Child-Free Generation? 1 in 4 Young Adults Already Ruling Out Having Kids
Even those who intend to have children don’t plan to have more than two. The reason, given by 56 percent of these respondents, was general financial constraints, which deterred them from wanting a larger family. Over four in 10 (43%) expressed concern that they wouldn’t have enough time to provide ample attention to many children. Moreover, 27 percent were worried about environmental concerns, such as resource usage and climate impact.
LONDON — Only half of Gen Z and millennial adults plan to start a family, as financial pressures and global anxieties continue to deter young adults from having children, a new survey reveals. The research, which polled 1,000 British adults between 18 and 34 who haven’t yet started a family, also found that one in four respondents have already decided against having a baby ever.
Only 55 percent of participants say they plan to have children in the future, while 20 percent are unsure. The most common reason, given by 49 percent of respondents, was their desire to focus more on themselves. Financial issues followed closely, cited by 47 percent, and fears about the state of the world were raised by 38 percent of the participants.
Environmental concerns associated with having children troubled 35 percent of respondents, while career aspirations and existing health issues influenced the decision of 28 and 22 percent of young adults, respectively.
Despite these findings, 71 percent of young adults felt societal pressure to have children, with 40 percent experiencing this pressure directly from family members. Mothers (68%) were the most likely to apply this pressure, followed by grandmothers and fathers.
“For generations, having children has just been the done thing, but it seems younger people are now deciding against this more and more,” a spokesperson for research agency OnePoll, which commissioned the study, says in a statement.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
Ruminations on Revelation: Solomon’s Reflections on Wisdom in Ecclesiastes
Though at times, Solomon’s language seemed to despair of any meaning to anything, he now sets forth this great truth, that, viewed from the standpoint of eternity and the perfection of God’s moral nature and the legitimacy of his law to his creature, nothing in the view of eternity is empty but all wi,l come before him for commendation or blame. His perfect standard will not be compromised.
In the last chapter of Ecclesiastes, Solomon brought focus to the importance of strict attention to the written wisdom given by God (12:9-14). Solomon, from the beginning of this book, stated his purpose to employ all the talent and experimental method at his disposal in writing this book (1:13, 17; 2:3, 9). This is generally true of all the writers of Scripture. They do research, they reason on the basis of divine providence, and seek proper interpretation of already-certified Scripture. They look to their own encounters with God and his truth. According to the nature of revelation, many of the things that they set forth as revealed truth utterly transcend both their experiences and their self-conscious gifts. At the same time, they knew that at no point were they merely unconscious amenuenses. Instead, they were being used by God as he employed their peculiar gifts and experiences. Note how Peter said, “I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things” (2 Peter 1:15). This statement came in the immediate context of his testimony that his words were giving greater clarity to the revelation that had come before (19). He himself, was, like the prophets “carried along by the Holy Spirit” even in the context of his “effort.” Solomon, in this task given him by God was “weighing and studying and arranging . . . with great care.” From a literary standpoint, he “sought to find words of delight, and uprightly he wrote words of truth” (12:9, 10).
Though Solomon was engaged in the project as a conscientious literary artist, or closely reasoning philosopher, in the end he does not doubt that his product would be “words of truth.” He presented the image of goads and nails “firmly fixed” (12:11). This particular labor, though all others that he described were “chasing after the wind,” was of sober purpose and enduring value. These words, taken in the whole, embodied truth. Even as Paul before Agrippa and Festus, Solomon could use such language, “I am not out of my mind, most excellent Festus, but I am speaking true and rational words.” (Acts 26:25). The writers of inspiration were aware both of the use of their labors and capacity as well as the perfect truth and authority given their writing by the Spirit of God. See Luke 1:1-4; Romans 14:14-21; 16:25-27; 1 Corinthians 2:10-13; Ephesians 3:1-13; 1 Peter 5:12; 2 Peter 3:1, 2; 1 John 1:1-4; Revelation 22:18, 19. In each of these scriptural testimonies, we engage both the transcendent character of revelation inscribed by inspiration and the writers’ consciousness that their own minds and perceptions stewarded that body of truth.
Solomon was also conscious that this book was superintended by God and that its teachings, understood correctly, are sure guides as part of a larger collection of inspired literature. The “collected sayings”(12:11) were given by one Shepherd. When combined with other inspired writings, this contemplation of Solomon as the Preacher gives depth and contour to the entire picture of the divine purpose of God in glorifying Himself through the wisdom of the plan of redemption. The “collected sayings” refer immediately to the accumulated argument of Solomon in this book and the conclusion toward which it drove him. By extension, this refers to the entirety of revelation, the “collected sayings,” at the end of the inspiration to record revelatory truth is final. Though many people will write books, one must make sure that the teaching of another does lead him away from the truths revealed in Scripture—“Beware of anything beyond these” (12:12).
Read More -
Secular When it Should be Sacred
Written by R. Scott Clark |
Thursday, July 7, 2022
Recovering the distinction between sacred and secular will not solve all our problems but, like its analogue, the nature/grace distinction (not dualism), the sacred/secular distinction is an important tool as we continue to learn how to navigate a post-Christian culture.A significant part of the process of recovering and applying classical Reformed theology to our contemporary situation (sometimes called ressourcement, a French word which refers to getting back to original sources) is recovering the distinctions that we lost in the 19th and 20th centuries. There are a number of these, e.g., the archetypal/ectypal distinction, which, in Recovering the Reformed Confession, I called the categorical distinction; the distinction between law and gospel, which, in the classical period of Reformed theology (i.e., the 16th and 17th), was received as basic. Another lost distinction is that between the sacred and the secular. This is a distinction that our classical writers employed regularly but one that is regarded with suspicion today. In this discussion, sacred refers to that which is devoted to God. Think of the way Leviticus speaks of that which is dedicated to God or holy. Secular, in this context, refers to that which is common to Christians and pagans alike, which is not dedicated to God or holy in that sense. It does not mean “unclean” or defiled but simply not specially set apart. Think of the difference between the loaf of bread in your kitchen and the bread that has been consecrated for use in the Lord’s Supper. We often say during the administration of the Supper, “this sacred meal.” That there are secular meals is necessarily implied. Your family dinner is such a meal but it is not dirty or corrupt.
Recovering the Distinction Between Sacred and Secular
The traditional Christian (and Reformed) distinction is regarded with suspicion by some because it is unfamiliar. It is also, as a recent correspondent wrote to me, regarded by some as a Roman Catholic distinction. Some have been taught that the sacred belongs to God and the secular belongs to the Devil. That would be Manichaeism (i.e., the theology behind the Star Wars films). Others have been taught (directly or indirectly) by the followers of Abraham Kuyper that any distinction between the sacred and the secular somehow removes the sovereignty of God.
Neither of these was true in the classical period of Reformed theology and they are not true now. The Protestants saw the secular and the sacred as two distinct spheres over which and through which God exercises his sovereign providence.
Calvin used “secular” as a category without prejudice regularly. E.g. in Institutes 1.8.2, he contrasted the different styles between the human authors of sacred Scripture and “secular” writers. We see the same usage in 1.8.6. Calvin regularly wrote of secular judges, secular philosophers, secular work. E.g. in 4.7.22 he contrasted the properly sacred work of ministry with Gregory I’s complaint that he was forced to be too occupied with “secular affairs.” This way of thinking, speaking, and writing was universal among the magisterial Protestant Reformers and the Protestant orthodox.
We should not confuse the category secular with the use of “secular humanism” and “secularism” as pejoratives. Just as there is a difference between science and scientism so there is a proper distinction between things that are secular and a philosophy of secularism.
One way to think about the distinction between the sacred and the secular is to consider the restriction that the Apostle Paul placed on us in 1 Corinthians 10:14–21. The problem facing the Corinthian church was what to do about sharing meals with pagans.
Read More
Related Posts: -
A Beautiful Life
When we know God is our portion, when we rest in His sovereign control over all things, when we understand nothing comes into our lives except by the hand of a loving God, then we can avoid the temptation and the trap of rooting beauty in the stuff of life. For we know, if beauty is found in changing things, our experience of contentment will ever change. When life is good, joyful, happy, and successful our contentment will be intact. But when the shipwreck comes, when the avalanche lands on top of you, when life opens up and swallows you whole, you will be devastated. But, if beauty is found in our unchanging God, then nothing on earth and no power of hell can ever move us, shake us, or break us.
A rather strange concept among the children of men is that beauty can and must be found in pain as well as pleasure. This behavior seems almost inconcevable to the worldly man, who ascribes beauty in the most lopsided ways. For instance, a carnal person will generously admit how a picturesque sunrise, a looming snow-capped mountain, an attractive woman, or a well-written play are all filled with a kind of beauty. But, it is my experience, that only a Christian is equipped to call the cancers of this life beautiful, or the poverty altogether lovely. It is the Christian who can endure the loathsome trial with all joy and the frowning providence of God as a true delight.
And while this may seem a bit mental, the Psalms will help us understand how.
Whole Life Beauty
In the 16th Psalm, David says the following in verses 5 & 6:The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and my cup; You support my lot. The lines have fallen to me in pleasant places; Indeed, my heritage is beautiful to me.
In this short passage, we learn 4 important truths that contribute to the Christian’s understanding of beauty and contentment.
Truth 1: The Lord is Our Portion
David begins this verse by reminding believers that the Lord is our portion. No matter what circumstances befall us, or what meals and drink we put to our lips, or what lands or houses we accumulate in our portfolios, the Lord is the true inheritance of every believer. This stands in clear distinction to the unbeliever, who gathers property and possessions like ants gather dirt, but still experiences multiplied sorrows from bartering the one true God for idols made with hands (Psalm 16:4). The psalmist is graciously pulling back the veil of reality for us to see the point of human living.
Think about it, if our inheritance is money or property value, our mood will fluctuate commensurate with the ebb and flow of the markets. Won’t such a fickle proposition end up producing a multiplication of sorrows? Or what if our portion comes from physical strength or sex appeal, wont our experience in life sag pitifully down into despair whenever wrinkles, white hairs, and calories collect in the gut? Of course, it will.
The simple and unavoidable point is that the human experience of temperament is directly tied to whatever we find beautiful. If the affections are affixed upon temporal things that dull and die, human experience in life will look more like an electrocardiogram than what David is setting forward here. But, if the believer will take note of what David is saying, and understand that God Himself is our portion, what could ever sour our disposition?
If the markets are up, our joy still comes from the Lord. If a great depression should overtake the land, the sound of Christian hymn-singing shall still overpower the shrieking cries of broken-hearted heathens, because our experience is rooted in the beauty of God and not on a fallen world. Indeed, physical attractiveness, relationships, health, wealth, the sovereignty of nations, and worldly inheritances will fail. Moth and rust will claim them all. But the Christian who understands this passage will never wail, because they have become enamored with their beautiful radiant God.
Truth 2: The Lord Reigns Over Randomness
A second truth we must consider, along with God being our most precious portion, is that no event is random in the hand of God. While the world casts the lot, supposing chance and superstition can override providence, the Christian understands that everything – both the good and the ill – comes from the wise hand of the Almighty (Proverbs 19:21; Isaiah 45:7).
Read More
Related Posts: