s Works vol 45, The Christian in Society II (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1962): 18.
4. August R. Suelflow, Servant of the Word: The Life and Ministry of C.FW. Walther (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2000): 227.
5. Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Lectures on Genesis, chapters 1-5, Jaroslav Pelikan, ed. (St. Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1958): 53.
6. The Estate of Marriage: 19.
