How Well Are We Fulfilling God’s Original Command?



February 8, 2024
Available in Audio Format:

When God created the world, he gave man a foundational command commonly known as the creational mandate: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion” over it (Genesis 1:28). There are five imperatives in this creational mandate, but the first three – be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth – all have to do with reproduction. It is striking that the very first three commands given by God to His image bearers have to do with having children.

So how well are we as humanity in general, as Canadians, and as Christians fulfilling this command?

Well, not very well. And, compared to an earlier version of this article, we are getting even worse at fulfilling this calling.

How well are we fulfilling God’s original command?

Although Christians and demographers might debate on when or if the earth is “full,” it is difficult to argue that Canada is full. Canada has one of the lowest population densities of any country on the planet, with an average of only 4 people per square kilometre. By comparison, the Netherlands, one of the most densely populated countries (excluding islands and city-states) has a population density 130 times that of Canada – 518 people per square kilometre. Although much of Canada’s landmass is not suitable for human habitation, Canada still has the third most arable land per person in the world, with 1.00 hectares (0.01) square kilometres) per person. That’s 17 times as much farmland per person than the Netherlands (0.06 hectares per person)! Relating to the command to be fruitful and multiply, Statistics Canada tracks the fertility rate of Canadians each year. It just published its data for 2022. Although the total fertility rate – the number of children that the average woman can be expected to have in her lifetime – has been declining for decades, the birth rate hit an all-time low of 1.33 in 2022.

What does this statistic mean? Well, the fertility replacement rate is 2.1, meaning that if the average woman in Canada had 2.1 children, Canada’s population would remain the same. This makes intuitive sense. Each woman would have to have two children to replace herself and her husband. Since not every woman lives long enough or is able to have children, the replacement rate is a little bit higher than two. If fertility rates exceed 2.1, then Canada’s population would grow, but if fertility rates are below 2.1, the Canadian-born population will decline.

With the current fertility rate of 1.33, the Canadian-born population is guaranteed to decrease in the long-term as more Canadians will die each year than will be born.

This trend is not unique. The fertility rates across the G7 (a group of Canada’s comparable wealthy and democratic peer countries) are all below the replacement rate of 2.1, according to the Statistics Canada Report.

Why Aren’t We Fulfilling this Command?

Fertility rates have been falling across the developed world for a number of reasons. The Institute of Marriage and Family, which joined the Christian think tank Cardus in 2016, identified three main reasons in a past report on Canada’s Shrinking Families.

First of all, a Cardus report by researcher Lyman Stone entitled She’s (Not) Having a Baby reveals that having children isn’t on top of the list of desires for women. Two of the most common reasons and strongest predictors for not desiring to have a child in the next two years was the desire to grow as a person and to focus on a career. Personal and professional growth are increasingly prioritized over familial growth.

That said, women do still desire children. But because of these competing desires, most women aren’t having as many children as they ideally would desire. According to the Cardus survey, almost 60% of women would ideally like to have more children, and only 7% of women would like to have fewer children. While the fertility rate (the likely number of children a women will actually have) in Canada is currently at 1.33, women, when asked, express a desire to have closer to 2 children. So, there is a “fertility gap” of women not having as many children as they would like.

Second, economic factors are incentivizing smaller families. Raising a child is becoming increasingly expensive, with the Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada estimating that a raising a child under the age of 18 costs $10,000-$15,000 in direct costs each year, plus the opportunity costs of lost wages. Given that the median after-tax income of Canadian families was $66,800 in 2020, children take up a substantial portion of a family’s budget. Women have also increasingly decided to pursue a full-time or part-time career not only to find personal fulfillment but simply to make ends meet. The desire to save money or to spend more money on leisure were also common factors cited in the Cardus study about why women were unlikely to choose to have children, or to have a smaller number of kids than their parents or grandparents did.

Third, Canadian families are becoming less stable, prompting fewer couples to decide to have children. Cardus’ Canadian Marriage Map demonstrates how, of the total number of families with children, the percentage of married couples has declined while the percentage of common-law couples and lone-parent families have increased. As of 2016, approximately one third of families with children lack a married couple at the helm. Almost half of all couples – common-law and married – do not have children.

Finally, the prevalence of contraception and abortion has enabled Canadians to choose when to have children and how many children to have. Contraceptive pills, approved in Canada in 1960, as well other forms of contraception have become widely used. When contraception fails, many Canadians turn to abortion. Although the number of documented abortions has been declining over the past decades (87,595 abortions were reported in 2021), there is little data on the number of abortion pill prescriptions, which have become increasingly common in recent years. But if you scroll back to the Statistics Canada chart above, the authorization to sell the contraceptive pill coincided with a dramatic decline in fertility rates in the 1960s.

What are the consequences of not fulfilling this command?

The major consequence of a low fertility rate is an aging and possibly declining population. Statistics Canada’s 2021 census report documents how the Baby Boomer generation (the uncommonly large age cohort born in the decades after the Second World War) is retiring from the workforce. In 2016, the number of people over the age of 65 exceeded the number of people under the age of 15 for the first time in Canada. Five years later, approximately one fifth of the Canadian population (19%) is over the age of 65 while 16.3% of the population is below the age of 15. This trend is projected to continue, as the number of retirees grows faster than the number of children for the foreseeable future. The number of people in the labour force compared to the number of retirees is also declining, meaning that there are increasingly fewer workers paying taxes to support our retirees each year.

The economic impact of an aging population is significant. In 2006, the Senate of Canada released a report on demographics forebodingly entitled The Demographic Time Bomb: Mitigating the Effects of Demographic Change in Canada, documenting how transfers to seniors and the health care costs of seniors would eat up an increasing percentage of government spending. This is a major consideration of whether federal or provincial finances are sustainable in the long-term (over the next 75 years). According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s 2023 Fiscal Sustainability Report, the federal government’s finances, provincial governments’ collective finances, and public pension plans are sustainable over the long-term. However, the “rising health care costs due to population ageing” are placing great strain on provincial health systems.

How might we better fulfill this command?

One way to reverse this demographic decline is through an increase in immigration. And that is precisely what Canada has done. Despite having a fertility rate well below the replacement rate (meaning that Canada’s population should shrink in the long-term) Canada’s population continues to grow, primarily through immigration. In 2023, Canada welcomed more immigrants and non-permanent residents than any other year in its history – over 1.1 million. While the populations of other G7 countries declined (Japan and Italy) or grew slowly (Germany, France, United States, and the United Kingdom) in the past five years, Canada’s population grew relatively quickly at over 1% per year.

While immigration may help mitigate our aging demographics and help Canadians collectively fill their country, God’s command to be fruitful and multiply applies to individuals too. Changing the cultural conversation about children isn’t primarily the task of the government. Given the economic, cultural, and technological factors that are encouraging Canadians to have fewer kids, the ultimate fix isn’t a government policy but a renewed understanding of and appreciation for the goodness of children. Children are not primarily a financial burden, a drag on career aspirations, or an unwelcome source of work, but a joy and a heritage from the LORD (e.g. Psalm 127:3-5).

Nevertheless, government policies certainly can help raise the fertility rate. Cash transfers to parents, such as the Canada Child Benefit and generous parental leave policies, alleviate some of the economic cost of children. Reforming Canada’s laws on marriage and divorce could help support stable marriages that are conducive to having children. Restricting abortion, both surgical abortions in hospitals and clinics and abortion pills taken at home, would increase the fertility rate as well.


Canada as a country, with a fertility rate of 1.33, is not fulfilling God’s command to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” well. And it’s getting worse. A growing prioritization of personal and career growth, economic factors, cultural attitudes towards marriage, contraception, and abortion are all pressuring or enabling Canadians to have fewer and fewer children. Canada’s low fertility rate is leading to a rapidly aging society, a trend that is only partially offset by increased immigration. Although changing cultural attitudes toward children is better led by the Church rather than the government, government policies can certainly also be reformed to encourage citizens to be fruitful and multiply.

Email Us 

Get Publications Delivered

TO Your Inbox

Sign up for our newsletter to stay informed about upcoming events, action items, and everything else ARPA
Never miss an article.