Be fruitful and multiply—and ignore the critics

When there’s a flood, the sensible thing to do is bring along a sandbag to fight it. When there’s a fire, an extinguisher will do the trick. But, in cultural controversy, some people bring fire extinguishers to floods. In other words, some people seem to be very confused about what the real problems are. Some of them have a bad habit of failing to resist really big cultural problems while, at the same time, they try to present themselves as critics of the church. For some among the clergy, it gives one the feel of being bravely “prophetic,” all while serving the agenda of Christianity’s enemies.

In Britain, an Anglican minister recently incited controversy with a simple tweet. The Rev. Dr. Jamie Franklin argued against population reduction: “As a priest in the Church of England, I recommend that every married couple has as many children as they possibly can. It is one of life's most wonderful things. ‘Lo, sons are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward.’ Psalm 127:3[.]” His declaration evoked a flurry of angry responses, particularly from liberal clergy dutifully bearing their fire extinguishers to the floodwall. The most strident respondents even cracked jokes about sterilizing and killing him.

While the Bible does not prescribe that couples must have as many children as biologically possible, it commands human beings to multiply and fill the earth. Moreover, the Anglican tradition affirms this biblical directive. The 1662 Book of Common Prayer lists the procreation of children who are to be brought up in the fear and admonition of the Lord as one of the three causes for matrimony. It also affirms that children are a blessing in the Churching of Women service. The Prayer Book even gives a martial edge to child-bearing and discipleship, with any new member (including infants) baptized in the hope that “he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner against sin, the world, and the devil, and to continue Christ’s faithful soldier and servant unto his life’s end.”

Simply put, an Anglican minister publicly affirmed counter-cultural Anglican teaching, which is precisely what a faithful, truly prophetic minister of the gospel should do.

But progressive clerics are selective in their obedience to the Scriptures and their ecclesiastical authorities. Many revisionists revoke them wholesale. Instead, such pastors find moral and spiritual guidance from what is currently popular in progressive circles. And so, in the progressive responses to Dr. Franklin’s tweet, one finds the typical pearl clutching over financial concerns and ecological fears.

Also revealed is an immense confusion over the purpose of sex and marriage. There, liberal ministers simply parrot what progressivism already teaches.

Yes, pastors must minister compassionately to infertile couples, who have an important role to play in the Church. And, no, women must not be objectified, reduced down to their ability to bear children. But the Church of England is not a fringe Mormon commune in the backwoods of Idaho, and a simple tweet cannot cover all pastoral cases and needs.

What really objectifies women and children today? Is it not the fertility industry and surrogacy, where profit motive mixes with primal desires for children? And does not the modern world face a crisis of infertility rather than over-population? The latter problem is made all the uglier when young couples renounce childbearing for the sake of a more luxurious, self-indulgent lifestyle that actually disappoints them in the end.

Whether clergy or members of the laity, faithful Christians need to speak and live counter-culturally. It’s right to believe that raising up a godly heritage is an expression of faith, hope, and love, and that Christian families committing themselves to this vocation can change whole countries for the good. Offspring are a blessing and God, in his kindness, desires for husbands and wives to experience these blessings, for the good of their union—but also for the good of the world.