By Lori Morris, CNM, certified nurse-midwife and women's health coach

The circumcision God commanded Abraham was not the circumcision done to baby boys today. According to historical accounts, the original covenant circumcision removed only the small part of the foreskin that extended past the tip of the penis. The radical procedure that strips and removes the whole foreskin was added by men more than a thousand years later, and that's the version routine infant circumcision is based on. And as Christians under the new covenant, we aren't required to circumcise at all.

After I did a four-part series on circumcision, a listener sent me an email that I think will help a lot of you who are still wrestling with this.

She had been going back and forth about circumcising. She'd watched one very tame video where the parents were in the room and the doctor used plenty of numbing medicine. Even then, she knew she couldn't watch it done to her son. But her husband wanted it, and after all, God required the Israelites to do it, so it must be good, right?

Then she listened to my series and learned that the sanitized version she'd seen wasn't the norm. She was overwhelmed with grief and wrestled with God. How could He ask His people to do something so painful and damaging to their baby boys, with no pain relief at all? She knew there had to be more to the story, because the devil is always twisting the Lord's commands.

She found her answer in an article she sent me, and she said she cried tears of relief. I bet she's not the only one who's been thinking these things, so I want to share what she found.

The article, "Circumcision: Then and Now" by James E. Peron, EdD, was published in 2000 and is shared on the Circumcision Information and Resource Pages (cirp.org). In full disclosure, I haven't been able to verify every historical detail myself, and you're welcome to dig into it yourself. Here's what it describes.

Milah, the covenant circumcision. In Abraham's time, circumcision removed only the extra tip of the foreskin that extended past the head of the penis. Most of the foreskin stayed. It still protected the head of the penis, it separated naturally as the boy grew, and the frenulum wasn't touched. The boy would have looked mostly uncircumcised. According to the article, this is the circumcision referred to in the Bible, and it's the kind Jesus would have had.

Periah, added around AD 140. About 140 years after Christ, a second step was added. After cutting the tip, the rest of the inner lining of the foreskin was torn and stripped back from the head of the penis and removed, often along with the frenulum. Rabbis added it to stop young men from stretching their remaining foreskin to look uncircumcised for social reasons and sports. This step was dictated by men. It was not what God commanded, and it causes much more nerve damage and loss of sensitivity.

Metzitzah, added later still. During the Talmudic period, a third step was added in some Orthodox groups, where the person performing the circumcision sucked blood from the wound. It spread serious infections, and many groups have since dropped it.

Routine infant circumcision took off in America in the late 1800s and 1900s. It was promoted for hygiene and health and even as a way to stop masturbation, with a long list of supposed cures. As women were coaxed out of their homes to give birth in hospitals instead of with midwives, routine circumcision became nearly universal.

Many of the doctors who taught the procedure were trained in the Jewish ritual, so the version that spread was the radical one, milah plus periah, removing most or all of the foreskin. That's still what's done to baby boys today.

Isn't it interesting that this became popular right as women left the privacy of their own homes to give birth? It was much easier to talk them into things there.

Here's what makes this even sadder. All of these extra steps were added after circumcision was no longer required by God at all. Circumcision did happen in the New Testament before Christ died and rose again, because they were still under the old law. But the old law was nailed to the cross, and circumcision of the flesh isn't part of the new covenant. What God wants is the heart.

You can study these for yourself:

Don't just take my word for it. "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God" (2 Timothy 2:15). Dig in and make sure what anyone tells you, including me, is the truth.

What we've been sold as beneficial, and even as required by God, doesn't hold up. From here on out, you can make a difference for your boys, their boys, and every generation after them. They'll look just like Dad, born perfect and whole, the way God made them.

If you're still deciding, my full circumcision series covers the social pressure, the history, the procedure, and the ethics:

Does the Bible require Christians to circumcise their sons?
No. Circumcision was part of the old law. Under the new covenant, Scripture says circumcision of the flesh avails nothing and what matters is the heart (Galatians 5:6, 1 Corinthians 7:19, Romans 2:29).

Is modern circumcision the same as biblical circumcision?
According to historical accounts, no. The covenant circumcision of Abraham's time (milah) removed only the tip of the foreskin. The step that strips and removes the rest of the foreskin (periah) was added around AD 140, and modern routine circumcision is based on that more radical version.

When did routine infant circumcision start in America?
It spread in the late 1800s and 1900s, promoted for supposed health and hygiene benefits, and became nearly universal as birth moved from homes to hospitals.

If you're pregnant and want support thinking through your newborn decisions, see my Menu of Services or email me at lori@morriswellnessservices.com.

You can listen to the full episode of If Mama Ain't Healthy (Ain't Nobody Healthy) at the top of this page.