THE LIMITS OF BIRTH-CONTROL
[To the Editor of TIIE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—" Expert° Crede " upbraids the anti-B.C. people for not grappling with problems like the one he describes. One reason is that the applicants for instruction show that they have settled not to-listen to any teaching which suggests an arduous but still possible course of conduct.
But the main reason is that all that can be done is for the Church to lay down principles and leave the application of them to the individual conscience guided by the wisest counsellor within reach. If your correspondent jeers at this " cloudland " attitude let him reflect on what he would have said if the stricter members of the episcopal Bench had uttered their frank opinion of his conduct. Like all the most vocal Of the Church's critics he would, in one breath, denounce the Church for not judging practical behaviour ; in another breath he would rail at churchmen for talking nonsense, because he chooses to take his own line.
But who are the anti-B.C.'s ? They are supposed to be a solid block of old-fashioned bigots who go about saying that contraception is in every conceivable circumstance horrible. They are nothing of the kind. They are people who have a profound conviction that contraception—per se ; apart from results—is an evil thing. Practically all recognize some conditions when the thing would be permissible. This group includes the large majority of the nation—but of that majority only a small number are prepared to act upon their scruples if it involves pain. That is where the line of demarcation has to be drawn. By far the wisest writing on the very grave subject is Dr. and Mrs. Lindsey's booklet Birth Control and Human Integrity. It pleads with all parties not to be dogmatic.—I am, Sir, &c., Overstrand, Cromer. E. LYTTELTON.
Previous page
