Sacred Offspring

Watch the discussion here: (YouTube link)

In much of modern theology—particularly in overly rationalized or disenchanted interpretations of the soul-body relationship—there is a tragic bifurcation between biology and spirit. Children are often reduced to mere biological outcomes, with God presented as a kind of bureaucratic soul-inserter, dropping spiritual payloads into otherwise mechanical processes. This view strips the mystery from human intimacy and ignores what many spiritual traditions have long intuited: that sexuality is not a sterile act of tissue and timing—it is a sacred rite, and children are its spiritual fruit.

To say that a child is merely the product of biology, with God tacking on a soul like a name tag, is to imply that spirit hovers outside of flesh—externally imposed rather than internally awakened. This view mirrors dualistic philosophies that devalue the body and treat matter as morally neutral or even corrupt. But if we affirm, as the Incarnation insists, that spirit and matter belong together—then we must also affirm that the act of union between two lovers can itself be a spiritually potent event, one that invites God not from above, but from within.

To separate soul from seed is to split what was never meant to be divorced. Sexuality, rightly understood, is not merely appetite or reproduction. It is mystical participation in divine creativity. In the intimate joining of bodies, there is also—if treated with reverence and covenant—a joining of essences. Love, trust, longing, vulnerability, even the metaphysical ache to be known and to know—these flow through the act like sacramental waters. This is not just mating. It is invocation. The lovers become co-priests in a temple made of flesh and delight, offering their oneness as a liturgy in which new life may be conceived.

The child, then, is not inserted by God as a postscript to biology. The child emerges from the spiritual current already moving between the lovers. We speak of the “fruit of the womb” for a reason. Fruit implies not just yield, but cultivation. Something tended, cherished, and emerging from the life of the whole tree—roots and branches, sunlight and sap. So too, a child is not merely the result of gametes and growth. A child is the fruit of love’s vineyard, formed as much by spirit as by cell.

This is not sentimentalism—it’s a theology of enchantment. It recovers the idea that human beings, made in the image of a God who creates through Word and Breath, are themselves creators of sacred mysteries. The family becomes not a logistical unit, but a garden of spiritual generation.

To teach that children are merely biological artifacts to which God adds “the soul component” is to flatten what should evoke awe. It’s like describing a symphony as vibrating strings or a cathedral as stacked rocks. True sexuality invites reverence. It insists that something more is happening—something that reverberates in eternity.

We must return to a vision of sexuality not as base instinct to be policed, nor as a clinical process to be managed—but as sacred dance, as covenantal fire, as the fertile moment in which the spiritual and the biological co-mingle like water and wine. Only then can we raise children not as chance combinations of genes but as spiritual inheritances, born from the holy communion of two souls.