New York Times on The Pearls

Erik Eckholm of The New York Times has written a well researched and carefully balanced article about the Pearls called Preaching Virtue of Spanking, Even as Deaths Fuel Debate.  Unfortunately, in his effort to be balanced, he really didn’t warn against the Pearls’ teachings at all. The comments are many and one of them links to my site, for which I am grateful.

Testimony: Why Pearl’s Methods Are Dangerous

An anonymous writer explains how she used to follow Pearls teachings to the letter and exactly how and why they are dangerous in  Corpses Don’t Rebel: A former follower of Michael Pearl’s “To Train Up A Child” reacts to the death of Hana Williams.

Deb of The Wartburg Watch posts about exposing Pearl’s teachings as well as the Judge who was recently exposed for his child abuse 7 years ago in “Judge” Not Lest Ye Be Judged.

Note: I do not have much to say about the Hillary Adams case, as abuse is beyond the scope of this blog unless it is being justified as Biblical, (in other words, unless God is dragged into it.)  So far I have yet to see that in this case.

Responses to Michael Pearl’s Defense on CNN

Here are some responses to Michael Pearl’s Interview on CNN‘s A360.

Michael Pearl Defends Book By Using Pragmatism by GraceGirl at Free By His Grace

Christian doctrine doesn’t condone abuse by Emilie Eaton at StatePress.com

And here are some responses to the Williams case:

The Digital Journal looks at the Pearls and the spanking controversy in The debate continues on ‘spanking’ children in the name of God.

Meanwhile,  Christian Book Shop Talk warns about To Train Up A Child in, Selling This Title Could Lead to Huge Legal Costs.

MaryJanesFarm Magazine and Shoshanna Pearl

I received an email late last week saying:

I have come across your website about TTUAC, and while I don’t agree with everything you write about :-) , I am glad you are taking a stand against TTUAC, and applaud you for that.

I also see that you have an online petition against the book at Amazon.

The reason I am writing is that one of my favorite magazines, Mary Janes Farm now has a full page ad for Shoshanna Pearls’ Making Babies.  I was frankly disgusted and very saddened to see that because I really, really love this magazine, but now I don’t think I can continue taking it.

I don’t know if you have a spot for this on your blog, or at any of the other sources you visit often, but I would like as many people as possible to write to the publisher/editor of this magazine to voice our objections to this advertisement.  The place to email is jpagliaro@maryjanesfarmmag.com.  Could you pass this on if you could?

About a year ago I posted about Mary Jane’s Farm Magazine running a full-page ad for the Bulk Herb Store  (Owned by Shoshanna Pearl) and suggested that someone might want to tell them about the Pearls and what they teach.  I did not give the above email address so maybe the correct person is still unaware.  Or maybe they just don’t care.

Michael Pearl Interviewed on CNN

Michael Pearl was interviewed by Anderson Cooper on this videoHere is the transcript, it’s about half way down.  His double speak is very obvious here.

In case that link ever is removed, Chucklestravels has posted it http://chucklestravels.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/showdown-on-cnn-anderson-cooper-interviews-michael-pearl-transcript/

Hana “Williams” Story on CNN

Gary Tuchman of CNN covers the case of Hana Alemu (legally Hana Williams as she was adopted by Larry and Carri Williams) on A360 in Ungodly Discipline. They plan to look closer at the book, To Train Up A Child by Michael and Debi Pearl.

The next day they featured an interview with Michael Pearl.   Here is the transcript. The part in question is about half way down.

Also  on CNN, Dr. Drew interviews Michael Pearl about his book, To Train Up A Child, in an episode called, Preaching discipline that can kill?  This video seems to be just an excerpt.  If I find the entire show, I will replace the link.

The Pearls’ Teachings are Not Biblical

Bible Scholar, Samuel Martin explains why he believes that Amazon should stop selling To Train Up A Child.  Please sign the petition, the link is in my sidebar.

And here are 2 posts about why the Pearls’ teachings are not Biblical:

Laura Ziesel shares an in depth study of Proverbs 22:6 in Train up a Child in Whose Way?

Samuel Martin shares a statement from Prof. William Webb responding to Hana’s death called, The Pearl’s Beatings Are Not Really Biblical which I am posting in its entirety below at his request.

Wednesday, October 05, 2011

The Newsletter of the
“New Foundation for Biblical Research.”
A project of the Century One Foundation, Inc. (www.centuryone.org)
© Samuel Martin
Samuel Martin – Project Director – www.biblechild.com

October 2011

Religious scholars speaking out against the teachings of Michael and Debi Pearl
Many of you may have by now heard about Hana-Grace Rose Williams, who died in May at the tender age of 13. See the details of her story here and how Michael and Debi Pearl’s book “To Train Up A Child” is yet again being implicated in this horrifying case. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016361753_hana30m.html
When I saw this, I postponed what I had planned to publish this month and I immediately started writing to a number of religious scholars that I know asking them to speak out on this outrageous, unacceptable and evil publication. Thankfully, my call has immediately been answered by Prof, William Webb of Tyndale Seminary, Toronto, Canada. I know that I will be hearing from other religious scholars very soon and I will be sharing more testimonies and comments from them as I receive them. We need to hear these voices now.
Many of you know that I have strongly endorsed Prof. Webb’s book in this newsletter (July 2011 Newsletter). Today, I am herein once again not only endorsing this book, but I am asking you to support this book to ensure that it obtains the widest possible reading, attention and exposure. Rather than telling you what Prof. Webb told me, I am herein including a written communication from him that I received just this morning. The following is a direct quote from Prof. Webb and is used with his permission.
THE PEARL’S BEATINGS ARE NOT REALLY BIBLICAL
“Although they will tell you it is from the Bible, the Pearl’s version of child discipline is not really biblical.  Not in the truest sense.  Not in the deepest sense of what should shape biblical authority.  Not in a way that honors the Bible’s underlying redemptive spirit.  It is utterly heart breaking to watch “Christian materials” written by Michael and Debi Pearl become part of the murder investigations in three separate cases where so-called Christian parents allegedly abused their children in life-threatening and life-ending ways.  I am stunned and appalled by what I have seen on CNN, King5 News, etc.
Unfortunately, Christians often get stuck in their ability to apply the Bible in today’s world.  It is my hope that my recent book (Corporal Punishment in the Bible: A Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic for Troubling Texts) will inspire hope and positive dialogue that helps the Christian community move towards something better for our children.  The book outlines how Marilyn (my wife) and I changed our minds about spanking.  Like the Pearls we were severely deluded in thinking that the rod was God’s way.  But over time we learned how to read and understand the Bible differently.  We also learned a truck-load of non-corporal methods of discipline which were far more weighty and effective than the Dobson version (2 smacks max) and certainly better than the abusive Pearl prescription (many beatings with the rod).  Like the slavery texts of Scripture, the answer is not simply in moving towards a better form of slavery.  That only captures part of Scripture’s redemptive spirit.  The Dobson approach is to be commended because they move away from the Pearl-type literalism.  But, that is not where biblical application should stop.  Like the slavery issue of past days, we need to move beyond a gentler, kinder form of slavery/corporal punishment.  Two smacks max is good but it does not reflect an ultimate ethical application of the Bible.  As with slavery, only abolitionism (of the rod) will permit Christians to fully embrace effective non-corporal methods and do the courageous, William Wilberforce action in this hour of time.  I pray that contemporary followers of Jesus might be known as those who want to live out the very highest ethical application of Scripture.  What the Pearls offer is nothing other than “gutter theology”; it is not really the Bible at all . . . well, not if we want to live out Scripture’s redemptive heartbeat.” Dr. William J. Webb is Adjunct Professor of New Testament at Tyndale Seminary, Toronto, Canada. (Quotation from Prof. Webb ends here.)
Brethren, now is the time for all of us to take action to work to stop what is happening today to children at the hands of dear misguided parents/others who think they are doing God’s will.
First, I am asking you to take this newsletter and the exact comments of Prof. Webb and post them to your blogs, pass them to your networks, put them on your FACEBOOK pages and disseminate his above referenced quotation as far and as wide as you can. For more links, reviews and other information about Professor Webb and his book see: http://redemptivechristianity.com &   http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/review/code=2761. Please include these in your posts.
Second, I am asking you to please buy his book. Get your copy here – https://shop.ivpress.com/epages/IVP.storefront/en/addtobasket/0-8308-2761-7
Third, I am asking you to write positive reviews of this book in any forum that you come across including but not limited to Amazon, news sites and other book related sites and blogs.
Fourth, I am also you to join me in applauding and supporting InterVarsity Press (www.ivpress.com) for publishing such courageous and careful scholarship. They need to know that we are watching and supporting Christian publishers who stand up for what is right. Please join me in doing this by writing/emailing them or leaving comments on their site.
I would like to thank Prof. Webb for standing up and letting his voice be heard through this newsletter at this difficult time. His message is an important one. His work is really an inspiration for those of us who are looking for truth. I am reminded of a quotation from a giant of Biblical scholarship who was a friend of my late father and I think it is appropriate to reference it here. “…we must bear in mind that the cause of learning has often been promoted by scholars who are prepared to take a risk and expose their brain-waves to the pitiless criticisms of others” (F.F.Bruce, “Modern Studies on the Judean Scrolls,” CT, I (11):5).
Prof. Webb, thank you for your courage, risk taking, intellectual honesty and standing up and speaking out for the truths of the Holy Scripture. I look forward to supporting you and your work for many years to come.

Posted by Samuel Martin at 1:31 PM

 

Pearl’s Official Response to Hana’s Death

Michael Pearl  has released an official statement on the tragic death of Hannah Williams on his No Greater Joy Facebook Page.  This time he is not laughing.  He explains that he tells parents not to abuse and gives some quotes to back that up.  He didn’t even quote where he said not to use punishment on a child who has medical issues for not obeying, which I consider to be his best defense.  However, I do not agree with him that anyone can follow his advice without being abusive, as he and I do not agree on our definitions of abuse.  In fact, he never actually gives his definition of abuse, which is part of the problem.  He says not to abuse but never tells them how far to go (other than to be 100% consistent) nor what constitutes abuse.  Then, every time someone crosses the (invisible) line, he blames them for not doing it correctly.

Here is his statement for those who can’t or won’t visit Facebook:

Hanna Williams’ Death – Official Statement

by No Greater Joy Ministries on Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 12:07pm

We share in the sadness over the tragic death of Hanna Williams. What her parents did is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of No Greater Joy Ministries (NGJ) and what is taught in the book, To Train Up a Child (see quotes below). We are grieved by Hanna’s death as well as the nearly 1,700 other children that die in this country every year as the result of neglect or abuse. This is part of the motivation of NGJ to provide materials that are helping parents to raise healthy and happy children.

Here are quotes from the book that actually warn against abuse.

“Train up-not beat up. Train up-not discipline up.” “A child needs more than ‘obedience training’, but without first training him, discipline is insufficient” page 4

“Disciplinary actions can easily become excessive and oppressive if you set aside the tool of training and depend on discipline alone to do the training.” Page 9

“Parent, have you trained yourself not to discipline immediately but to wait until your irritation builds into anger? If so, then you have allowed anger to become your inducement to discipline.” Page 25

“Parent, if you are having problems with your children, you can be assured that you are not alone. Your children are also having problems with you. You are going to have to make adjustments in your own life if you are going to help them with their problems.” “… the responsibility for making a significant change is completely yours.” Page 32

“There are always some who act in the extreme. These individuals are capable of using what has been said about the legitimate use of the rod to justify ongoing brutality to their children.” page 50

“The rod should never be a vent for parents’ anger. Where the supreme motivation is anything other than the child’s good, it is inevitable that such behavior by the parent will assuredly create problems.” page 51

These quotes and the rest of the book are about turning the hearts of parents to the children and the hearts of children to the parents.

If, as alleged, Hanna’s parents owned a copy of the book, it is obvious from these quotes and their actions, that they either have not read it or totally ignored its contents. The book repeated warns parents against abuse and emphasizes the parents’ responsibility to love and properly care for their children, which includes training them for success. There are thousands upon thousands of parents (the book has sold over 660,000 copies) who have and are properly applying the philosophy in the book with the joyous results of happy, productive, well-adjusted children in loving successful families.

The alleged presence of the book makes it no more responsible for Hanna’s death than the presence of a weight loss book in the home of an overweight person is responsible for their obesity. Its presence is actually recognition that there was a problem and obtaining the book was an effort to solve it. Unfortunately, if Hanna’s parents own a copy they chose to ignore (or twist) the contents of the book that could have corrected their poor parenting and prevented the abuse and her death.

It is our desire to redouble our efforts to help families and to prevent future tragedies.

Michael Pearl, President

No Greater Joy Ministries

He is wrong about the Williams obtaining the book in an effort to solve the problem.  They were using the Pearls’ materials for years before they adopted Hana and Immanuel.  I don’t know how long ago they last read the book, but I have said many times that they twisted the advice therein.  The only reason I link the Pearls to this tragedy at all is because of their Parents Must Win Every Battle At All Costs mindset which I feel could have something to do with the Williams’ need for control.  I suspect that after all those years of Perfectly Obedient Children resulting from following the Pearls’ teachings, the fact that they were unable to get results from their adopted children pushed them off the deep end.  I could be wrong, but this is how it looks to me.  I thought that back  on Sept 6 and the more I learn, the more it looks that way.

Admin of Pro-Pearl Facebook Page Has Change of Heart

The admin of one of the To Train Up A Child fan pages has had a change of heart.  She was planning to delete the page, then people said that she should keep it to prevent others from using that name and could use the page to warn people.  Then someone said that the Pearls have copyright for that name and that they were going to report her, so I’m not sure what she is planning to do now.

In case she ends up deleting the page, here is her status from Sunday, Oct 2 11:52 am

Due to a change of heart by the admin, this page will be deleted in 24 hours. I only leave it up that long for this message to be read. I encourage all who genuinely like this page to reconsider and think about your actions. This book is NOT biblical. The older my children get the more I realize that I have failed them by following even a few of the principles encouraged by this book.

· · Share · Yesterday at 11:42am

This story has also been posted at ChucklesTravels with a screenshot of the Facebook Post.

Monday, Oct 3 at 6:32 pm she posted

I have started the process of deleting the page. It takes 14 days for it to go dark. For now the short version of my change is this. I had already been questioning the methods when one day my son hit me and I “smacked” him back saying “no don’t hit” and he looked at me like I had lost my mind. A 2 year old, smarter than his momma? I think so. Makes ZERO sense any way you look at it.

· · Share · 14 hours ago

Her wall has turned into quite the debate board and she is looking for more admins to help her out.  Meanwhile, someone made another fanpage using the same avatar and same name except instead of “To Train Up A Child, by Michael and Debi Pearl” it is “To Train Up A Child – by Michael and Debi Pearl.”  Do you see the difference?  It’s the punctuation.  And that person is calling her an atheist.  It is amazing to me that they equate being against spanking with not believing in God.

Update Oct 6, 2011:

The page has been deleted, which is for the best.

Joshua Skogerboe has a blog post about this called, Here’s To the Steady Decline Of Michael And Debi Pearl’s Influence…

Reactions to Hana Williams story

Here are some reactions to the “Hana Williams” story from around the internet.  All of these links consider the link between To Train Up A Child and Hanna’s death.

Note: I just found out from a friend of her’s from Ethiopia that her real name is Hanna Beck. eta: word from Ethiopia is that her real name is Hana Alemu.

The Short Life of Hana Williams by chucklestravels

Did the Disturbing Philosophy of To Train Up a Child Lead to Hana Williams’ Death? by J. Bryan Lowder on Slate.com

Hana Grace Williams, 1997 – 2011 by Tulipgirl who makes a very good case as to how the Pearls’ emphasis on “defeating totally” a “rebellious” child had a lot to do with how the Williams managed to turn the Pearls’ teachings into an instrument of death.

Controversial book part of adopted girl’s murder investigation from Religion News Blog

Extreme Discipline Book Connected to Adoptees’ Deaths from Adoption Talk

Obviously, I’ve been away for awhile
by Down To Earth Woman

Another Dead Child: Hana Grace-Rose Williams, age 13. (Parents owned book “To Train Up a Child”) and Having flashbacks/Survivor’s Guilt by Elizabeth Esther

Rally has been archiving this entire story in his How Could You? Hall of Shame. This is a clear and concise timeline of sorts with many links. It also contains some details I had not heard elsewhere.

And here is a news story which, while old news, seems to contain a few details I hadn’t yet read.

Case file: Parents starved and beat girl, locked her out in the cold from KVAL.com

The Pearls’ Book NOT Banned in New Zealand (Working on Amazon)

New Zealand’s Censorship Compliance Unit has decided not to ban nor restrict Michael and Debi Pearl’s book, To Train Up A Child, according to this article in the Marlborough Press.  While I don’t believe in book banning, it seems to me that if a country has that policy, this book should fall into that category and I am a bit confused as to how they reached their decision.

I do believe in encouraging book sellers to stop selling offensive books and so does  Milli Hill at Peaceful Parenting who explains why Amazon should stop selling books which promote Child Abuse, especially To Train Up A Child. This piece includes a long quote from Debi Pearl in which she explains how one should use the switch on a child under one year old.

Note: The petition to which she links is the same one to which I link in my side bar. If you have not signed it, please sign it and share the link. Thank you.

The Effects of Spanking – Part 3 *Sensitive*

(Part 1)  (Part 2)

In the last piece I discussed one of the major effects of spanking, which is denial.  We also looked at repression and the continuum of violence against children.  If a swat or light slap on a child’s hand or bottom is intended to cause pain to the child, then it is a form of violence against the child just as it is for adults.  Children are not sub-humans, and do not deserve to have pain inflicted upon them because they are unable to behave like adults.  As we’ve seen in my last two series, “Spanking is NOT God’s Will,” and “The Christian History of Spanking,” God never intended us to spank our children.   This series further proves this as it is showing the very harmful effects of spanking children—even if it’s done “lovingly” and by Christian parents.  In this piece, I will be discussing how spanking effects empathy, anger, and aggression in children and adults.

Empathy—“That Child Needs a Good Spanking!”

We hear the above statement, “That child needs a good spanking,” by many advocates of spanking as if they have no empathy for what the child is actually experiencing or the pain a “good spanking” will cause the child both physically and emotionally.  As we saw in Part 2 of this series, many pro-spankers were spanked/abused as children themselves but have repressed their pain and are now in denial that hitting children does in fact cause harm.  This denial can often, and does indeed, lead to a lack of empathy when it comes to children as well as other adults.

So, what is empathy?  Empathy is the ability to put oneself in another’s shoes.  The ability to share in another’s joy or pain.  An example of this is when a close friend gets hurt in some way, and because we can share in his or her pain, we want to do anything we can to help ease his or her pain.  We may not completely understand how our friend feels, but we know what it is like to hurt.  As Christians, we share in Christ’s sufferings (Romans 8:17; 2 Corinthians 1:5; & Philippians 3:5).  Even though we do not know exactly what it was like for Christ to be beaten and then nailed to a cross in order to bear all of humanities’ sins, just thinking about it breaks my heart, humbles me, and fills me with gratitude for Him.  The Bible also says that we are to “Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn” in Romans 12:15.  Empathy is obviously important to God!

Despite empathy being important to God as it allows us to love our enemies (Matthew 5:44 & Luke 6:35), which is not easy to do, we are not born with empathy.  Empathy is learned.  Yes, due to our sinful nature we are born with a tendency towards selfishness.  An infant is not capable of empathizing, but this is not because of purposeful sin as some Christian pro-spankers believe.  This is because an infant’s brain is not developed enough to allow the infant to think beyond his/her world.  This does not mean that the infant is evil!  This just means that infants are not at that developmental stage, and won’t be for four or five more years (or longer if these children are not treated with respect and gently told about other’s feelings).  The young brain is designed by God to first learn what the child’s body can do.  The first three months infants are learning exactly how their bodies work.  In fact, infants and toddlers are in Jean Piaget’s first stage of his Cognitive Development Theory, which is Sensorimotor Development.  While children this age do learn a great deal through social interactions, all of their learning is happening through their five senses and movements.  Piaget and Inhelder (1969) state, “We call it the ‘sensorimotor’ period because the infant lacks symbolic function; that is, he does not have representations by which he can evoke persons or objects in their absence” (p. 3).  Infants do not have a strong concept of self.  That begins to develop as infants grow into toddlers.  Late in the first year of life, infants begin to discover that they are separate beings from their parents.  All throughout the first year infants discover that they can make things happen.  “The emergent self is the sense of familiar experience of the body and of the familiarity in the way others respond to those experiences” (Fogel, 2011, p. 202).  During the second year of life, toddlers’ sense of self develops much more.  They now know that they are independent from their parents.  Toddlers are really discovering exactly who they are outside of their parents.  They have a very strong desire for independence even though they are way too young to handle much independence as the very thing that they so strongly desire is also often very overwhelming for them.  This is why toddlers have so many “behavioral issues.”  Actually, these “behavioral issues” are developmentally appropriate as they discover who they are, how they fit within their families and their world, and try to strike a balance between dependence and independence.  For this reason, toddlers are still focused on themselves, although, they are a bit more aware of others and may comment when they see or hear someone cry.  They may even try to comfort the person who is crying.  However, toddlers will think the reason the other person is crying is for the same reason they cry.  “A happy and well-adjusted little girl, watching a lion roar in the zoo, reflected: ‘He’s roaring because he wants to eat me for breakfast.’  She could not imagine that the lion had his own private reasons to roar” (Lieberman, 1993, p. 179).  Let me make myself clear.  Infants and toddlers are very aware of their parents’ emotions from birth and are affected by them.  But this does not mean that infants and toddlers can empathize with the parents.

Young children from birth until somewhere around the age of four or five years are what Piaget calls egocentric.   Again, this may be due to our sinful nature but it does not mean that young children are evil.  God designed children exactly how they are.  There’s a reason He made young children egocentric probably for survival in this harsh, sinful world.  “Piaget referred to this feature of early thinking as ‘egocentrism,’ not because children are selfish but because they understand an event subjectively, through their own reactions to it.  Their understanding of the relation between cause and effect is centered on their own capacity to make things happen.  As a result, young children react to an event in terms of how it affects them.  In other words, children reason by applying to themselves the real or imagined consequences of an event” (Lieberman, 1993, p. 179).  This is why young children have a very hard time sharing with other children.  They can’t imagine the other child wanting the toy as much as they do.  I will be discussing how to appropriately teach young children empathy, and how to encourage turn taking in my next series.

Since empathy is a learned behavior, how does the use of physical punishment affect the development of empathy in children?  If we read books and comments written by pro-spankers, whether they are Christian or non-believers, there’s always a certain sense of coldness and harshness as they try to convince others that spanking is an absolute must for raising respectful and/or godly children.  They may try to sugar coat it by explaining how to spank “lovingly,” but it is still harsh as they also use seemingly harsh Bible verses that are taken completely out of context to back themselves up.  In fact, the very phrase that I discussed in Part 2 of this series, “I was spanked and I’m okay,” further shows not just denial, but a lack of empathy.  They assume that because they are “ok” after being spanked (hit) as children, that the same will be true for all children.  This seems very egotistical.  Also, when they read about someone who isn’t ok after being hit as a child, they often blow off that person and/or say that the person’s parents didn’t spank “the right and lovingly” way.  I continue to hear the exact same argument from pro-spankers that if spankings are done “the right way,” then no emotional harm is done to the child.  Only research and the very actions of pro-spankers show otherwise.  All spankings are harmful to children!  This is true when it comes to empathy.

Given the fact that children are naturally egocentric, when we hit children in order to teach them a lesson, children focus on the pain, fear, and anger they are feeling from being spanked, and therefore are unable to truly internalize the message.  Yes, parents may tell the child before and after the spanking why he/she is being spanked, but the child does not truly hear the parent’s words.  Pain does stop the behavior temporarily, but pain highly interferes with the learning process as children are more focused on the pain than anything else.  Yes, children may act like they truly understand why they were spanked, but this is simply to please their parents in order to avoid further spankings.  Many parents spank when children are “malicious” or disrespectful such as when a 3-year-old hits his brother or sister.  He gets spanked for hitting, which makes no sense because children can see clearly that hitting and spanking are the same — only adults “spank” — but being spanked for hitting does not teach him how to appropriately interact with his siblings.  He may be forced to apologize to his sibling, but he is so focused on how he was hurt that he is unable to even try to learn how his sibling felt when he hit him/her.  This hinders the development of empathy in the child.  “One of the most enduring consequences of corporal punishments—and yet one of the least appreciated and studied—is the stifling of empathy and compassion for oneself and others” (Greven, 1992, p. 127).  Yet, God requires us to be empathic and compassionate with other people.  “If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent” Matthew 12:7.  (see also Hosea 6:6; Ephesians 4:32; Colossians 3:12).  As Greven (1992) states, “The ability to put oneself in the place of others and to understand how they feel and experience life, and the ability to grasp sympathetically both their suffering and their joy is one of the greatest human achievements” (p. 127).

Sadly, as their parents, the very people who are supposed to be loving and teaching them empathy, purposely and intentionally hurt their children the children begin to develop immunity to empathy.  They are so focused on their own pain and how to avoid being physically punished that they are unable to fully grasp or appropriately relate to other’s suffering and pain.  We see this mostly in adults who were physically punished or harshly punished in other ways grow up to become pro-spankers and advocates of spanking.  But, we can also sometimes see a lack of empathy in children.   On August 20, 2011 Amy shared with me how being spanked caused her to struggle with a lack of empathy throughout her childhood.  Amy stated:

“I personally struggled in my childhood with empathy. I would often spank my younger siblings even when I was very young. I would get angry with them and erupt just as my parents did with aggression, and would act out a spanking ritual on my younger sibs. Then afterwards I would feel little to no guilt or remorse. I felt justified since that was how adults resolved their issues when they became angry at me. I had lost sight of an ability to empathize with my siblings who most unfortunately were getting doubly spanked. I was also unable to make friends because when I became angry I would become aggressive. It really does change the course of one’s attitude and in a strange twist of fate there ability to know or trust oneself.”

It is clear that Amy’s parents taught her a “lesson in indifference to suffering” (Greven, 1992, p. 127).  Going back to all of the books written by pro-spankers, as I said, they all lack empathy and compassion for children.  In fact, they advise parents, especially mothers, to stifle their empathy and natural desire to protect their children in order to “discipline them with the rod.”  Here is one such example of an advocate of spanking telling mothers to stifle their empathy in order for their children to be spanked:

“J. Richard Fugate, an advocate of the rod, recognizes the impulse toward empathy and compassion in some parents, especially mothers: ‘A mother naturally cringes at the thought of switching her own child.  The reality of intentionally inflicting pain, especially in using a rod that can make a mark (which will quickly go away), goes against the natural tendency to protect, comfort, and nurture her child.  Uninformed mothers may even try to interfere with the father’s proper use of a rod.’  His advice is for mothers to think of the long-term consequences of their use of the rod in obtaining the obedience of their children, however much they may feel the need ‘to protect, comfort, and nurture’ their children” (Greven, 1993, p. 127-128).

I find this quite interesting as throughout the Bible God says He will love, nurture, and protect His children.  Yes, there were times in the Old Testament when God got angry with people for turning their backs on Him, and yet, He would always have compassion on His people.  He created mothers with a natural instinct to nurture and protect her child.  Just as He made young children egocentric, He also made mothers nurturers and protectors of their children.  This is all for survival in a world that is broken by sin.  God is love.  I can’t imagine the Holy Spirit instructing parents to ignore their God-given instincts in order to intentionally inflict pain on their children.  In fact, God command us to take off our sinful nature and put on love and peace.  “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry…Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13 Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14 And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity” Colossians 3:5, 12-14.  What pro-spankers don’t seem to understand is that it is our sinful nature that allows us to intentionally inflict harm on children and other people.  Pro-spankers rely on the same 5 or 6 rod verses in Scripture to justify allowing their sinful nature to inflict pain on their children, and then further justify it by saying they comforted the child after the spanking.  I would like to ask you, if you’re a pro-spanker, do you actually feel the Holy Spirit jumping for joy inside you while you’re hitting your child?  Do you feel that warm glow we feel when God is pleased with us while your child is crying out in pain from you?  These are tough questions, but if we are honest with ourselves, the answers to these questions is no.  We may think that after we spank our children and are busy loving and comforting them that God’s pleased.  However, is that really the Holy Spirit or is it a combination of endorphins being released as well as our minds trying to justify our actions?  Some Christians reading this may not have a strong sensitivity to the Holy Spirit.  After all, how do we know it is the Holy Spirit speaking to us?  First, one must be a born again Christian in order for the Holy Spirit to dwell inside you.   “Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit” 1 Corinthians 12:3.  Second, the Holy Spirit never tells us to do anything evil.  Everything that the Holy Spirit tells us is good and glorifies God.  Thirdly, everything the Holy Spirit tells us to do will not only benefit us, but will benefit others.  I will be discussing Godly sorrow versus worldly sorrow in a future piece on guilt and shame, but for now, I want to point out that the Holy Spirit always promotes Godly sorrow in that we are more concerned about how our mistakes affected others and/or our relationship with God instead of how our mistakes have affected us.  Therefore, the Holy Spirit encourages empathy, peace, and love, which are the fruits of the Spirit of which Galatians 5:22 speaks.  The Holy Spirit does not promote pain and violence in Jesus’ Name!  In fact, the Holy Spirit reminds us of Christ’s teachings, which are peaceful and gentle.  “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” John 14:26.  Finally, Scripture warns us not to do anything that will “grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” Ephesians 4:30.  Since we must stifle empathy, compassion, and gentleness when we spank (hit) our children, this grieves the Holy Spirit.

Another reason physical punishment hinders the development of empathy in children is that it does not show respect for the body, mind, feelings, and spirit of the child.  Therefore, the child does not learn to respect his/herself or others.  Thus, the cycle of physical punishment/abuse, which are one in the same (see Part 2), continues unless the person recognizes that it is wrong and against God’s Will and works against it.  Also, physical punishment causes children to become passive, which, despite what many Christian pro-spankers say, is not good!  This can lead to children not getting the help they need both in and out of school.  It also leads to apathy.  Greven (1992) states,

“Equally enduring are the apathy and passivity so often experienced by children who are physically punished and abused.  Ruth and Henry Kemp point out: ‘Another outstanding characteristic of young abused children is their compliance and acceptance of whatever happens.  They are passive and obedient, even when in the hospital they are required to submit to painful procedures, or when in the process of an evaluation they are taken away from their parents by a stranger.  They will remain in uncomfortable positions for a long time if asked to do so, or sit quietly while their mothers talk for a long time.  That this truly is compliance is proved by their gradual growth of assertiveness and resistance, if they are removed to a more permissive environment’” (p. 128-129).

This may sound great to some parents.  Who wouldn’t want an easy, compliant child.  But what people such as the Pearls fail to understand is these children are not truly happy.   They’ve learned to stop feeling, to stop caring about themselves and others in order to survive lest they get beaten again.  This is no way for anyone to live, much less a child.  In severe cases such as these, children do not learn empathy at all as they are so focused on just surviving.  This is exactly what happened to Phil E. Quinn.  Quinn (1988) begins my stating the fact that “Empathy makes us so uncomfortable with someone else’s suffering that we are motivated to do something about it.  Parents unable to empathize with the hurts of their children are likely to do little to relieve the suffering” (p. 55).

Quinn goes on to describe how he never learned empathy as a child due to the severe abuse he endured throughout his childhood.  He explains:

“Empathy is learned most easily in childhood.  The tragedy for me, as for many others, is that I was never provided the opportunity to develop empathy.  My childhood was spent trying to survive—not only the abuse, but my own incredible feelings.  I was too preoccupied with my own feelings to be concerned about those of others.  It took all my concentration and effort to avoid being overwhelmed by a childhood that threatened almost daily to destroy me.  Even at the age of twenty-three it was difficult to vicariously experience what someone else might be thinking or feeling” (Quinn, 1988, p. 55).

Due to not being able to learn empathy as a child, it wasn’t until he started having children that Quinn was force to teach himself how to be empathetic towards his children.  Quinn (1988) states:

“Like other survivors of child abuse, I tended to measure the suffering of others—particularly my children—by my own experience.  If what they seemed to be experiencing fell within the range of my own negative experience, then no empathetic response would result.  Like all children learning to walk and run and play, my children would occasionally fall down and skin their elbows and knees.  Also like most children, they would turn to me for comfort.  At first.  But after a while they stopped coming to me for comfort.  Why?  I was totally oblivious to their suffering!  Seeing their little skinned elbows and knees provoked no emotional reaction in me at all…To be an effective parent, I literally had to resensitize myself to the experiences of my children; to realize that skinned elbows and knees do hurt and that it was important to respond with empathy and caring.  It took time and conscious effort to develop these empathetic skills, but I made it” (p. 55-56).

Sadly, not everyone is as successful at retraining themselves to become more empathetic towards others; especially towards their children, as Quinn was.  Denial and repression often set in making one oblivious to the need to have more empathy.  Then satan further hardens our hearts by having us read books and articles that say children must be spanked in order to become God-fearing adults.  Since children learn by example and experience, it can sometimes be difficult to break out of the cycle of using physical punishment/abuse with their own children.  After all, “If it was good enough for my parents and me, they reason, then it is good enough for me and my child.  It is one way to parent, or at least it is the way it has always been done in my family.  This is one reason abused children tend to become abusive parents” (Quinn, 1988, p. 56).  It is clear that children are learning more through their parents’ actions towards them than by their words.  Parents can tell their children until their blue in the face that violence is unacceptable, but if they are hitting their children in order to drive home the message, the children will get the exact opposite message.  Children are too focused on the pain to internalize a message of peace and love from their parents’ words.    Thus, the age old saying, “Actions speak louder than words,” is quite true when it comes to children!  “From the research of Straus and others, we’ve learned quite a bit about the effects of spanking. We’ve learned that spanking teaches kids that hitting others is morally correct. In other words, hitting is okay if the other person is doing something wrong and won’t stop it” (Sprain, 2000, http://www.parentingthoughts.org/Spanking.htm).

Children will often imitate how their parents treat them and other people.  When they see and/or experience adults hitting children, they will often act it out during play either with a doll or a sibling.  “The mom of one of my patients once told me that she thought she had to spank her child to be a good disciplinarian  – until one day she observed her 3-year-old daughter hitting her younger brother. When the mom intervened, the daughter said, “I’m just playing mommy.” Obviously, there was no more spanking in that house” (Sears, 2010, http://www.parenting.com/article/ask-dr-sears-spanking—-yay-or-nay).  I have witnessed similar situations in which a physically punished child hits their sibling during play.  They really have no idea why what they did was wrong nor do they understand how they’ve hurt their sibling.  “Spanking sabotages empathy. A child is likely to haul off and hit another child without considering whether his actions are going to hurt the other person” (Sears, 2010, http://www.parenting.com/article/ask-dr-sears-spanking—-yay-or-nay).

Finally, there have been Facebook postings in which people joke about how they were spanked and it didn’t affect them.  Here’s an example of one such post.  “I have to laugh at people who are against spanking… My parents whipped my butt like there was no tomorrow… I didn’t hate them… I didn’t have trust issues with them because of it… I didn’t fear them… But I darn sure respected them! And I learned what my boundaries were and knew what would happen if I broke them… I wasn’t abused… I was disciplined… *Re-post if you got your butt smacked and survived it… God put extra padding back there for a reason*” (Dulce de Leche, 2011, http://dulcefamily.blogspot.com/2011/08/i-spanked-my-dog-and-he-turned-out-fine.html).  Like Dulce, I am sickened and saddened by the harsh, mocking tone of such a post as if being hit and/or hitting a child is not serious.  It also further proves that pro-spankers lack empathy and compassion.  To truly believe that children need a “good whipping or spanking” in order to learn limits and boundaries shows a lack of regard for the fruits of the Spirit, the child’s feelings and dignity, and for people who were spanked and did not turn out “just fine.”  Yes, children who are physically punished/abused can learn empathy, but it is much more difficult for them, and they often learn it from someone other than their parents.  The research and actions of pro-spankers clearly demonstrates that physical punishment/abuse limits the development of empathy in children.

“Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD” Leviticus 19:18.

In the next section of this piece, I will be discussing how spanking/abusing children often leads to anger and aggression at some point in their lives.  Also, the physical punishment/abuse in the Name of God often leads some to become angry with God and/or the church.

Anger and Aggression—“I refuse to follow a God that promotes and inflicts violence!”

The above statement, “I refuse to follow a God that promotes and inflicts violence,” saddens me greatly.  I have been hearing it a lot lately from non-believers after the airing of the interview with Michael and Debi Pearl from No Greater Joy Ministries on CNN a few weeks ago.  The parents of Lydia Schatz were convicted of murder after beating Lydia to death by following the Pearl’s child training “wisdom” found in their book, To Train a Child.  We will be discussing how people—including those that grow up in Christian homes—can become so angry that they reject God forever.

As we saw in the previous section on empathy, a lack of empathy makes becoming angry and aggressive with others—especially with children—much easier.  After all, as we saw above, some pro-spankers tell parents to suppress their God-given instinct to love, nurture, and protect their children in order to inflict pain on them in the name of “godly discipline.”  Empathy works to inhibit anger and aggression in people (Quinn, 1988).  People who lack and/or suppress empathy and compassion are much more likely to believe that spanking children is perfectly fine.  The reason for this is that being hit by one’s parents not only makes one feel weak and helpless, but it also teaches the child that the stronger adult is allowed to hit the weaker child.   Children are never allowed to defend themselves during spankings lest they endure further spankings with possibly even more force being applied by the parents.  These memories are stored either consciously or subconsciously in their minds.  When these children become adults, many of them crave the power that they lacked as children; therefore, misusing the power they now have over their children.  “Only now, when someone weaker than they is involved, do they finally fight back, often quite fiercely.  There are countless rationalizations, still used today, to justify their behavior” (Miller, 1994, p. 16).

Anger and aggression are two very common effects of physical punishment/abuse with children because children have a very black and white view of justice and fairness.  Even when children are spanked the “right, loving” way, anger and aggression pop up as they try to cope with the confusion and unfairness of being intentionally hurt by their parents who are supposed to love them.  Greven (1992) states, “Being assaulted violently in the name of discipline invariably produces anger and often rage in children, just as it does in most adults” (p. 123).  Because young children cannot express their anger verbally due to a limited vocabulary, they will often act out aggressively.  Also, some children may become more defiant as a way to seek revenge for being hit by their parents.  “In fact, research shows that children who are spanked tend to grow defiant and aggressive” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 78).  Despite what many Christian advocates of spanking claim, the anger, aggression, and the other harmful effects of physical punishment are actually worse when it is done in the Name of Jesus!

There was a study done in 2003 to see if it was indeed more harmful to use physical punishment within a religious or non-religious context.  Psychology professor, Bette L. Bottoms, at the University of Illinois in Chicago, conducted psychological tests on two groups of subjects.  One group experienced physical punishment/abuse in the name of religion.  The other group experienced their physical punishment/abuse in a non-religious context.  The results were clear.  The subjects who had experienced physical punishment/abuse in the Name of God “more severely suffered from such psychological problems as depression, anxiety, hostility, and psychotic personality disorders” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 31).  Heimlich (2011) goes on to state:

“In that study, Bottoms opines as to why abuse involving religion might be more traumatic than abuse in which religion is not a factor: ‘Religious contexts and justifications may add an additional layer of complexity and harm to the experience of child physical abuse… We speculate that there is an additional sense of betrayal involved and much internal cognitive dissonance and perhaps guilt as victims deal, not only with the physically abusive actions, but also with the confusing relation of the actions to religion, which they are taught to believe and follow’” (p. 31).

This is further illustrated by MC’s experiences as a child.  MC was brought up in a Fundamentalist Christian family where spanking is used quite commonly as parents are taught that God “commands” that children be spanked.  MC was spanked by his father on his bare bottom throughout his childhood with his father using his hand, belt, or paddle.  As a child, MC repressed his anger because he was taught that he deserved to be hurt by his father for disobeying; that his father spanked him because he loved him; that the spanking was for his own good; and that God commanded his father to spank him as this was a sign of love.  While there were occasions where MC did get angry as a child due to his own spanking or friends and siblings being spanked, much of his anger cropped up when MC became a young adult.  He found out that everything he had been taught as a child were all lies.  He felt betrayed.  In an electronic message sent on August 28, 2011, MC conveyed the following to me:

“The main out-let of my anger is unfortunately the church. The church may not have personally whacked my bare skin with a paddle or belt, but they certainly passed along the false teachings that caused my father to do it. I resent the teachings and practices of the church I grew up in, and I resent any Christian organization that passes along, or accepts, such teachings today. My blood boils when I think of how what the church taught impacted my sexual development, leading to an orientation that eroticizes spanking. If my orientation is a sin, then the church helped lead me into that sin by passing along their pro-spanking message. I also find it difficult to trust the church; and as much as I have tried to separate my anger at the church from God, I sometimes find myself unable to trust God, and often feel angry at God. I feel like the church failed me, and now my relationship with God is strained and filled with tension.”

How very sad that MC struggles with anger for the church and with God because of the pain he experienced as a child.  This is quite common of people who have been hurt in the Name of God.  How can a child grow up to truly trust in the Lord when He “wanted” the child to be hurt for his/her sin?   I find it interesting that so may Christians truly believe in spanking to discourage their children from sinning and lead them to God, but we’ve been seeing throughout my series that the opposite seems to happen in most cases of physical punishment.  “Some parents even believe that it is their Christian duty to administer physical punishment—to build character, discourage sin, and instill a sense of submission and obedience to the will of God, as represented through parental authority.  They take what God has created in his own image and refashion it so their children will grow up to be just like them” (Quinn, 1988, p. 156-157).  Many Christian and non-Christian pro-spankers constantly claim that spankings done “lovingly” are never harmful in any way to the child, this obviously is not the case.  Look what Quinn (1988) goes on to say, “My adoptive parents told me hundreds of times, during the endless beatings, that they loved me.  If that was their way to love, they very nearly loved me to death” (p. 157).

Olivia grew up in England in the 1950s when physical punishment was rarely questioned.  She was physically punished regularly as a child.  On August 27, 2011, Olivia shared with me via electronic mail how angry she felt whenever her parents would hit her.  It was even worse if her dad tried to be loving afterward.  Here’s what Olivia stated:

“I would be in my room say, and Dad would go and fetch his large slipper with the leather sole…..  yelling of course… he would wrestle me over his lap while he sat on my bed, pulling my panties down while pinning both my hands with one of his above my head … while I told him and begged him to stop to no avail.  He would then use that pinning technique with one leg to make sure I couldn’t get away .. and then start spanking.  Down would come that leather slipper over and over on my bottom .. while I screamed the place down ..  I was terrified, ANGRY, I hated him.. them… How DARE he/she hit me ??  How DARE they hit anyone???  On and on it would go .. not just say 10 strikes .. but on and on.  Honestly I don’t know how long.  All I know was that I was left a seething angry/distraught mess, almost ‘thrown’ onto my bed, to stay there until I was ‘ready to come down and behave’.  Most of the time I stayed there.  A lot of the time I was told to stay there as further punishment.  [He tried once.. with the 'oh we love you' and tried to cuddle me ... I was having none of it... I couldn't bear him near me.  I hated him!  How DARE he want to hold me and tell me he loved me !! HE was LYING ... how could you hit and hurt someone like that and then tell them you LOVED THEM ???  ... that is how I felt then!]  How did I usually feel??  I … distraught ..is not strong enough… I really do NOT have the words.  As I have said before, I learned fear, pain, anger, hate and resentment.   I really DID hate them at that time.  I prayed to God to send me away.  [A common threat to children in those days was to be 'sent to Boarding School' which was supposed to be a terrible place]  I prayed that they WOULD send me to Boarding School because I was never in trouble at school, my teachers all liked/loved me!  I can remember blubbering bubbles and snot and almost being sick with the .. anger  the .. fear…. the … unfairness… the …. audacity of it for hours… My bottom bright red and again with white streaks where the slipper had fallen.  Or my mums fingers… hard, hot ridges…  I was always asking to go and stay with my paternal grandparents for ‘the weekend’ or a week … my grandmother was only too pleased to have me … and I think she knew why from the way she spoke to me.   My mum never knew .. but there were a few times.. when although I was only perhaps… 8 – 11 … I went out into the night when she was asleep and sat on the front garden wall .. sobbing at the stars and moon and sky.  Begging God to help me.   This would have been HOURS after being spanked .. and after her bedtime… “

Again, while Olivia sought comfort from God in most cases throughout her childhood, the very thing that was supposed to help discourage sinfulness in her actually was what created her anger, hate, and resentfulness towards her parents who thought they were doing the right thing.  I wonder if some pro-spankers are not only in denial and lack a certain amount of empathy, but are also so filled with anger that they get revenge by twisting Scripture around in order to justify hurting their own children.  After all, “Beatings, which are only one form of mistreatment, are always degrading, because the child not only is unable to defend him- or herself but is also supposed to show gratitude and respect to the parents in return.  And along with corporal punishment there is a whole gamut of ingenious measures applied ‘for the child’s own good’ which are difficult for a child to comprehend and which for that very reason often have devastating effects later in life” (Miller, 1994, p. 17).  Sadly, the devastating effects that Miller is describing are the very ones that keep the cycle of physical punishment/abuse continuing.

While some research shows that an occasional spanking done “lovingly” is a bit less harmful (we will discuss spanking “in love” more in-depth in a future piece), it is still damaging as it teaches children to equate hitting with love.  This creates a higher risk for domestic violence as children who were hit grow into teenagers and adults.  Simons, Lin, and Gordon conducted a research study in 1998 to see if physical punishment did indeed increase the risk of dating violence later on.  They studied 113 boys in rural Iowa that were in 7th grade and/or were 13-years-old.  They asked these boys’ parents how often the boys were spanked, and how often a belt or a paddle was used to administer the spankings.  The questions were repeated in three intervals during this five-year study.  Over half of the boys in this study experienced physical punishment during these five years.  “Consequently, the findings about corporal punishment apply to the majority of boys in that community, not just to the children of a small group of violent parents” (Straus, 2006, p. 201).  During this study, the boys were also asked if they had hit, pushed, or shoved their girlfriends in the last year during a disagreement.  The boys were asked about any other delinquent acts they may have been involved with as well.  The study took into account whether the boys’ parents were loving, consistent, and supervised their children.  Here are the findings from this study:

“Simons and his colleagues found that the more corporal punishment experienced by these boys, the greater the probability of their physically assaulting a girlfriend.  Moreover, like the other prospective studies, the analysis took into account the misbehavior that led parents to use corporal punishment, and also for the quality of parenting.  This means that the relation of corporal punishment to violence against a girlfriend is very unlikely to be due to poor parenting.  Rather, it is another study showing that the long run effect of corporal punishment is to engender more rather than less misbehavior.  In short, spanking boomerangs” (Straus, 2006, p. 201).

Yet another study done with young children shows that corporal punishment “was associated with an increased probability of a child assaulting the parent a year and a half later.  Thus, while it is true that corporal punishment teaches the child a lesson, it is certainly not the lesson intended by the parents” (Straus, 2006, p. 200).  Some pro-spankers claim that consistently spanking does not make children any more aggressive than other children, and that the key is to be consistent.  I must challenge this because there are just too many other studies showing the opposite to be true.  Also, if physical punishment does not create an aggressive tendency in children, then why do a great deal of these children grow up to follow in their parents’ footsteps?  It just does not line up with the research or the societal norms.  While I will be discussing “lovingly” hitting children in a future piece, I want to share what Wendy conveyed to me about how it was when she was in grade school.  Corporal punishment was allowed during the time she was in grade school.  However, there still was a great deal of aggressiveness at the school.  Here is what Wendy observed as written via an electronic message dated August 27, 2011:

“Since physical punishment was used both at home and at the school I went to from K-4, violence just seemed like a normal way to solve problems. There was some concern about aggressive behavior, but not enough knowledge at the time to realize that spanking might not be the best response to it.”

Katie also went to a Christian grade school where corporal punishment was used.  However, the teachers and principal were not allowed to spank the children if they were angry.  Here are Katie’s thoughts about seeing calm teachers spanking children at school as conveyed to me via an electronic message on September 3, 2011:

“I can tell you that at our DND schools the teacher who was angry wasn’t supposed to spank – it was meant to be an “impartial” teacher to administer a “reasonable” beating. I was a good girl and never got hit at school though. I thought it was creepier to have someone who wasn’t angry do the hitting – it seemed worse to me than someone who had lost their marbles. Calculated.”

It seems that spanking children “in love” is worse than being hit in anger.  Either way, hitting children teaches them how to behave aggressively and violently towards loved ones.  It also can teach children to submit to domestic violence.  In a study written in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2010 examined 2,000 families to see if the use of physical punishment with 3-year-old children was related with physical violence used between the parents.  Over half of the 3-year-olds in this study had been spanked at least once during the previous month.  The results of this study showed that “The odds of using physical punishment doubled in households where parents used aggression against each other.  This is not surprising since physical punishment is a form of interpersonal aggression” (Lopez-Duran, 2010, http://www.drmomma.org/2010/09/why-spanking-is-never-okay.html).  Sadly, most hitting of children begins at the extremely young age of 1-year-old, with some infants being hit before they are even a year old.  Infants never understand being hit!  This is far beyond their comprehension.  It is the same for toddlers!  Research shows that “children who were spanked at age 1 had more aggressive behaviors at age 2 and performed worse on measures of thinking abilities at age 3” (Thomas, 2009, http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/early-spanking-increases-toddler.html).  And finally, in yet another study that was done to see if spanking infants and toddlers made them more aggressive as they got older, “Slade and Wissow found that, compared with children who were never spanked, children who were frequently spanked (five times a week) before age two were four times more likely to have behavioral problems by the time they started school. (Slade E., Wissow L. Spanking in Early Childhood and Later Behavior Problems: A Prospective Study of Infants and Young Toddlers, Pediatrics, vol. 113, no. 5, May 2004)” (Klebanov, 2011, http://www.examiner.com/parenting-in-san-francisco/the-ministry-of-michael-and-debbie-pearl).  It is clear that physical punishment does increase aggression in children.

A great deal of pro-spankers claim that the world is much more violent than it was back in the “good old days” because children are being spanked less.  They believe that children who are not physically punished are not as respectful.  These two claims are actually incorrect.  “Straus (1994) and Gershoff (2002) report that over 90% of parents still report using corporal punishment on their children” (Couture, 2007, http://stophitting.blogspot.com/2006/01/back-in-good-ol-days-and-other.html).  Sadly, the majority of children today will be hit at some point during their childhoods.  And in Part 6 of “The Christian History of Spanking,” I show how respect differs from fear as many people equate fear as respect when actually fear is much different than respect.  In reality, the world is no more violent than it was 100 years ago.  A hundred years ago, there was the Civil War and other wars, slavery in which a great deal of slaves were often beaten, Colonists were taking over Native American land—killing entire tribes.  There has always been a great deal of violence in our world with Christians doing a great deal of it.  Ever since Adam and Eve sinned, there has been violence as violence is due to sin entering the world.  The only true difference between now and then is that we are almost constantly exposed to violence thanks to media.  Besides sex, violence is a common theme in our movies, television shows, music, and videogames.  Plus, the news is constantly reporting acts of violence.  We are so much more aware of violence whereas back then people were not as exposed or aware of the violence that was occurring.  And they could shelter themselves and their children from violence as there was no television or Internet.  Children didn’t watch cartoons or play videogames filled with violent images like they do today.  Children were taught to respect life as many families had to hunt for their food.  Because so many parents have to work full-time in order to survive today, children are being left alone with all this access to violent media with little guidance from busy, stressed out parents.  Research shows that all of this exposure to violence is desensitizing children and adults to violence.  Greven (1992) states:

“’Research has demonstrated that television must be considered one of the major socializers of children’s aggressive behavior.  Two major behavioral effects of heavy viewing of televised violence are: (1) an increase in children’s level of aggression; and (2) an increase in children’s passive acceptance of the use of aggression by others.’  Both aggression and apathy thus are intensified by an immersion in television violence although the roots of both undoubtedly are to be found in the life histories of punishment and abuse of those who view such violence with either indifference or enthusiasm” (p. 129).

It is clear that between being spanked (hit) from young ages and being exposed to so much violence via the media that children are learning that violence is how we solve problems.  And they learn that a certain amount of aggressive behavior is acceptable and even expected in today’s society.  However, Jesus is very much against any type of violence.  Look what He says in Matthew 11:13, “From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.”  Not only does this show that Jesus is against violence, but that violence has always been in the world.

Since aggression and anger are closely related as they feed off of each other, I would like to conclude this piece by taking one last look at anger.  While anger can be used in a productive manner, it is often allowed to fester, leading to rage, bitterness, and resentment.  Scripture warns us not to sin in our anger (Ephesians 4:26).  Jesus also gives a very stern warning in Matthew 5:21-26 about allowing anger to get out of control.  He also tells us to be quick to reconcile with each other in this same passage.  As we’ve seen throughout this section that physical punishment often creates a strong feeling of anger in children even if it is done in the “correct, godly, loving way.”  As we saw with MC, anger may not appear until the child becomes an adult.  Anger is a common response to being hurt in any way.  As Greven (1992) states:

“Anger is a child’s best (and often only) defense, for it arises out of a powerful sense of self, a self being violated and abused by painful blows and hurtful words.  The child has been hurt on purpose (bolding for emphasis done by Steph) by an adult in order to teach a lesson in discipline, but the child experiences this pain and reproach as an assault upon the self as well as upon the body.  Often the result is not only anger but also hatred and a powerful desire for revenge, which often takes the form of imagined mutilation or murder of the person who inflicted the pain.  These powerful emotions are permanently stored in unconscious memories, but sometimes people also remember them quite consciously, years after the events that provoked the feelings” (p. 124).

As I’ve said many times in all of my series, if God truly wanted us to hit our children in order to “discipline” them, why didn’t He provide us with more instructions?  And since the rod verses quoted by pro-spankers are so general, then why does hitting create more sin in our children instead of less sin?  In fact, as we shall see in a future piece, hitting children in Jesus’ Name can and does lead some children to become so angry with God for “making” their parents inflict pain on them as children.  Anger is one of the most powerful emotions that we have.  If spanking is so right and godly, then why do adults still deal with the anger created in them from being spanked by their Christian parents?  Here is yet another story of a child being hit by his father who was a pastor, and after many years, still vividly remember the anger he felt towards his father:

 “When in his early fifties, Edmund Gosse recalled in his famous autobiography, Father and Son (1907), his one encounter with corporal punishment as vividly as if it just happened.  Gosse was the only child of two intensely apocalyptic parents, English members of the sect of Plymouth Brethren.  He recollected: ‘It was about the date of my sixth birthday that I did something very naughty, some act of direct disobedience, for which my Father, after a solemn sermon, chastised me, sacrificially, by giving me several cuts with a cane.  This action was justified, as everything he did was justified, by reference to Scripture.’  Gosse also had vivid memories of his own reactions and feelings to this encounter with corporal punishment.  He recollected ‘being made, not contrite or humble, but furiously angry by this caning.  I cannot account for the flame of rage which it awakened in my bosom,’ he wrote, but added that ‘I have to confess with shame that I went about the house for some days with a murderous hatred of my Father locked inside my bosom’” (Greven, 1992, p. 124).

Some may say that it is a child’s will that causes the child to become angry and aggressive after a “godly” spanking.  I must disagree with this because a “godly” spanking is supposed to help rid the child of sin, but instead, it sows a seed of sin into a child’s heart.  It is obvious that this is not what God intended!  This is why Jesus warns against causing children, and anyone weaker, to sin in Matthew 18:6-9 and Mark 9:42.  This is also why Ephesians 6:4 and Colossians 3:21 commands parents not to embitter their children.  Yes, a lack of discipline causes children to sin and become embittered.  But so does physical punishment and other types of harsh punishment.

As I mentioned, we’ll be seeing that using physical punishment in Jesus’ Name causes some children to abandon their faith altogether, in a future piece due to their anger.  Going back to CNN’s recent interview with the Pearls, authors of To Train a Child, that I began this section with, many non-believers have been leaving many angry comments on Christian websites that advocate against the Pearl’s teachings and the use of any type of physical punishment saying, “I refuse to follow a God that advocates and promotes violence!”  After hearing about the abusive and deadly teachings of the Pearls, who truly believe that their teachings are ordained by God, atheists and other non-Christians have been absolutely tearing apart God’s Word by taking certain verses and passages completely out of context in order to show how violent and bad God is.   They are angry because instead of seeing our true God, they are seeing an evil, hateful god.  They are not seeing God’s amazing grace, mercy, love, and forgiveness because we Christians are not doing well with showing our broken world God’s love for them.  Matthew 5:13-16 states, “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot. 14 You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.”  We are supposed to be the salt and light over the world in order to bring people into the Kingdom of God, but yet, we hit children in God’s Name; murder people in God’s Name; say, “God hates fags;” while appearing to act better than others.  It really is no wonder so many people are rejecting God, and are so against Christians.  They are getting a completely inaccurate view of who God is from the very people who are representing Him.

This anger is causing people to perish because they refuse to come to Him for salvation.  This is not what God wants at all!  He loves everyone so much and is not willing that any should perish (2 Peter 3:9).  It is clear from all of the research and personal stories that children remember being physically punished and abused more than parents realize.  Do we really want our children to grow up to be angry, un-empathetic people who become aggressive toward weaker people?  Or do we want our children to grow up displaying the fruits of the Spirit in order to help turn more people to God that they may know His wonderful peace, love, and joy that we can only get through a personal relationship with Him?  It’s up to us!  Please open your hearts to the Truth!  God does not promote, condone, or command the use of physical punishment with children.  Please open your eyes and look around the world in order to see what is happening because precious children are being hurt.

“Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord” Romans 12:17-19.

 (Continued)

Reference:

Couture, L.  (2007) Back in the Good Ol’ Days. http://stophitting.blogspot.com/2006/01/back-in-good-ol-days-and-other.html

Dulce de Leche. (2011).  I Spanked My Dog and He Turned Out Fine. http://dulcefamily.blogspot.com/2011/08/i-spanked-my-dog-and-he-turned-out-fine.html

 Fogel, A.  (2011). Infant development: A topical approach.  Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing.

Greven, P. (1992). Spare the child.  New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Heimlich, J.  (2011). Breaking their will.  Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

Klebanov, M. (2011).  The “Ministry” of Michael and Debi Pearl. http://www.examiner.com/parenting-in-san-francisco/the-ministry-of-michael-and-debbie-pearl

Lieberman, A. F.  (1993). The emotional life of the toddler.  New York, NY: The Free Press.

Lopez-Duran, N.  (2010).  Why Spanking is never Okay. http://www.drmomma.org/2010/09/why-spanking-is-never-okay.html

Miller, A.  (1994). For your own good.  New York, NY: The Noonday Press.

Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1969).  Psychology of the Child. Washington D. C.: Basic Books, Inc.

Quinn, P. E.  (1988). Spare the rod.  Nashville, TN: Aboington Press.

Sears, W.  (2010).  Spanking—Yay or Nay.   http://www.parenting.com/article/ask-dr-sears-spanking—-yay-or-nay

Sprain, J.  (2000).  Spanking-What Research Says.  http://www.parentingthoughts.org/Spanking.htm

Straus, M. A.  (2006). Beating the devil out of them.  New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Thomas, J.  (2009).  Early Spanking Increases Toddler Aggression, Lowers IQ. http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/early-spanking-increases-toddler.html

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Cybersattva on Pearl Laughing

Cybersattva responds to Michael Pearl’s comments on Facebook (from March 2010) in Stepping Outside of TTUAC.

An Email From NGJ

Patrick Morgan, who writes the  Cybersattva Blog, wrote an email to No Greater Joy Ministries about his concerns with To Train Up A Child.  He received a reply from the Assistant General Manager which he posts along with his commentary. Note that he adds commentary in the comments.

New Zealand Considers Censoring TTUAC

The New Zealand Internal Affairs Department’s Censorship Compliance Unit has confirmed that it is investigating To Train Up A Child by Michael and Debi Pearl after a complaint was made according to an article on Stuff called, ‘Violent’ child training book off to censor.  The article  says that it has already been removed from Whitcoulls‘ online store but that other leading book sites are still selling it and that, “Censorship Compliance Unit manager Stephen OBrien said the book’s content would be investigated and, if it was found to be objectionable, it could be either banned, restricted or referred to the human rights or childrens commissioners. ”

Channel 3 News covers the story in Child abuse ‘instruction manual’ could be banned.

Update:  Whitcoulls’ is still selling the Spanish Version of the book.  *doh*

Here is a closer look at the debate regarding the possible banning.

The Schatz Story Going Mainstream

Brad Hirschfield posts in The Washington Post about the Schatz story and To Train Up A Child in a piece called, Beating children in the name of God.  He exhorts us Christians, saying:

Tragically, this is going on, it must be stopped, and it is precisely those of us for whom the Bible is a sacred and life-centering text that must take the lead in stopping it.

As is always the case, it is those closest to a tradition that should bear the greatest responsibility for it when it is being abused. We cannot simply distance ourselves from “those crazy people”, because “those crazy people” are using the same books we hold dear to commit atrocities, so who better than those who turn to (some of) the same books, to take on the responsibility of addressing the abuses committed in their name?

Amen

Jo Ashline of The Orange County Register also reports on the Pearls’ teachings and the recent controversy in Couple Claims God Wants us to Beat our Children.

I would like to respond to this quote:

During the CNN interview, Mr. and Mrs. Pearl also maintain their innocence in the beating death of Lydia and assure viewers that their training method does not promote anger or abuse, but rather a calm, methodical and effective method of spanking a child into submission.

What the Pearls and their followers fail to understand is that Lydia refused to or was unable to submit and they calmly and methodically spanked her for 7 hours until her tissues broke down.  You know how hitting meat makes it tender, right?  Well, if living flesh is hit long enough, even calmly and methodically, it gets tenderized.  The tissues break down and tiny particles of muscle tissue block the kidneys causing rhabdomyolosis. Please check that link for a more detailed explanation from Under Much Grace.  Rhabdomyolosis was the official cause of her death, by the way.

By the way, I have updated my Quotes from TTUAC page with some quotes from the NGJ website because the quotes were so disturbing to me that I thought they needed to be shared.  It is taking a lot of self control to keep myself from ranting and raving about the quotes, so I’m just going to let the quotes speak for themselves.

More Investigation from CNN

CNN continues its investigative report of abuse among fundamental Christians and how it relates to the Pearls’ teachings.  Jocelyn Zichterman, who was raised in this culture and started Freedomfromabuse.net, explains the concept of Breaking The Will and how spankings must continue until the child submits even if it takes several hours. This video seems to cut suddenly, I’m wondering if this series will continue.

Transcript of Pearl on CNN including Cut Scenes

Under Much Grace features not only the CNN video about the Pearls but a link to the transcript on the CNN site.  As the transcript contains some cut scenes, she highlights those in her post.  For anyone who wants to read just the part of the transcript which contains the Pearl/Schatz story, use CTRL F (on a Windows computer) to search the page for the word, “Paradise.”

Elizabeth Esther also posted about the CNN video and got many interesting comments.

Former Pearl Follower, Becky from Created To Be His, also shared the videos and explained why she does not believe that the Schatzes lost control.

CNN Exposes the Pearls’ Teachings

CNN  has done an exposeé on the Pearls’ teachings and has implicated them in the death of Lydia Schatz. This series features a close look at the Lydia Schatz case,an interview with Michael and Debi Pearl as well as an interview with D.A. Mike Ramsey who says that he blames the Pearl’s teachings for Lydia’s death.

Here is Part 1.

Here is Part 2.

Here is Part 3

You can find transcripts here including cut scenes.

They did not really explain why the Pearls’ teachings are implicated because they did not explain what these teachings are.  This goes far beyond a simple spanking debate.  I link to many articles which explain this and have been meaning to put it all together in one post.  I thought I had done it here, but upon taking another look at it, I see that I was waiting until after the  trial to flesh it out.  I’ll put that on my to do list.  Meanwhile, please look at my categories for The Pearls’ Teachings above and the sub categories, especially Counter Arguments.  If you have time, check out posts which dig deeper into the Pearls’ teachings with in depth analysis. I hope that you will also find my tags helpful for narrowing down the information you seek.

Note, here are some quotes from To Train Up A Child by Michael Pearl, the book which started the controversy.

My first collection of news stories.

Reactions in the blogosphere.

More news stories and reactions..

CBS did an investigative report about the Schatz and other child abuse stories.

And then a Plea Deal Reached in Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz Murder Case.

They were sentenced to prison.

All mentions of the Schatz story can be found under my Schatz tag.

 

 

The Effects Of Spanking – Part 2 *Sensitive*

(Part 1)

By now, people have read my very personal story.  I can’t begin to put into words how difficult that was for my family and me.  As I said in Part 1, the purpose of this series is to explore all of the effects of using physical punishment with children.  In this piece, I will be discussing denial as one of the many effects of spanking (hitting) children.  I will also share a couple of definitions of physical abuse, and will discuss the continuum of violence against children.

Denial—“I was spanked and I turned out OK”

One of the many, and most visible if one looks closely enough, effects of spanking and physical abuse is denial.  Denial is a psychological defense mechanism to any traumatizing or painful event.  This is why denial is one of the first steps in the grieving process.  It is easier to deny that something very painful has occurred than to deal with the pain head on.  How many times have we heard, “I was spanked and I’m okay,” from pro-spankers?  Go on the Internet and Google “spanking children,” and we get an array of pro-spankers arguing intensely with anti-spankers about how spanking isn’t harmful.  They base their arguments on their personal experiences.  They are often quick to become defensive, and even get downright angry, when anti-spankers try to gently point out how and why they are wrong.  This is due to the fact that it is very difficult to admit that their parents did hurt them as children, or that they are now hurting their own children.  Instead, they come back with the same arguments as to why spanking cannot possibly be harmful.  “One reason the harmful effects [of spanking] are ignored is because many of us (including those of us who are social scientists) are reluctant to admit that their own parents did something wrong and even more reluctant to admit that we have been doing something wrong with our own children.  But the most important reason may be that it is difficult to see the harm.  Most of the harmful effects do not become visible right away, often not for years.  In addition, only a relatively small percentage of spanked children experience obviously harmful effects” (Straus, 2006, p. 152-153).  Therefore, since the effects of physical punishment are rarely visible to parents and other adults, it makes it even easier to deny that they exist.

Denial begins at a young age when the physical punishment begins, whether it’s “lovingly” done or done in anger because they are taught that physical punishment is something parents do to children, and that it is for the children’s own good.  When children grow up being physically punished, they assume that all children are treated this way.  Spanking becomes a normal part of childhood until the children become old enough to find out that not all children are spanked.  Instead of admitting their parents were wrong, some children have internalized the painful message that they deserved to be hit, and that it was for their own good, that they use denial to deal with their pain.  Of course, guilt and shame also factor into denial.  I will be discussing guilt and shame in a future piece.  Of course, this is often compounded when the child sees that society accepts the hitting of children, and when he/she is taught that God also “accepts” or even “commands” that children be hit in His Name and in the name of “discipline.”

I like how Alice Miller, author of For Your Own Good, explains how denial can begin to develop in children when force and coercion are used with them from a young age.  Miller (1994) states,

 “We justifiably resist new exhortations if moral demands were frequently imposed upon us at too young an age.  Love of one’s neighbor, altruism, willingness to sacrifice—how splendid these words sound and yet what cruelty can be hidden in them simply because they are forced upon a child at a time when the prerequisites for altruism cannot possibly be present.  Coercion often nips the development of these prerequisites in the bud and what then remains is a lifelong condition of strain.  This is like soil too hard for anything to grow in, and the only hope at all of forcibly producing the love demanded of one as a child lies in the upbringing given one’s own children, from whom one then demands love in the same merciless fashion” (p. 8-9).

We can see that the cycle of denial can continue throughout many generations as children grow up denying that their parents mistreated them by hitting them, and therefore, treat their children the same way that their parents did.    Also, “Children do not want to be a burden to their parents, nor do they want to be the cause of pain and suffering” (Quinn, 1988, p. 44).  The passage from Miller reminds me of the parable Jesus taught about planting the seed (God’s Word) in different soils in Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23.  If the seed doesn’t fall on good, healthy soil, then it cannot take root.  When children are taught from a young age that physical punishment is a normal part of life in the parent-child relationship, it can be very difficult for them to accept the Truth later on that this indeed is not normal or even correct.

Going back to the idea that God “approves” of parents hitting their children, the children begin to believe that they are somehow evil, dirty, and that they deserve to be punished for their sins despite the fact that Jesus Christ has already paid the penalty for humanity’s sins.  For example, Lisa, a contributor of the Broken Daughters website shared her story.  She grew up in a Fundamental Christian home.  When, as a toddler, she began displaying developmentally appropriate (typical) behaviors for her age, her parents sought the advice of their pastor.  Their pastor convinced Lisa’s parents that Lisa’s developmentally appropriate behaviors were actually from the evil one and were sinful, and that her parents needed to harshly physically punish Lisa for them in order to free her from satan’s influence.  By then, Lisa’s parents had been reading other books such as To Train a Child in which the same advice was echoed.  In her story on the Broken Daughters website, Lisa describes the first time her parents beat her as a toddler.  Yes, she clearly remembers it despite being so young.  But what caught my attention even more and made me even sadder is what Lisa says after describing this horribly traumatizing experience.  She writes, “This wasn’t my only beating and by far not my severest, but it is one of the most prominent ones in my mind. It is hard for me to see the injustice in this until today. I was a bratty child. An evil child. That’s what I learned all my life. I find it hard to say that my parents beating me back then was wrong. I have been told by outsiders that it was, but it’s still a concept hard to grasp for me” (Lisa, 2011, http://brokendaughters.wordpress.com/2011/06/18/training-up-this-child-–-part-2-who-let-the-dogs-out/).  It is clear that Lisa, like many other children who are physically punished from young ages and throughout their childhoods, internalized the message that she deserved to be beaten for her sinful behavior, and finds it difficult to completely renounce her parents’ treatment of her even though she is fighting against the denial.

As I previously mentioned, children are quick to pick up on the societal and cultural norms in which they live.  Children, when made to feel safe and un-judged, will admit that physical punishment is indeed quite painful emotionally in addition to physically.  “In 2006, the final report was published of the UN Secretary-General’s Study on Violence against Children, the first comprehensive global study into the nature and extent of the problem. The Independent Expert leading the Study, Professor Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, wrote in the report: ‘Throughout the study process, children have consistently expressed the urgent need to stop all this violence. Children testify to the hurt – not only physical, but ‘the hurt inside’ – which this violence causes them, compounded by adult acceptance, even approval of it’” (Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children-FAQ, 2011, http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/frame.html).  However, due to the fact that societal and cultural norms accept the use of physical punishment with children, compounded by the fact that even God “accepts” this, children’s cries for help go unheard, thereby, convincing children that this must be a good thing.  We’ve seen in my historical series that children haven’t been valued as they should, though, there have been some improvements along the way.  But sadly, society still tends to take the side of the adult rather than the child, thus, making the child feel as if he/she has no choice but to also take the side of the adult or otherwise face possible, or even more rejection, from the family, society, and God.  “Society takes the side of the adult and blames the child for what has been done to him or her.  The victimization of the child has historically been denied and is still being denied, even today.  This denial has made it possible for society to ignore the devastating effects of the victimization of the child for such a long time” (Miller, 2010, http://www.squidoo.com/alice-miller).

Repression often coincides with denial as part of denial is repressing painful events in order to not to have to deal with them.  Children are taught, even forced, at very young ages to repress their negative feelings.  For example, many great, loving parents will often shush their baby when the baby cries.  Or, parents will tell the infant, “You’re okay.”  These parents mean well and are doing their best to comfort the infant, but they are actually teaching their child that crying and having negative feelings are bad.  For some Christian pro-spankers, they will go so far as to spank infants for crying too much.  As children get older, many Christian pro-spankers such as James Dobson, Tedd Tripp, the Pearls, and Roy Lessin tell parents to spank the child again if they cry too long after the first spanking, act angry, or try to defend themselves during the spanking.  In his book, Shepherding a Child’s Heart, Tripp (1995) states, “After you have spanked, take the child up on your lap and hug him, telling him how much you love him, how much it grieves you to spank him, and how you hope that it will not be necessary again. Then if he is still not restored, you are to check your own spirit to see if you have handled him roughly… [or] brought unholy anger on this holy mission, and if you have, seek forgiveness from God. If your child is still angry, it’s time for another round, ‘Daddy has spanked you, but you are not sweet enough yet. We are going to have to go back upstairs for another spanking’” (p. 149).  Lisa, who I previously mentioned, was spanked for being in a bad mood one day.  She writes on the Broken Daughters website:

“So, on that one day, I was in a very frustrated, grumpy mood. I barked at my siblings. I didn’t do my chores as thoroughly as I should and normally did. Come dinner time, I sat on my chair with a sour face, poking around in the mashed potatoes and not really eating. My mother told me to straighten up, which I did only half-heartedly. My dad asked me what happened, and I told him I didn’t know, I was just feeling a bad mood. Silence. Chewing. Let’s get over it.

After dinner, I was quick to clean up the dishes with my mom. I wanted some alone time. I was trying to carry the dishes as fast as I could. In my hurry, I dropped a glass. That wouldn’t have been a big deal on its own. But my mom was so stressed – so stressed. She started yelling at me, yelling away her day’s worth of frustration. After a few minutes of this, my dad came storming out of the living room, yelling at us both for disturbing his peace. My mom started crying and yelled back at him that I was impossible to raise and she needed him, that he was never around to be the strong leader he would like to be. That pushed my dad over the edge. He grabbed my arm and pulled me out of the room. I heard my mom yell behind me that when I got back, she wanted a happy child and not this grumpy lump of clothes I was. My dad pulled me into the kid’s bedroom, got his cane off the closet and started beating me in fury. I was screaming my life out. My siblings started crying outside. My dad ran to the door, grabbed the first child he could get a hold of, which was Jacob, pulled him in too and gave him a spanking as well” (Lisa, 2011, http://brokendaughters.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/training-up-this-child-part-5-the-pearl-song/).

Sometimes, as children grow up learning to repress and deny the pain in which their parents have inflicted upon them, they actually begin to idealize their parents.  I know two women who were physically punished by their fathers, and to this day, neither women will admit that their fathers did anything wrong.  However, their brothers disagree with them as their fathers also physically punished their brothers.  “Fantasies always serve to conceal or minimize unbearable childhood reality for the sake of the child’s survival; therefore, the so-called invented trauma is a less harmful version of the real, repressed one” (Miller, 2010, http://www.squidoo.com/alice-miller).  The fact that, as I mentioned previously, so many pro-spankers, Christian and non-Christian alike, get so defensive whenever someone tries to lovingly point out the Truth about spanking and that it is harmful only further proves the harm.  We usually only get defensive and upset when we don’t want to admit we are wrong, or when something is painful.  It can be quite difficult to face facts rather than holding onto what we have been taught to believe from a young child.  The Bible tells us that God speaks to us in a still, small voice (1 Kings 19:11-13).  Look at what God says in Isaiah 30:21: “Whether you turn to the right or to the left, your ears will hear a voice behind you, saying, ‘This is the way; walk in it.’”  How can we hear God speak to us if we don’t allow Him to help us undo the denial and repression that our parents inflicted upon us because their parents did the same to them and so on?  If we choose not to listen to God and allow Him to break free from this denial and repression, then the cycle of abuse, physical punishment, and the use of other degrading methods of punishment will continue.  As Alice Miller (2010) states, “As beaten children are not allowed to defend themselves, they must suppress their anger and rage against their parents who have humiliated them, killed their inborn empathy, and insulted their dignity. They will take out this rage later, as adults, on scapegoats, mostly on their own children. Deprived of empathy, some of them will direct their anger against themselves (in eating disorders, drug addiction, depression etc.), or against other adults (in wars, terrorism, delinquency etc.)” (http://www.squidoo.com/alice-miller).  If we don’t allow God to truly work in our lives, satan will attack us.  Condemnation, denial, and repression are from satan.  Please pray to God for help if one of your first reactions to this is defensiveness as satan may be attacking you.  God forgives and does not condemn.

Is All Hitting Violence Toward Children?

There seems to be a continuum of violence when it comes to spanking children.  Imagine a line (one will be in my book to help make this clearer) and on the left hand on the line/continuum is a light slap or swat on a child’s covered bottom or on the child’s hand.  As we move toward the right side of this continuum, we have severe beating that leave the children seriously injured or dead.  In the middle of the continuum are things such as hitting the child’s bottom a few times with an open hand, hitting child’s bare bottom with an open hand, using an object to hit child’s bare bottom, and so on.  Many people see absolutely no problem with the light hitting that is on the left side of the continuum as that is often considered “loving discipline” and a parent’s duty in raising children.  But as we move towards the right side of the continuum, most people would agree that beating children to death is wrong.  In the middle of the continuum is where arguments within the pro-spanking community often begin as they don’t agree where the line between “discipline” and abuse should be placed.  As Phil E. Quinn (1988) points out in his book, Spare the Rod, “Contemporary society tends to believe that some hitting of children is good and acceptable as a parenting technique—but certainly not all hitting.  The good hitting, we euphemistically call spanking.  The bad hitting, we call child abuse.  The dilemma, as always, is, Where does spanking end and beating begin?  For too many parents, a spanking ends when bleeding begins” (p. 19).

There are some definitions at which I would like us to take a look.  First, let’s look at the definition of the word spank:

1.  Verb: “to strike (a person, usually a child) with the open hand, a slipper, etc., especially on the buttocks, as in punishment.”
2.  Noun: “a blow given in spanking; a smart or resounding slap” (www.dictionary.com).

Here is the definition of the word hit:

1.  Verb: “to deal a blow or stroke to.”
2.  Verb: “to come into violent contact with” (www.dictionary.com).

Here is the definition of the word abuse:

“Abuse is defined as any thing that is harmful, injurious, or offensive. Abuse also includes excessive and wrongful misuse of anything” (Gulli & Nasser, 2002, http://www.ask.com/health/galecontent/abuse).

As we can see these definitions are quite similar to each other.  Many pro-spankers try to claim that spanking and hitting children are two completely different things.  Yet, we see that the only difference between the definitions of hitting and spanking is that spanking says it is done on the child’s buttocks.  Other than that, there is no difference.  When we look at the definition of abuse, we see that it is any thing harmful or offensive.  Because spanking and hitting is always intended to inflict pain on a child, it is covered under the definition of abuse.  Pain means harm is being done to the body.  As I pointed out in Part 1 of my series, “The Christian History of Spanking,” the body uses pain to alert us that injury is either taking place or is about to take place.  Plus, there is emotional pain that always occurs when a person—child or adult—is hit against his or her will.  That’s why we run away from both physical and emotional pain.  It isn’t fun unless one needs it for sexual pleasure, which we will discuss in a future piece of this series.  There are two more definitions of abuse that we need to consider.  The first is by Phil E. Quinn.

Quinn (1988) defines abuse as “any assault, whether verbal, sexual, or physical, or any deprivation of basic health and welfare necessities—regardless of severity, parental intention, or observable effects on the child” (p. 18).

The second definition of abuse we need to look at is by Alice Miller.  Miller (2010) defines abuse as “Humiliations, spankings and beatings, slaps in the face, betrayal, sexual exploitation, derision, neglect, etc. are all forms of mistreatment, because they injure the integrity and dignity of a child, even if their consequences are not visible right away” (http://www.squidoo.com/alice-miller).

I understand that these definitions will upset many people because no parent wants to think that he/she is or has abused his/her children.  And most grown children do not want to think that their parents abused them.  This is very painful and difficult to face and accept.  But, all of these definitions are meant to be preventive.  They are not meant to condemn anyone.  However, if we allow light hitting of children, then light hitting could easily, and usually does, lead to more severe hitting—even if it is totally unintentional.  The reason for this is that children tend to build up a tolerance to spanking depending on their personalities.  So, a light slap on the hand or bottom might work well for a toddler, but is usually not effective enough for a 3 or 4-year-old.  But children deserve the same rights as adults when it comes to being hit.  If we lightly slap another adult against his/her will, we can be arrested and charged with assault!  It shouldn’t matter how old or big someone is, he/she should be protected from having harm inflicted on him/her by another person.  It should not be left up to parents how much pain can be inflicted on their children because “children can be subjected to an incredible amount of pain and suffering before our perception of parental prerogative changes to one of parental abuse” (Quinn, 1988, p. 19).

Conclusion

The effects of spanking/abuse are very real otherwise people wouldn’t need to get defensive when their beliefs that spanking is not harmful.  Look at any article on the Internet such as, Judge has harsh words for Mom before sentencing her for spanking her kid, and we see many angry comments from pro-spankers about how good spanking is.  This is denial as it is too painful for some people to admit that hitting children is wrong and causes harm.  Yet, their comments only testify to the harm that spanking causes.  Repressing, denying, and projecting the pain from spanking/abuse only causes the cycle of physical punishment to continue.  God never intended this for His children—big and small, young and old!  We must face the Truth, even when it hurts, and walk into the Light instead of stumbling around in the darkness.  “Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God” John 3:19b-21.

(Read Part 3)

Reference:

Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. (2011).  FAQ. http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/frame.html

Broken Daughters-Lisa.  (2011).  http://brokendaughters.wordpress.com/2011/06/18/training-up-this-child-–-part-2-who-let-the-dogs-out/

Broken Daughters-Lisa.  (2011).  http://brokendaughters.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/training-up-this-child-part-5-the-pearl-song/

Gulli & Nasser. (2002). Abusehttp://www.ask.com/health/galecontent/abuse

Miller, A.  (1994). For your own good.  New York, NY: The Noonday Press.

Miller, A.  (2010).  How is emotional blindness created? http://www.squidoo.com/alice-miller

Quinn, P. E.  (1988). Spare the rod.  Nashville, TN: Aboington Press.

Straus, M. A.  (2006). Beating the devil out of them.  New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Tripp, T.  (1995). Shepherding a child’s heart.  Wapwallopen, PA: Shepherd Press.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Gentle Parenting In Action

Libby Anne has a very interesting blog post about how being raised by the Pearls’ teachings affects her efforts to gently parent her daughter in Parenting Is Not A Contest.

For more examples of Gentle Parenting, check out Pearl in Oyster’s (PIO’s) play by play of one whole day day:

A Day in the Life, Part 1 – Morning Routine

A Day in the Life, Part 2 – getting out the door and running a few errands.

A Day in the Life, Part 3 – Library and Lunch

A Day in the Life, Part 4-The Rest of our Day

And allow  Greenegem to show you what Guiding with a rod looks like.

The Death Of Lydia Schatz on Wikipedia

I just found the Wikipedia article on the Death of Lydia Schatz. It seems to be factual.  Interestingly, they link to this site.  Only, they don’t link to any one post, but to page two of my blog.  That doesn’t seem helpful at all, it must be an error.  They also have an entry for Michael Pearl which mentions both Lydia Schatz and Sean Paddock.  Interesting.

Edited to add:  Libby Anne fixed the error as you can see in her comment below.  :-)

The Christian History of Spanking Part 6

( Part 1 ) ( Part 2 ) ( Part 3) (Part 4) (Part 5)

This will be the conclusion of this series in which we have explored and discovered some of the origins of spanking children within Christianity.  It was my goal to show that spanking is from man and not God, as so many well-meaning Christians have believed throughout the ages.  In this paper, I will show how the idea of controlling children dates back to the early church in the ancient world, look at how Catholicism has advocated and used physical punishment with children, show the likely origin of the “Christian rules of how to spank children,” and will conclude with explaining Behaviorism and how physical punishment falls under that very old and outdated branch of Psychology.

The Origins of the Christian Need to Control Children

Many Christian advocates of spanking as well as the parents who follow these advocates are often quite concerned with controlling their children’s behavior, and really, one could say controlling their children.  Advocates such as James Dobson, the Ezzos, the Pearls, and others teach parents that they must be in control of their children from birth.  They claim that newborn infants must be taught that their parents are the bosses, not them.  If this sounds familiar, it is because control and breaking children’s wills go hand and hand.  We’ve seen how breaking the child’s will has been advocated for and done by Christians throughout history despite there being no biblical grounds for doing such a thing (See Parts 1, 2, & 3 for more info on breaking children’s wills).  This need for adults to control their children dates back to New Testament times.  In fact, certain verses of the New Testament are used to try and justify controlling one’s children.

1 Timothy and Titus are known as the Pastoral Epistles.  However, like Ephesians and Colossians, these books have passages about family relations.  Unlike Ephesians and Colossians, 1 Timothy and Titus have qualifications that leaders of the church must meet in order to be considered for such leadership positions.  In particular, 1 Timothy 3:4-12 and Titus 1:6 say that leaders of the church must manage their family well and “see that his children obey him” 1 Timothy 3:4a.  At this point, we must look at a bit of historical context in which all four of these books, written by the Apostle Paul, were written.  In the New Testament period after Jesus ascended into Heaven, followers of Christ began gathering in homes in order to worship Jesus and be taught from The Word as the disciples and apostles wrote the letters and books that now comprise the New Testament.  Some books and letters were written for certain groups, churches, and people based on the circumstances of the time and geographical locations.  The books of Ephesians and Colossians are clearly written to be read aloud to congregations that would meet in homes of certain people to worship “as we are reminded by Colossians 4:16: ‘Once this letter has been read among you, see that it is read also to the church at Laodicea, and that you in turn read my letter to Laodicea.’  Each group in these ethical lists—husbands, wives, children and slaves—was addressed because these people were present in the meeting for worship and would hear the letter being read out” (Strange, 2004, p. 73-74).  Ephesians and Colossians clearly expected every group of people regardless of age and occupation to be present at worship meetings.  Therefore, the teachings of these two books for the Christian household address both sides of these relationships.  And as I’ve pointed out throughout my series entitled “Spanking is NOT God’s Will,” the verse in Ephesians that prefaces the Christian household teachings is 5:21 which states, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”  It is clear that Paul had Christ’s radical teachings about everyone being equal and the great being last and the servant being first in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 19:30; Mark 9:35) when he wrote Ephesians and Colossians because although there is a hierarchical order in each of these relationships, there is also mutuality.  Husbands are not to dominate their wives just as parents are not to dominate their children.  There’s a sense of equal responsibility to each other in each relationship.    “In at least some congregations, therefore, children were not merely passive spectators on the edge of what was going on, but were taught and encouraged alongside adults during the course of the church’s meeting for worship… Significantly also, Colossians and Ephesians make the responsibilities of parents and children mutual (Emphasis added by Steph).  If children owe their parents the duty of respect, no less do parents their children of consideration.  This was quite a radical idea in the culture of the time, where a far more one-way relationship would be the norm” (Strange, 2004, p. 74).

I would like to point out another great example of Jesus teaching equality when it comes to the Kingdom of Heaven.  Let’s look at Matthew 20:1-16.  In this parable told by Jesus, a landowner goes out and finds servants that have not been hired.  The first servants are hired early in the day and agree to do a full day’s work in the fields for a denarii.  As the day goes on, the landowner continues to hire servants to work in his fields, each agreeing to work for a denarii.  At the end of the day, all of the hired servants come to be paid by the landowner.  Every servant received a denarii for his work.  When the servants that had worked all day in the field saw that the servants that had only worked for a few hours or less in the field received the same amount of pay as them, they were quite frustrated with the landowner and questioned him about this.  Look how the landowner answered the servants: “But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? 14 Take your pay and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. 15 Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’” Matthew 20:13-15.  It is clear that Jesus does not favor those who have been following Him longer.  Nor is anyone a worse sinner than another.  Yes, we will all be judged and receive different rewards based on our own relationship with God, but He views and loves everyone equally.   Jesus has called us into a new way of living in which family life are no longer absolute, “but moulded by the demands of the kingdom (Strange, 2004, p. 75).  As we have seen in Part 7 of “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” and some in Part 5 of this series, fathers had unlimited authority during the first century and more than likely in the previous centuries leading up to the first century.  Discipline was often heavy-handed with the use of physical punishment (Bunge, 2001; Strange, 2004).  But Christ changed all of that when He came.  His message was one of peace, mercy, and forgiveness instead of violence.  “Here in Colossians and Ephesians, we see a practical expression of Jesus’ vision for the family and the kingdom of God.  Here the family is no longer an autocratic institution, but a place for all members to grow together in their common life in Christ.  Something similar could be said about the way the relationship of masters and slaves is made mutual in Colossians and Ephesians (Col. 3:22-4.1, Eph. 6:5-9)” (Strange, 2004, p. 75).  Christ values mutuality over dominance.

Sadly, it seems that many Christians do not understand this, as throughout the centuries paternal control over the family is what is often emphasized in most fundamental and even some evangelical churches.  I believe that the Scriptures that these churches tend to focus on outside of the Old Testament to justify paternal control of the family are the verses I mentioned above, 1 Timothy 3:1-15 and Titus 1:6.  Since 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus were also written by the Apostle Paul, we might begin to wonder if Paul is contradicting himself because these books have a very different feel when it comes to instructions for the Christian family.  The answer to this question is no.  Why?  Because 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus were written for pastors and other leaders of the church.  That is why these books are referred to as the Pastoral Epistles.  They were not read aloud to the congregation during worship meetings as Ephesians and Colossians were.  These books were also more in line with the cultural norms of the first century as well as were meant to aid in the management of the church.  “It is often remarked by commentators that the Pastoral Epistles conform to the received ethical opinions and dominant social expectations of the surrounding culture of the day… Of the two ways of understanding the Christian family, it was that of the Pastoral Epistles which predominated in early Christianity” (Strange, 2004, p. 77).  Just as the view of how the Christian families were dominant in the ancient world, they still are dominant today.

People, in general, seem to have a superiority complex.  It wasn’t until the 1960s that we had the Civil Rights Movement making Black and White people equal when it came to the U.S. laws.  It wasn’t until 1990 that the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in order to protect people with disabilities from discrimination.  And although this country has made great progress in providing people with equal rights, we have a long way to go as racism, discrimination, and ageism are still very much alive in this country and all over the world.  Due to our sinful nature, we have a tendency to want to be in control.  Therefore, it is understandable that some Christians tend to ignore what Ephesians and Colossians have to say about family life except for the verses that tell children to obey their parents and focus on what 1 Timothy and Titus say about how a Christian family should be run.  In 1 Timothy and Titus, dominance over the people lower on the hierarchical chain is now emphasized rather than a mutual relationship.  Children are left out of the pictures except for how leaders of the church are to manage them.  “In 1 Timothy 3:4f. we are told that the bishop or overseer must control his children without losing his dignity, and that the way he manages his household is a mark of his ability to manage a congregation.  A similar quality is also required in a deacon (1 Tim. 3:12), and, as Titus lays down, in an elder (Tit. 1:6)” (Strange, 2004, p. 75).  While this type of management works well within the church itself, it is quite harmful for individual Christian families as each member of that family should have a respectful, mutual relationship with each other.  I am in no way implying that the husband is not the head of the household, he certainly is (Ephesians 5:23).  While the church is God’s household as 1 Timothy 3:15 states, it is important to remember that “the letters themselves are in the form of an address to church leaders, rather than to the whole congregation” (Strange, 2004, p. 76).   These passages should not be used to place children under their parents’ discipleship nor justify parental control as some Christians try to do.  “Children’s discipleship, which was given its own place in Colossians and Ephesians, was absent from the Pastoral Epistles.  Children have become part of their parents’ discipleship; they make their appearance only on the margin as objects of control and as problems requiring proper management” (Strange, 2004, p. 76).  Taken alone, it is quite easy to misuse these passages to justify the need to control children.  This is why we must understand the context in which they were written and for whom they were written.

Shepherds must control their herds.  Control in this context means to oversee, guard, and steer the flock to abundant food and water.  This is exactly what our church leaders as well as parents should be doing.  Shepherds also protect their flocks from harm.  Jesus does this with us if we allow Him (John 10:1-5).  He even laid down His life for us.  We must follow His example.   Acts 20:28-30 states, “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.”  And most importantly 1 Timothy 3:2-5 says that while a church leader must manage his family well and see to it that his children obey him, he must also be “above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?”  I have bolded two important phrases that some Christians seem to ignore.  The leader is to be gentle and see that his children obey him in a way that is worthy of respect!  Somehow I don’t think spanking a child or using other forms of harsh punishment meets these particular qualifications.

Over the centuries, people have always seemed to equate respect with fear as if these two words are interchangeable.  The Bible often says to fear the Lord (see Part 5 of “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” for more information regarding what fear the Lord actually means).  I would like to look at the definitions of fear and respect.  Dictionary.com defines fear as “a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined; the feeling or condition of being afraid.”  The definition of respect according to Dictionary.com is “esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability.”  And “to hold in esteem or honor.”  As we can clearly see, fear and respect have absolutely nothing to do with each other.  What I find even more interesting is that the definition for fear contains the words “evil” and “pain” whereas respect does not.  This makes sense because fear is not from God as 2 Timothy 1:7 states, “For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love and self-discipline.”  It makes me wonder why so many Christians believe that fear and respect are one in the same.  People, especially children, that fear someone will often do something not because they want to or respect the person, but because they are afraid of the person and want to avoid painful punishment.  Sadly, some parents do not care why their children obey them just as long as they do.  Unfortunately, parents who use fear and punishment to make their children obey them are actually teaching their children to be selfish as the child is not thinking about doing something for another person but rather to protect him/herself from punishment.  We should not be teaching our children to only do things to avoid punishment, as the Bible says, “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves” Philippians 2:3.  Also, as we shall see in my next series entitled, “The Effects of Spanking,” not only does spanking hurt the parent-child relationship, it also causes children to become more rebellious especially as they get older.  Craig Hart is the author of the article called, “Three Essential Parenting Principles” that was published in the Spring 2003 issue of BYU Magazine.  He is quoted in Janet Heimlich’s book, Breaking Their Will, which states, “’While coercion often leads to immediate conformance by the child, research indicates it rarely results in a long-term solution and often leads to the child’s being more defiant, depressed, aggressive or withdrawn, and manipulative in the home and with peers,’ writes Hart” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 86).

In conclusion, while the passages in 1 Timothy and Titus are important for how churches are to be run and provide some guidance on family life issues, they should not be our sole references of how families should be run.  Sadly, since ancient times, Christians have had a need to control their children.  Christian advocates have taught parents to do this through harsh treatment and punishment of children despite Christ’s radical teachings regarding family and children.   “The Didache, or Teaching of the Apostles (date uncertain, but probably early second century) speaks to parents about the need not to ‘withold your hand’ [in punishment] from your son or daughter, but to bring them up in the fear of the Lord (Didache 4.9).  Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna (c. 69-c. 155), wrote to the Philippians with moral instruction, which, like Clement’s before him, spoke to the men about how they were to instruct their wives.  Among the wife’s duties was ‘to educate the children in the education of the fear of God’ (Polycarp, Philippians 4.2)” (Strange, 2004, p. 77).  I believe the following passage from Strange (2004) sums up the cultural and Christian origins of the need to control children and minorities:

“The modern observer is likely to have little sympathy with what can be seen the way in which the second-century church treated its women and children members.  The emergence of the patriarchal structure which we see in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers (Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius) may look, from our point of view, like a decline—both from the teaching and example of Jesus and from the insights of Paul about the child’s inclusion among God’s people.

But before we dismiss the course taken by the church, we should bear two things in mind.  The first is that the church adopted a form of existence which would allow it to work with the grain of the surrounding culture, which, as we saw in chapter one, was markedly patriarchal.  This adaptation, which seems to have well under way by the time the Pastoral Epistles were written, was perhaps a necessary evolution for the church to maintain its witness.  Further, as a matter of principle, we recall that Jesus’ own ministry to children was through their parents.  The second century church was therefore developing in a line with the precedent of Jesus’s own ministry” (p. 82).

We have been focusing on Fundamentalist Protestant Christians throughout this series on the Christian history of spanking children.  However, Fundamental Christians are not the only ones to have a long history of control, fear of Hell and satan, and the breaking of the will through the use of physical punishment with their children.  As we will see in this next section, Roman Catholics also contribute to the dark history of hitting children in the name of God.

Catholicism and Spanking

The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of using physical punishment with children.  This should not be surprising considering how violent the first century Romans were (see Part 7 of “Spanking is NOT God’s Will for more information).  In fact, it wasn’t until 1980 that most Catholic schools banned the use of corporal punishment.  Unfortunately, some Catholic schools as well as some public schools still permit the use of corporal punishment.  These schools are primarily in the Southern states.  The use of spanking children in schools dates back to Colonial times as the Puritans were not the only ones that took Native American children from their families in order to “civilize” them.  In fact, there was a Catholic mission boarding school called St. Francis located in South Dakota that had a long history of using harsh physical punishment as well as other abuses with the Native American children that were literally torn from their families and forced to attend this school.  In an article published in 1990 in Lakota Woman called, “Civilize Them with a Stick,” one Native American woman describes her family’s experiences in St. Francis:

 “They used a horse buggy whip on my grandmother then she was put back into the attic— for two weeks.

My mother had much the same experiences but never wanted to talk about them, and then there I was, in the same place. The school is now run by the BIA— The Bureau of Indian Affairs— but only since about 15 years ago. When I was there, during the 1960s, it was still run by the church. The Jesuit fathers ran the boys wing and the sisters of the Sacred Heart ran us—-with the help of the strap. Nothing had changed since my grandmother’s days. I’ve been told recently that even in the 70s they were still beating children at that school. All I got out of school was being taught how to pray. I learned quickly that I would be beaten if I failed in my devotions or, God forbid, prayed the wrong way, especially prayed in Indian to Wakan Tanka, the Indian Creator” (Dog & Erdoes, 1990, p. 565-566).

 

Most Christian parents, Catholics included, spank their children for the remissions of sins, meaning that the spanking is to cleanse the child from the sin that they have committed by disobeying their parents.  After a child is spanked, the child is supposedly free from the guilt of his/her sin since he/she has paid the penalty for his/her sin and can be forgiven by his/her parents and God.  In an article written by Crystal Lutton, author of the book, Biblical Parenting, she suggests that one of the origins of the practice of spanking may be with the Catholics.  In her article entitled, “The History of Spanking,” Crystal Lutton (2011) states, “There is an interesting history of spanking. From its earliest practice, in Ancient Greece, spankings were administered to adults. It was a pagan practice for increasing fertility in barren women who were spanked by the pagan priests and later was introduced into the Catholic Church as a means of adult women having their sins removed through the spankings of the priest after confession” (http://aolff.org/spare-the-rod/the-spanking-files-2/history-of-spanking).  While I trust Crystal Lutton’s vast knowledge in this area, I personally have no other references that say the same thing, therefore, hesitate to guarantee this as absolute fact.  At the same time, I do believe that we must consider this as a possibility.  At the very least, this shows how far back spanking goes in the history of Catholicism.

The Catholics have their own version of the Bible in which they tout as God’s Word.  The Catholic Bible contains all of the books of the Holy Bible in which Protestants use, but it also contains some other books that are not in the Protestant Holy Bible.  One such book is Sirach.  Sirach seems to be quite similar to the book of Proverbs and is located in the Old Testament of the Catholic Bible.  Like Proverbs, there is a verse in Sirach that seems to strongly advocate for the use of physical punishment with young children.  Sirach 30:12 states, “Bow down his neck while he is young, and beat his sides while he is a child, lest he grow stubborn, and regard thee not, and so be a sorrow of heart to thee” (DRA 1899 American Version).  The next verse in Sirach seems to indicate that a child should not play but be put to work in order to control his behavior.  “Instruct thy son, and labour about him, lest his lewd behaviour be an offence to thee” (DRA 1899 American Version).  As an Evangelical, Bible-based Christian, I don’t know if Catholics take these verses literally or what exactly is meant by them.  Given the fact that Catholicism has a long history of using physical punishment with children both at school and in the home, I would guess that the majority of Catholics have taken these verses as well as the rod verses in Proverbs literally.  At many of the Catholic schools, children have been hit with rulers.  Their hands, heads, and bottoms are some of the locations in which children have been hit with rulers as a form of  “discipline” at school.   “Not willing to wait for God or the devil to get us, the Church had its own brand of punishment. Humiliation tactics were a specialty of the Church. Corporal punishment was quite common. Anyone who ever went to a Catholic grammar school can vouch for that. Guilt and anxiety were always favorites of the Nuns. As if the fear of God they laid on you was not enough, the Nuns took matters into their own hands. More than a few children were hoping the devil got to them before the Nuns and their Rosary’s did” (Cooney, 2003, http://fspp.net/Articles/crumbling_walls.htm).  How sad that, again, children were turned off to God due to how they were treated.  Not only that, children were often hit in these Catholic schools for every little act that was consider an act of defiance as we saw in the Native American woman’s description.  “According to Irwin A. Hyman, author of Reading, Writing, and the Hickory Stick: The Appalling Story of Physical and Psychological Abuse in America’s Schools, Catholic schools have a long history of using physical punishment for just about every perceived act of defiance on the part of students.  Speaking about disciplinary methods that were widespread decades ago, Hyman notes, ‘No restraint was considered prudent in the vigorous application of the yardstick on open hands, across knuckles, and to derrieres in an effort to save the souls of errant youth’” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 89).  And while corporal punishment, as I mentioned previously, has been banned in most Catholic schools, children attending the more conservative Catholic schools in the South are at a higher risk of being spanked while in school.

Much like Fundamental Christians, Catholics have often feared Hell and the devil when it comes to one of the reasons they spank their children.  They have often believed that they could “beat the devil” out of their children.  As we have seen throughout this series, fear of Hell and satan is a common thread among Christian pro-spankers.  “For a very long time, Christians have associated demons and the devil with sinfulness.  In the late 1500s, each of the seven deadly sins was paired with a demon.  Many Christians speak of sin as what separates believers from God—a separation that makes a person vulnerable to being possessed by Satan or demons.  Therefore, some Christians believe that when a child misbehaves—thereby exposing his or her sinfulness—a proper remedy is to drive out the evil forces that might have taken over the child’s soul” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 103).  In case one is wondering what exactly are the seven deadly sins, they are wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony.  It seems that the Catholic Church divides these sins into two categories: Venial and Mortal Sins.  Sacraments are often used to restore the relationship between a Catholic who has committed one of these sins, especially if he/she committed one in the Mortal Sins category, and God.  Otherwise, a Catholic may face eternal damnation according to the Catholic Church.  The Protestant Holy Bible mentions 7 things that God hates and detests in Proverbs 6:16-19.  And interestingly, the opposite of the fruits of the Spirit described in Galatians 5:19-21 seem to highly correspond with these seven deadly sins.

The fear of satan is exactly what drove Matt’s mother to use physical punishment with him when he was a child.  Janet Heimlich interviewed 60-year-old Matt in her book, Breaking Their Will.  His story is a perfect example of how Christian parents can allow fear from satan dictate how they raise and treat their children:

 “She would take me into the utility room, her domain, and pull this big belt off of the wall which she had hung in the closet.  I think it was my uncle’s Marine belt—one of those big wide leather belts with the big brass buckle on it—and she’d whale on me, on my bottom and the backs of my thighs.  Every once in a while she would ask me to pull down my pants and do it on my bare skin.  I do remember a couple of times that she was hitting me so hard and flailing so hard that she lost control of the belt, and the buckle hit me a couple of times and made these gashes in my skin.  Generally, I’d start crying and yelling, and then she’d say ‘OK, go to your room.’  And I’d go to my room, and not only would I close the door to my room, but I’d go in my closet, and I’d close the door to my closet so I had double protection.  And then I would cry, and say things like, ‘Nobody loves me,’ and ‘I hate my mom.’

Matt’s mother likely had a problem controlling her anger, yet there was another force at play: her religious beliefs.  The woman was a devout Catholic and was petrified of the devil” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 75).

Sadly, many Christian parents who are trying so hard to save their children from the devil by using physical punishment with them don’t realize that they are playing right into satan’s hands.  Satan knows our weaknesses.  He also knows that children believe in God at birth, and therefore, wants to do everything he can to destroy their natural faith in God by having their parents teach a wrong and distorted view of who God truly is through hitting the children in His Name.  We must remember that satan is the father of lies (John 8:44), and that “devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour (1 Peter 5:8).

This leads me to a well-known ritual practiced primarily by Catholics, but is also practiced by some Protestant groups, called exorcism.  “What is exorcism?  Dictionary.com defines it as ‘to seek to expel (an evil spirit) by adjuration or religious or solemn ceremonies’” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 269).  When we think of exorcism, we usually think of Jesus commanding an evil spirit or demon to come out of a person as well as a Catholic Priest doing the same thing.  We also think of the movie, The Exorcist.  We usually don’t think of anything physical being done to the person with the evil spirit except for maybe being restrained so the demon doesn’t throw the person around and/or the laying of hands on the person in order to bless them.  I never thought beatings could be a part of an exorcism.  I also didn’t know exactly how many children have undergone exorcisms until I began researching physical punishment in the Roman Catholic Church.  Sadly, physical punishment seems to be done during exorcisms in which a child is involved because, as I have been pointing out all throughout this series, many pro-spankers truly believe that spanking and beating children can purify their souls.  “For this matter, repeated corporal punishment designed to ‘beat the devil’ out of children…can constitute a form of ritual abuse” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 269).

Many children have had an exorcism done due them for any number of reasons including typical developmentally appropriate behaviors, challenging behavioral problems, certain physical conditions or disabilities such as Epilepsy, mental or emotional problems or conditions, and even sleepwalking.  Of course, children with special needs and behavioral problems are at a much greater risk for both physical punishment and exorcism.  “We should also be concerned that children with special needs or behavioral or psychological problems are not getting help because they are mistakenly viewed as being possessed by demons.  In these cases, children may be denied access to specialists and undergo exorcisms” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 275).  Unfortunately, being beaten during an exorcism not only causes physical and psychological harm to children, but in some cases it has caused death.

“On April 14, 2008, authorities said that twenty-five-year-old Nelly Vasquez-Salazar of Waukegan, Illinois, confessed to brutally slashing to death her 6-year-old daughter, Evelyn Vasquez, because she believed that the child was possessed by the devil.  The child reportedly had been stabbed eleven times.  What apparently led the mother to suspect demons was her daughter’s habit of sleepwalking.  According to police, Vasquez-Salazar told her mother that she would wake up and find Evelyn standing by her bed.  Her mother then reportedly told her that the child was possessed” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 268).

Now before we shrug this off as one of the more extreme cases, another example of a child dying from an exorcism is Terrance Cottrell.  Terrance had autism and had undergone many exorcisms in order to rid him of the supposed evil spirit causing his autism.  Autism causes children to usually not want to be touched or to make eye contact with another person.  Therefore, we can imagine how upset Terrance would get during exorcisms with people touching him, surrounding him, chanting and praying.  During his final exorcism, the pastor sat on Terrance’s chest in order to restrain him, “which led to his being suffocated by the pastor” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 275).  It is important to note that these parents who physically punish and have their children go through exorcisms, for the most part, truly believe that what they are doing is truly right and good.  As I’ve said throughout all my series, parents want to obey God in order to raise godly children.  It’s just too bad that “experts and authorities” that use their weaknesses to gain these parents’ trust are leading these parents down the wrong path.  It is also too bad that our focus isn’t more on God’s Word and Its true meaning.

What I find even more interesting when it comes to exorcism is the following verse found in Matthew 8:16 which states, “When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick.”  Jesus drove out demons not by beating the person with the demon, but as the verse says, with a word!  And we see this all throughout the New Testament that demons and evil spirits are rebuked and driven out verbally!  Also, while there are demons and evil spirits on this Earth reeking havoc for satan, we must be cautious in determining whether someone is absolutely possessed by a demon because God is the only One truly “trained” and able to cast out demons and evil spirits.  He will guide the correct person to expel the demon out with a word if absolutely necessary.  Therefore, it is quite clear from Scripture that “beating the devil out of them” is not biblical.  As I’ve shown, “Parents who frequently spank their children due to beliefs that this treatment can rid a child of evil spirits can cause serious, even deadly, injury…The tragic death of Josef Smith, the eight-year-old boy who died from having been physically abused by his parents…As it turns out, the parents’ fear of Josef being possessed by a demon likely played a role in his death” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 275).

In conclusion of this section about Catholicism and the use of physical punishment with children, I would like to take a brief look at St. Augustine as he had a major influence over some of the people that I have discussed in this series.  St. Augustine (354-430) was a great theologian.  He was extremely interested in children, especially infants.  He believed in original sin and that every child was born with a sinful nature.  “Augustine watched infants closely and attempted to put into words this world without language.  Augustine described tenderly the smiles of sleep and the comfort of nursing, but juxtaposed these occasions of serenity with a newborn’s jealous rage when, even after it had been fed, it saw another infant at a nurse’s breast” (Stortz, 2001, p. 83 & 84).  Despite his belief in a child’s sinfulness beginning at birth as well as his being physically punished as a child, St. Augustine did not believe that children ought to be spanked by adults.  “While children in this age of life can exhibit temper tantrums and extreme acts which many modern Christian smacking advocates have urged parents to repress with corporal punishment, Augustine gave no such advice” (Martin, 2006, p. 159).  Also, Augustine didn’t like the inequity between adults and children as they both sinned, but yet, children were the ones getting punished for it.  “That basic inequity between children and adults marked his childhood: ‘The schoolmaster who caned me was behaving no better than I was.’  Though childhood was full of reprehensible actions, Augustine did not favour punishing children as severely as adults” (Martin, 2006, p. 160).

It is clear from what we’ve seen throughout this section that the Roman Catholics have a dark history of using fear, control, and physical punishment in the Name of God just as Fundamental Christians do.  We have also seen a possibility that the origins of spanking for the remissions of sins may have begun with ancient Catholicism.  And finally, we’ve seen that using physical punishment to rid children of evil spirits has been done throughout history even though it has no biblical basis.  While not all Catholics have advocated for nor used corporal punishment with children, sadly, a great deal have.

In the next section, we will discover the origins of the “rules” for “lovingly” spanking.

From Where the “Rules” for a “Loving Christian Spanking” Come

I have often wondered where the current as well as historical Christian advocates of spanking came up with the rules of a “loving, godly” spanking.  After all, there are supposedly two types of spankings in our current culture—the godly spanking versus the cultural spanking.  According to many Christian pro-spankers, the cultural spanking is when non-believers spank their children out of anger or frustration.  Of course, Christians are capable of spanking their children out of anger or frustration.  According to the Christian advocates of spanking children who claim to be biblical and child “experts,” spanking in anger is what causes all the adverse effects of spanking in children.  They claim that a “godly” spanking done without anger and “lovingly” is not harmful to children in any way.  In fact, James Dobson (1996) states, “For example, a dime sized bruise on the buttocks of a fair-skinned child may or may not indicate an abusive situation. It all depends. In an otherwise secure and loving home, that bruise may have no greater psychological impact than a skinned knee or a stubbed toe. Again the issue in not the small abrasion; it is the meaning behind it” (p. 25).  Therefore, as long as the child is physically punished in the “correct and loving way,” that even if the spanking leaves marks and bruises on the child’s bottom, legs, or hands (the most common places for children to be spanked) it will not do any psychological or emotional harm to the child.  We’ll come back to this in the upcoming series called, “The Effects of Spanking.”

So, what exactly are some of these “rules” for a “loving, godly, Christian” spanking?  They are:

  1. Never spank in anger.
  2. Always spank lovingly.
  3. Spank only for outright disobedience or harmful behavior.
  4. Tell the child exactly why he/she is being spanked before and after the spanking.
  5. Explain to the child that Jesus wants the parent to discipline him/her because the child sinned by disobeying the parent.
  6. Hug and comfort the child after the spanking

Of course, there are different variations of these rules depending on which Christian pro-spanking advocate one consults.  Another “rule” that often varies among Christian advocates of spanking is whether or not to use one’s hand or an object to spank the child because for some, the hand is part of the parent and should symbolize love and care to the child.  However, what I find quite interesting is that there are no such “rules” on how to correctly spank a child.  God always provides instructions on important subjects such as prayer, marriage, sex, and forgiveness for us to follow.  Jesus has provided us with numerous parables that illustrate the numerous important topics about which He spoke.  Since spanking a child is very important, why are there no specific instructions or examples for how to appropriately spank children?  Some Christians use Psalm 4:4 and Ephesians 4:26 which states, “In your anger do not sin” in order to say that these “rules” for spanking children are indeed biblically based.  However, this verse is not a direct instruction of how to spank.  Yes, it can be applied to spanking but this is the only verse, besides the rod verses, that can be applied as the rest of Scripture is more against than for spanking.

To answer our original question of where do the “rules” for the “loving and godly” spanking originate, I recently read a wonderful article by Dulce de Leche entitled, “Spanking in Anger-What Does it Matter?”  In her article, she discovers one of the origins of these “rules” for spanking.  There is a book that was written by Dorothy Spencer that was published in 1936 that explains domestic adult discipline.  It is called The Spencer Spanking Plan.  As part of the domestic adult discipline, husbands are instructed in how to appropriately spank their wives.  “Finally, the origin of the “never spank in anger” directive is actually based in domestic spankings—the Spencer Spanking Plan.  Yes, it was meant to describe husbands never spanking their wives in anger.  The instructions are very specific: 1. Explain what actions will merit a spanking. 2. Be careful not to cause injury or leave welts or bruises.  It should only cause just enough pain to be effective.  3.  It must never be done in anger.  4. After the spanking, the wife will kiss her husband and thank him.  Her offense is now forgiven and friendly relations are re-established” (Dulce de Leche, 2011, http://dulcefamily.blogspot.com/2011/06/spanking-in-anger-what-does-it-matter.html).  (For more info see http://untotheleast.blogspot.com/2006/12/spencer-spanking-plan.html).  Isn’t it interesting that these “rules” for spanking wives are quite similar to the “rules” for spanking children in a “Christian” way?  It seems very obvious to me that the Christian advocates of spanking children such as Dobson, Tripp, the Pearls, Lessin, and the like have adapted these Spencer rules to rules for spanking children.  And yet, there is absolutely nothing in the Bible that resembles these rules.  In fact, if we are to take the rod verses in the book of Proverbs literally, we are to beat children across the back, not bottom, legs, or hands, with a staff/walking stick.  It does not provide us with any more instructions than that.  Man has interpreted these verses in a way that works for them.  They try to cover their guilt by making up rules and using objects that they deem appropriate to inflict harm on their children in Jesus’ Name.

Just as spanking is man made, so are the “rules” for a “Christian, godly, loving” spanking.  There is no biblical support for such rules just as the Bible does not support using control and fear to break children’s wills.  In the final section of this piece, we shall see how spanking and harsh punishment was, and still is, put under the guise of one of, if not the, first offshoot of the field of Psychology.

The Guise of Behaviorism

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the field of Psychology began to be of interest to many people.  They wanted to know the science behind animal and human behavior such as what caused or stopped behavior.  This brought a great deal of experiments with both animals and humans in order to understand the human mind better.  Behaviorism was, if not, the, first branch of the field of Psychology.  Ivan Pavlov, John B. Watson, and B. F. Skinner were among the first Behaviorists, though, as we’ve seen throughout this series that Behaviorism has been practiced throughout the centuries, and observed that behavior can be controlled through rewards and punishments.  “Behaviorism is the view that behavior should be explained by observable experiences, not by mental processes” (Santrock, 2008, p. 227).  As one can see, Behaviorism is very black and white as it focuses solely on what is seen and totally ignores what is unseen.

For example, Behaviorists believe that to get a toddler to stop throwing temper tantrums negative reinforcement or punishment such as spanking must be used to stop the child from having a fit.  On the other hand, if one wants a toddler to keep picking up his/her toys, then according to a Behaviorist, positive reinforcement or reward must be administered to the child such as praise or candy.  E. L. Thorndike was another one of the early Behaviorists and he summed this idea up into what is known as The Law of Effect.  “The Law of Effect says behaviors that are followed by pleasant consequences are more likely to occur in the future while behaviors that are followed by unpleasant consequences are less likely to occur in the future” (Preston, 2011, http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/defense_of_spanking/why_punishment_is_needed.html).  Behaviorists, in general, do not take into account children’s emotions, ages, developmental stages or abilities, or anything else going on within the child or family when it comes to behavior.  “For the behaviorist, these thoughts, feelings, and motives are not appropriate subject matter for a science of behavior because they cannot be directly observed” (Santrock, 2008, p. 227).  Behaviorism aims to externally control all behavior without taking into account or looking for the root of the behavior.  As we shall see in an upcoming series that will be entitled, “Discipline IS God’s Will,” children act up for a variety of reasons, and there is usually a need behind the behavior being exhibited.  If we can address the need behind the behavior, the behavior will usually go away.  Also, Behaviorists don’t seem to take into account that children may not know the appropriate way to behave and/or may just be learning the appropriate behavior.  As I continue to point out throughout all of my work, punishment aims to stop behavior, it does not teach more appropriate behavior.  People argue that they always tell the child how to appropriately behave next time after the spanking or other punishment, but they fail to realize that the child is too busy trying to recover from the spanking or other punishment that are not capable of truly hearing the parent or of doing any learning—especially if the child is in pain.

Spanking has been hidden under the guise of Behaviorism for 50-100 years now.  Because of this, many pro-spankers such as James Dobson, who claims to be a Psychologist, use the fact that it has been proven by Psychology that spanking and other forms of punishment work to control children’s behavior.  This helps justify hitting and shaming children because a branch of Psychology claims it is necessary.  As I said in the section about the origins of control in this piece, spanking is all about control, and not about how to truly teach children how to behave!  And spanking has been shown to lead to even more unwanted behavior.  “All too often, aversive stimuli are not effective punishments, in that they do not decrease the unwanted behavior and indeed sometimes increase the unwanted behavior over time.  One recent study found that when parents used spanking to discipline 4- to 5-year-old children, the problem behavior increased over time (McLoyd & Smith, 2002).  Another recent longitudinal study found that spanking before age 2 was related to behavioral problems in middle and late childhood (Slade & Wissow, 2004)” (Santrock, 2008, p. 240).

Unfortunately, Christian advocates such as Dobson and others claim that studies such as these are biased and inaccurate.  They truly believe that using Behaviorist methods in order to control children, as long as they are done in a “loving, godly way,” are a great way to keep sin and satan out of children.  We must remember that Behaviorism is outdated and only another guise to promote the harsh, unbiblical act of spanking children.  As we shall see in the next 2 series, we know a great deal more about the human mind, especially when it comes to child development.  We must not base childcare and rearing on a quite old, narrow-minded branch of Psychology!

Conclusion

Throughout this series, we have explored where different concepts such as breaking a child’s will, fear of death and Hell, control, and Behaviorism originated and how they have influenced Christians to spank their children.  We have also looked at historical figures that have advocated for spanking children, and have tested their theologies against what the Bible actually says regarding the treatment of children.  And finally, we have read some horrific true stories about Christian parents harming, and even killing, their children in order to do their best to raise their children in a godly manner.  Most of them were trying to do so out of love.  It is my hope that as people have read this series as well as “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” that God is showing that hitting and punishing children was never what He intended.  Please be open to His true Will.

I would like to end this series on a positive note.  While there have been many throughout history who have spanked and advocated for spanking, there also has been many who have not such as D. L. Moody, Martin Luther, St. Augustine, and Martin Luther King Jr.  They understood that the rod verses do not mean to hit children, but to use proper authority in order to discipline them in a way that will lead them to Him.  I conclude this with the following passage from the book called, Children in the Early Church by W. A. Strange:

“Here is the advice of the so-called Teaching of the Apostles (Didascalia Apostolorum), a Syrian Christian church order of the early third century, on the subject of disciplining children:

‘Do not hesitate to reprove them [your children], reasoning with them and chastising them and arguing; for you will not kill them by chastising them, but rather give them life, since this is his hope; beat him with a rod, you will free his soul from hell [Prov. 29:17; 25:14].  Our ‘rod’ is the word of Jesus Christ, as Jeremiah saw a branch of an almond tree [Jer. 1:11].   Everyone therefore who hesitates to speak a word of chastisement to his son, hates his son.  (Didascalia 4.11; Funk 1906 1 230, 232)” (Strange, 2004, p. 78).

May we discipline our children with the Word of our living God!

References

Bunge, M. J. (Ed.). (2001). The child in Christian thought. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Cooney, T. (2003). The crumbling walls of the Roman Catholic Church.   http://fspp.net/Articles/crumbling_walls.htm

Dobson, J. (1996). The new dare to discipline.  Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.

Dog, M. C. & Erdoes, R.  (1990). Civilize them with a stick.  Lakota Woman, 28-37, 38-39, and 40-41.

Dulce de Leche. (2011). Spanking in anger-what does it matter? http://dulcefamily.blogspot.com/2011/06/spanking-in-anger-what-does-it-matter.html

Heimlich, J.  (2011). Breaking their will.  Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

Lutton, C.  (2011). The history of spanking.  http://aolff.org/spare-the-rod/the-spanking-files-2/history-of-spanking

Martin, S.  (2006). Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.  Jerusalem, Israel: Sorensic.

Preston, P.   (2011). Why punishment is needed. http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/defense_of_spanking/why_punishment_is_needed.html

Santrock, J.  (2008). Educational psychology (Illinois version).  Boston, MA: The McGraw-Hill Companies.

Strange, W. A.  (2004). Children in the early church.  Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Broken Daughters

I just found another blogger, Lisa Bennet, who is sharing her life story/testimony of being raised in a fundamentalist christian home.  In Part 5 her parents start following the Pearls’ teachings.

REAL Parenting Joy

PfamilyGal expresses her concerns about the Pearls’ teachings in REAL Parenting Joy.

When The Child Abuser Has a Bible

In Dec of 2010 The Official Newsletter of the National Child Protection Training Center featured an article entitled, When the Child Abuser Has a Bible: Investigating Child Maltreatment Sanctioned or Condoned by a Religious Leader.  They mention To Train Up A Child by Michael and Debi Pearl in the footnotes and include a quote from Beth Fenimore’s open letter to Roy Lessin, How Spanking Changed My Life (Note: this story is very graphic and might be triggering for some. Use your own descretion.)

Michael Pearl: Heretic?

Becky, from Created To Be His,  shares how she changed her mind about Michael Pearl’s teachings after 10 years of following them in Michael Pearl: Heretic?

Review of Good and Evil

Samuel left a long review of Good and Evil, by Michael Pearl, at HotCheapBook.

Wartburg Watch and IFB

The Wartburg Watch Focuses on Independent Fundamental Baptist Churches this week.  So far they have:

Is The Independent Fundamental Baptist Church Any Different Than the Southern Baptist Convention and Sovereign Grace Ministries?

The Independent Fundamental Baptist Church Sounds Like Mark Driscoll and The Rest of Them

Who Do The Independent Fundamental Baptists Say They Are?

They will probably add 1 or 2 more posts this week so stay tuned.

Also, don’t miss miss this new post from  Under Much Grace:

Redeeming Dinah: The Errors of Ron Williams, the IFB, and Gothard’s Esteem of Rabbinical Writing as Holy Writ

 

Heartbreaking Abuse

Warning, the first post should not be read by sensitive people:

The Breaking the “Diabolical Will” of Infants in the IFB – Even at Hephzibah House: Pondering Pearl and Lydia Schatz Part VII

There But For Grace: Why Good People Make Dangerous Choices (Pondering Pearl and Lydia Schatz) Part VIII


Humiliation at Hephzibah House: Restriction and Control over Restroom Breaks