Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Are millennials forgetting the formative power of the family?
Are millennials forgetting the formative power of the family?
Dec 13, 2025 10:00 AM

According to a recent report from the U.S. Census Bureau, the values and priorities of young adults are shifting dramatically from those of generations past, particularly when es to work, education, and family.

“Most of today’s Americans believe that educational and economic plishments are extremely important milestones of adulthood,” the study concludes. “In contrast, marriage and parenthood rank low: over half of Americans believe that marrying and having children are not very important in order to e an adult.”

Comparing young adults between 1975 and today (2012-2016), the study highlights a range of shifts in the popular views on what it means to e an adult,” as well as what’s most important and formative throughout that process.

As shown on the following chart, respondents demonstrated a clear preference for full-time work, education, and economic stability well before marriage and family-rearing. (The study defines young adults as 18- to 35-year-olds.)

“What is clear is that most Americans believe young people should plish economic milestones before starting a family,” the study says.

Observed another way, we can see the shift by looking at four key milestones — “getting married, having children, working, and living independently” — from generation to generation.

Alas, the Census study only affirms what University of Virginia sociologist Bradley Wilcox and his fellow researchers have been highlighting for some time now.

“Culturally, young adults have e to see marriage as a ‘capstone’ rather than a ‘cornerstone,’” they write, “that is, something they do after they have all their other ducks in a row, rather than a foundation for launching into adulthood and parenthood.”

For Wilcox and his colleagues, the shift has surely led to certain gains, but overall and in the long run, the trend toward delayed marriage is likely to accelerate the fragmentation of American society.

“We believe that marriage is not for everyone, be they twentysomething or some other age,” they write. “Nevertheless, the decoupling of marriage and parenthood represented by the Great Crossover is deeply worrisome. It fuels economic and educational inequality, not to mention family instability, amid the rising generation.”

Indeed, what at first seems like a e development in economic and educational progress has its roots in a view of progress that’s fundamentally backwards.What might we lose if we, as a society, tend toward putting it last, and not first, treating family and children as a “crowning achievement” (Wilcox’s words) vs. a foundation or a starting point for civilizational success?

In response to these changes, Wilcox prehensive approach, passing economic, educational, civic, and cultural initiatives, to help twentysomething men and women figure out new ways to put the baby carriage after marriage.” Butwhile there are plenty of institutional adjustments that we can and should consider, we can begin by simply remembering (and calling unto remembrance) the formative, transformative power of the family.

As children, the family sets the stage for our service and the scope for our gift-giving, both in work and play. It is in the family where we first learn to love and relate, to order our obligations, and to orient our activities toward others. It is in the basic, mundane exchanges between parent and child, brother and sister, that we learn what it means to truly flourish.

As spouses, marriage brings its own variety of personal and relational formation, offering unique lessons on love and covenant, sacrifice and obligation, freedom and duty.

And as parents, the family has a remarkable “reforming power,” wielding an inescapable and irresistible mix of moral, social, and spiritual transformation. The delay in child-bearing may indeed be dangerous when es to impendingdemographiccollapse, but that’s not even considering the “formation” vacuum we’re bound to see among the adults that are already inhabiting oursocial and economic landscape.

As Herman Bavinck explains in his book, The Christian Family, “The family is a school for the children, but in the first place it is a school for the parents”:

[Children] develop within their parents an entire cluster of virtues, such as paternal love and maternal affection, devotion and self-denial, care for the future, involvement in society, the art of nurturing. With their parents, children place restraints upon ambition, reconcile the contrasts, soften the differences, bring their souls ever closer together, provide them with mon interest that lies outside of them, and opens their eyes and hearts to their surroundings and for their posterity. As with living mirrors they show their parents their own virtues and faults, force them to reform themselves, mitigating their criticisms, and teaching them how hard it is to govern a person.

The family exerts a reforming power upon the parents. Who would recognize in the sensible, dutiful father the carefree youth of yesterday, and who would ever have imagined that the lighthearted girl would later be changed by her child into a mother who renders the greatest sacrifices with joyful acquiescence? The family transforms ambition into service, miserliness into munificence, the weak into strong, cowards into heroes, coarse fathers into mild lambs, tenderhearted mothers into ferocious lionesses. Imagine there were no marriage and family, and humanity would, to use Calvin’s crass expression, turn into a pigsty.

The family isn’t the only place we can learn these lessons, of course. But up until recently, these basic lessonshave been largely “built in” to the human experience, and at a much earlier age.

Such reminders needn’tpoint us toward one-size-fits-all mandates or blueprints for when or whether people should marry or have children. But they ought to remind us of what’s at stake, and that the family is more than a “crowning achievement” or a prize received after a life lived well.

As young adults continue to ponder and asses the importance of various formative “milestones,” and as we seek to prioritize them, in turn, we’d do well to simply pause and remember the “reforming power” of the family, and the joy and freedom it has to contribute to all else – economic, educational, or otherwise.

“Family is the first and foundational ‘yes’ to society because it is the first and foundational ‘yes’ to our nature,” as Evan Koons explains in For in the Life of the World, “to pour ourselves out like Christ, to be gifts, and to love….In family, our character is formed and given to the world.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Krauthammer on Proportionality
“‘Disproportionate’ in What Moral Universe?” asks Charles Krauthammer in today’s Washington Post. He continues: When the United States was attacked at Pearl Harbor, it did not respond with a parallel “proportionate” attack on a Japanese naval base. It launched a four-year campaign that killed millions of Japanese, reduced Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to cinders, and turned the Japanese home islands into rubble and ruin. Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal...
On Blogging
G. K. Chesterton on Journalists: “…there exists in the modern world, perhaps for the first time in history, a class of people whose interest is not in that things should happen well or happen badly, should happen successfully or happen unsuccessfully, should happen to the advantage of this party or the advantage of that party, but whose interest simply is that things should happen. “It is the one great weakness of journalism as a picture of our modern existence, that...
Isn’t the Cold War Over?
I’ve got an idea for a new . Titled, Hugo and Vladi, it details the zany adventures of two world leaders, one of whom (played by David Hyde Pierce) struggles to upkeep his image of a friendly, modern European diplomat while his goofball brother-in-law (played by George Lopez) keeps screwing it up for him by spouting off vitriolic Soviet rhetoric and threatening all of Western civilization with his agressive (but loveable) arms sales and seizures of private panies. It is...
Sin and Extreme Sports
You may know that a traditional way of interpreting the Ten Commandments involves articulating both the explicit negative prohibitions as well as the implicit positive duties. So, for example, the mandment prohibiting murder is understood in the Heidelberg Catechism to answer the question, “Is it enough then that we do not kill our neighbor in any such way?” by saying, “No. By condemning envy, hatred, and anger God tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves, to be patient, peace-loving,...
In Search of the ‘Values’ Voter
How can government best uphold Christian values? The right’s traditional answer is through legislating morality issues that are central to family values or the sanctity of life. It looks like the left will counter this with an expanded version of government. Andrew Lynn looks at the petition for the religious vote in the context of Sen. Barack Obama’s recent speech to Call to Renewal. Read the mentary here. ...
Protestants and Natural Law, Part 7
In Parts 5 and 6 we addressed the two mon Protestant objections to natural law. And now, as promised, we will see what limitations the Reformers perceived in natural law, even as they affirmed its value. (Incidentally, the treatment of the natural knowledge of God that Peter Martyr Vermigli, Jerome Zanchi, and Francis Turretin provide, to mention only a few, pletely in step with that of the early church. For more on that topic, click here.) The widespread assumption that...
‘The Aryan clause, the Confessing Church, and the ecumenical movement’
The latest issue of the Scottish Journal of Theology is out, and includes my article, “The Aryan clause, the Confessing Church, and the ecumenical movement: Barth and Bonhoeffer on natural theology, 1933–1935.” Here’s the abstract: In this article I argue that the essential relationship between Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth stands in need of reassessment. This argument is based on a survey of literature dealing with Bonhoeffer and Barth in three basic areas between the critically important years of 1933...
A Unitarian, the Pope, and Jeffrey Sachs Walk Into a Bar…
Hunger, disease, the waste of lives that is extreme poverty are an affront to all of us. To Jeff [economist Jeffrey Sachs] it’s a difficult but solvable equation. An equation that crosses human with financial capital, the strategic goals of the rich world with a new kind of planning in the poor world. –Bono, Foreward to The End of Poverty by Jeffrey Sachs, italics mine. I am informed by philologists that the “rise to power” of these two words, “problem”...
Yeah, Ohio!
Ohio Court Limits Eminent Domain ...
Gambling Hypocrisy
“All forms of gambling are predatory and immoral in their very essence,” says Rev. Albert Mohler. I don’t agree, at least insofar as his identification of what makes gambling essentially immoral is not necessarily unique to games of chance: the enticement for people to “risk their money for the vain hope of financial gain.” Stock e to mind. Indeed, as I’ve pointed out before, there is no single coherent Christian position regarding gambling per se. For example, the Catechism of...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved