Please read this entire post and respond to the question I ask at the end. I am very curious about something most profound…

Wendy and I were interviewed by Kevin Swanson a couple weeks ago, and we listened to it this morning. The conversation went well and Kevin, a skilled orator and radio host, brought out some interesting things. One was quite punctual. Kevin asked, “What do you think they [the camera crew] learned most about your family?” My answer was:

I think they learned that the stereotypes of a large family weren’t true. They envisioned a rigid family, a family without a lot of joy in it, one that was chaotic and out of control. What they witnessed instead was a family with a lot of love in it.

Consider what popular culture teaches our young children about large families. “There was an old lady who lives in a shoe, who had so many children she didn’t know what to do.” Old, poverty stricken, clueless. Surely mothers with many children will resemble the old lady in the shoe. How can she not? She has so many children she doesn’t know what to do!

Like many stereotypes, the reality is quite different. We know many large families and, more commonly, these mothers keep their youth and are admired for their agility and confidence. They aren’t controlled by the chaos. Quite the contrary, they are sometimes observed in public leading their many children like a kindergarten teacher leading a classroom of kids. They’re happy and confident. There is not the presumed unruliness and chaos.

The old lady in the shoe begs a question: where is the father? Parenting as a team covers many shortcomings, as most married couples would agree. Whenever Wendy is at the “end of her rope,” I will perhaps come home from work, take the kids from her care, and give her a break. Earlier this year we together decided that bringing the school-aged kids to my office would be a good idea. I school them for 8 hours every week (two mornings a week). Perhaps the old lady not knowing what to do is because there isn’t a dad around to help out.

Wendy and I spend a good deal of time addressing the stereotypes that people have of large families in our book Love in the House.

There is a common stereotype of a woman who has had many children. Her body is falling apart—skin and stomach muscles sagging, barefoot, overweight, and careworn as she chases several unkempt and unruly children. Hardly the picture of vibrant health and beauty. Perhaps this image is partly responsible for the fear many women harbor about having children. They are afraid of how they may come to look, disappointing to themselves and unattractive to their husbands. In stark contradiction, all three mothers featured on “Kids by the Dozen� were beautiful, thin and radiant. Between the three of them, they gave birth to 43 children.

So, where does this stereotype come from if it doesn’t come from real families that have many children? Before I try to give an answer, I would like to hear from you. Fill out a response in the box below, and answer to this simple question…”Why do people have a negative opinion of families with many children?” I am most curious, and it would be interesting to read each other’s opinions.

The mainstream media seems to be catching onto the “quiverfull” movement. An Internet article on Newsweek Online features a family from San Antonio who recently acquired www.quiverfull.com. The Bortels affirm the idea that families are increasingly surrendering the reproductive side of their lives to God, and they are enjoying the fruits of its obedience. (Read “How Full Is Your Quiver?” here.)

I suspect, though, that Newsweek and MSNBC miss the mark by inserting hotly sensitive words into the context of explaining the quiverfull movement. The article claims quiverfull families are “purists.” They define purists as those who purify themselves from any form of birth control. I suppose we are purists, then, if this is how Newsweek defines it. However, “purists” have a negative religious connotation that does not sit with how the Jeubs view family and children. “Purists” seek to cleanse every questionable area of sin from their lives, usually with the erroneous understanding that we can somehow attain perfection in this world. This dysfunctional view of self as we relate to God has historically led to phariseeism, witch hunts and disappointing hypocrisy.

The article also claims that quiverfull evangelicals are in reality turning into Catholics. “What quiverfull looks like is a group of Protestants who are more Catholic than Catholics.” The article also seeks the commentary from a sociologist who claims that the only functional use of children existed in the past when they were “helpful economically, but today, they become a disadvantage, especially to younger kids who don’t get as many resources.” Trying to boil our convictions down to dogmatic and economic equations misses the mark of what quiverfull families truly believe.

While we can’t speak for every large family, we believe the mark of our life to be quite simple and liberating. Instead of viewing children as an economic burden, we see them as blessings from God. Having children isn’t a method of “purification”; it is an enlightenment of children as gifts, a realization that is often in opposition to the view that children are a disadvantage. The title of the article, “How Full Is Your Quiver?”, suggests that this liberating understanding is really some sort of contest, a works-based race toward who can have the most kids. “Quiverfull” means simply that we will take God’s gifts as God gives them. The “full” in the quiver is entirely relative. A family with one child can be just as quiverfull-minded as a family with 13. The number isn’t where the “purification” is; it is in the obedience and love we have for our God and the plan He has for our lives.

In defense of the article, though, it is nice that the mainstream media is recognizing the quiverfull movement. We wrestle with the stereotypes of radical fundamentalism all the time, but it isn’t surprising that popularists misunderstand the love of Christ and the liberating freedom of allowing Christ to fill your quiver. The article claims that the “quiverfull movement is absolutist,” but that hangs on what is meant by “absolutist.” If this means that we look forward to a growing love for God (which includes his plan for our lives) and a growing love for each other (which includes the children we are given), then yes, I guess the Jeub Family are a bunch of absolutists.

Those who live the quiverfull life understand what I’m saying. Imagine loving your spouse without worrying how pregnancy will “disrupt” your plans. Imagine a faith in God that looks forward to the exciting plan God has for you rather than a faith that requires you to develop a religion that fits your man-made plan. Imagine your family experiencing the fruitful and joyful love for each other believing everyone is a gift to this world. This is the quiverfull mindset, and it is a freeing and exciting way to live.

I often am asked, “How much do you spend on groceries?” Most people think to themselves a basic mathematical equation: T1K x 13 (T1K = their one kid) x Their Grocery Bill = The Jeubs’ Grocery Bill. Without fail, when we figure out the real numbers, my grocery bill is usually a half or a third of what most people spend on T1K!

How can this be? For one, God is our ultimate provider. Let me make perfectly clear that I do not want to detract from how incredibly proficient Jesus Christ is in providing our “daily bread.” I am thoroughly convinced–and evidences pop up all the time in our lives–that God will always provide the necessities in life to those people who are faithful.

In fact, I’d go out on a limb and say this: it matters not how many kids you have when it comes to your daily needs. God has always kept Chris and I on the edge of our finances, but you know what? We have always been taken care of. If we had 100 kids, I believe God would provide for this. Almost engrained in modern parents is the idea that they must be perfectly prepared for the coming of children. The argument goes something like this: Not only must parents be mature enough to have children, they have to have all their finances in a row and be totally secure in order to face the drastic–and expensive–world of babies.

In reality, this is backwards. As for maturity, a young couple can stay forever self-centered and egotistical if they avoid having children. Once the first baby comes along, the same young couple miraculously matures. They grow into the next phase in life: child rearing. Whether through adoption or natural birth, couples who become parents grow up.

Isn’t this the way it always was until recent history? In the 19th century, it was not uncommon for the 14 year old couple to get married. And this was right when their hormones were just getting turned on to each other. Those elders in that generation did not flip out about 14-year-olds not being “mature” enough or “financially stable.” Of course they weren’t. Getting married in the mid-teens was not that big of a deal.

Don’t misread me; I’m not advocating teen marriages. There is sense in waiting through the educational years. However, I am protesting the thirty-somethings who are still on the Pill thinking children are somewhere (don’t know where) in their future. What these couples don’t realize is that they have a window of opportunity to procreate, and if they pass without partaking, they will miss out on the beautiful maturation of raising children.

-Wendy

There is an excellent article published on ForeignPolicy.com meditating on the inevitable consequences of a 1-child culture. Phillip Longman points out a number of different truths that seem like no-brainers.

Single-child families are prone to extinction. A single child replaces one of his or her parents, but not both. Nor do single-child families contribute much to future population. The 17.4 percent of baby boomer women who had only one child account for a mere 7.8 percent of children born in the next generation. By contrast, nearly a quarter of the children of baby boomers descend from the mere 11 percent of baby boomer women who had four or more children. These circumstances are leading to the emergence of a new society whose members will disproportionately be descended from parents who rejected the social tendencies that once made childlessness and small families the norm. These values include an adherence to traditional, patriarchal religion, and a strong identification with one’s own folk or nation.

Longman goes on about how important it is for fathers to have a role in the formation of family. With very scientific logic, he makes the argument that population is much more of a deciding factor of the progression of civilization than any other factor. He is responding to the epidemic of a population decline in Europe (this is a European site), a decline he proposes will bring about undesirable outcomes. Consider:

Many childless, middle-aged people may regret the life choices that are leading to the extinction of their family lines, and yet they have no sons or daughters with whom to share their newfound wisdom. The plurality of citizens who have only one child may be able to invest lavishly in that child’s education, but a single child will only replace one parent, not both. Meanwhile, the descendants of parents who have three or more children will be hugely overrepresented in subsequent generations, and so will the values and ideas that led their parents to have large families.

Perhaps Longman’s boldest argument is given in his conclusion. There is a lot here, and you’ll have to read the entire article to really grasp the profoundity of it:

Societies that are today the most secular and the most generous with their underfunded welfare states will be the most prone to religious revivals and a rebirth of the patriarchal family. The absolute population of Europe and Japan may fall dramatically, but the remaining population will, by a process similar to survival of the fittest, be adapted to a new environment in which no one can rely on government to replace the family, and in which a patriarchal God commands family members to suppress their individualism and submit to father.

This article has not been buried in the stack of a dominant media who would rather ignore such logical claims. Brit Hume of Fox News picked this up and reported it:

Demographic Switch?

Conservatives may soon be taking over the country… literally. That according to Foreign Policy magazine’s Phillip Longman, who argues that a rise in birth rates in a small, culturally conservative segment of society could usher in a return of old-fashioned family values.

Longman writes that with more Americans choosing to have fewer children or none at all, those with conservative values are reproducing at a much higher rate than the rest of society and he says the “conservative baby boom” may have already begun.

Longman notes that fertility rates in states that voted for George Bush in 2004 are 12 percent higher than in those that voted for John Kerry.

Phillip Longman is Bernard L. Schwartz senior fellow at the New America Foundation. He is the author of The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity and What to Do About It. I am ordering a copy today.

• Wealth and travel: “Lift up your eyes from where you are and look north and south, east and west. All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever.” (Gen. 13:15)
• Social status and fame: “I will make you into a great nationa and I will bless you; I will make your name great and you will be a blessing.” (Gen. 12:2)

But Abram said, “O Sovereign Lord, what can you give me since I remain childless and the one who will inherit my estate is Eliezer of Damascus?” And Abram said, “You have given me no children; so a servant in my household will be my heir.” (Gen. 15:2-3)

Take a moment to imagine what a mother of 11 births looks like. Imagine this mother’s sanity, her weight, and her looks. If you are truthful, you will likely have a picture of someone like the title of this web log suggests: barefoot, fat and ugly.

This is a perspective most people have of mothers of large families. Now, I know many large families (we hang out with each other). I can think of a mother of 16, 12 and 9 right off the top of my head. Each of these women are beautiful women. In fact, I cannot think of one mother of more than, say, 6 kids who actually fit the stereotypical obese image that most people have of mothers of large families.

In fact, here’s a photo that’ll knock you over:

This is my wife, Wendy, a mother of 13 children. This was taken right before she got pregnant with the twins. So much for barefoot, fat and ugly, eh?

The lesson here is simple and so incredibly true: “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2a). The world has an negative view of what becomes a woman when she is blessed with children. The exact opposite is true, and I have seen this manifest in many families. This is the renewed vision for mothers of many children: they are beautiful, confident, and fulfilled when they allow God to bless them with the wonderful gift of children. Overcoming the negative stereotype of motherhood is a healthy step to understanding the choice of large families.

Here’s a news item for you:

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, in 1975 about one in eleven women was childless by the age of 44. By 1993, that number had risen to approximately one in six. 34.9 million American families were childless and only 33.3 million families had a child under the age of 18.

Before you assume I got this from some pro-lotsa-kids website, think again. This bit of information was broadcast proudly as evidence of a trend we should embrace. This came from ChildfreeByChoice.com, a website devoted to those interested in the childfree lifestyle. Their website has things you would find on websites promoting any lifestyle…

• Weblog of young couples complaining about families in restaurants
• List of films that have no children in them
• List of famous people who had no children
• Humorous quotation poking fun at rednecks, large families and kids in general

I admit, I enjoyed paging through this site. The Childfree by Choice (often referred to as “Childless”) crowd is the exact opposite of the crowd we associate with. These people hold up many reasons for choosing no children: more time with their partner, practice simplicity, busy lifestyles, and environmental reasons.

Are these people for real? I think to myself. Is life all about spending time with your partner (the site is quick to point out that this includes straight, bisexual and gay partners)? Is simple living disrupted by children? Is busyness a virtue to be sought after? Environmental reasons must include “overpopulation,” a modern perception that is incredibly false. There are few choices more permanent than “choosing” to live life without a heritage, and my heart goes out to these people who think they’re onto something here.

So many truths of life come out when you have children. You discover that life with your spouse is strengthened, that the fruitful things in life are the simple ones, and that life spent on trivial pursuits are just that: trivial. I can’t think of the Childless by Choice crowd as anything other than knotted up, angry, shallow, self-centered people whose choices have centered on the only thing in life they understand—themselves.

“Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you—the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground—so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number upon it.” (God to Noah, Genesis 8:15-17)

I find a stark resemblance between Adam and Eve’s decision to manipulate their fruitfulness with the modern couple’s attempt to control their own. The story of the fall of mankind is a tragic reflection of Everyman. The story comes from Chapter 3 of Genesis where Satan, the serpent, convinces Eve that death will not result if she ate from the forbidden fruit.

Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

Every young couple staring down the barrel of reproduction is tempted with this question: “Did God really say, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number’?” Notice how Satan deceived Eve by focusing on the forbidden rather than the blessing. The entire garden was allowed to Eve, but Satan wanted Eve to focus on the one fruit that was not allowed.

The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

The fruitfulness of many children is a difficult reflection for large families. Amidst miss-made socks and piling laundry, school activities and homework, limited hot water on a Sunday morning, squabbles and fights, bruises and scraped knees…it is difficult to reflect on the blessings of many children. However, reflecting on the deception of Satan to Eve, is my focus on the wrong things? Am I being cooed by a fallen cultural persuasion similar to the first deception of mankind?

“You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Surely God understands that I am not able to handle more than a couple kids. Surely God has given me the power to control my reproduction, so surely I should do so. My wife is fragile, my finances are limited, my mental health can be stretched only so far, my neighbors think I’m nuts, etc., etc., etc.

Soak this meditation in. We have all fallen for the worldly lie that substitutes God’s plan (be fruitful and increase in number) with our plan (birth control). We don’t die from breaking from God’s plan, but our lives are much less fruitful. I have yet to meet the large family who willingly followed God’s conviction to be fruitful and multiply come back many years later with regret. Sure, wise parents will reflect on what they would have done differently in raising their many children, but do they ever say, “I wish I had fewer children” or “I wish I was not blessed with so many kids”? I suppose I will meet a parent like this someday, but I can’t imagine such reasoning to be that of a sane person. The parent who wishes they had never had their children is demented, dysfunctional and cruel.

Why? Isn’t such a twisted, selfish position exactly what is encouraged in life? Aren’t young couples encouraged today to eat of the fruit of careers, travel and entertainment? Why allow the fruit of children to interfere with our plans and our will?

When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

I know my meditation here is like coals to some heads. I have been confronted by some who are quite convinced that restricting the blessing of children is fine…in fact, it’s responsible and wise. I have listened to their arguments, but I have yet to see how God’s Word supports it. All the empty arguments that go along with the Planned Parenthood lifestyle (overpopulation, responsible living, economics, social drains, blah, blah, blah) are nothing but naked lies. This website exists to expose the naked truth of many of these lies. I almost laugh as some of these arguments.

Wendy’s 12th pregnancy was difficult, and I recall sharing this with a friend of mine. He quickly admonished me for allowing Wendy to have all these kids. “She’s not getting younger, you know!” I love to expose the flaw in this argument with an incredibly convincing proof: my wife looks like a teenager, she’s knock-out beautiful, and she now (just 3 months after delivering twins) weighs less than she did when we were married. You can see why I laugh at some of these arguments.

The “childless by choice” crowd goes to great lengths to show their choice to be intelligent. The more I study God’s Word and the deeper I get into following God’s conviction to be fruitful and increase in number, the more I am convinced that the world’s choices resemble the ridiculousness of Adam and Eve sewing fig leaves together to hide the consequence of their choice.

Yesterday I posted a meditation on Genesis 1, drawing from God’s magnificent creation and mandate to man: subdue the world and multiply. Such a mandate shakes the spine of the modernist. Both subduing and multiplying challenge the environmentalist, but the mandate isn’t written for unruly and chaotic man. These mandates are for creatures made in the image of God. Genesis 1:27-28 are verses laying out justification for having kids.

We have 13 children. Two are adults—and don’t think for a moment that parenting gets easier when they graduate from your house (I’ll save that meditation for a later date). Eleven are home: 13 years and under. With the twins at the tail end, we have six children under 6 years old. A mess that would take one child all day takes my kids 30 seconds. Chores that are simple tasks in most families like dishes or laundry can (and often does) become overwhelming burdens in a very short time.

With all this to say, how in the world can my wife and I keep things from being chaotic? Is order in a home like mine possible?

Wendy and I are often asked, “How do you do it?” There are many truths that we have come to realize over the years, but we have to say that Genesis 2 is one of the most important. Our marriage is much more than a contract; it is a union. We work often as one flesh, similar in mind and in deed. We are united together so incredibly close. The result is that we are stronger, better equipped to take on the challenges of 13 kids, a strong bond able to withstand nearly impossible odds.

In God’s system of orderly family life, he did not make man to be alone; in his infinite wisdom, God created Eve to be a helper of Adam. “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him” (v. 18). This union was no small thing; it wasn’t a contractual arrangement or an ordinary fitting of two links in a chain. God took the rib of a man to make the woman, “of man” is the root meaning of the female word “woman,” to become “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.” Man and woman don’t simply become two bodies working in the same household; they become “one flesh,” molded together for the life they create in the home.

Marriage is tough, I hear people say. I can’t say I relate. Could I do all that I do—and could Wendy do all that she does—if our unity was not there? We wouldn’t be half the people we are now without each other. So what if marriage is tough; what great blessing in life isn’t? Saying “marriage is tough” is like saying freedom has its limits, or vacations are a lot of work, or charity costs a lot. What good does it do a marriage to center on the blindingly obvious? I don’t say marriage is tough. Instead, marriage is the union of two into one to make life fuller than going alone.

This isn’t a meditation on how marriage is better than singleness. I am fully aware of the verses in the bible that debunk the idea that marriage is inherently better than not. Instead, this mediation is an attempt to debunk the modern idea that marriage—and more specifically raising a family—is exhausting. The traditional model of getting married, having children, and making a life in the world as a family is a rewarding, simple and exciting life. I’d call family life “exhausting” like I’d call skiing down the finest ski run in Colorado, planning a vacation in Hawaii, or running a most successful business “exhausting.” Exhausting isn’t the right word for it. Marriage is exhilarating.

Back to the meditation: how do we do it? I could write a book on specifics, but the foundation is relying on the Word of God. Genesis 2 outlines marriage as a method to accomplish a full life, an abundant life. The union of man and woman in holy matrimony is incredible, a powerful force that can not only raise 13 kids, but can revolutionize the world. This website is full of specifics on how to sort clothes, how to wash dishes, how to keep order in our lives, but if you really want to know a foundational principle of a successful large family it is this: holy matrimony.

At the beginning of this year, I am starting a 3 year journey through the Bible one chapter at a time. Today I start with Chapter 1 of Genesis, the mother chapter for large families. I’m referring to Genesis 1:28, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.”

Large family advocates (myself included) love to cite this verse as a reminder of what God wants for our world. However, I can’t help but try to understand the anti-Chapter 28 mentality. It is easy to imaging a Planned Parenthood, uptight environmentalist ragging about overpopulation and neglected little kids. But it is not so easy imagining Christian couples who read the same verse and who love the same God as me purposefully overlooking this verse and choosing to not be fruitful and not increase in the number.

You may be surprised to hear that I am hesitant to blast this verse from the mountain top. The key verse at the top of my website is not Genesis 1:28. When a young father shares with me about his temptation to use birth control, I stop short of pounding this verse over his head. When a new mother up to her ears in little children complains to Wendy about never having a moment’s peace, Wendy doesn’t stick it to her by reminding her of how she’s fulfilling Genesis 1:28. I suppose we could always say, “You’re doing the will of Genesis 1:28…so quit complaining!”

No, these frustrations are real. We feel them. Ignoring them would be almost inhumane. Our God (the one who wrote Genesis 1:28) loves us and wants the best for us. He has an abundant life in store for us, and he wants us to live life to the fullest. I look forward to the coming 3 years of bible study to venture into these dynamic and life-giving verses about God.

How then should I respond with Genesis 1:28? Well, for one, I can continue to allow God to bless me with the fruit of children. Just because I don’t pound Genesis 1:28 over people’s heads doesn’t mean I should ignore it all together. For Wendy and me, Genesis 1:28 is speaking directly into our lives. I don’t want to put God in a box and say that He is using this verse to speak just as radiantly in your life, too. He may, but that is for God to judge. If these words are convicting to you, then by all means, weight them carefully. God is speaking to you. However, I won’t stand on the corner and call lightning from heaven to strike you if you walk away from this verse.

The watering down of Genesis 1:28 in our culture concerns me, sure, but it is the watering down of Genesis 1:27 that concerns me even more. Following the creation of the entire universe, God saw fit to cap his creation with the most significant creation of all: mankind…

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

This verse is the really radical verse, more radical than the verse following. We are created in the image of God. When you let that stew for a while, you will quickly find yourself struggling between immense pride and immense humility. To think that God declared this after creating the entire universe! Do we have similar traits woven into our hearts and minds? You bet we do. We are created in God’s image, born with a reflection of God-like qualities and vision planted in our psyche.

Now, don’t take my words out of context. I can hear some of my Reformed friends now reminding me pointedly—and correctly—that we live in a fallen world. Verse 27 is not a New Age statement that wipes out the complex and depressing reality of sin, corruption, and a world gone wrong. My point is not nearly as heretical as it is simplistic: God loves us, and he wants us to make more of us. He created the first man and woman, and he set up a process for us to continue his greatest creation. It is not pompousness or pride to say God wants more people in the world. It is the simple truth. It is woven into his plan for the world, an inherent reality that no matter how hard I try to rationalize it differently, I can’t escape.

Understanding verse 27 prefaces our understanding of verse 28. If we are made in the image of God, why would we try to restrict the blessing of reproduction? Reproduction: the very word sounds like we’re making products off an assembly line. Perhaps what we should call it is re-creation. When we think of recreation, we think of fun, fulfillment, what we love to do when free from the pressures of the world. Wouldn’t it be great if we saw the blessing of children in the same light? I believe God wants us to.

Click here to find out

USA Today recently came out with a family on record with the most children born to one couple, the Chernenko family of Sacromento, 17 children. Originally from the Ukraine, this family shows that having many children can be a great blessing from God. Unlike other large families that have large incomes to overcome the modern doubts of financial sustainability of so many kids, Vladimir Chernenko provides only a modest income as a security guard and a janitor at a school. The USA Today article shows how God is in control of our finances, our families, and our faith…if we allow him that control.

I’m not quite certain that Wendy and I will make it to 17, but I am certain of the faith that we have that God will take care of us if we do. This isn’t complex theology or detailed decision making. We aren’t masterminding our future or “planning” our parenting as if our children are lab specimins with predictable lives and scientific hypotheses. Our children are gifts from God, and each one of them are blessings to us, to each other, and to the world.

Japan is reporting for the first time since 1899 that their population is decreasing. The Yahoo! News article reports that the trend downward is largely in part because its young couples are “increasingly finding children a burden to their careers and lifestyles.” Now Japan, the world’s second-largest economy, joins Germany and France in their population implosion.

A couple weeks ago I wrote on Ecclesiastes 4:9-12, a reminder of how important community is. I drew a conclusion that a family of many siblings is a strong “cord” that “is not quickly broken” (verse 12). While some may scoff at a large family as a sign of dependence and weakness, we believe it is a sign of strength and stability.

The verse is broad, and I witnessed this strength of community yesterday morning as a group of friends—eight families in all—put together the most beautiful Thanksgiving dinner we have ever had. As I explained to one of the moms a couple weeks ago, we, right now, are very needy. Mom is constantly feeding twins, Dad is self-employed and constantly needing to get to work, and kids are still just as demanding as ever.

This is such a testimony of the strength of community. All eight families attend the local home school group. One mom desired to make a turkey for us, but thought of asking other moms who knew us to make side dishes. On Thursday morning, we had the most exquisite Thanksgiving dinner delivered to us that included not only turkey, but two kinds of stuffing, mashed potatoes and gravy, corn bread, muffins, cranberry sauce, green beans, a number of pies, and much more. What a blessing!

Also two weeks ago, Wendy and I were contemplating dropping our traditional Thanksgiving tradition. Every year we get together with another family who doesn’t have immediate family in the area (most gather with their families; our families are all out east). Though we have only done this for five years, this is a big deal to our kids. However, with twins, we were thinking of NOT having anyone over. With the announcement of this large blessing from family friends, we invited our chiropractor and his family over for the meal. The tradition lives on and our blessing was shared!

Wow, what a Thanksgiving to be thankful for! We can’t say how much we appreciate our good friends. We are humbled at their heartwarming generosity. Thank you so much!

I’m reading through Ecclesiastes, you know. Chapter 3 is a famous one:

There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven.

Then the verse starts “a time to be born and a time to die,” and so on.

In everyone’s life, there is a time to have children, a “biological clock” that is ticking. I have met some who think that this clock is not a definite amount of time, that they literally have their entire lives to bare children. Haven’t you ever talked with, say, someone in their late 30s who claims, “We’re waiting a little longer to have children.”

The seductive argument is that parents have control over the time to have children. I have also talked with parents who, after several years choosing not to have children, end up finally having children, then discovering the great joy of raising a family. These parents often say things like, “I never realized the joy of parenting,” “I couldn’t fathom what it was like to have my own children,” or “I didn’t really know how selfish I was without children.” (I know a mother of four who used to claim “I will never have children”!)

I can’t shout it louder from the mountain top how great it is to have children…even 13 children. Yes, I really believe that. I have so much to be thankful for this Thanksgiving. And my hope is that this blog is a subtle persuasion for those parents choosing not to have children (for whatever reason) to take that step of faith and start parenting. Their time may be now.

I received a the National Review today and noticed a picture of William F. Buckley. It was a black-and-white photo with Buckley as a young child. I could pick him out in the crowd of people. I did a little bit of research anf found the William Buckley — one of the century’s most influential conservatives — was one of 10 children.Check out the family stats here. Further down the page we learn that Buckley’s siblings include authors, debate masters and judges. Quite a brood.

I wonder if he was neglected at a child, being that he was one of 10? I wonder if he suffered from loneliness or depravity. Hmmm…

We’re fighting a cold through our family. We woke up Sunday morning all wanting to go to church. The plan was for Dad (me) to bring all the kids and leave Mom home with the twins. When Dad (ha-choo!) came down with a worse cold than the night before, we decided to hang out at home.

At 11:00, we had a worship service in the living room. We sang the songs I knew the chords to (Jehovah Jirah, The Lord of the Dance, This Is the Day, As a Deer Panteth for the Water, and others). The verses we opened to (a total random chance) spoke specifically toward the large family.

Two are better than one,
because they have a good return for their work:
If one falls down,
his friend can help him up.
But pity the man who falls
and has no one to help him up!
Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm.
But how can one keep warm alone?
Though one may be overpowered,
two can defend themselves.
A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.

-Ecclesiastes 4:9-12

While the twins slept, Wendy and I and the kids at home (Cynthia, Lydia, Isaiah, Micah, Noah, Tabitha, Keilah, Hannah and Josiah) meditated on these verses. They related to playing outside and hurting themselves. Was there ever no one to help? They related to cold winter nights or evenings camping. Had any of them never had a sibling to cuddle up with? They related to bullying and teasing. Had they ever felt no one at home to retreat to?

No, these kids don’t know what it is like to be alone. They are a cord of a dozen strands. They will grow up knowing an unbreakable strength in their family that many families seldom experience. This meditation was understood by even Keilah, 4.

There are strong families with fewer kids, I know. My point is not more-kids-the-better. My point is simply this: there is strength in numbers. These verses revolt against the modern idea that too many kids will leave a child unattended and neglected. We laugh at how empty this opinion is! There is hardly an unattended moment, and if Mom and Dad aren’t there for a child, a sibling is close at hand. How can anyone fathom that our children are alone?

There are some that try to fathom it, like Mark Morford of the failing San Fransisco Chronicle, a single man who took potshots at a family of 16 kids in his article, “God Does Not Want 16 Kids.” As if he knows anything about God’s will or anything about the dynamics of large families, Mr. Morford said,

I have a friend who used to co-babysit (yes, it required two sitters) for a family of 10 kids, and she reports that they were, almost without fail, manic and hyper and bewildered and attention deprived in the worst way, half of them addicted to prescription meds to calm their neglected nerves and the other half bound for years of therapy due to complete loss of having the slightest clue as to who they actually were, lost in the family crowd, just another blank, needy face at the table. Is this the guaranteed affliction for every child of very large families? Of course not. But I’m guessing it’s more common than you imagine. (underscores mine)

“I have a friend…” is a pathetic argument. Other than the family he read about, Mr. Morford has not one personal story to share about a large family other than this “friend” who “co-babysat” for a large family. Funny, Mr. Morford preaches tolerance for homosexuals and affection for the culture of pornography…but families with too many children, they’re “lost.”

Readers of the San Fransisco Chronicle (there aren’t many left…circulation dropped 17 percent last year) may enjoy “manic and hyper and bewildered” ad hominem attacks on families of which they have absolutely no understanding. My children know nothing of the depravity cited above. The argument that children from large families are deprived and neglected is an empty argument, one grasping for a truth that isn’t there, having to rely on anecdotal evidence to make a point.

The French government is battling a fertility rate that is below the replacement of the population. France “enjoys” 1.9 children per couple. You need not be a rocket scientist to do the math. If you continue this 1.9 per 2.0, you will eventually become extinct. A United Kingdom article sites the reason for such a political move: the fear that babies are born to “unprofessional” families. Mothers who work full time are the ones being paid to have children. These children, then, will naturally be dumped into the daycare systems and raised by other “professionals.” France is actually one of the higher fertility rates in the European Union. Every member nation of the EU has fallen below the replacement of parents in population (meaning less than 2.0 kids per 2.0 people). Deaths have outnumbered births since 1976 in Germany. This has been referred to as a population implosion. While some point to economic impacts of such implosions, I can’t help but think that such impacts are missing the point. I look at my 11 children and think, “Why would so many ‘professionals’ think a career is more important than children?”

This is what a father said to me after making somewhat of a spectacle at the 4th of July parade last summer. Our town of Monument hosts a 1-hour kids’ bike parade before the real parade. Approximately 500 kids wrap their bikes and trikes in red, white and blue tissue paper and walk through the parade route. The Jeubs carved out their own section waiting for the parade to start, and I naturally started a conversation with a dad right behind us.

“Eleven kids?” he laughed. “Good for you but not for me!” And then he swore.

He didn’t realize how rude the comment was in front of my children. This dad for whatever reason wanted to make it audibly known that he would never be so crazy as to have so many children. (Hint strongly realized: we’re crazy!)

My children heard it, and they noticed my simple smile in response to the rude comment. The Jeub Family is often misunderstood by folks who don’t know the joy of a large family, and this wasn’t any different. What was heartbreaking was that this father said this in front of his one child. A young boy, maybe 5, seated in a neatly decorated battery-operated toy Jeep. He showed no response. He didn’t look to be enjoying himself much. The parade started soon after and we marched through the Kiddy Parade. It didn’t take 30 seconds for my kids (or myself) to forget this short conversation and return to having a blast on the 4th of July.

In fact, I didn’t remember this conversation till yesterday when I took this picture (below) at a wedding in Colorado Springs. A friend of mine, Ron, father of 9, had the honor of launching his oldest son into marriage. I showed up with nine of my kids (didn’t want to out do the father of the groom) while Wendy stayed home and enjoyed a day of rest. The day was gorgeous, so after the reception the kids and I went outside and snapped a few good pics.

Is a large family good for some and not for others? Who knows but our Lord. Perhaps the father I met briefly in the parade was meant to have only one child. What I do know is this: the joy the Jeub kids have with one another is a joy that knows very little boredom or isolation. A life with many children is a rich life, full of blessing and adventure, and full of opportunities like this to take a great picture.