Losing Ground

The Declension of Households

In his book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1966) Samuel Huntingdon points out that Islam has grown faster than Christianity in the latter half of the twentieth century. He believes that in the long run this will continue. Why? Huntingdon's answer is terse: “Christianity spreads primarily by conversion; Islam by conversion and reproduction.” (p. 65)

In recent decades the population in Islamic societies has exploded. Islam is a religion requiring conformity—external conformity. Thus,the children of Islamic households are conditioned to be Islamic. On two counts, Islam has grown adherents more quickly than Christianity. Firstly, Islamic families tend to have more children. Secondly, Huntingdon implies that the children of Christian households are less likely to walk in the faith of their parents.

Are these two factors true? We suspect so. Ought they to be true? Emphatically not.

With respect to the first factor—the greater fecundity of Islamic households—we can observe that strong population growth is often a phenomenon amongst poorer peoples—and most Islamic societies are poor. There are a variety of factors at play here. Oftentimes, the very real prospect of the death of one or more children through sickness or malnutrition leads families to prefer larger numbers of children. Another factor is lack of access to effective contraception. Another consideration is the preference for larger numbers of children so that the parents will be taken care of in older age. Children are seen as the best retirement plan of all. Yet another reason is children represent an unpaid work force in the family business.

It has been shown frequently that when living standards rise, population growth tends to fall. Children are less necessary for economic reasons. People become more focused upon lifestyle and “quality of life” and the bearing and raising of children eventually comes to be seen as a “lifestyle choice” rather than a necessity.

But this should not explain why the population growth amongst Christian families should tailor off. If anything, rising living standards should see larger Christian families, not smaller. Greater prosperity means that Christians can support, clothe, educate, and sustain more children than former generations. They can employ home help if needed. They can put adequate food on the table. They can afford the Christian school fees, and so on.

We would expect Christian families to be larger because the bearing and raising of children amongst Christians is not a preference nor an issue of lifestyle choice. It is a spiritual duty. The divine command to mankind to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth has not been revoked. For Christians who have ceased rebelling against the Lord and have returned to Him, the command to be fruitful and multiply is to be taken seriously and responsibly obeyed, unless prevented or hindered by providences of one kind or another. In the Christian faith, children are vitally important and a great deal is focused upon them.

To the extent that this is not the case amongst Christians—to that extent we fear Christians have become conformed to the spirit of the age rather than to biblical precepts and commands. Children have become "rug rats" rather than a rich inheritance from the Lord. Thus we suspect that falling birth rates amongst Christian households reflects a deeper spiritual malaise.

The second factor implied by Huntingdon is that Christian families fail more often than not to bring up their children so that they, in their turn, walk in the faith of their fathers. If true (and we suspect it is) we need to ask why. For clearly this is not a biblical construct. The Scriptures would teach the exact opposite. God works His grace in and through families and households. “My covenant is with you, and your children” He says to Abraham. “This promise is to you and your children,” says Peter at Pentecost.

Once again, however, we suspect that many Christians are oblivious to these vital truths. They have adopted instead the rampant individualism of the Unbelieving world and become conformed to the spirit of the age. They have come to believe that faith and obedience is an intensely individualistic matter (individualism is one of the defining characteristics of the Unbelieving West) and not a household and family matter. But this is a terrible travesty. Either the Christian faith shapes and condition everyone in the household or it does not. If it does not, the household has conditioned the children to grow up as unbelievers. Either way, the household is the most powerful conditioning institution on the planet. God has made it so.

Christian parents are made and held responsible for the conditioning in the home. Either that conditioning is Christian or it is not. Either children are taught daily how to believe, live, act, pray and serve as Christians or they are not. If they are not, the parents will end up teaching them how not to believe, live, pray, act and serve as Christians. They consequently end up teaching them to live as unbelievers. These are the only two options.

Either way, Christian parents are teaching and conforming their children. The real question is, how are their children being conditioned? To live in faithfulness or unfaithfulness to the Lord?