September 13, 2007
Conception Day – To Want or Not To Want Children: This is the Question
In case you missed it, yesterday was Conception Day. At least so it was in a Russian province. (HT: MC) It’s a cool deal. You spend the day at home, try to make a baby, and if you are lucky enough to have that baby born exactly nine months from Conception Day on the Russian Constitution Day, you get a brand new, Russian-made SUV. 
I’ve always wanted a Russian-made SUV. And the way to get one seems pretty easy and fun. At least on Conception Day.
It’s a pretty good deal for the Russian man. He gets a pleasant day with his wife (I naively assume morality here) and nine months later gets a shiny new four-wheel-drive toy. Granted, the interim 280 days of gestation are a bit difficult for the wife, but they could get lucky. And if they are so unlucky as to have a long pregnancy then they’ll have to live with the little creature they made. But what the hey? They can endure with a screaming urchin for a few years, smack it around a little, and when it is barely four years old commit it over to the government schools for its upbringing. It was the government that wanted it in the first place. The gamble is worth it. Harmless fun.
The story reminds me of my godly and much-loved grandmother who has been with the Lord for years now. She was prude. Very prude, I think. She was a lovely and generous woman that unnecessarily got worked up from time to time over funny details. I remember her outrage when the girls at Bob Jones University had gone to wearing white nylons.
One day she, her married grandson that she called “Bobby” even though he was a full-grown man, and some friends were talking about the infertility treatments that Bobby and his wife were investigating. I think Grandma was trying to verify that Bobby was not one of those young married yuppies that did not want to have children, so Bobby emphatically said, “Grandma, we’re trying to get pregnant.”
“Well, then,” Grandma sweetly chortled, “keep trying! At least you can have lots of fun trying!”
I don’t know if it was that she suddenly realized her humanity had sneaked out or Bobby’s “Wahoo! Preach it, Grandma!” that made her turn all shades of red. I never let her forget it.
Well, it seems like the Russians need incentives to have kids. That’s sad, but what’s worse is that Christians often need incentives to have kids. American Christianity has become so narcissistic and secular that we are plagued with many married couples who actually think it is their right to not want kids. The Roman Catholic Church made matrimony a sacrament and procreation a holy duty and necessary result of matrimony. “Since the primary end of the family is the procreation of children, the husband or wife who shirks this duty from any but spiritual or moral motives reduces the family to an unnatural and unchristian level. This is emphatically true when the absence of offspring has been effected by any of the artificial and immoral devices so much in vogue at present” (source). They mean business.
The question remains for those of us who are not Roman Catholic or unimpressed with Russian SUVs: is it our liberty to not want children?
I think the answer is clear. I think a couple that does not want children is ungodly. It is as simple as that. As a pastor, I won’t marry a couple that won’t have children. However, before I propose three ideas in support of this statement, let me hasten to warn against judging any couple that may not have children. My wife and I were barren for ten years and we had to endure from time to time the unfair criticisms of people who either said or acted as if we were deliberately choosing against children. We do not know why a couple may not have children. It’s none of our business. Having said that, I suggest reasons for the following proposition:
Reasons
I. The married couple that does not want children is displaying a sinful resistance to an aspect of the image of God that can best be demonstrated through them because they are married.
God creates. And man, created in God’s image, should desire to procreate. The imagio deo is not only a characteristic of man, it is a command for man. We must be like God.
I believe that this [procreation] is one of the main reasons why God has made the sexual experience in human life to be as pleasurable and wondrous as it is. Image-of-God procreation is designed to reveal the pleasure God has in creating people in his own image, and the joy of bringing yet more of these humans into existence. We have the privilege of creating image-of-God persons. God didn’t have to do it this way. He could have done it himself. But, the Father desires to share. He chooses to give to us some of the most wondrous aspects of his work (Bruce Ware, Father, Son, & Holy Spirit: Relationships, Roles, & Relevance, p. 58.).
II. The married couple that does not want children is displaying a sinful resistance to the most effective means provided to the Church for the fulfilling of the Great Commission.
Why is this sinful? The goal of the Great Commission is to make disciples out of people in order to redeem them from the effect of sin, a falling short of God’s glory (Romans 3:23). They are nurtured, discipled, taught, and sanctified from “one degree of glory to another” (2 Corinthians 3:18) to ultimate glorification (Romans 8:30). The Son of God is taking “many sons to glory” (Hebrews 2:10). The means by which the Son of God takes many sons to glory is by an obedient Church fulfilling the Great Commission. To disobey the Great Commission is sinful. To willfully choose against the most effective means provided to the Church for the obedience of the Great Commission is so foolish it too is sinful.
To have children is to secure for one’s self a mission field. I have only two children, but when I go to heaven I am reasonably sure that I will be able to have made at least two disciples. This is neither arrogant nor unrealistic. In fact, the hope of my succeeding in my Great Commission duty in the lives of my children is so realistic that it is proverbial: “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6). Paul said people were his hope, joy, crown of boasting, and glory (1 Thessalonians 2:19-20). How foolish and un-Christian it is for young couples to choose against the procreation of people.
God has graciously provided an extremely effective method of evangelism and discipleship. The couple who scorns it for the immediate pleasures of this world is in sin.
III. The married couple that does not want children – even though they cannot procreate biologically – is displaying a sinful reluctance to be God-like in caring for the orphan.
God “defends the cause of the fatherless” (Deuteronomy 10:18). True religion, according to James, is to be concerned for the orphans (James 1:27). What better way is there to care for an orphan than by adoption? What more effective means to show God’s love for the fatherless than by adoption? What better means of evangelism and discipleship is there?
We may not need Conception Day. We could care less for Russian-made SUVs. Godliness alone should make us yearn for children.
This entry was posted in the following categories: Compassionate Ministry , Family , Missions , Parenting , Politics and Culture
God gave us a brain, too. I’m sure He expects us to use it.
So the next couple in their 60’s that comes to you to get married, you’ll refuse because they’re too old to have kids and too old to care for an adopted one?
LOL. I’m sure I would be flexible! There are always extenuating circumstances to consider. Always! Thanks for point out one of them.
Posted by: bob at September 13, 2007 11:53 AMGlad to hear you can be flexible, Bob. It must be from all those mental gymnastics you did to get to your “Thus sayeth the Lord” conclusion. Rather impressive, I must say.
Posted by: Liz at September 13, 2007 12:15 PMDo I discern a caustic tone?
Let me clarify. My conclusion was simple: godliness alone should make us yearn for children. I did not say that couples who do not have children are ungodly. I did not even say that a couple should have LOTS of kids.
I said, in so many words,that barring all obvious extenuating circumstances that logically preclude the possibility of bearing or adopting children it is not ungodly to desire children. Furthermore, it would be ungodly to not want children.
I made my case with biblical reasoning.
The burden of proof is on the person who would like to argue that a couple can be godly and yet not desire children even though they have the physical means or financial resources to procreate and/or adopt.
Trite arguments about Christian Liberty are not relevant here. Our bodies are not our own. The command to multiply was given to mankind through Adam. It is a universal mandate. I don’t see how the Christian dispensation changes that. That’s how I see it anyway.
I am not trying to be combative here. Show me biblically where I am wrong. I have been wrong many times before. I am always willing to change.
Posted by: bob at September 13, 2007 12:42 PMThat’s where we disagree: I don’t believe that was a command God gave to Adam. The Bible says that God blessed them and said “be fruitful.” I interpret that as a blessing from God, not a command.
Since I believe that it’s not a command, then Christian liberty (and common sense) are relevant.
Questions:
Would it be godly to have children even if you knew you would be bringing them into an un-equally yoked home or a home where they were (at least at that time) unwanted?
Also, if an infertile couple were too poor to consider adoption costs, how are they to proceed? Sell all they own to buy a child they then can’t provide for?
What would you say to those who who truly seek God and yet feel no draw or desire for children? They exist, I assure you.
What are you to do in the case of a home where one spouse desires children and the other does not? Even if both are Christians?
Sorry to bombard you with questions, Pastor. This is not something I’ve heard before. I’ve always thought that if God wants us (me and my husband) to have children that He would provide them to us - one way or another.
Since He hasn’t, I’ve rested in that peace and been content. After reading this, I’ve feel like I’m supposed to be weeping and knashing my teeth because I don’t have a child. And, well, I don’t…I feel at peace with what God HAS given me in the area of family.
Is that wrong? Am I supposed to be desiring the children God hasn’t seen fit to give me yet? Or ever?
Also, I’ve seen people who I think we would both agree should not be parents. Don’t you think thete are those people who would not be good parents? Even among believers?
Posted by: Ann-Marie at September 13, 2007 05:08 PMAnn-Marie -
Good questions all. Great spirit. Let me attempt an answer. But before I launch into answers, remember I am talking very narrowly about the desire and motives, not the fact of whether a couple has or does not have children. One of your questions specifically addresses that point.
Would it be godly to have children even if you knew you would be bringing them into an un-equally yoked home or a home where they were (at least at that time) unwanted?
I think that is a “timing” question; not really whether children are wanted or not. It seems to me that in situations like these it would be unwise to bring children into the scenario. My point is not about birth control, timing, number of children, or any of the above. It is about one of the purposes of marriage.
Also, if an infertile couple were too poor to consider adoption costs, how are they to proceed? Sell all they own to buy a child they then can’t provide for?
Again, it’s about an attitude/desire for children. Notice each of my points in the original post used the phrase “if a couple does not want.” Therefore, I think it would be unwise for a poor couple to sell all they had for a child because they would not be able to provide for the child. The Providence of God dictates His will. I would suggest they pray, pray, pray. Hannah did.
What would you say to those who who truly seek God and yet feel no draw or desire for children? They exist, I assure you.
I know they exist. Thus, the reason for my post. But your question narrows it down to those “who truly seek God.” I believe these there are couples that do truly seek God, manifest it in a life of total dedication, self-sacrifice, marital harmony and a pursuit of holiness that feel no draw or desire for children. This does not mean that they are right. I think the burden would be on them to show why “out of faith” they choose against children. Whatever is not out of faith is sin. However, most couples who do not want children are not as devoted to God’s service and will as they may want people to think. Having said that, I still admit the reality that there are sincere couples that do not want children only because they do not know that they should want children.
What are you to do in the case of a home where one spouse desires children and the other does not? Even if both are Christians?
One spouse is wrong (all else being equal). But since each has authority over the other’s body (1 Corinthians 7), I think that wisdom dictates waiting and prayer.
Sorry to bombard you with questions, Pastor. This is not something I’ve heard before. I’ve always thought that if God wants us (me and my husband) to have children that He would provide them to us - one way or another.
Don’t be sorry. Your respect and thoughtfulness are very obvious. Thank you. I’m the one saying hard things. I’ve got to tackle the questions. We can’t resolve complex (and controversial) issues overnight and on a blog! We may not agree, and that’s fine too. We may both modify our views, but in the end we have to be very ready to examine our thoughts in light of truth.
Since He hasn’t [provided children], I’ve rested in that peace and been content. After reading this, I’ve feel like I’m supposed to be weeping and knashing my teeth because I don’t have a child. And, well, I don’t…I feel at peace with what God HAS given me in the area of family. Is that wrong? Am I supposed to be desiring the children God hasn’t seen fit to give me yet? Or ever?
No, it’s not wrong to be content. In fact, Jennie and I have counseled many barren couples about the importance of thanking God for, and enjoying, barrenness. We enjoyed a ten year honeymoon, lots of trips, lots of nice restaurants, and lots of couple time. Not so much now.
I wouldn’t want anyone to pine after something God has clearly shown that He is not giving in the sense that they become bitter or discontent. But God has designed for all Christians to live in the tension of earnestly praying for something while simultaneously waiting contentedly. One can (and I argue should) wish for God’s ideal, the “natural family” (as theologians and sociologists refer to it) while patiently embracing one’s reality. That’s why we named our daughter Patience. We learned to enjoy reality while praying for God’s ideal as set forth in Creation, the “natural family”, a family with children. However, I maintain that the married couple that has no ambition to follow after God’s “natural law” is sinning in the sense that they do not recognize what is God’s ideal.
I have to acknowledge the possibility of exceptions to that general rule. But, again, I do not speak of the physical reality of the couple as much as I speak of their ideal. A young couple with physical and financial means and no spiritual, out-of-faith purpose for having no children has no justifiable reason to stay childless.
Also, I’ve seen people who I think we would both agree should not be parents. Don’t you think thete are those people who would not be good parents? Even among believers?
That couple should not have children, I agree. But that is a “timing” issue. But the issue is not whether they are qualified or not. The issue is what they want. If your hypothetical couple wants children, but is not ready, it would be foolish for them to have children at that time. This then doesn’t really pertain to my argument. They aspire to the right thing.
If the couple is not qualified and they do not want children, well then they have two problems. The first is that they don’t even aspire to the right thing. The second is that they aren’t ready for children even if they should have them.
C.S. Lewis said that our problem is not that we desire the wrong things so much as we are too easily satisfied.We’d settle so quickly for a career with self as the center, or even a ministry that depends on our total person, while turning up our nose at the opportunity to procreate one more person for the glory of God or adopt one more of God’s people to bring up to the praise of His glorious grace. When we begin to see ourselves as graced players in God’s cosmic plan, we start to realize that God’s pre-fall ideal for man is still something that we should long for; we are not living for our seventy years alone; we are not simply existing to be happy as Christians can be; but we are part of a great and growing people, procreating and adopting eternal souls.
I know you don’t have children. But I am praying for you that God will give you children. I have no reason to think that a “natural family” is something we shouldn’t pray for. Other young couples in our acquaintance are also childless. How, when, or even if they will have children is something I do not know. I just hope they want to have children with contented delight in what they already have.
Posted by: bob at September 13, 2007 06:12 PMI hate to nitpick, but for the sake of any adoptees who may read this, can I just mention that “buy a child” is a loaded phrase that could cause some distress to those involved in the adoption triad? Unless one goes through the black market, this is a misnomer.
Carry on!
Posted by: Beth at September 13, 2007 08:48 PMThought provoking post. I have to say I’m inclined to disagree, but it’s definitely given me some things to think through.
One issue that you have addressed partially, but might elaborate on is the fact that for many people, the concept of family is badly marred because of damaging experiences. Bringing children into this world, for them, seems a cruel thing and almost evil.
Posted by: Jason at September 13, 2007 09:15 PMPastor - Thank you for those wonderful answers! That makes it much more clear what my thought process and prayer actions should be.
Beth - I’m sorry! I didn’t mean to offend. I wasn’t sure of the right term. My husband and I have looked into adoption and the cost associated with it made us sad we could not pursue it - that thought probably came through in my comment. I truly didn’t mean to offend! As Pastor says, we DO have the prayer option!
My apologies!
Posted by: Ann-Marie at September 14, 2007 09:12 AMAnn-Marie,
Are you aware of groups that will help with the financing of adoption? Two links you might look at are www.voiceoftheorphan.org and members.shaohannahshope.org .
Posted by: Ed Groover at September 14, 2007 11:02 AMThanks, Ann-Marie!
Yes, I know how frightening the costs can be. We never had the money , either (we prayed for four years before God intervened the first time).
God provided each time (4 times), and has for many people I know.
It’s amazing to see how He does it, and how worth it all is to have that child home and to see him/her bloom with love and become not only ours, but also God’s (3 of them are saved).
That being said, “my times are in thy hand” Ps. 31:15. I believe God places that desire and fulfills it for the good of all concerned, in his time. I would have made it happen a lot faster, but would have also missed out on what God had in mind for us, which was/is very special.
On the topic, I know a godly, generous, hard-working couple who married a bit later (30s) and decided not to have kids b/c he was nervous about incidents in his family (mental health?). They have reached out to help with other’s children. I don’t know if “perfect love casts out fear” applies here or not, but that’s what came to mind.
Posted by: Beth at September 14, 2007 01:06 PMAnn-Marie,
I have started a Blog/News section on our adoption website YouBelong. I was going to hold off on posting this particular recording that was given by Piper at the beginning of this year.
However, I decided to post it tonight because I found it to be a great encouragement, and I thought it might be for you as well.
You can listen to it here.
Posted by: Shannon at September 16, 2007 10:26 PMBob-I’m sorry for reacting in the flesh and the lack of respect in my responses. I was very irritated by your post and replied before I could think about my response. Please accept my apologies.
Posted by: Liz at September 17, 2007 11:31 AMShannon - I’m looking forward to it. Thanks!
Posted by: Ann-Marie at September 17, 2007 11:55 AMLiz,
Apologies accepted.
I actually have some scattered thoughts scratched out on my comprehension of Genesis 1:28ff as a benediction. I think it is. However, I will try to explain why I think God’s blessings contain implicit commands. But, alas, there are other things to do in the world besides blogging….
Posted by: bob at September 17, 2007 01:10 PM
