On the Anniversary of Roe One Cleric Accuses Christians of Being “Baby Machines”

by Douglas W. Phillips, Esq., January 22, 2004

Dear friends, I am truly brokenhearted. Today, the very anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the very day that we should be rejoicing in life, declaring the antithesis between God’s vision for life and the world’s hatred for children, I received on my desk the most remarkable newsletter I have read in some time.

I showed the newsletter to at least a half a dozen people to make sure that I was not dreaming, but was actually reading the words before me. The response from each person was the same — sadness and incredulity. One person actually wrote to me that “[the] diatribe was so far beyond the pale that it left me reeling.”

The newsletter accused some Christians home educators with a passion for biblical patriarchy as “treating their wives as baby machines,” of embracing a worldview similar to the wife-beaters and daughter-murderers of pagan Rome, and the tyrant fathers of organized crime (as discussed in Mario Puzo’s Godfather), of being arrogant spiritual tyrants of the Spanish Inquisition type, and of harming women. This same day I received a series of tapes and transcripts indicating that the very words of the newsletter were being repeated in sermons delivered in churches at locations around America.

Had this letter come from Planned Parenthood or the National Organization for Women, I would not have been surprised. It did not. This newsletter came from Andrew Sandlin, a man who claims to be a Christian worldview speaker.

Some of you have written me in the past with questions about the numerous attacks (veiled and explicit) of Mr. Sandlin on Vision Forum and our work to encourage the restoration of Christian family culture. I want to assure you that after several years of silence and personal private appeals to Mr. Sandlin by ourselves and others regarding issues of Christian character in public discourse, we are prayerfully considering (out of necessity) a public response. Please stay tuned.

One mother wrote to me expressing her own hurt over the viciousness and insensitivity of this cleric: “Mr. Sandlin seems to think that all of us who are married to such men are mindless drudges — Stepford Wives without brains who can do nothing other than drag along from day to day, breeding children like so many maggots. God help us! What a perversion of the beautiful and blessed vision of children and children’s children God has given us in Scripture!”

In the same letter she correctly observed that Mr. Sandlin accuses brothers in Christ of ‘turning their wives into baby machines,’ among other degrading slanders. Friedrich Engels made a very similar remark in 1884 when he wrote The Origin of the Family: ‘The overthrow of mother right was the world historical defeat of the female sex. The man took command in the home also; the woman was degraded and reduced to servitude; she became the slave of his lust and a mere instrument for the production of children.’ Can Mr. Sandlin really believe that this is what the proponents of patriarchy think of women when they exhort men to provide for their wives, protect them, shelter them, and nurture them spiritually?”

For the record, I do not think that Mr. Sandlin deliberately planned for his newsletter attacking families with many children as “baby machines” to arrive on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. (To be precise, he accuses husbands of abusing their wives by demanding more babies — as if the decision to have children is a tyrannical coercion on the part of the husband against the wife.) Nevertheless, the irony is compelling: While Christians should be embracing child birth on the 31st anniversary of Roe, Mr. Sandlin is focusing his pen on attacking “baby machines.” In fact, he is using the very type of terminology employed by Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood) to express disdain for the commandment “be fruitful and multiply.”

My question for men like Mr. Sandlin is this: Which of these babies, these products of “baby machines,” would have been better off had they not been born? Which of these mothers and fathers would have been better off without that precious child, had they simply resisted the temptation to become “baby machines”? In the years to come, will Mr. Sandlin and his cotere have the courage to look these children in the eyes and say: “Sorry kid, you were the product of an abusive patriarchalist, and his baby machine.” And while we are on the subject, which of these parents were sinning by conceiving children? If the procreation of such children to a married man and woman is as tyrannical as Mr. Sandlin believes, are parents who engage in such wicked procreation subject to church discipline? If not, at the minimum, should these patriarchalists who turn their wives into “baby machines,” be disciplined by the church for spousal abuse?

Sadly, we do live in a day and age in which some of the greatest persecution against the Christian family comes from professing Christians. It simply is not appropriate to accuse Christian fathers with a heart for patriarchy of “treat[ing] their wives as baby machines.” Nor is it kind to accuse brothers in Christ of “having an eerie resemblance” to pagan wife beaters and the mafia. Such statements are irresponsible in the extreme.

May God give us sweet speech which embraces the ethic of life, welcomes babies, boldly proclaims hope for the family, and never ridicules those who take the Bible seriously concerning the blessing of children by labeling them “baby machines.”

Postscript:

Mr. Sandlin’s Published Vision for Building Christian Culture:

“We here know that Christians won’t win back the culture by sad-sack ‘quiet times,’ funeral-dirge ‘worship services,’ fifth-rate apocalyptic fiction, tofu Sunday school socials, and Little House on the Prairie bonnets, but by boisterous invocations of the Almighty God, ear-blasting steel guitars, full-bodied Napa Merlots, exotic marital sex, and God-drenched avant-garde teenagers. We won’t win the culture until we get over being embarrassed by our robust, world-affirming Bible. Embarrassed by Song of Solomon’s stunning eroticism. Embarrassed by Israel’s worship dance and loud musical instruments. Embarrassed by Jesus’ water-to-wine miracle (WWJD should really mean, ‘What Would Jesus Drink?’) ... So crack open the Bible, fire up a Cohiba [Cigars], mix the martinis, and crank up the latest Coldplay CD [an MTV rock group].” — Excerpt from an article published on RazorMouth.com entitiled; “Those World-Affirming Dudes — crack open your Bible, and mix a martini”, post date October 16, 2002.

Vision Forum’s Published Vision for Building Christian Culture:

1. Turning the Hearts of Fathers to Their Families

2. Proclaiming the Nobility and Glory of Motherhood

3. Reviving the Doctrine of “Women and Children First”

4. Embracing the Blessing of Children and the Sanctity of Human Life
5. Building a Culture of Virtuous Boyhood and Girlhood
6. Reinforcing Godly Masculinity and Femininity
7. Understanding Family Culture as Religion Externalize
8. Teaching History as the Providence of God
9. Developing Biblical Worldview Through Presuppositional Thinking
10. Training Character by Hebrew Discipleship and Home Education

11. Communicating the Applicability of the Law of God

12. Addressing the Ethical Issues of the 21st Century

13. Preparing Men to Stand in the Gates
14. Encouraging Unity Between Church and Home

Reader’s Comments

Dear Mr. Phillips,

I wholeheartedly disagree with Mr. Sandlin that we must embrace substandard (and even blasphemous) characteristics in order to win our culture. It is a pity indeed if we have no more to offer the world but a dish of their own rotted pottage! When Jesus Christ wooed me, He offered me a whole new recipe for living? One that has nourished my soul with everything I need for life and godliness. He delivered me from the world’s empty ways! Why would we offer anything less?

I am appalled at the utter contempt for the Word of God that Mr. Sandlin expressed in his derogatory remarks toward the blessed gift of precious children through godly motherhood and servant, patriarch leadership. In October we were the privileged recipients of our eleventh child and I can assure you that my husband and I never once thought of him, or any of our children, as anything less than the undeserved goodness of our God. Mr. Sandlin has surely never experienced the indescribable joy of the birth of his eleventh child! In all 22 years of our marriage I have never felt like “a slave of my husband’s lust or a mere instrument for the production of children”. What a depraved way to look at something so biblically beautiful and ordained as receiving children out of godly marriage. Did it ever occur to Sandlin that I, as a Christian woman, the wife of a patriarch, could intelligently respond to the loving guidance of Scripture, to choose to receive as many children as God would give me? No, Mr. Sandlin, I joyfully enter the marriage bed with my mind fully engaged, knowing full well that from it we may be blessed with the sweet fruit of our union. In so labeling me a mindless ?baby machine?, Sandlin does much to expose his true prejudice against women since apparently he thinks it would be better if I exchanged my womanhood and ability to produce babies to become like a ‘wombless’ man. Apparently he equates freedom from childbearing as liberation in Christ. How wrong he is! What does Mr. Sandlin do with Scriptures like, ?But women will be sanctified through childbearing — if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.? 1Timothy 2:15 ? Having many children has not limited my horizon at all, but instead broadened it! I have the privilege to nurture and educate eleven children to love God and the sweetness of His ways. Our nine sons are growing into fine young men preparing to face the world as ambassadors for Christ not to join the world as minions to its ways! And our daughters are gracious yet competent to put their hands and minds to serve the Lord with gladness. PS 16:6. The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance?

Mr. Sandlin, on the other hand, should sober up and be shaking in his avant-garde boots as he reads from Isaiah 5:20:

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”

May Mr. Sandlin understand that the way to grace is by loving the truth.

M.D., Joyful mother of 11

Dear Vision Forum:

I am truly enjoying and being uplifted by the beautiful responses of mothers to Sandlin. That is one way God is bringing good out of evil.

I love every one of my 7 earthly blessings. I love my life of mothering. I would feel cheated doing anything else. There is such beauty in living life in God’s will rather than striving against it. I am sorry for moms who have to work. I am sorry for those who have chosen to limit their blessings. Many older women have said to me that they wished they would have had more children. Many women have said to me that they wished they could stay home with their children. It is natural for women to love babies, to care for children, to teach children, to love their homes.

Frankly, I am insulted that someone would call a person such as myself a “baby machine”. I am a mother MOTHER 7 times over, a mother. But it wouldn’t matter if I had only one blessing. My identity after being a child of God, a helpmate to my dear husband, is mother. I love the word. I love to hear my beautiful 8 yo daughter call me mother. You should see the heads turn in public. I love to hear my babies say mamamamama in their first babbles. I love to hear my toddlers calll Mommmmmy. I love to hear my big kid with his voice changing say Mom.

I am not a baby machine, I am a mother, living in the will of my Heavenly Father. Sandlin should crawl out of his ditch and ask me for forgiveness for his insult.. K.B

Dear Vision Forum:

After reading the comments Mr. Sandlin made about the Christian family and reading the responses of your blog readers, I felt that I had to voice my outrage at this attack on our Christian homes. One of the things that concerns me most about Mr. Sandlin’s comments is that there are so few men that joyfully receive as many children as God will send to them. To accuse these men, who have the faith and guts to have a large family, of “treating their wives as baby machines,” is going to further discourage men from embracing the vision for families that God has so clearly laid out in his word. I am disgusted that Christian ministers would feel the necessity to add further stumbling blocks in the way of a man who is trying to raise a godly seed (Mal. 2:15). I am a 19 year old young lady who prays daily for a husband that will have my same love and passion for children and for a Christian home. Christian leaders should be challenging young men to go against the tide of our sensual, ungodly culture and boldly live out the Bible’s plan for Christian patriarchy in their families. I hope and pray that today’s men will not be led astray by the false teachings of current leaders, but that, instead, their minds will be renewed by the washing of the water of the word (Rom. 12:2). To God be the glory!

Amy I.

Dear Doug,

I read your latest Blog entry regarding the vitriolic reaction to biblical patriarchy from Rev. Sandlin, and I was truly confounded. I have also received and read a copy of Rev. Sandlin’s article and can see that you have in no way exaggerated his words or misrepresented their context. The quotes from Rev. Sandlin were so shocking that it sounded like something made up. It certainly had nothing to do with what I have heard and read from your materials in all the years I have known you — and I attended the first “Back to Patriarchy” Conference in 1996.

Rev. Sandlin’s criticism of biblical patriarchy does not contain any Scriptural exegesis on the passages modern patriarchs use as foundations for their views. At best, all we hear is a weak “argument from silence” — a very strange position coming from someone who says he believes that the Scripture speaks to all areas of life.

The teachings contained in your materials on patriarchy are not new and would be considered very mild had they been promoted even 100 years ago. If Sandlin thinks you are promoting totalitarianism and legalism, what must he think of the Reformers? I seem to recall that Martin Luther believed birth control was equivalent to murder. Many mainstream 19th-century Reformed pastors believed having pipe organs in church was heretical and popish. Would Rev. Sandlin dare use the kind of ad hominem attacks against these great men of Church that he so flippantly uses against you and other teachers in today’s Church?

But the most disappointing part of Rev. Sandlin’s attack on biblical patriarchy is the condescending, highbrow, and obnoxious rhetoric he employs. Clearly, such tactics are meant to inflame — not to exhort. Sandlin seeks to make people angry at advocates of patriarchy by creating outrageous straw man arguments. These tactics are purely reactionary and never constructive towards building a godly Church.

I hope and pray that whatever ecclesiastical order he belongs to will exhort him to repent and to seek reconciliation with his brothers. I am truly grieved.

A Virginia Father

Dear Doug,

This is all the more astonishing because it is coming from a Christian brother. I expect it from the feminists; I just couldn’t have imagined it coming from a Reformed pastor who says he believes in classical biblical exegesis.

And this is the horrible “between a rock and a hard place” we full-time homemakers now find ourselves occupying. We know the world hates God’s created order and the roles He assigned at the beginning. We expect career women to misunderstand us or think of us as ignorant rubes. But now when we look to the Church for support, we find the same attitudes in the pews all around us. When we hunger for the instruction and exhortation of godly Titus 2 women, we find that they’ve all flown the coop to pursue careers now that they have an empty nest and (obviously) “have nothing to do.” When we look around for precious young ladies who might want to help out with the housework or children (learning as they go), we discover that their parents have shoved them out the door to earn money so they can get into college and jump into the career track as soon as possible. When we long for real parish life (a vibrant, warm, hospitable, helpful Church community), we find we live in a veritable ghost town where answering machines are the most we can hope for when we call a sister in the Lord.

The despair many Christian homemakers feel today doesn’t come from a lack of support from their husbands as much as it does from a severe sense of loneliness when they look for like-minded friends and godly older women. I hear this all the time from lovely Christian moms who feel like rowboats anchored in the middle of the ocean. God created us to need the community of His Body. When Christians pursue individualistic goals, the Body atomizes itself and we lack the strength (or even the vision) to bring about the cultural renewal we claim to seek. I fully admit I am no superwoman. I cannot do everything alone; I need the support of Christ’s Body. I need my older, godly mentors to exhort me in love when I fail. I need the servant-hearted young women who come to clean my house when I have the flu. I am no island, nor should any woman be expected to function as one. But this new anti-scriptural take on the woman’s role is creating this very problem — isolation in the midst of the Church.

Mother of Four