Anglo-Catholic view of deliberately childless marriage?

Discussion in 'Church Strands (Anglo-catholics & Evangelicals)' started by Reed, Apr 8, 2020.

?

Is a deliberately childless marriage valid/morally acceptable?

  1. Yes

    9 vote(s)
    45.0%
  2. No

    6 vote(s)
    30.0%
  3. It depends

    5 vote(s)
    25.0%
  1. Reed

    Reed New Member

    Posts:
    23
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    United States
    What do Anglicans, particularly Anglo-Catholics, think of using birth control or sterilization within marriage, not to limit the number or frequency of children, but to avoid having children altogether?

    As late as 1948, the Bishop of Canterbury spoke on behalf of the entire Church of England, saying that deliberately childless marriages were not marriages at all and could be annulled. I read some report from an Anglican-Roman Catholic dialogue which may have been from even later than this that expressed the same view, on behalf of the Anglican tradition. In 2000, the Bishop of Rochester said that married couples have a duty to have children, though he didn’t go so far as to deny the validity of deliberately childless marriages, and stressed that it was his personal opinion.

    What do Anglicans of 2020 think of the issue? I’m particularly asking for the opinions of Anglo-Catholics, because that is the stream of Anglicanism I am most interested in, and because the Anglo-Catholics are interested in upholding patristic views, and I doubt ANY of the Fathers would have supported a deliberately childless marriage (though they were nearly unanimous in the view that married sex without the specific intent of procreation was sinful, a view which NO CHURCH today, not even Rome, affirms).

    The Declaration of Intent used for Anglican/Episcopalian weddings still requires the couple to recognize that their church teaches that one of God’s purposes for their marriage is the raising of children “when it is God’s will.” Could a couple say, “We’ve discerned that it’s not God’s will for us, so we’re going to always prevent it by getting sterilized or always contracepting?” Or does affirming that it may be God’s will mean that you can do nothing to prevent it? I guess it depends on whether you think God’s will can be done through your own contraceptive actions.

    I understand that, in practice, the vast majority of laypeople and clergy have no problem with deliberately childless marriages. I even read something in the marriage materials on the Episcopal Church’s website about couples deciding “whether” to have children, not “when.” But I’m wondering what faithful/conservative Anglicans, particularly Anglo-Catholics, think. Is a deliberately childless marriage a contradiction?
     
  2. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    It is God's will for us to be fruitful and multiply (within the bounds of marriage).

    Birth control in marriage is undertaken to allow pleasure without procreation. At its root, willingness to thwart the primary reason why God gave humans their sex drive (procreation) while still receiving the pleasure aspect is essentially selfishness. Is selfishness godly or is it sinful? Consider what God thought of Onan, who 'spilled his seed on the ground' specifically so that he might avoid producing offspring.

    When I 'point the finger' on birth control, I have 3 fingers pointing back at myself because my wife and I used those methods in our younger days, and I don't feel good about it. Thank God for His mercy and forgiveness; my past mistakes have been erased through the blood of Jesus!

    The act of intercourse validates the marriage, for it is meant to be a blood-covenant event (God designed the hymen for a reason). So I see no reason why a childless marriage would be invalid, unless they have never consummated. If anyone wishes to read more about blood covenants in the Bible and cultures, and how this impacts the consummation of marriage, I suggest the book, The Miracle of the Scarlet Thread, by Booker. https://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Scarlet-Thread-Expanded-Revelation-ebook/dp/B01N4G3159/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1UT2AA1GYRDMC&dchild=1&keywords=miracle+of+the+scarlet+thread&qid=1586443939&sprefix=miracle+of+th,aps,230&sr=8-1

    I don't know if this is the "Anglo-Catholic" view, but I believe it is the Biblical view.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2020
    bwallac2335 likes this.
  3. bwallac2335

    bwallac2335 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,008
    Religion:
    ACNA
    They are valid but morally wrong. It is the rise of birthcontrol and childless marriages that have led to the legalization of gay marriage. Once you take children and make them an option in marriage not something that naturally arises out of marriage for most part you destroy one of the key tenets of marriage and make marriage only about the self and self gratification. I say for the most part because not all people can have children and this is not talking about them
     
  4. Reed

    Reed New Member

    Posts:
    23
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    United States
    Then what do you think of the Archbishop of Canterbury's statement in 1948 that “consummation, which means completion, has not been reached, if, by the use of artificial means, procreation has been willfully and deliberately prevented.” Can a man with a vasectomy ever really consummate a marriage?
     
  5. bwallac2335

    bwallac2335 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,008
    Religion:
    ACNA
    He can, and now this is only my view, if he has repented of that vasectomy and hopes that somehow it no longer works. Sometimes that does happen. He also can try to get it undone if that is even possible which I believe it is.
     
  6. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    My answer would be that consummation is the act of physical intercourse. But you have a point, because I think historically there is a lot of precedent for equating consummation with impregnation. You reminded me of this just now; I think I've read that, long ago, when a couple could not conceive the marriage might be annulled. I never have viewed that as morally correct.
     
  7. Reed

    Reed New Member

    Posts:
    23
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    United States
    It was, and in the Roman Catholic Church, undisclosed infertility is still grounds for annulment.
     
  8. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    839
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    I believe, as an Anglo-Catholic, that all the following are wrong: having a deliberately childless marriage, use of contraception, sterilisation, abortion, surrogacy and in vitro fertilisation.

    I am treating the ballot as secret but just the same as if I had put 'Vote Labour' posters in my window, I believe there is not much secrecy regarding how I voted. :D
     
    Rexlion and bwallac2335 like this.
  9. bwallac2335

    bwallac2335 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,718
    Likes Received:
    1,008
    Religion:
    ACNA
    I agree with all of what you said.
     
  10. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    839
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    I understood impotence to be grounds. Indeed, in the Roman Catholic Church it is considered an impediment to marriage. I was not aware that sterility was grounds for annulment.
     
  11. Traveler

    Traveler Member

    Posts:
    50
    Likes Received:
    38
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    RC, moving to Anglican
    The current criteria for annulment lists antecedent impotence. I'm not sure if that means the impotence was known about but not disclosed, or if it extends to somebody who didn't know at the time of marriage that they were impotent.
     
  12. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    3,323
    Likes Received:
    1,626
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
  13. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    839
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    The impotence must be antecedent, i.e. have existed prior to the marriage. If a 20-year-old is mpotent the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) considers this an impediment to marriage. If a man married for many years develops impotence as, say, a result of diabetes his marriage does not become invalid. I understand the RCC considers that after puberty a man would know whether he was impotent.
     
  14. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    deleted
     
  15. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    842
    Likes Received:
    706
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    True, but Paul admonishes spouses not to deny sexual gratification to each other in 1 Corinthians 7:1-5:
    Procreation is not mentioned here (though perhaps it is implied). Rather, Paul teaches that the sexual act -- though it must occur within the confines of a marital relationship between one man and one woman -- is granted by God as a kind of mutual comfort from one partner to the other. The ESV uses "conjugal rights" when translating ὀφειλομένην, while others translate it as "marital responsibility", but clearly this teaching is not based purely on sex as a procreative act. Remember that Paul's audience in this letter is to the Gentiles as well as the Jews of Corinth, and he cannot assume any deep knowledge of Old Testament scripture among his Gentile converts. Thus the order of creation in Genesis with Adam and Eve might not have been known to them, nor God's purposes in forming human beings as male and female, nor his commandment to "be fruitful and multiply".

    He also knows that the Gentile converts were sunk in a culture of sexual excess (sound familiar?) and probably would have viewed the sexual act as something as casual as eliminating waste from the body. Paul is teaching that the sexual act is a thing ordained by God to bring male and female together into "one flesh" (Gen. 2:24).

    As I read it, the biblical teaching is not that sex must be only for procreative purposes -- the act of coitus itself is part of the marital relationship, not only to beget children, but to provide an outlet and a relief for both partners so they are not prone to sexual sin.

    EDIT: I'm honestly not sure where I fall on the whole birth control issue. Scripture teaches, "Do not deprive each other, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time", so it seems to me that might be a form of birth control (refraining from coitus during the female's most fertile cycle, for example).
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2023
    Rexlion likes this.
  16. Celticlady39

    Celticlady39 New Member

    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Christian
    I consider myself to be ‘Anglo-Catholic’. I think that in certain circumstances birth control and sterilisation are justified. There are way too many people having children who can’t afford to support them properly. Also, if someone over the age of 35 has a child, there is a higher chance of complications and the child being born with disabilities.

    Of course I think married couples should have children but realistically, many married couples cannot afford to bring up several children. I think that’s just being sensible. I understand people have alternative views and that’s fine, just putting mine out there
     
  17. Clayton

    Clayton Active Member

    Posts:
    178
    Likes Received:
    108
    Country:
    United States
    I’m scheduled to get a vasectomy later this month. My wife feels she is too old to have more kids, and neither of us wants to put her in a position in which she’d feel like she should do something drastic should a late-in-life pregnancy go sideways. ( She is a non-believer and doesn’t have the same queasiness about these things as I have.)

    I’m not exactly 100% with the plan, but going to do it anyways, to avoid something potentially much worse. Is it sinful? Possibly. We already have kids, so it’s not like we’ve chosen to be “childless.” We’re just at a difficult stage in life.

    In the service, one must sometimes choose the lesser weevil.
     
  18. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    839
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    It says you're Catholic. That could mean a number of things. If you are a Roman Catholic I'd strongly advise you to consult your priest, spiritual director and/or confessor before taking this step. The Roman Catholic Church considers what you propose doing to be a grave/mortal/serious sin. Is putting your soul in jeopardy worth the short-term gain in this life? Perhaps, you and your wife could look into Natural Planning (apologies if I haven't quite got that name correct).
     
  19. Tom Barrial

    Tom Barrial Member

    Posts:
    80
    Likes Received:
    37
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Some people should not be parents. It is better not to have them than to abuse them. I had 6. No church leader or church rules would ever tell me what to do
     
    Celticlady39 and Lowly Layman like this.
  20. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,722
    Likes Received:
    2,488
    In the story of the Garden of Eden, we read that God recognized that "it is not right for man to be alone" (Gen 2:18) and creates Eve. The story goes on to say "This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one" (Gen 2:24). Something Jesus reiterates when counseling against divorce.

    Paul talks about marriage in his epistles and the command he gives to wives and husbands is to love and respect each other.

    Marriage is about Love, about sharing a life in union with each other. Children can be a blessing in marriage but are not a requirement.
     
    Celticlady39 likes this.