Maggie suggested I join her "Wondering Wednesdays" and so I am! Here's a question for my anti-contraception crowd. Why don't we hear more about the Sin of Onan?
Let me back up for those who might be unfamiliar. One of the arguments in favor of contraception is the fact that the Bible never explicitly condemns it. (Note that I don't think this is a particularly good argument, since (a) the Bible isn't explicit about a lot of things that we all know are bad and (b) even when the Bible explicitly condemns things many Christians will just go right ahead and do them anyway - but that's a whole other issue.) However, the story of Onan seems to indicate that it does. Here it is, from Genesis 38:6-10:
Judah got a wife named Tamar for his first-born, er. But Er, Judah's first-born, greatly offended the Lord; so the Lord took his life. Then Judah said to Onan, "Unite with your brother's widow, in fulfillment of your duty as brother-in-law, and thus preserve your brother's line." Onan, however, knew that the descendents would not be counted as his; so whenever he had relations with his brother's widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing off-spring for his brother. What he did greatly offended the Lord, and the Lord took his life too.
God found Onan's act offensive (some translations say "detestable") and so struck him dead.
Now, some modern scholars argue that Onan's sin was in not fulfilling the law of levirate marriage, as opposed to his coitus interruptus. However, that type of violation was not punishable by death, but by public humiliation (the widow would take off the man's shoe and spit in his face; see Deuteronomy 25:5-10). For more detailed exegesis and criticism of the claim that Onan's issue was his intent, as opposed to his method, read "The Sin of Onan Revisited." It's pretty clear that Onan was killed because he withdrew.
This story has long been interpreted to prohibit acts of intercourse that are not open to life, by Jewish and Christian scholars alike. (The word "onanism" is actually now defined as "coitus interupptus; masturbation.") A few quotes:
Clement of Alexandria (2nd century)
"Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted." 1
St. Augustine (4th century)
"Marital relations even with a lawful wife, are unlawful and degrading when the conception of a child is deliberately frustrated. This was the sin of Onan, and God struck him dead because of it." 2
"Relations with one's wife, when conception is deliberately prevented, are as unlawful and impure as the conduct of Onan who was slain." 2
St. Thomas Aquinas (13th century)
"Next to murder, by which an actually existent human being is destroyed, we rank this sin by which the generation of a human being is prevented." 2
Martin Luther (16th century)
Onan's sin is "far more atrocious than incest and adultery" and a form of sodomy. 3
"Onan must have been a malicious and incorrigible scoundrel. This is a most disgraceful sin. . . . We call it unchastity, yes, a Sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed." 4
John Calvin (16th century)
"Besides, he [Onan] not only defrauded his brother of the right due him, but also preferred his semen to putrify on the ground, rather than to beget a son in his brother’s name. The voluntary spilling of semen outside intercourse between man and woman is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous." 4
John Wesley (18th century)
"Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord — and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls." 3
The sin of Onan is Biblical foundation for the prohibition of sexual acts that are intentionally sterilized. The thing is, I very rarely hear this story discussed. So I've been wondering why. Is it just because the 20th century interpretation is more popular now? Is it because it's such a short story from the Old Testament, as opposed to a clear teaching from the Gospel? Is it because the theological argument against contraception is stronger? Why don't we hear about Onan?
And here's a bonus question: Why don't we ever hear about pharmakeia? It's often translated as "sorcery" and refers to the secretive mixing of potions... which some scholars suggest includes contraception and chemical abortions. Anyone know anything about that?
References
The Sin of Onan Revisited, by Brian Harrison: http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt67.html
1 http://www.scripturecatholic.com/contraception.html
2 http://www.catholic-truth.info/apologetics/birthcontrol.htm#c
3 The Bible and Birth Control, by Charles Provan. (Note that I haven't actually read this yet, but found Protestant quotes against contraception in several places, most referencing this book. Also, I believe he pushes Quiverfull.)
4 http://onemoresoul.com/contraception/church-teaching-contraception-abortion/what-does-the-bible-say-about-contraception.html