On Birth Control and Beach Houses: Shaping Conjugal Catechesis

ASJ proposes a better way to catechize married and engaged couples about the difficult Catholic prohibition of contraception.

As thousands of Americans head to the beach for Memorial Day weekend, many will stay in rented-out beach houses. This gives the Apostolate of St. Jerome an opportunity to use an example from the secular world to clarify a teaching that many secular Christians find difficult.

It is stating the obvious to say that the Catholic Church is struggling mightily these days with its pastoral duty to explain to married and engaged couples why birth control is such a grave sin. Many have given up hope of ever turning the tide on this issue, looking instead for theological reasons by which the Church could change her teaching and permit contraception.

Part of the problem, as ASJ incessantly proclaims, is that so many in the Church have abandoned the traditional Christian views about sex and marriage and have replaced them with a neo-pagan, heretical view that emphasizes the goodness of venereal pleasure. ASJ pleads with the Church leadership to see that from this starting point it is impossible to make a rational, compelling case for why Catholic couples should comply with the Church’s ancient prohibition of birth control.

Another part of the problem is the acceptance of natural birth control methods like Natural Family Planning. By allowing this middle ground, the Church makes it harder for faithful theologians to explain the true arguments against contraception, so close as it is to this “okay” behavior that is promoted ardently by very zealous Catholics.

ASJ must reluctantly admit that the Church does indeed approve of methods like NFP. While we work within the Church to show the flaws in this position, we take comfort in the hope that tolerance of NFP is merely a passing phase. Just as “an eye for an eye” would grow into “love your enemies,” and just as St. Paul’s plea that a runaway slave be treated well would eventually grow into a Church-wide rejection of slavery, so we hope that the Church is passing through the intermediate step of allowing NFP en route to a realization that Christian marriage demands even a rejection of “natural” birth control.

But while we wait in hope for this day, in the meantime we can explain both the sin of contraception and the problem with NFP via analogy with beach houses of all things.

Our extended metaphor begins by imagining a very exclusive seaside resort where beach houses rent for such high prices that only the wealthiest can afford weekends at the beach. Now, in our analogy, God is the owner of these beach houses, and the beach, as beautiful as any spot on earth, represents chastity. Those who have the means to rent out these exclusive beach houses symbolize celibates and virgins, who are blessed with a gift not given to all.

Now those who cannot afford to vacation at the beautiful beach of perfect chastity represent married couples. The rental payments are beyond their means just like perfect chastity is. But even so, God desires that married couples also be able to wade in the waters of chastity and thereby leave inspired to transform themselves more deeply in the image of His virgins and celibates, who in turn more perfectly image His Son Jesus. But since these married couples can’t pay the steep rent, God, in His love and mercy, desiring to perfect all those He called, proposes a plan.

“I’ll tell you what,” He says to the married. “You lack what it takes to rent out one of my luxury beach villas, but here’s what I’ll do. I need people to help with the upkeep of all the beach property that I own. So I’ll let you live in one of my beach houses free of charge. Have a good time and enjoy the beach, but make sure to keep the house in good order.” Then He continues, “From time to time, I may want to see to it that a servant of mine is able to enjoy some time at the beach, soaking in the beauty, before I send him or her out on a mission to do my will. I’ll send them to stay with you whenever I need, and when I do this I want them to find the house welcoming, comfortable, and in good shape. You will host them in exchange for me waiving the rent you would ordinarily owe me.” Then He says, “Should the need arise, my people will give you a call, and you two will be in charge of hosting my servants free of charge in exchange for me letting you live in the house free of charge.”

The married couples invariably accept this, agape at a deal that seems too good to be true. They live for free in an exclusive vacation spot, a privilege not granted even to God’s most cherished souls, and from time to time they might have to play host to one of God’s servants (an honor really) for an extended spell.

Now these couples who stay for free in the beach houses can behave in a number of ways, for in our analogy, the servants being sent to stay with the couple represent children who God sends into the world destined to fulfill His will.

First of all, it’s possible that the rudest, most soul-sickened couples will receive a call from God, and then in complete selfishness and injustice hang up in His face. This corresponds to abortion, but it’s relatively rare that a couple would be so spiritually withered as to do this.

What is more common however is that after having hosted a few of God’s servants as they agreed, couples can’t help but like having time at the beach all to themselves. It’s more fun not to have to play host to anyone else, and you can even imagine couples coming to dread phone calls. So one day they get the idea to cut the telephone line in the house, or tamper with the ringer. This way, God can’t “disturb” them and make use of the privileges promised Him. This is precisely to the sin of contracepting couples.

The point is couples need to understand that in Christianity, marriage is a deal with God whereby each side gets something. It is a quid pro quo whereby God suffers their participation in the marital act for the assurance that, if and when He so wills it, He can use their union to bring new souls into creation for which He has dedicated some important mission according to His will. God allows couples to do something that He doesn’t allow of any of His other followers. He suspends for them the normal rule of celibacy that He both recommends to His children, and has chosen for their eternal destiny—should they get there. But in return for this giant concession, He naturally expects something of them that He doesn’t demand of his other followers who are not exempt from this rule. He rightly asks that they remember why they were given this privilege and that they host His servants, by welcoming and providing for children.

With this analogy, it becomes easy to see how contracepting couples cheat God by keeping a special privilege God granted them without returning to God the favor that He deserves as the rightful owner of the beach house.

But now another option is gaining popularity in the Church that doesn’t stick it to God as overtly as abortion and contraception. We can illustrate this by supposing that after a good deal of observation, couples discover that when God’s staff calls ahead to send a servant to stay, the timing of these calls follows a discernible pattern. Suppose they notice through study that his phone calls usually come on Tuesday or Thursday mornings, owing to the internal rhythms of God’s design. One day couples get wise to this pattern, or cycle one may say. They couples decide that on Tuesday and Thursday mornings they’ll go for a walk on the beach. That way, hey, they didn’t hang up on God or tamper with the phones, they just weren’t in to take the call. God’s secretarial staff, tiring of phone tag, calls another couple who is more receptive to Him. Feeling taken advantage of, God makes a mental note to maybe spell out the contractual terms more clearly the next time around. But this is effectively the situation of couples who practice methods like NFP. Like contraceptors, they try to have their cake and eat it too. The result of this behavior is easy to predict. Married couples will wonder why they should worry about paying rent when they can have all the perks of seaside living with very few drawbacks if any. Celibates and virgins will be discouraged when they see that while they're working so hard at their virtues to afford their places in God’s beach houses, others are enjoying the same privilege in addition to privileges they don’t have themselves. They’d have to be stupid to continue paying rent, and they will leave the ranks of religious or the priesthood for married life. This of course is the sad state that has come to pass in the Church where celibates and virgins are having their footing ripped out from under them by the Church’s wrong-headed emphasis on marriage and sex. Yet so many “conservative” Catholics try to defend the legitimacy of couples who behave precisely in the manner illustrated. But watching them try to harmonize the contradictions in their logic would be laugh-out-loud funny if its consequences for the Church weren’t so tragic. Of course, most of the proponents of this view are married folks themselves.

Now to finish our analogy. Imagine a couple that, liking the beach so much, and maybe even weary of hosting God’s servants, works hard to develop the ability to move up the socio-economic ladder and afford the high rental prices on their own. God would be most pleased with this. And since the couple is now paying rent, they would not be obligated to play host to any more servants of God. These couples correspond to those who, after some years of marriage, develop the ability to live with each other in continence. As ASJ teaches, this should be the goal for all couples. For God would take more chastity over more kids any day.

This beach house analogy gives an intuitive and powerful way to teach why the Church rightly rejects birth control as immoral. But this analogy is hard for many to accept because it implies that sex is something displeasing to God that must be offset with something good, that is, openness to children. Yet this is the truth, and ASJ will keep working to help the rest of the Church realize and accept this all-important idea that contains so much unleashed pastoral potential.

 This article appeared in the May 23, 2007 issue of The Loyal Lion.