Adoption in Christianity: A Call for Contextual Understanding
A response to an article in the Christian Century by Haley Hudler
On Adoption Language
In the December 2023 issues of The Christian Century, author Haley Hudler wrote that “Paul’s metaphor to those of us who have experienced adoption—and the abandonment that is usually central to it.”1
To begin, I do not wish to minimize or dismiss Hudler’s own feelings and experiences regarding her adoption. I understand how she can have her own difficulty with the word from her own family history. However, I wish counter her the suggestion that Christians should abandon "adoption theologies," which to me seems both reactionary and misguided. A key line from the article I found most confusing was her assertion that Paul "never intended for (gentiles) to change their existing identity.”
Throughout his letters, Paul talks about being a "new creation" (2 Cor. 5:17), gentiles being "grafted" into an existing tree (Romans 11:17), and dying to the self/old person (Gal. 2:20 - among others).2 In Galatians in particular, Paul spends much time on this, writing “for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:26-28).” Paul uses this same Jew or Greek language also in Col. 3:11 and Eph. 2.
In Ephesians 2, Paul is more explicit about that familial action taking place, “So then, remember that at one time you Gentiles by birth (“or in the flesh” according to the footnote). But because of Christ’s work, Christians are “no longer strangers and aliens, but… citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God.”
I want to key in on the word “household,” which is the Greek word “oikeioi” which speaks of “belonging to a house or members of family.3 This is important as Hudler suggests an image of fostering as a more appropriate metaphor, noting that Paul spoke of “adrogatio” or a situation where an adult voluntarily places “themselves under the authority of another.” While I would agree with Hudler that God was not (and is not) asking humans to abandon their family and ethnicity to become Jewish (or a Jesus follower), Paul was rather suggesting people join a whole new family—God’s family.
Therefore, it seems the idea of “fostering” comes up short, as we are taking on a new identity in Christ. Perhaps it is not so much that adoption is a broken metaphor for talking about God's relationship with Christians but rather humans have fallen short of the metaphor itself in our practices.
On Harry Holt
I also found her treatment of Harry Holt disingenuous. She includes a paragraph from a biography of Harry Holt, founder of Holt International, an international adoption agency. (I’ve included a section below, from the 1956 book The Seed from the East).
…I look out here at this beautiful playground God has so generously given us, and something inside of me cries out at the thought of those poor little babies starving to death or being thrown into dumps to be gnawed on by rats. I think we ought to adopt some of the GI children.
In Hudler’s article, she writes “his description of Korean children as perpetually in a state of poverty and existing in ‘dumps’ speaks volumes about the roots of this movement” Yet, from the actual quote she referenced, Holt did not say Korean children existed in dumps. Rather, Holt is worried about them "being thrown into dumps," and "starving to death."
According to Holt International’s website, Holt was first compelled to act in response to a video produced by World Vision, highlighting the needs of “children left orphaned or abandoned in the wake of the Korean War.”4 More, these children were “illegitimate children born between American soldiers and Korean women during and after the Korean War.” More, “according to several documents, the number of these post-war interracial children who were left behind by their parents without sufficient care and protection was large enough to draw the attention of concerned people outside the country.”5
No doubt, there was likely some amount of superiority on Holt's part, yet his words seem less heinous than Hudler makes them out to be. I am sure mistakes were made, yet the subtle jab about how his actions "speaks volumes" suggests nefarious intent and seems unnecessary. All the research and studies of today did not yet exist in Holt's time.
More, from a 1976 article in the New York Times,6 writing about the perspectives of these GI Children, now as young adults in South Korea, the author shares the following:
The young adults are thus a relatively small group who were bypassed for adoption either by chance or because their mothers kept them until they were too old to be adopted. But that makes life no less painful for each one. To the contrary, it appears to make life even more harsh because the few mixed‐race persons stand out all the more in this hostile society. The solution to their troubles, “several of the mixedrace persons contended, was to emigrate to the United States. “We all feel almost the same way about that,” Miss Auh said, even though few speak English well, they have no friends in America and they are Korean by culture and thought. But they are attracted by the size and diversity of America.
Perusing the internet for additional materials on this topic, I did find a interesting book worth a read for someone interested in taking a deeper dive on this topic, To Save the Children of Korea: The Cold War Origins of International Adoption, which examines how and why the practice of international adoption began in Korea in the 1950s, and how it grew and spread to other sending and receiving countries around the world in the decades since.7
In conclusion
In a world where interpretations of ancient texts and historical figures collide with contemporary values, the discourse around adoption metaphors in Christian theology highlights this complexity. While discussion and examination is important, circumspection is needed. Paul's intent, albeit subject to interpretation, emphasizes a profound transformation of identity to God’s family. Similarly, the scrutiny of historical figures like Harry Holt prompts reflection on the danger of applying present-day judgments to past actions. Holt's initiatives, though not without imperfections, emerged from a context vastly different from today's norms and understanding. The lens through which we view these narratives must accommodate historical context, with the men and their mission judged from within that metric. Looking back, both men did and said some things that might look askance today, but within their own context, were quite revolutionary for their compassion and inclusion.
Haley Hudler, “Are All Christians Adopted?,” The Christian Century 140, no. 12 (December 2023): 42–45.
All subsequent scripture quotations are taken from the New Revised Standard Version unless otherwise stated.
Wesley J. Perschbacher and George V. Wigram, The New Analytical Greek Lexicon (Peabody, MA, MA: Hendrickson, 1990).
“History Timeline,” Holt International, November 21, 2023, https://www.holtinternational.org/history/.
Kang Hyun-kyung, “‘gi Babies’ Inspire Us Family to Pursue Philanthropy,” koreatimes, September 7, 2015, https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2023/12/113_184368.html.
Richard Halloran, “Now‐ Grown Children of G. I.’s in Korea Are Bitter,” The New York Times, June 2, 1976, https://www.nytimes.com/1976/06/02/archives/nowgrown-children-of-gis-in-korea-are-bitter.html.
Oh, Arissa H.. To Save the Children of Korea: The Cold War Origins of International Adoption. Redwood City: Stanford University Press, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804795333