Access your downloads at our archive site. Visit Archive
Magazine Article

Occupational Moral Idiots

But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. (Mark 10:14)

  • Ellsworth McIntyre,
Share this
But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. (Mark 10:14)

R. J. Rushdoony in his new book, a commentary entitled Romans and Galatians, speaks of pastors as "prone to occupational moral idiocy." The quote from the Gospel of Mark is an illustration of just how prone we preachers are to this disease. The disciples, the Lord’s most loyal followers, hand-picked by him to the ministry and trained under his divine instruction, had just provoked him to anger by hindering little children from coming to their Savior: therefore, we preachers may have a serious blind spot where child evangelism is concerned. This blindness has suckered modern-day preachers into joining hands with humanists to oppose Christian day care and in some cases even Christian education for non-churched children. The King’s angry warning is necessary for you and me because we need to be in fear of his displeasure.

The churchman/humanist has two chief tactics: First, he demands that the Christian educator discriminate against children in order to possibly boost adult attendance at Sunday services. The churchman says, I should block the door of the elementary and high school and admit only children from "churched" families. One Reformed pastor put it to me this way, "If any ministry does not bring families into the church, it’s a questionable activity."

The Bible, however, advises differently from the churchman. The Bible says, "Whosoever will may come," and whosoever will not be obedient, "separate yourselves" from disobedient brothers "so-called" (see 2 Thes. 3:6). "So-called" brothers use church membership instead of obedience to God’s law as a screening device. Maybe that is why their churches are cursed with the stench of death. There is a name for this do-it-yourself, homemade "separatist" doctrine used by the churchmen. It’s called "natural privilege" (See Rushdoony’s Romans and Galatians, Chapter 39). Grace Community chooses to admit and expel according to the Bible, instead of natural privilege.

Punish the Baby?
Many churchmen also say, "Don’t admit any children, churched or unchurched, below first grade and never offer day care lest you weaken the home." I respond, any family discriminated against by Grace Community will go elsewhere, most likely to an ungodly, humanist institution. It’s too late to preach sermons on the benefit of full-time motherhood to families already choosing day care, just as it’s too late to preach "Thou shalt not commit adultery" to a single mother in need of day care.

How about greed? Should I scold and discriminate against the family choosing day care for an extra paycheck, or should I offer help? Let’s ask the question correctly: Because a family has decided an extra paycheck is more important than a mother staying at home, should the church punish the baby? Doesn’t the baby need to be saved, if possible, from the consequences of the family’s failure? I think so. Therefore, any mother who shows up at Grace Community and wants our care is certain to get it without our demanding church membership as a qualification. If I accept someone whom I should not, I am confident that this fault can be more easily forgiven than forcing the baby into anti-Christian care. I want that baby for my King’s army. I don’t want the Lord Jesus Christ "much displeased" with me.

Those more loyal to their church than to Christ refuse to do anything that is not for selfish concern, glory or gain of their organization. Over my career, I have seen many churches reluctantly start Christian schools under duress. These schools born of "shot-gun marriages" typically lose money. Such schools are constantly under attack or neglect from the pulpit and in the business meetings of the church, until the school is hounded out of existence.

The Murder of the Christian School
The murder of the Christian school is carried out by two main demonic means: First, the school is sternly warned to conduct screening interviews with the parents before admitting the children. The interview, of course, must discourage some parents from placing their children under Christian hope. In other words, the child is punished, because the parents are given reason to resist instant conversion to the church’s point of view. I wonder—do you suppose, can you doubt?—Jesus is much displeased with this procedure? Wouldn’t it be more Biblical to take "whosoever will" and leave the conversion of the parents for another day?

The second method of school murder is by gross discrimination. It is nearly universal that Christian schools could easily operate at a profit if permitted to offer day care to mothers desperately in need of such help. Many church schools are forbidden to offer mercy to these women: "You should stay at home with your child," is the chorus that the church joins humanists to sing. We preachers have failed to preach, "Thou shalt not commit adultery." We preachers have failed to condemn civil government for decriminalizing fornication; and as a result, the women victimized at least in part by our cowardice have showed up at our door asking for day care. Instead of bread, we hypocritically give them a stone. Outwardly we say, "I am sorry, lady, but we disapprove of mother’s working outside the home. It would be a bad example. Besides, we don’t want to weaken your home by making day care attractive. You see, we love you, and we are only acting in your best interest." Inwardly, the preacher thinks, "You people wouldn’t come to church on Sunday anyway. Good riddance!"

Is it any wonder that Jesus is much displeased? The opportunity to bring a child to Christ has been lost, or more accurately, a child has been condemned to humanist doctrine in the name of the church. Such is the handiwork of moral idiots.

Grace Community Day Care and School, on the other hand, operates without financial support from any church and 100% of all tithes and offerings at Nicene Covenant Church, the sponsor of Grace Community Schools, goes to other Christian ministries not able to financially support themselves by the free market. The model organization that Grace Community represents is a powerful expression of the command of our King to permit the little children to come to him. We have demonstrated that Christian schools when operating in tandem with a day care can be run at a substantial profit. If a school uses our operational manual, the church has no financial burden. Instead the school/day care can be a financial angel to the church. All that is required of churchmen is to get out of the way or "suffer or permit" (Mk. 10:14) schools and day-care operations like ours to do the work the King has called us to perform. Yet seldom does a month go by that I don’t hear our ministry has been attacked by angry churchmen. Is it any wonder that Mark 10:14 reads ". . . Jesus . . . was much displeased . . ." ?

The Spirit of Judas Iscariot and Foolish Arguments
The arguments of these churchmen and their brother humanists are very old, very silly, very boring. All of these arguments can be and have been made against every Christian ministry I can think of. Their complaints sound similar to Judas Iscariot’s (see Jn. 12:4,5) accusing God’s children of sin. For example, couldn’t fools say that orphanages encourage the morally weak to abandon children? For example, the father of modern-day humanism, Voltaire, turned over to a Christian orphanage the children he sired by his mistress. Couldn’t fools say that orphanages encourage fornication and adultery by rushing to the assistance of erring sinners like Voltaire? Couldn’t fools say that old people’s homes encourage families to abandon their parents? Wouldn’t the elderly be better off at home? How about hospitals? Couldn’t fools say that hospitals encourage bad health practices by making those with weak character suffer less than their due? Wouldn’t the sick be better off at home surrounded by their loved ones?

Of course, this spirit of Judas Iscariot is much more than foolishness. It is evil to bear false witness against the children of God (Mt. 12:31-37). How can an obedient Christian refuse aid to a child in need of care or a sick or old person in need of mercy? Isn’t it true that any family that is weak enough to evade its responsibility or abandon its members is a family which cannot be valued above the Christian alternative? Those physically and morally sick need mercy, instruction and not a horrible judgment cast in their teeth by morally insane churchmen posing as their "moral betters." How interesting that those who give the above silly arguments are often the first to cry, "Judge not, lest you be judged." There are times for judgment, and there are times for mercy. God help us to know the difference!

The time to show mercy is clearly taught by the parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk. 10:30-37). The Samaritan saw on his right hand a stranger in need and with all his might, the Samaritan gave aid and comfort. The Levite (read: "modern churchman") passed by on the other side. Why? Well, obviously that’s a question God doesn’t bother to answer. Why doesn’t matter; the churchman refused to give aid and the churchman’s excuse is not given by God. What excuse can possibly be made?

Children of God or Dog Food?
But if all of this is not convincing to the reader, consider this example. About two thousand years ago, the Roman authorities were worried. It was reported by minor bureaucrats to those in the marble palaces that the Christians, under cover of darkness, were snatching abandoned babies from the mouths of wild dogs. It was the normal and tolerated rhythm of affairs to abandon unwanted infants under the bridges of Rome. Packs of wild dogs ate the children and the "noble" families of Rome congratulated themselves on sparing a child a life in a family where the baby would be unwelcome and unloved. After all, wasn’t death to be preferred to a life without love? Besides, why should a woman pay with a lifetime of reduced status for a moment of sexual indiscretion? Now, those "do-gooder" Christians had rescued these children and distributed them to devout families. It was rumored that these Christians actually believed that their God would bless them for rearing other people’s children. Such ignorant superstition is harmless enough, thought Rome, but now something horrible had occurred. These castaway children had reached physical maturity and they looked on Rome with eyes that knew not pity. Somehow these "bastard" children believed that they were creations of God as the Christians taught them to "parrot." These ungrateful orphans didn’t seem to appreciate or understand that Rome was only trying to save them from a "loveless and impoverished" life. This history lesson separates the sheep from the goats, or should I say, the saints from the moral monsters?

Across our land are modern-day Roman pagans joined by their churchmen accomplices. They condemn Christians for taking into their day cares and schools the children of the pagan. I have a vision. My vision will be a nightmare for my enemies. When the children whose tender souls escaped the yellow fangs of the cruel humanists come of age, they will be used by the Lord of Battles against my foes. The day may come when my humanist enemies will taste the wrath of God just as the Romans did.

Some Churchmen More Evil Than Voltaire
Incidentally, the generation of rescued babies did not overthrow Rome, but when Rome’s well-deserved destruction came, you can be certain that the dog-food children found it difficult to understand why some churchmen wept. St. Augustine, for example, thought the fall of Rome was the fall of all hope. Today’s churchmen are far more mistaken than foolish Romans. Some of today’s churchmen humanists are worse than fools; they are willfully blind. They would even hinder those who would bring children to Christ (see Lk. 11:52). This St. Augustine would never do. (Come to think of it, even Voltaire was not evil enough to oppose Christians helping children.)

Choose Sides—It’s the Rats or the Children! One glorious day the children saved from the burning will see the hand of God, avenging their cruel treatment by the hands of humanists. Which side will you be on? Rescuing children from the dogs and rats of humanism is a calling fit to test the mettle of a Christian soldier. Why? Well, you see, a pack of disappointed dogs, rats, and other humanists will try to eat you if you come between them and their dinner. That’s why! If you have what it takes, I can show you how to glorify God rescuing children and possibly make you a rich person on earth and a richer one in heaven.

  • Ellsworth McIntyre
More by Ellsworth McIntyre