Many Christian couples, either by choice by chance or somewhere in between (see the side discussion in the next paragraph), are in a position where they do not have children and don't intend to do so. Being a Childfree Christian myself, the matter has been of concern to me personally. Many years ago when I first realized that my wife and I wouldn't be able to have children without extensive medical intervention (if at all), I began to research the opinions of Christian leaders on the subject. What I found was that, while sympathetic to (if not avidly pitiful of) the plight of couples who are unable to have children, when it comes to simply choosing not to have children, Christian leaders are less than understanding.
We'll look at some of those opinions in a moment, but first, let's have a little side discussion about this whole business of "choosing not to have children" verses "not being able to have children." The vast majority of outsiders (e.g., parents) who look at this issue believe it's a matter of either-or. That is, either a couple is either unable to have children, or they choose not to. However, as almost all childfree couples will tell you, it is rarely that simple. If we imagine a line, where the far left point is "unable to have children," and the far right point is "choose not to have children," the vast majority of childfree persons fall somewhere in between. Medical considerations, financial considerations, legal considerations, social considerations, and host of other factors, all of which are very personal and none of anyone else's business, come into play in any couple's journey to parenthood or non-parenthood.
But no matter. As I said earlier in this article, some Christian leaders are less than understanding about Christians not having children. Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, seems to be one of the most outspoken about the subject:
The Scripture does not even envision married couples who choose not to have children. The shocking reality is that some Christians have bought into this lifestyle and claim childlessness as a legitimate option. The rise of modern contraceptives has made this technologically possible. But the fact remains that though childlessness may be made possible by the contraceptive revolution, it remains a form of rebellion against God's design and order. [1]
Trusted family researcher and speaker Dr. James Dobson, of Focus on the Family, is also averse to the idea of "deliberate" childlessness.
My comments are directed primarily to married couples who view having children as simply another “lifestyle choice” — and an undesirable one, at that. I believe that attitude contradicts what we know from Scripture about the blessing of children and the high calling of parenthood. [2]
Interestingly, Dr. Dobson's public position on the matter seems to contradict what one of his staffers told me directly in a personal e-mail about the subject:
...Dr. Dobson does not believe that the Lord dictates that all couples are to have children. ... Ultimately, though, the decision about whether or not to start a family rests with a couple and the Lord. We do know that He has a unique plan for each of us, and as a husband and wife give this matter prayerful consideration they will make the choice that is right for them.[3]
Even the Bible itself, at first glance, appears to support the positions of Drs. Mohler and Dobson, among countless others. In fact, the verse I'm going to quote below (among others) is often cited by these men as a basis for their positions:
Children are a heritage from the LORD, offspring a reward from Him. Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are children born in one's youth. Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them. Psalm 127:3-5 New International Version
So in light of what respected and educated Christian leaders have to say about the subject, and in light of the Bible's very words on the subject, how can a Christian justifiably "choose" not to have children?
Let's look at three cultural considerations of God's people of Bible times that may have shaped their writings on this matter, and how those considerations are not relevant to Christians today.
1: High Infant Mortality. In an age when medical care consisted mostly of herbal preparations and prayers; to say nothing of rampant disease, malnutrition, frequent famines, and the like; it would stand to reason that very few babies born in Bible times lived to see adulthood. Indeed, if a man wanted to have sons that lived to adulthood, simple mathematics require that he have as many babies as possible simply to weed out the ones that don't survive infancy. Obviously, for most Christians in the modern era this is not a concern. Thanks to God's role in advancing medical care, nutrition, etc., most First World babies can reasonably be expected to live to adulthood.
2: The Need to Populate the Battlefields. There's a reason Solomon uses military equipment (a quiver and a bow & arrows) as an object lesson about children in the 127th Psalm. Ancient warfare was largely a numbers game; if your enemy shows up at the battlefield with 5,000 soldiers, and your side shows up with 3,000 soldiers, the odds are already against you. Therefore, if your sons faced a reasonable expectation of having to go to war at least once (if not several times) in their lifetimes, then the more sons you contributed to the war effort, the more likely it would be that your side would win. Christians today are not faced with the horrifying prospect of having to send our boys to war in the name of the very survival of our people, as were God's people in Bible times.
3: The Need for Workers in the Fields. So you've got a field of grain to be harvested, and the only way to get it harvested is through the manual labor of farmhands. And you're got to do it quickly, or your crops are going to wither and be useless. What are you going to do? Either put your own sons to work (1 Samuel 16) or hire field hands (Ruth 2). And if there is a shortage of field hands, your crop is ruined. Jesus himself used the shortage of field hands as an object lesson about the Kingdom in Matthew 9:37, when He said "The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few" (NIV). Today, even the most devoutly Christian of farmers can harvest his crop with machines and technology and doesn't need sons/hired hands simply for farm work. And even in labor-intensive forms of agriculture, the labor pool is large enough that shortages of farm workers are rarely of concern today.
So what does all of this mean for Christians today? As liberty-minded Christians, we respect the right of Christians to have as many or as few children as they want and are able to care for. We reject any notion that the number of children a couple has is any business of the government, the pulpit, or the community. We may make personal value judgments about how many children a couple has (am I really the only Christian who is appalled by the Duggars), but in the end we realize that it is none of our business, and we ask for the same respect to be given to us.
[1] http://www.gender-news.com/other.php?id=23
[2] http://www.a2ndgenerationofhomeschooling.com/2010/06/dr-dobson-on-intentional-childlessness.html
[3] Personal e-mail from Rick O'Shea, Focus on the Family Staffer
Very good analysis. It had never occurred to me why the quiver/weaponry terminology was used in those verses.
ReplyDelete