Reflections on Fatherhood

There are two aspects of bringing a child in the world with the help of the Lord that have always struck me as particularly powerful. Both are ontological in nature, but one deals with the cosmos and the other deals with my own metaphysical makeup. Neither of these are my own conclusions, of course, but these brief and inadequate reflections are representative of my own internalization of the two ideas.

The first is a reflection on the created cosmos, cosmos understood in the wider sense of the entire created order (both material and spiritual) and not simply the material universe. The process of bringing a child into being is an act of co-creation wherein the parents cooperate with God, the Creator par excellence. Whereas there are other things man can do that first appear to be acts of creation (such as painting a landscape, building a house, or even cooking a dinner), these acts are only “creation” by way of analogy. “Creation” properly speaking is the bringing forth of something out of nothing, creation ex nilhio. Only God can create in the strict sense of the word. However, in the bringing forth of a child, God allows man to share in this act, to cooperate with Him in bringing forth a reality that previously was not. It is God as the author of life that brings a soul into existence, but it is the husband and wife that give the matter is formed by this soul. (This is consonant with good Catholic theology which speaks of the soul as the form of the body.)

To draw out the distinction between the bringing forth of life and other analogical acts of creation, let us look carefully at the product of such acts. In the case of building a house or painting a landscape, the final product is something temporary, meaning bound to the confines of time. The painter does not take his painting with him into the eschaton. The chef sees his created works disappear within hours of their preparation (and in fact that is the entire telos of his creations). Neither the painter nor the chef make lasting changes, changes that have eternal significance. Even the multi-billionaire who donates unthinkable amounts of money to medical research and the doctor who uses the money to successfully cure a deadly disease and save millions of lives, laudable though this is, do not change eternity. On the negative side of the coin, even the tyrannic dictator who murders half his people, destroys entire nations, and controls a significant percentage of the world does not change eternity. History will see him fall, and the end of time will bring with it the end of his influence.

Parents, on the other hand, in their cooperation with God, not only participate in creation ex nihlio, but also bring to life a soul, and a soul is an eternal reality. When a soul is given existence, this existence is permanent. No matter the fate of our soul beyond this life, the one assurance we have is that the soul will have existence. God, who holds our soul in existence, continues to do so for all of eternity. In this way, the parents of the child change the entire created order; they affect eternity. Said differently, they change the very fabric of the cosmos, not merely accidentally (in the Thomistic sense), but instead substantially. This is why having a child has cosmic significance. To make this all the more powerful, man is the only being to whom God has given this gift. Even the angels do not participate in creation in this sense.

The second is a reflection on my own personal vocation (and that of my wife and family as well). When my wife and I had our first child, I was struck by the profundity that I was then something that previously I was not: a father. In a very real way, the presence of our first child changed who I was, not just accidentally in my daily routines and way of life, but also substantially. Whereas I previously had to form of humanness, the form of maleness, and the form of husbandness, after bringing our oldest into the world, I now had the form of fatherness as part of my constitution as a human person. My very metaphysical constitution was altered because of this child. However, “altered” doesn’t seem quite an accurate verb. Instead, my personhood was being perfected. From the beginning of time, God not only meant me to be a male and a husband, but he also ordained me to be a father. The temporal event of having the first child was a step towards this perfection, toward my final cause.

In a parallel manner, my vocation was also being clarified and perfected. My calling holiness by way of marriage to my wife now acquired more clarity. Our salvation, while always aided primarily through one another, would now be aided by the call to raise children.

While I have been speaking primarily in reference to having a first child, it must be noted that one’s vocation is never general, but always specific. God did not call me to be a husband; he called me to be a husband to Christina. God did not call me to be a father; he called me to be a father to Tatiana, our first born. Subsequently, God called me to be a father to Tatiana, Kateri, Jude Thaddeus, Benedict, our fifth child, and any other children with which He blesses us. In this way, each of my children has brought further perfection to my metaphysical makeup and to my vocation. Before Kateri, I was a father, but after Kateri I was a father of two, which brings with it an entirely different dynamic. Before Jude, I was a father of two girls, but after Jude I was not only a father of three, but also a father with a son. After Benedict, I now was a father of four, but also a father of two brothers. Each child has changed the makeup of the family and in turn changed the very person that I am. This will undoubtedly be the case with our fifth. My telos in God is not just as a father, but as a father to Tatiana, Kateri, Jude Thaddeus, Benedict, and our fifth child. Thus, with the appearance of each of these children, my perfection in God is furthered.

However, I am not the only member of the family that has been altered by the new lives that have been given to us. When Kateri entered our life, Tatiana went from being an only child to being an older sister. Benedict, after nineteen months of being the baby in the family, will soon be an older brother. I am who I am because of my wife and children, and each member of the family owes their metaphysical makeup in part to every other member of the family.

Thus, the bringing of new life into the world with the help of the Lord has significance on both a cosmic and an individual scale. With each child the entire created order is altered and my own personal core is further perfected in God’s plan. What a beautiful dance this is between the cosmic and the local, the universal and the particular. I suppose it should come as no surprise that participating in the act of creation with a God who is Creator should bring together these two extremes, the big and the small. After all, we have a God who did just that. The Incarnation is precisely the perfect union between the universal and the particular, the cosmic and the historical, the Creator and creation.