Against angelic anthropology: the matter of biological growth

The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ - Article 27.

Yesterday's post quoted from an essay by the late John Hughes which has probably been the work which has most influenced my theological development in recent years - his 'The Possibility of Christian Culture' (2012).  Hughes critiqued that "significant body of Christian theologians" (Yoder and Hauerwas are mentioned) who have attacked "cultural Christianity":

it is my claim that they are implicated in certain novel departures from Christian tradition in modernity and ultimately depend upon an overly angelic anthropology that renders key traditional Christian practices incoherent.

Hughes goes on to particularly identify "a suspicion at least or outright rejection of infant baptism".

This came to mind when considering some of the responses to a recent post by Psephizo.  One would have thought that it should have been quite uncontroversial to suggest that "biological growth" - Christians having babies - "doesn’t appear to be optional if we want to see the church grow again".  Psephizo points to Rodney Stark's analysis in The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History, with its emphasis on the key significance of biological growth for the early Church.

Amidst various criticisms of "biological growth", Psephizo considers a theological objection:

we are living under the (re)new(ed) covenant in Jesus. We worship a single saviour, and the apostle who wrote much of the New Testament was also single. Our new task is not simply to procreate, but to evangelise; our new family is not simply those we are related to by blood, but those we are related to by discipleship; growth comes less by having physically children, but by having spiritual children, which explains some of the extraordinary language in the New Testament.

And, indeed, this view has been reflected in some online criticisms of what has been described as "breeding" (a quite offensive and patronsing term for the gift of children).   Does biological growth not contribute to the idolatry of family?  Does it not ignore the Dominical words regarding hating wife and children?  Psephizo's response in many ways echoes Hughes' point about "an overly angelic anthropology":

But the reality is that we are not simply inhabitants of the age to come; we are also at the same time inhabitants of this age. So, although we live under the dynamics of the kingdom of God, we also continue to live under the dynamics of the created world. We are not yet completely free from the obligations set out in the creation narrative. Only when there is no more death will there be no more marriage and procreation.

Grace does not destroy nature.  Whatever the Dominical words concerning hating wife and children may mean, they were not read by the early Church in Gnostic fashion.  Hence the Apostolic exhortations:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right ... this is the first commandment with a promise (Ephesians 6:1-2);

... do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4);

Children, obey your parents in everything, for this is your acceptable duty in the Lord (Colossians 3:20);

Let deacons ... manage their children and their households well (1 Timothy 3:11).

Even when praising celibacy and wrestling with the messy reality of human sexuality, the same concern to encourage and affirm the life of the family, procreation, and parenting is seen in patristic catechesis, preaching and teaching - in Augustine, Chrysostom, and Cyril of Jerusalem. In the words of Cyril:

But let those also be of good cheer, who being married use marriage lawfully; who make a marriage according to God's ordinance ... who have entered upon matrimony for the procreation of children.

Grace does not destroy nature.  And so the Church grows as the faithful have children who are baptised and nurtured in the Faith.  This has been the experience of Christians across the centuries, at fonts in parish churches, generation after generation.

We might have a suspicion that it is the ordinariness of this practice and experience of biological growth which provokes distaste - a hyper-Barthian (perhaps even neo-Gnostic) yearning for grace to disrupt and disorder, to overthrow and reject the ordinary, the everyday, to overthrow and reject nature.

... grace hath use of nature - Of the Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Politite III.8.6

Which brings, as Hughes indicates, to the practice of infant baptism, and to the exhortation given to godparents:

Ye are to take care that this Child be brought to the Bishop to be confirmed by him, so soon as he can say the Creed, the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments in the vulgar tongue, and be further instructed in the Church Catechism set forth for that purpose.

Here, in this ordinary, everyday practice of having babies, baptizing infants, nurturing children, teaching the basics of the Faith "in the vulgar tongue", the Church grows.  That there are other occasions and opportunities for the Church's growth is also a joyful gift of grace.  That others will come to the Faith and the Sacrament of Baptism outside of the nurture of families, is to be celebrated.  That others will witness to the Faith in the single life or in marriages apart from children is to be celebrated and affirmed.  But they too will share in the blessing of biological growth in the Church and will contribute to the nurture in the Faith of children born and baptised within the Church - as godparents, as catechists, as examples.

So what should contemporary Anglicanism do to renew the prospects of biological growth?

Three suggestions might be considered:

1. Restore infant baptism as the normative expression of Holy Baptism.  The antiquarianism of the liturgical movement of the 60s, seeking to 'restore' an idealised vision of the patristic era by making adult baptism the norm in liturgies, ignored and undermined the Church's lived experience over centuries, and its continued lived experience - many more Anglican baptisms are of infants than adults.  According to the most recent statistics for the CofE, 59% of baptisms were of infants and 9% were of those above the age of 13.  Even with the staggering collapse of numbers of infant baptisms in TEC, the most recent statistics indicate that nearly ten times as many infant baptisms occur as adult baptisms.  Infant baptism is the normative expression of Holy Baptism.  Liturgies which deny this only undermine the theological significance of infant baptism in the Church's life and thus hinder a theology and practice which underpins biological growth.

Related to this, the theology of the Baptismal Covenant - no doubt well-intended - entirely misses the point.  Its abstractions, noble though they are, do not have the significance of the exhortation traditional Anglican rites addressed to godparents.  Nurturing this child in the Faith and the life of this parish - this is how the grace of Baptism is experienced, and how the Church grows.

2. In the words of Philip North, Bishop of Burnley:

Across many communities, ex­­tended family life remains very strong. For all its frustrations, it is where most people find support, self-identity, and purpose. But too many Anglicans seem embarrassed to stand up for the sanctity of the family. This is often motivated by a laudable desire not to exclude minorities. But the danger is that the Church is failing to address or uphold an area of life that is a core preoccupation for the majority of people.

Marriage and children remains "a core preoccupation for the majority of people" and - as a recent CofE survey showed - this includes millenials, more of whom want a church than a civil wedding, despite the preponderance of 'Nones' in this age group.  There should be no reticence within the Church about celebrating marriage and the gift of children.  That reticence is seen in how many contemporary Anglican marriage rites merely offer a discreet nod towards children, compared to the significance given to children in traditional marriage rites.  Thus, well into the introduction of the Church of Ireland's BCP 2004 contemporary marriage rite there is this rather meagre reference:

It is intended that they may be blessed in the children they may have.

This is in stark contrast to many traditional rites:

First, it was ordained for the increase of mankind according to the will of God, and that children might be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of his holy name.

Our marriage rites should be unapologetically, joyfully affirming biological growth for the Church.

3. As Psephizo notes, biological growth requires a commitment to nurture children in the Faith:

we need to provide patterns of discipleship for children which are integrated with, rather than disconnected from, family life. This is the best way to encourage children to grow in their faith.

Perhaps one of the biggest contributions to the rise of the 'Nones' has been the fact that parents were not given the means and the confidence to nurture their children in the Faith.  Simple domestic practices are key to this.  How do I teach my child the Lord's Prayer? What do I say for grace before meals?  What do we do in our home to mark the Christian character of Christmas and Easter, feasts and fasts? To return to that phrase from Alison Milbank, "secularism in our country is a loss of habits". So, then, provide material and resources which give parents the confidence and means to nurture their children in the habits of the Faith.

The fundamental weakness of "an overly angelic anthropology" is - ironically - its collusion with a secular age.  In its pursuit of a sectarian, 'spiritual' vision, it hands over to secularism the ordinary joys, duties and preoccupations of the vast majority of us: marriage, family, children.  A Church shaped by such "an overly angelic anthropology" will therefore increasingly fail to resonate with the culture, showing little or no interest in drawing these ordinary joys, duties and preoccupations into the life of prayer and sacrament, into the mystery of Cross and Resurrection.  Joyful affirmation of and support for biological growth, on the other hand, enables the Church's mission to be lived out in and through those joys, duties and preoccupations, that the Church's life may be continually sustained and renewed - because "grace hath need of nature".