--- title: Improvement Era description: Monthly periodical of the Mormon church, 1897 onward. This library holds the issues of November 1897 to December 1930. authors: - Olsen, C. L. collections: - periodicals tags: - magazine - improvement-era periodical: Improvement Era volume: 26 number: 2 published: 1922-12 publisher: Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Associations publisher_place: Salt Lake City language: en type: magazine reference: 'C. L. Olsen, "Large Families", *Improvement Era* 26, no. 2 (December 1922): 138–143.' source: url: https://archive.org/details/improvementera2602unse transcription: Transcribed from the Internet Archive scan of each issue (the item for each issue is named in the issue's own source); unnumbered advertising leaves are omitted, printed page numbers are kept as page markers. identifier: improvementera2602unse start_page: 138 end_page: 143 rights: status: public-domain basis: US publication 1930 or earlier (published 1922-12) source: https://archive.org/details/improvementera2602unse publication_year: 1922 note: The Internet Archive item metadata carries a blanket "© Copyright by Intellectual Reserve, Inc." notice. The library owner judged it inapplicable because this issue was published in 1922, before 1931; a scan-level notice does not restore copyright. --- # Large Families Large Families" Dr. C. L. Olsen The term "a large family," intuitively brings before our mind's eye, for the sake of comparison, the small family, as well as larger and smaller ones. Even the thought of a family without children crowds in upon us. In discussing the subject before us, we must first endeavor to show the necessity for children to be born at all, unto their parents — and, likewise, the necessity of parents allowing children to be born untoi them. And, thank God, we are not left in the dark concerning this matter; neither do we have to depend upon the whims and fancies of mortal man, in determining this import- ant issue. It should not require a great deal of argument to convince Latter-day Saints, particularly, that to bear children is a mis- sion, divinely appointed to all of God's children. There can be no room for argument about this question, which has ones and for all time been settled, by an Authority, which no Christian, at least will doubt. "To the law and to the testimony." So, let us turn to Holy Writ: When the all-wise Creator had finished his great work, preparing this earth as an abode for his children while they should sojourn in mortality, and he had placed upon this, his footstool, our first parents, "God" — I am quoting — "blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and re- plenish the earth." To multiply urns intended as a blessing-- not as a punishment. To inherit an earthly tabernacle is the only means by which the spirit of man can possibly advance and in course of time become like his heavenly Father. If it is true — which of course it is — that "all of God's children must receive bodies be- fore this earth and its inhabitants will have fulfilled the great purpose for which they were created," it is clear that the respon- sibility of allowing children to be born, or of denying them that natural right, rests upon those who, as husbands and wives, have, impliedly, accepted the mission of becoming parents, if God shall grant them the privilege. These great truths must be self-evi- dent to every right-thinking man or woman. *An address delivered before the Advanced Senior Class. M. I. A., and others over sixteen years of age, Miller ward, Granite Stake, March 7, 1922. LARGE FAMILIES 139 What, you say, are all men subject to this law, the law gov- erning the multiplying of species? Yes, absolutely. Every healthy individual, not only human beings, but lower animals, as well, instinctively respond to the nuiversal law of reproduction. None but the coward, the faint-hearted weakling, or selfish crea- ture will attempt to evade it. Listen to the immortal shake- speare : "Torches are made to light, jewels to wear, Dainties to taste, fresh beauty for use, Herbs for their smell, and sappy plants to bear; Things growing to themselves are growth's abuse: Seeds spring from seeds, and beauty breedeth beauty, Thou wast begot — to get it is thy duty. "Upon the earth's increase why shouldst thou feed, Unless the earth with thy increase be fed? By law of Nature thou art bound to breed, That thine may live, when thou thyself art dead; And so in spite of death thou dost survive, In that thy likeness still is left alive." Man, the Creator's master piece, the crowning glory of God's creation, is the only being capable of designedly thwarting his Maker's plan. Elder Joseph A. West, in his excellent article, "Marriage" (Era, Feb., 1922) referring to a statement in the Oregonian, says: "The American family of fifty years ago averaged a little over five children; whereas now it averages but a little over two; one hundred and fifty years ago, the average was about eight," and adds, "We have besides an innumerable host of men and women who fail to comply with God's first great commandment — to multiply and replenish the earth." Referring to the U. S. census for the decennium ending with 1920. the Springfield Republican has this to say regarding the relative size of the American family : "The traditional statistical convention of five in a family [meaning parents and children] is apparently due for revision before very long. The Census Bureau now reports the average at 4.3, having declined from five in 1880 to 4.9 in 1890 ; to 4.7 in 1900 and to 4.5 in 1910." Comparisons are odious; but they are mighty telling for all of that. We, the Latter-day Saints, need not go back 150 years to find some very valuable food for reflection. I well remember the time — and I am not old, by any means — when we boasted eight as being the number of an average Latter-day Saint family, as against five for the United States as a whole. And what are the comparative averages today? About 6 to 4%! And now we are brought face to face with the subject under discussion from another angle, namely that of quality: Referring specifically to the number of children in a family, the 140 IMPROVEMENT ERA proposition, "It is not quantity but quality that counts," has been variously stated by several eminent men time and again, publicly and pri\ ately, in speeches and in writings. The statement sounds plausible, logical, in fact! therefore, it is frequently repeated, parrot-like, by those who readily take things for granted. Hav- ing been allowed to go unchallenged — at least, I have never heard anyone attempting to disprove its accuracy — the assertion has gained credence, while even well-informed persons have accepted the argument as finally settled. To be sure, quality and not quantity is paramount in some, perhaps most, of human undertakings, for extample, soldiers in a given encounter; aeroplane pilots, sea captains, the personnel of an Arctic expedition, etc. But in e^ ery single instance, the so much desired "quality" depends on individual selection, wheth- er it be from the ranks of the drafted men, the most skilful aviators, the careful mariners or from explorers, renowned for their intrepidity. But notwithstanding such selection and the greatest care imaginable being exercised in human calculations, the actual outcome may prove a disappointment. For wherever the human equation operates, the ultimate results are problematical — they may or may not measure up to expectations. These deductions hold good in any human venture; and rearing a family of chil- dren, the greatest of all human ventures, is no exception. "The best laid plans of men and mice aft gang aglee." The unsinkable Titanic sinks; the majestic Roma crashes to the ground, a seeth- ing mass of flames, abruptly ending the expected glorious career of its noble crew; Shakleton, the daring explorer, dies before reaching his goal. To make the proposition, "It is not quantity but quality that counts," an axiom as applied to the number of children in a family, is absurd. It is the feeble echo of quibbling man, strug- aling to find an excuse for not allowing nature to take its course. It is the hollow creed of so-called sexual reformers; the untenable theory of the ultra-scientific mind, in search for something with which "to soothe the unholv throng," bending every energy to find an excuse for disregarding this divine injunction: Multi- plv! The evil one does not care how this is done, if he can but frain the victory. Now, let us for a few moments calmly consider the question, viewing; it from a rational standpoint: The quality of the pro- duct depends upon the quality of the material. Analogically, the same rule governs the human product; hence, if the qualitv in children he deficient, the onlv remedv lies in obtaining bet- ter "material." How? Bv selection. Can any human being make such selection? No. The quality of the spirit determines LARGE FAMILIES 141 the quality of the child, the man or the wornan. It does not in the least depend upon the number of children in a given family. Such a homely proverb, as: "You can never make a silk purse from a sow's ear," can be applied to human beings, even. Fortunately, the Lord has not entrusted puny, whimsical mortals with the privilege of selecting from among his spirits the particular one or ones they may happen to want — spirits which, when embodied, should be nobis, beautiful and strong, and possess a surpassing degree of "quality." This particular prerogative the Lord has reserved unto himself. He may in his inscrutable wisdom see fit to send some superior spiritual intelli- gences to obtain earthly tabernacles, in one or another dispensa- tion, all to bring about his holy purposes. In explaining the meaning of the extravagant proposition mentioned (and its exact language has been quoted) its pro- ponents will say that according to science, if parents could be in- duced not to burden themselves with so many children, but rather be satisfied with, say, one or two, they would be able to pay more attention to these, provide them with better homes, better food, better clothes and more enjoyment; surround them with more "refined" associates, give them a better education, etc., and that these considerations will bring about the so greatly desired "quality." The fact is, that parents, and would-be or should-be parents, today are burdened with too much "science" altogether, in connection with the rearing of children, while com- mon sense is side-tracked, The "problem" of parenthood, that frightful bugbear of latter-day sinners, is ding-donged in our ears, in season and out of season. Parents and parents-to-be, take heart! Do not heed the specious pleadings of zealous social "reformers," who are trying to show you how God's plan can be improved upon. Quietly study your own condition; consider the following facts, and weigh them carefully. Each and every spirit, both before and after entering mortality, is an individual entity. As such, and hairing been endowed with ability to choose between good and evil, and gw en an inalienable right to exercise his or her free agency, all that parents can do, in rearing a family of children, is to teach them sound doctrine, instil in them correct principles, set them a good example, and endeavor to the best of their ability to bring them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. There is a limit to responsibilitv- even, so that mortals need not feel dismayed, but, filled with faith, hope and charity they may accept the call to parenthood, confidently trusting in an over- ruling Providence. "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me." Such was the call of the Savior. Before children can come unto him, they must be born. And woe unto 142 IMPROVEMENT ERA those who intentionally "forbid" God's spirits to enter into mor- tality, thus hindering them from progressing in the scale of intelligence. Ah, yes, eugenics and eusthenics! We must not forget to mention them. When these interesting subjects — so fascinating, because of their plausibilities — shall have been worn threadbare, depend upon it, some new euphonic term will be coined, for eru- dite, grave-visaged bachelors and spinsters, to prate and orate about. Meanwhile, people with common sense, healthy bodies, sound minds and natural instincts will go right ahead and people this world in the good, old-fashioned way, heeding nature's promptings and not the silly admonitions of their inferiors. Now let us look at the large family as an actuality: The potential large family admits of academical discussions; the actual large family is a domestic reality, where polemical disput- ations as to the whys and wherefores, and the eventful outcome of the venture, are out of place. A large family is not necessarily a bedlam, where confusion reigns supreme. It is rather comparable to a colony of busy bees, where each indi^ idual member either has learned, or is learning, to do something useful, not only for her own self, but for the good of the whole "colony." The mothsr, that dignified, guiding load-star in the home, may be compared to the stately queen-bee, as she quietly, calmy, but well aware of her command- ing station, moves about in the "hive", directing e\ery activity of all the inmates. The popular refrain. "Everybody works but father," does not apply to the head of a large family, especially if he and his wife start housekeeping on daily wages, a meagre bank account, or, as more often happens, without any tangible assets. If he is not poor, his large familv will very likely both make him and keep him poor, that is, in this world's goods. If ever — as we are told was the case in in good, old Ameri- can days of yore — children were considered as representing in- trinsic money value to their parents, their rating on any such basis is long since obsolete. At present, the exchange quota- tion?, on the child-market are decidedly bearish/ — I believe that would be the oroper Wall Street term. But for all of that, the !"an having a large family of children — of anywhere near decent rhildren — is rich, indeed. Perhaps not rich in money, stocks or bonds, but in possessing the inner satisfaction that he is a man, and not a mouce. He takes at its face value the scriptural declaration: "Lo, children are a heritage of the Lord. As ar- rows are in the hand of a mighty man, so are children. Happy is the man that h?th h^s rrerver full of them: thev shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate." LARGE FAMILIES 143 Modernizing his attitude as understood by the phrase, "speaking with the enemies in the gate," such a man — one, deserving having that masculine designation spelt with a capital M — manfully taking his part among men and endeavoring to do his full duty as husband, father, neighbor, and citizen, has learned by heart the admonition of our virile western bard, the inimitable Walt Whitman: "Live so every day that you can look any man in the face and tell him to go to ," and he may feel tempted to use the closing word of this rather vigorous thunder bolt, if he be accosted by the birth-control vituperator, made the target for ribald jokes or flippant jests or assailed by the sancti monious hypocrite. And as for the children in large families, they compare at least very favorably with those coming from the smaller-sized family. Trained, not only didactically but in actual practice, to curb selfish tendencies; to share with others their little joys; not only to recite the Golden Rule, but to live it, they, generally "make good," so that when turned out the finished product, they stand up, four square, as men, not lisping sissies; women, not fashion-plate chromos. Now let ms say to you mentally and physically strong young men and women of marriageable age: Get married. Beget chil- dren— don't be scared; let them come, as many as God is willing to send you. You will be all the happier for bidding these pre- cious spirits welcome, taking them in your arms and into your homes. Do not try to interfere with the course of nature, as regards bearing children. Let no one make you believe that if you ha^e "too many" children both they and you will suffer from hunger on that account, in this blessed land. For, as true as it is written: "In some way or other, the Lord will provide; It may not be my way, It may not be thy way, And yet in his own way the Lord will provide." /