The trial of infertility
Posted on August 9th, 2012
In the Genesis lectures, Luther discusses the trial Isaac and Rebekah endured in their infertility.
This is another trial. After the flame of lust has ceased and Isaac has become a husband and has had Rebecca as his wife for 20 years (for so long does God delay the promise in which He had promised his father Abraham: “Through Isaac shall your descendants be named”), another affliction now follows, and indeed one that is far more burdensome than the previous trial. The victor over lust overcame the devil by his chastity up to the time of his marriage. In the marriage state he longs for offspring, in accordance with the promise; and he certainly has no slight hope, since he knows that his wife was prepared for him and brought to him in accordance with God’s plan. But Rebecca does not bear a child; nor does she have a promise that she will be a mother, just as Sarah, too, did not have a promise at first. This undoubtedly troubled his heart, and to this trial were added fear of and worry about perpetual barrenness, which they considered to be a curse. For the fathers laid very great stress on this statement (Gen. 1:28): “Be fruitful and multiply.” They felt that a special blessing of God rested on this statement; and because they did not multiply, they supposed that they were cursed and under God’s wrath.
-Luther, AE 4
Tagged: Genesis, Infertility, Luther, Marriage
I am curious as to why you chose to title your post “The trial of infertility” instead of “The trial of barrenness”? Do you suggest they are the same thing?
No, but “barren” tends to place the condition squarely on the woman. I prefer to use the term “infertility” to make it something that both husband and wife endure together, irrespective of whose body happens to be so afflicted. (And in some cases, it can be both the husband and the wife, at least at certain times.) “Barren” is a good biblical word, of course. But saying, “We are infertile” rather than “She is barren” avoids the danger of blame.
Thank you for explaining. I can see where you are coming from as a writer; however, I don’t see Luther placing the blame of barrenness solely on the woman in the quote above. I also appreciate learning how you read and understand the word “infertility.” As a barren woman, I have a different, personal reading of that word: http://heremembersthebarren.com/2011/10/19/being-infertile/
Thanks, Katie. I look forward to reading it.
Okay, I’ve read it now, finally. The points you make resonate with me, but (it seems to me) it’s all in how one hears the words. You note that “barren” means “not productive; desolate; fruitless; lacking.” However, that’s what the word “infertile” means, at least in part. Literally, “fruitless.” Or, derived from fero, “not carrying, not bearing.” So, I’m going to stick with using “infertility” for the reasons I stated above.
I completely agree with you in that it’s all in how one hears the words. I guess that is the point I am trying to make. In our present society, when I am categorized in conversations/blogs as one who struggles with the trial of infertility, listeners/readers are often steered into a discussion of medical issues surrounding barrenness. I think they can’t help it, because the connotations of the word “infertile” in our culture tend to be medical. Yet, you and I (and Luther, for that matter) know that my childlessness does not whittle down to simply a medical issue. Honestly, I grow weary of wading through the infertility-medical-speak over and over again in conversations in the Church. While the sting of the word “barren” still smacks me upside the head sometimes, I like that it at least exists in the Bible and that it acknowledges my childlessness to be something God allows rather than just something the world labels and diagnoses. Thanks for listening, Pastor Esget. I sure appreciate your addressing this issue with pastoral care. Peace to you in Christ Jesus, the One in Whom I bear much fruit, even in my barrenness.