Jerry C. Brewer
In more than the half century since World War Two ended, women of all ages have filled the work place. Additionally, the Feminist Movement began agitating a few decades ago for equality on the job between males and females.
Ask a young girl today what she wants to be when she becomes an adult and, chances are, she won’t say, “A homemaker.” A secular humanistic society has so tainted even the thinking of Christians that it is now expected that females will all grow up to pursue careers outside the home. These things ought not so to be. Nothing is clearer in the New Testament than that young women should be keepers at home in their God-ordained roles as homemakers.
We often quote Paul’s injunction to Titus about “sound doctrine” and exclusively apply it to such things as the plan of salvation, the church, etc. But, have you ever looked at Titus 2:1 in its immediate context? The “sound doctrine” he delineates in the verses immediately following includes, (1) that older men be sober, grave, sound in faith, (2) that aged women behave themselves properly in holy behaviour and as teachers of good things, and (3) that the older women teach the younger women “to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” (Titus 2:4-5).
The home as God ordained it in the beginning is the home where fathers, under Christ’s authority, provide for their families and mothers, under that same authority, guide their households.
It has long been my conviction that our society’s departure from God’s pattern for the home is a major contributing factor to the to the immorality that threatens to consume the fabric of American life. That belief has been confirmed by a former CBS newsman.
Bernard Goldberg’s new book, Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, deserves to be a best-seller…Goldberg—an Emmy-winning broadcast journalist who spent three decades at CBS—seeks to disprove the notion that media are fair. Best of all—from my perspective at least—he blasts one of the most protected bastions of political correctness: working mothers.
In a chapter titled The Most Important Story You Never Saw on TV, Goldberg documents the steady decline in the behavioral, emotional and physical health of America’s children that has taken place as the percentage of latchkey and day-care children has increased. Some Examples:
From 1979-88 (a period that coincides with a sizable increase in two-income families), the suicide rate for girls ages 10-14 rose 27 percent, while for boys it rose 71 percent.
In 1970, only one in 20 American girls younger than 15 had had sex; today, one in 3 is having sex, and 3 million teenagers are infected with sexually transmitted diseases every year.
A study of 5 million eighth-graders found that children left home alone more than 11 hours a week are three times more likely than children with after school adult supervision to abuse drugs, alcohol or tobacco.
A study by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, published in 2001, found that toddlers in full time day care tended to be more aggressive toward other children and defiant toward adults. This was the case, the institute found, regardless of the quality of the care.
Goldberg acknowledges that not all evidence is bad. Some studies on day care have found it’s not bad at all. (When one considers only studies conducted by people or groups without apparent bias, however—as is the case with the above study—the results almost always paint a not-so-pretty picture.) And he’s clear that he’s talking about parents who choose to work outside the home, not those who effectively have no choice.
Goldberg asks why the major media have not done more reporting on this. Why haven’t Dan Rather, Peter Jennings and their counterparts at the other major news networks shone their probing spotlights on growing evidence that great numbers of America’s children are getting the old short shrift by parents who decide that making more money and gaining status are more important than providing the best life for their children? Because this is about women, and in America’s newsrooms, women are a ‘protected class.’
Feminists are highly threatened by the sort of evidence Goldberg cites…
And so, as writes Rich Lowery in the May 2001 National Review, “We are willing to do anything for the children except suggest that their mothers should stay with them; we are committed to leaving no child behind unless it is by his mother hustling off to make her career.” (John Rosemond, “Author Cites Working Moms In Deterioration of Morality,” in his column, “Parental Guidance,” The Daily Oklahoman, Mon., Mar. 11, 2002, p. 5B).
God has always known that godly mothers are the guardians of morality. His wisdom in ordaining that they should be keepers at home cannot be questioned. We who propose to teach “sound doctrine” ought to be sounding the clarion call for mothers to be “keepers at home” in the exalted position where God placed them instead of competing in the marketplace.
When mothers (and fathers) are driven by materialism and secular concerns more than concern for their children’s souls, everyone suffers—most of all, the children.