Birth Control, Halliday G. Sutherland [classic books for 11 year olds txt] 📗

is

13.15. Further, no one can doubt that in such densely populated

districts as North and South Holland and Gelderland the Catholics, who

number more than 25 per cent, of the inhabitants, exercise a

perceptible influence in raising the birth figures for the whole

kingdom. The results would be very different if the entire country

adopted Neo-Malthusian principles.” [39]

 

Section 3. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

As was proved by the census of religions in 1906, the United States of America is becoming a great stronghold of the Faith. In Massachusetts the Catholic Church numbered 1,100,000 members, whereas the total membership of all the Protestant Churches was 450,000. In Illinois there were about 300,000 Methodists and 1,000,000 Catholics. There were 2,300,000 Catholics in the State of New York, and about 300,000 Methodists, while no other Protestant Church numbered more than 200,000. The New England States, once the home of American Puritanism, are now great centres of Catholicism.

Professor Meyrick Booth [40] explains this remarkable change as being due to two causes: (1) The influx of large numbers of European Catholics, who cling tenaciously to their religion; (2) the greater fertility of these stocks as compared with the native population. Moreover, he has tabulated the following statistics:

TABLE IV

State. Population Chief Religious Bodies Births & Birth

(1906) Deaths rate per

(b. and d.) 1,000

Indiana 2,700,000 Methodist 233,000 b. 36,000 13.0

Prot. Episcopalian 102,000 d. 36,500

Disciples 118,000

R.C. 175,000 Iowa. 2,224,000 Methodist 164,000 b. 36,000 16.0

Lutheran 117,000 d. 20,000

Presbyterian 60,000

R.C. 207,000 Maryland. 1,295,000 Methodist 137,000 b. 19,000 15.0

Prot. Episcopalian 35,000 d. 20,000

Baptist & smaller,

about 100,000

R.C. 167,000 California. 2,377,000 R.C. 354,000 b. 32,100 14.0

Prot. bodies about d. 32,400

(All Churches weak) 250,000 Kentucky 2,290,000 Baptist 312,000 b. 35,000 15.0

Methodist 156,000 d. 18,000

R.C. 166,000

In these States the birthrate is low; in three there are actually more deaths than births; and in all five the proportion of Catholics is comparatively small. These States may be compared with five others, in which the Catholic and the foreign elements are well represented:

TABLE V

State. Population Chief Religious Birth and Birthrate

(1910) Bodies Deaths per 1000

New York. 9,113,000 R.C. 2,280,000 b. 213,000 22.0

Jews (?) 1,000,000 d. 147,000

Methodist 300,000

Presbyterian 200,000

Rhode Island 540,000 R.C. 160,000 b. 13,000 24.0

Baptist 20,000 d. 8,000

Prot.

Episcopalian 15,000

Massachusetts 3,336,000 R.C. 1,080,000 b. 84,000 25.0

Congregational 120,000 d. 51,000

Baptist 80,000

All Protestants

together 450,000

Michigan 2,800,000 R.C. 490,000 b. 64,000 23.0

Methodist 128,000 d. 36,000

Lutheran 105,000

Connecticut 1,114,000 R.C. 300,000 b. 27,000 24.0

Congregational 66,000 d. 17,000

Prot.

Episcopalian 37,000

In these States the birthrate is very much higher than in the former. Furthermore, a New York paper [40] investigated the birthrate in that city with special reference to religious belief, and concluded that the different bodies could be graded as follows with respect to the number of children per marriage: (1) Jews, (2) Catholics, (3) Protestants (Orthodox), (4) Protestants (Liberal), and (5) Agnostic. Professor Meyrick Booth, who is himself a Protestant, concludes his survey of the evidence as follows:

 

“looking at the situation as a whole, there is good reason to think

that the Protestant Anglo-Saxons are not only losing ground

relatively, but must, at any rate in the East and middle East, be

suffering an actual decrease on a large scale. For it has been shown by

more than one sociologist (see, for example, the statement in _The

Family and the Nation_) that no stock can maintain itself with an

average of less than about four children per marriage, and from all

available data (it has not been found possible to obtain definite

figures for most of the Western and Southern States) we must see that

the average fertility of each marriage in this section of the American

people falls far short of the requisite four children. Judging by all

the figures at hand, the modern Anglo-Saxon American, with his high

standard of comfort, his intensely individualistic outlook on life, and

his intellectual and emancipated but child-refusing wife, is being

gradually thrust aside by the upgrowth of new masses of people of

simpler tastes and hardier and more natural habits. And, what is of

peculiar interest to us, this new population will carry into ascendancy

those religious and moral beliefs which have moulded its type of life.

 

“The victory will be, not to those religious beliefs which most closely

correspond to certain requirements of the abstract intellect, but to

those which give rise, in practice, to a mode of life that is simple,

natural, unselfish, and adequately prolific—in other words, to a mode

of life that works, that is Lebensf�hig.” [41]

As things are, the original Protestant stock of America is being swamped by the growth of the Catholic, the Jewish, and the Negro population. Moreover, the United States is faced by the grave problem of a rapidly increasing coloured race. Despite this fact the American Malthusians are now demanding that a National Bureau should be established to disseminate information regarding contraceptives throughout their country! And what of the other reformers? They also are very busy. They have already abolished those cheering beverages from grapes and grain, or rather they have made alcohol one of the surreptitious privileges of the rich. They are seeking to enforce the Sabbath as a day of absolute rest, not for the glory of God but in order that tired wage-slaves may have their strength renewed for another week of toil in the factories and the mills. Again, they would uproot from the homely earth that pleasant weed whose leaves have made slaves of millions since the days of Sir Walter Raleigh. All these things would they do. There are some things the reformers have not done, and these things are recounted by an American writer, Dr. Anthony M. Benedik:

 

“The divorce peril, the race-suicide evil, the greed for ill-gotten

gold, things like these the reformers touch not. And these things it is

which harm the soul. Abolishing the use of alcoholic drinks and of

tobacco, putting the blue laws into effect, suppressing all rough

sports, may make a cleaner, more sanitary, more hygienic, a quieter

world. And yet there keep recurring to mind those words of the Master

of mankind, ‘What doth it profit a man if he gain the world and suffer

the loss of his soul?’ What worthy exchange can a man make for his

soul?” [42]

On the other hand, it is good to read that the Governor of New York has recently signed a bill making it a misdemeanour for landlords to refuse to rent apartments to families in which there are children. In that State children thus regain equal rights with dogs, cats, and canaries. Is it too much to ask of the House of Commons that they should pass a similar law? We shall see.

The dangers of birth control were apparent to that great American, Theodore Roosevelt, when he said:

 

“The greatest of all curses is the curse of sterility, and the severest

of all condemnations should be that visited upon wilful sterility. The

first essential in any civilisation is that the man and the woman shall

be the father and the mother of healthy children, so that the race

shall increase and not decrease.” [43]

 

Section 4. THE SAME RESULTS IN ENGLAND

On a smaller scale the position is the same in England and Wales, where Catholicism has probably checked to some extent the general decline of the birthrate. In 1919 there were only six towns in England [44] with a birthrate of over 25 per 1,000, these being St. Helens (25.6), Gateshead (25.9), South Shields (26.9), Sunderland (27.1), Tynemouth (25.9), and Middlesbrough (26.7). Now in these towns the Catholic element is very strong. During the same year in the four registration counties in which these towns are situated, a larger proportion of marriages were celebrated according to the rites of the Church of Rome than in the other counties of England and Wales. [45] The actual proportion of Catholic marriages per 1,000 of all marriages in these four counties was: Lancashire 116, Durham 99, Northumberland 92, and the North Riding of Yorkshire 92. That gives a fair index of the strength of the Catholic population. Again in 1919 we find that Preston, a textile town, has a birthrate of 17.1, whereas two other textile towns, Bradford and Halifax, have rates of 13.4 and 13.1 respectively: and there can be little doubt that the relative superiority of Preston is mainly owing to her large Catholic population.

The actual birthrate amongst Catholics in England may be estimated from information contained in The Catholic Directory for 1914. As that work gives the Catholic population and the number of infant baptisms during the previous year in each diocese of Great Britain, and as Catholic children are always baptized soon after birth, it is possible to estimate the birthrate of the Catholic population. Working on these figures Professor Meyrick Booth [46] has published the following table:

TABLE VI

Diocese. Birthrate per 1,000 of the

Roman Catholic population.

Menevia (Wales) 45.2 Middlesbrough 38.0 Leeds 42.0 Liverpool 40.0 Newport 53.0 Northampton 33.0 Plymouth 26.0 Shrewsbury 38.0 Southwark 39.O Westminster 36.0

–-

Average 38.6

–-

During the same period the general birthrate amongst the whole population of England and Wales was about 24 per 1,000. And figures that are even more remarkable have been published by Mr. W.C.D. Whetham and Mrs. Whetham. [47] These writers, having investigated the number of children in the families of the landed gentry, show that the birthrate amongst the aristocracy has declined.

 

“A hundred fertile marriages for each decade from 1831 to 1890 have

been taken consecutively from those families who have held their title

to nobility for at least two preceding generations, thus excluding the

more modern commercial middle-class element in the present Peerage,

which can be better dealt with elsewhere. We then get the full effect

of hereditary stability and a secure position, and do away with any

disturbing influence that might occur from a sudden rise to

prosperity.” [48]

The results were as follows: [Reference: Population]

 

Year. Number of children to each

fertile marriage.

 

1831-40 7.1

1841-60 6.1

1871-80 4.36

1881-90 3.13

 

The birthrate amongst thirty families of the landed gentry, who were known to be definitely Catholic, was also investigated, with the following results:

 

Years. Number of children to each

fertile marriage.

 

1871-90 6.6

 

(as compared with 3.74 for the landed families as a whole during the

same period.)

The interpretation of these figures is not a matter of faith, but of reason. I submit that the facts are prima facie evidence that by observance of the moral law, as taught by the Catholic Church, even a highly cultured community is enabled to escape those dangers of over-civilisation that lead to diminished fertility and consequently to national decline.

The truth of this statement has been freely acknowledged by many Anglicans. According to Canon Edward Lyttelton: “The discipline of the Roman Communion prohibits the artificial prevention of conception, hence Ireland is the only part of the United Kingdom in which the birthrate has not declined, and the decline is least in places like Liverpool and those districts where Roman Catholics are most numerous.” As we have already seen, there are also other reasons why Catholicism preserves the fertility of a nation.

Without wishing to hurt the feelings of the most sensitive materialist, it is necessary to point out that, apart altogether from the question as to whether the chief or immediate cause of a declining birthrate is the practice of artificial birth control, or, as seems to be possible, a general lowering of fertility, birthrates are more dependent on morals and religion than on race and country. During the past century irreligion spread throughout France, and the birthrate fell from 32.2, during the first decade of