Contemplating Gentle Discipline

Molly contemplates what Gentle Discipline means to her in Beyond The Ideas.

CNN Story on Christian Talk Radio

Jeri, the Owner of Gentle Christian Mothers, just sent me an interesting link.  This is a Talk Radio Show about the CNN coverage of the Schatz Story from Aug 18, 2011.  The half hour show is called, Issues Etc. and the host is Told Wilken.  After playing the audio of the CNN show, he accepts calls and emails from his listeners to discuss the question, “Is Spanking Required in the Bible?”.  His conclusion seems to be that it is not mandated but neither it is prohibited.   The key to him is discipline.

And in the latest news about the Pearls, they just released a new book.  I see that Amazon is not at all concerned about the Petition.

Logical Consequences vs Punishment

Pearl in Oyster (PIO) takes a look at Logical Consequences vs Punishment as she continues her 52 Tool Cards Series.

Bonus post:  Sibling Rivalry? From the Mouth of Babes.  <3

The Effects of Spanking Part 6 *Sensitive*

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

In the last part of this series we saw how teaching children to equate love with pain can cause them to become sadomasochistic.  We also saw how spanking children, even when done “lovingly” and the “right way,” causes many children to struggle with depression, guilt, and shame as having pain intentionally inflicted on them by their parents never makes them feel positive about themselves.  In this concluding piece of this series, we will see how spanking keeps the vicious cycle of abuse and authoritarian parenting going for generations unless one fights against it.  New research shows that children that are physically punished/abused can develop a form of Stockholm Syndrome as they deny and repress their pain.  Also, I will be showing that intentionally inflicting pain on children causes brain damage as the brain gets rewired due to experiencing pain and trauma throughout childhood.  Many parents do not realize how vulnerable the young, developing brain is.  Finally, I will be explaining the Scientific Method of conducting research in order to disprove the claim of a great deal of pro-spankers that all the research proving spanking is harmful is somehow biased.  I hope this series further proves that spanking did not come from God otherwise none of these harmful effects would ever occur.

The Cycle of Abuse and Authoritarian Parenting—“My parents spanked me and I survived and so will my children!”

Many pro-spankers often make this statement.  They’ve learned that physically punishing children is an acceptable manner of child rearing as it is what their parents did to them.  Also, Christian advocates of spanking have incorrectly taught them that God mandates the use of physical punishment in order to have godly children.  As these people have grown up learning never to question authority figures, it makes it easy for them to blindly obey the Christian advocates of spanking who claim that they are “experts” on child rearing such as Dobson, the Pearls, Lessin, Tripp, the Ezzos, and Christenson.  Plus, many well-meaning, everyday church pastors teach that the rod verses in Proverbs mean that we are to hit children in order to “discipline” them.  (See “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” for why the rod verses actually do not mean to physically punish children).  The way parents were treated as children is most often the way parents will go on to treat their children.   “If you are harsh and demanding, it is very likely your children will rebel and turn away from your value system sometime down the road.  In addition, you are setting up your children to reap a lifetime of emotional pain and rejection, and the cycle of abuse continues” (Kuzma, 2006, p. 9).

Many people confuse the three parenting styles.  The three parenting styles are authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive.  If parents physically punish their children, they are authoritarian, even if they do some of the things that authoritative parents do such as listening to their children at times or offer some choices to the children.  This is because authoritarian parenting stresses obedience without question, first-time obedience, strictness, and the use of punishment, especially corporal punishment, with their children.  Authoritarian parents also have very high (usually beyond what the children are developmentally capable of) expectations for their children.  While authoritarian parents, in general, love their children very much and simply want the best for them, these parents tend to focus more on keeping control of their children than on using effective discipline strategies that respect the actual needs of the individual child.  Janet Heimlich (2011) explains authoritarianism this way, “What is authoritarianism?  Usually this term refers to an oppressive form of government where leaders have great control over their subjects.  Dictionary.com describes authoritarianism as ‘favoring complete obedience or subjection to authorities as opposed to individual freedom’” (p. 46).  Fear is the primary way authoritarian parents gain and maintain control over their children.  Most of these parents are Fundamental Christians in which their church leaders also use authoritarianism tactics to maintain control over their congregations.  “Fear and authoritarianism often go hand in hand, as religious leaders can use terror tactics to maintain order and control” (Heimlich, 2011, p. 48).

Is authoritarianism biblical?  One could say it was during Old Testament times as God was not easily accessible, and people had to obey all God’s commandments in order to be accepted by God.  But, as I continue to point out throughout all of my series, God saw that His people were not able to live up to His extremely high expectations and choose to send His Son, Who was God, to die for all of humanity’s sins.  God humbled Himself to the lowliest of lows and choose to come to Earth as an infant, be born naturally as every other baby was born, drink milk from His mother’s breasts, and then suffer and die like a common criminal for us.  Our great and mighty God did all of this for us.  As soon as Christ died, the veil that was across the temple tore in two symbolizing that we now have full and complete access to God (Matthew 27:51).  The God of all creation did that for us.  We now live in grace.  “But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation” Colossians 1:22.  What’s more is that God is singing over us (Zephaniah 3:14-17)!  Therefore, authoritarianism is not biblical.

Sadly, if all one has ever experienced is authoritarianism and being physically punished throughout childhood, it can make it very difficult for the person to break out of that cycle because he or she does not know any other way to be a parent towards his or her child.  Thus, the same patterns take place within the parent-child bond.  Here is an example of the patterns that generally occur in authoritarian and abusive homes.

“The Cycle of Abuse follows a certain predictable pattern that begins when the child is young and gets progressively worse as the child becomes a teenager. Here are the steps you will see:

1. The child misbehaves. 2. The parent notices the child’s misbehavior and gives him instructions to correct it. 3. The child does not comply. He may ignore the instructions, argue, or even refuse to do what the parent says. 4. The parent feels angry. The parent feels that his authority is being threatened. The parent yells at the child, shakes him, insults him, or hits him. 5. The child feels angry, resentful, and worthless. 6. The child’s misbehavior becomes more ingrained and is now based on feelings of revenge and/or worthlessness. 7. The parent becomes more and more frustrated with the continued misbehavior and the entire cycle escalates until someone intervenes or someone gets hurt badly.

You can see the potential for this cycle to occur in any family” (Keith, 2011, http://childparenting.about.com/cs/familyissues/a/childabusecycle.htm).

This is particularly true in homes where obedience to authority is of the utmost importance.  As obedience becomes ingrained in the child’s mind, as with Dave who we met in Part 5, he or she may become afraid to question anyone, and may begin to crave the healthy amount of control that he or she lacked throughout childhood that when he or she finally has a child, he or she may begin to enforce the control onto the child.  These people feel so angry, resentful, and guilty that they misuse their authority over their child because they are finally in a position of power over someone reliant on them.  Miller (1994) states, “When someone suddenly gives vent to his or her rage, it is usually an expression of deep despair, but the ideology of child beating and the belief that beating is not harmful serve the function of covering up the consequences of the act and making them unrecognizable.  The result of a child becoming dulled to pain is that access to the truth about himself will be denied him all his life.  Only consciously experienced feelings would be powerful enough to subdue the guard at the gates, but these are exactly what he is not allowed to have” (p. 78).

Another reason why using authoritarian parenting and physical punishment with children tends to keep the cycle of abuse going is that, as I discussed in Part 3 of this series, a great deal of children who are physically punished struggle with a lack of empathy as they deny their own pain and become a proud survivor of physical punishment.  This sense of pride makes them deaf toward other’s pain and suffering, especially that of their children.  Also, they have become accustomed to obeying authority, especially when they believe that it is “godly,” and will obey even when it causes severe pain to a child.  Alice Miller (1994) states:

“The other explanation—that these were people who worshipped authority and were accustomed to obey—is not wrong, but neither is it adequate to explain a phenomenon like the Holocaust, if by obeying we mean the carrying out of commands that we consciously regard as being forced upon us.  People with any sensitivity cannot be turned into mass murderers overnight.  But the men and women who carried out ‘the final solution’ did not let feelings stand in their way for the simple reason that they had been raised from infancy not to have any feelings of their own but to experience their parents’ wishes as their own.  These were people who, as children, had been proud of being tough and not crying, of carrying out all their duties ‘gladly,’ of not being afraid—that is, at bottom, of not having an inner life at all” (p. 81).

This very well might explain why Michael Pearl and other Christian as well as non-Christian pro-spankers seem so proud of what they are advocating and doing to their children.  Their hearts have been harden by the pain they experienced as children, thus, continuing this vicious cycle by not only doing it to their children, but teaching other parents to do it to their children in order to “obey God” and raise “godly children.”  Studies have been done showing this pride and willingness to obey authority even when it causes another to be in severe pain.

One such study was conducted by Stanley Milgram, which was published in 1974 as Obedience to Authority.  In this study, Milgram wanted to see the lengths that people would go in obeying someone they perceived as having authority over them.  To conduct his experiment, he set up a situation in which there was a “teacher” and a “learner.”  The teacher would ask the learner a question, and if the learner answered the teacher’s question incorrectly, or failed to respond at all, a shock ranging from 0-450 volts would be administered to the learner at increasingly voltage each time the shock was administered by the teacher.    In reality, no shocks were actually given to the learner, but this fact was kept from the teacher. “The experiment’s true purpose was to discover the point at which an individual would refuse to obey and then actively disobey the insistent commands of the experimenter.  Milgram found that in experimental situations in which the ‘learner’ voiced his response to the increasing shocks, from mild discomfort to agonizing screams and pleas to be released from the straps binding him to his chair, many of the ‘teachers’ nevertheless continued to inflict the shocks” (Greven, 1992, p. 201).  What’s more is many of these “teachers’ continued administering the shocks until the “learner” finally grew silent as the higher voltage shocks could cause serious harm and even death.  This concerned Milgram and his colleagues.  Greven (1992) goes on to state, “What astonished Milgram and his colleagues was the proportion of individuals willing to obey the command to inflict pain right to the limit even when, in at least one instant, the person inflicting the shock believed that the person being shocked had died.  After the termination of the experiment, this man commented: ‘Well, I faithfully believed the man was dead until we opened the door.  When I saw him, I said, ‘Great, this is great.’  But it didn’t bother me even to find that he was dead.  I did a job’” (p. 202).

It is important to note that the study used people from all different backgrounds and different walks of life, and yet, half still continued to give shocks up to the maximum limit.  I found this very interesting and disturbing as did Milgram.  Why would so many seemingly good people obey authority to the point of inflicting such severe pain and even death on another person?  Knowing the research in child development, I suspect it had something to do with how these people were treated as children.  Also, these people believed that the shocks that they were administering to the “learner” were for his own good.  “In most of the experiments, Milgram found that approximately half the people who volunteered to give the shocks were willing to obey the authority to the limit despite the anguished pleas, and subsequent silence, of the person they were helping to ‘teach’” (Greven, 1992, p. 202).

While Stanley Milgram never considered the childhoods of the people who obeyed unwaveringly, I believe that this study shows what happens when pain, fear, and coercion are used with children; they lose a major part of themselves.  Christians think broken wills are a good thing for children, but in reality, a broken will means an inability to think or feel for oneself.  A broken will eventually turns into a hardened, calloused, prideful heart that is willing to listen to only the Christian teachers that align with their beliefs rather than taking the time to really study God’s Word and hear His still, small voice.  This also allows children to relate and defend their parents’ hurtful and abusive actions, and therefore, keeping the cycle of abuse and authoritarianism going despite hearing their children’s cries of pain.

Stockholm Syndrome

Most people are familiar with Stockholm Syndrome from the two well-covered cases of it.  The first case of Stockholm Syndrome happened in Stockholm, Sweden on August 23, 1973.  Bank robbers held three women and a man hostage for 131 hours.  The robbers strapped dynamite to all of the hostages.  At the end of the hostage situation, the hostages wound up defending their captors.

The second well-known case of Stockholm Syndrome is what happened with Patty Hearst.  Patty Hearst was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army on February 4, 1974. When two months later the group robbed a bank in San Francisco, it was observed on the bank’s surveillance camera that Patty was with the group and holding a gun during the robbery.  She had become attached to her captors and voluntarily aided them in their criminal activity.  Here are a few more details of the situation that Patty Hearst was in so that we can understand the psychological aspects of how people can develop Stockholm Syndrome:

“The apparent leader, Donald DeFreeze, called himself Field Marshall Cinque Mtume. Like Charles Manson only five years before, he wanted to start a revolution of the underprivileged, and he intended to do that by declaring war on those with status and money. From his followers he commanded total obedience and worship.

By her account, Patty was kept blindfolded for two months in a closet at the group’s headquarters, unable even to use the bathroom in privacy. DeFreeze realized that her visibility as a social figure that had gained the nation’s sympathy would showcase his cause, so he worked to turn her into an angry revolutionary.

From her report, DeFreeze relied on harsh psychological techniques:

She was isolated and made to feel that no one was going to rescue her.

She was physically and sexually abused by various members of the gang.

She was told that she might die.

She was fed lies about how the gang was oppressed by the establishment.

She was forced to record messages that blasted those she loved.

By early April, she had a new identity and was deemed ready to accompany the gang on their next daring foray” (Ramsland, 2011, http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/terrorists_spies/terrorists/hearst/1.html).

Many people don’t realize that Stockholm Syndrome occurs in domestic situations as well, such as spousal abuse and child abuse.  With the main dynamic occurring in cases of Stockholm Syndrome being that the person is reliant on the captor/abuser for survival, many times the victim will end up becoming attached to the captor/abuser, and begins to truly believe the captor/abuser has his or her best interests at heart as he or she believes the lies that the captor/abuser feeds him or her.  Also, the abuser holds absolute power over the victim.  “Because survival depends upon the good will of the oppressor, the abused become infatuated with and bonded to them” (Levy, 2009, http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/tribal-intelligence/200909/mackenzie-phillips-and-the-stockholm-syndrome).  This is how it is with children and their parents.  Children have no choice but to be totally reliant on their parents for survival.  Most parents that physically and emotionally harm their children truly love their children, and will do just enough things correctly, such as comfort their children, be responsive to some of their children’s needs, and play with their children, that the children form an attachment to their parents—even if it isn’t a secure attachment.  (See “Why NOT to Train a Baby” for more info on attachment).  As children grow up being fed lies by their parents about physical punishment being “for their own good,” being done “out of love,” children begin to deny and repress their pain allowing them to truly believe these lies.  They begin to identify with their parents, thus, believing their parents have done nothing wrong to them.

Michael Pearl seems to be a perfect example of Stockholm Syndrome occurring because of child abuse.  As I mentioned in the previous section of this piece, he talks proudly of the whippings that he received as a child.  And now he proudly teaches parents to do the same to their children beginning in early infancy.  He truly sees nothing wrong with his teachings despite three children dying because their parents followed his teachings.  Interestingly, it appears that the more severely the parents abuse a child, the more likely it is for the child to develop this form of Stockholm Syndrome.  “In the book, Traumatic Experience and the Brain, author David Ziegler, the director of a treatment program for abused children, writes that ‘I have often noticed that the degree of loyalty from a child to an abusive parent seems to be in direct proportion to the seriousness of the abuse the child received. In this counterintuitive way, the stronger or more life-threatening the treatment, the stronger the loyalty from the child’” (Levy, 2009, http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/tribal-intelligence/200909/mackenzie-phillips-and-the-stockholm-syndrome).

Since children can never escape from their parents on their own, they cannot completely withdraw from their parents.  Therefore, children will develop unique ways of coping with harsh treatment.  “If the betrayed person is a child and the betrayer is a parent, it is especially essential the child does not stop behaving in such a way that will inspire attachment. For the child to withdraw from a caregiver he is dependent on would further threaten his life, both physically and mentally. Thus the trauma of child abuse by the very nature of it requires that information about the abuse be blocked from mental mechanisms that control attachment and attachment behavior” (Freyd, 2009, http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/defineBT.html).   Blocking the pain from physical punishment and abuse is known as dissociation.  Dissociation is where the child mentally removes him/herself from the situation so that he or she can no longer feel the pain.  It is like an out of body experience.  During a spanking, a child might pretend to be hovering over the scene where his or her parent is hitting him or her.  This allows children to cope with the pain without risking their ability to survive by maintaining a bond with their parents.  I believe Stockholm Syndrome is a very real negative effect of corporal punishment.  It may explain why so many pro-spankers are proud that they survived being physically punishment and see nothing wrong with continuing the cycle with their children.  Sadly, as we’ve seen throughout this series, messing with little minds and bodies leads to big consequences that are permanent.  In the next section we will see that physical punishment leads to young brains being harmed.

How Spanking Hurts Brain Development

The first seven years of a child’s life is when the majority of brain development and growth occurs.  The first three are even more vulnerable because the foundations of brain and personality growth happen during these first few years.  Yes, infants are born with a certain personality, but what happens to infants after birth often has long-term consequences on whom they will become.  The brain is developing very fast during this time, and all experiences will either enhance or harm this critical time of brain development.  “In early childhood, the brain develops faster than any other organ in the body. By age 5, the brain reaches about 90 percent of its adult weight, and by 7, it is fully grown. This makes early childhood a very sensitive and critical period in brain development” (Riak, 2011, http://www.nospank.net/pt2009.htm).  What’s more is that many Christian advocates of spanking infants claim that the infants are purposely trying to manipulate their parents, but this is not true as the way that the infant’s brain works makes them incapable of manipulating their parents.

“Because children lack abstract reasoning and analytical abilities until they approach the age of twelve, they lack the ability and the mental wiring to be able to plot “diabolically.”  This website offers an easily understood description and more detail about how the brain of a child develops over time, noting how brain function starts out as rudimentary and becomes more sophisticated as the child matures.  Children learn as they grow and grow as they learn, but that learning process differs greatly from the way an adult learns.  The Pearls created the idea of the child as the natural adversary of the parent, an idea that does not arise from Biblical or scientific fact.  Their concept of the ‘diabolical will’ of the child attempts to spiritualize and rationalize the Pearls’ own intolerance of the natural immaturity and the limited function of a young and developing child” (Kunsman, 2012, http://undermuchgrace.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-its-like-to-experience-only-right.html).

Sadly, people just don’t know how vulnerable the young brain is, and that spanking, no matter how it is done, has been shown to affect brain development in a highly negative manner.  Most children begin getting physically punished before they are 1-year-old.  And most Christian pro-spankers claim that it is best to spank children between the ages of two and six years old.  This is precisely when the brain is the most vulnerable to stress and trauma.  The pain of being physically punished is unlike other types of pain that young children experience because their parents, to punish them, intentionally inflict this pain on them.  It is usually accompanied by verbal admonishments from the parent.  Therefore, whether the spanking is administered “lovingly” or in anger, the child, even as an infant, knows that the parent’s intention is to inflict pain on him or her even if the child does not understand why the parent is hitting him or her.  This is why we will often see pain and confusion in a young child’s eyes the first time a parent hits because the child does not know exactly why the parent is doing this.  All the young child knows is mommy or daddy hurt me when I do certain things.  The trauma of being intentionally hurt by the very people children love and are reliant on is what causes negative effects on young children’s brains.

Recent research has studied the brains of people who were abused as children using fMRIs.  One such study was conducted by Psychologist Eamon McCroy.  It was published in Current Biology on December 5, 2011, and it showed that the brains of abused children looked similar to those of soldiers who had been in combat.  “His team compared fMRIs from abused children to those of 23 non-abused but demographically similar children from a control group. In the abused children, angry faces provoked distinct activation patterns in their anterior insula and right amygdala, parts of the brain involved in processing threat and pain. Similar patterns have been measured in soldiers who’ve seen combat” (Keim, 2011, http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/12/neurology-of-abuse/).

As I pointed out in Part 4 of this series, children begin to become stressed and fearful before a spanking takes place.  They release stress hormones into their bodies as their heart rates and blood pressures rise.  The pain of being hit only causes their bodies to further secrete stress hormones.  This huge release of stress negatively affects the child’s entire body.  Given that young children are incapable of controlling their emotions and impulses, spankings are likely to occur quite frequently and, sadly, more than once a day.   Having chronic stress is not good for brain development. “Stress caused by pain and fear of spanking can negatively affect the development and function of a child’s brain. It is precisely during this period of great plasticity and vulnerability that many children are subjected to physical punishment. The effect can be a derailing of natural, healthy brain growth, resulting in life-long and irreversible abnormalities” (Riak, 2011, http://www.nospank.net/pt2009.htm).

Now, before I get blamed for not citing Christian research with regard to how physical punishment negatively affects brain development of young children, Dr. Kay Kuzma, Christian author of The First Seven Years, has a background and doctorate degree in Early Childhood Education, states the following:

“If, however, early spankings are given frequently, emotional pain is laid down in the limbic system of the brain that can affect the child’s later behavior.  There is startling new evidence against inflicting pain on children reported in a special issue of Newsweek, titled ‘Your Child,’ (Spring/Summer 1997).  It has to do with the vulnerability of the brain to trauma during the first few years.  If the brain’s organization reflects its experience, and the experience of the traumatized child is fear and stress, then the neurochemical responses to fear and stress become the most powerful architects of the brain.  ‘If you have experiences that are overwhelming, and have them again and again, it changes the structure of the brain,’ says Dr. Linda Mayers of the Yale Child Study Center.  Here’s how:

Trauma elevates stress hormones, such as cortisol, that wash over tender brains like acid.  As a result, regions in the cortex and in the limbic system (responsible for emotions, including attachment) are 20 to 30 percent smaller in abused children than in normal kids, finds Dr. Bruce Perry of Baylor College of Medicine.  These regions also have fewer synapses.

In adults who were abused as children, the memory-making hippocampus is smaller than in nonabused adults.  This effect, too, is believed to be the result of the toxic effects of cortisol.

High cortisol levels during the vulnerable years of zero to three increase activity in the brain structure involved in vigilance and arousal.  (It’s called the locus cerulean.)  As a result the brain is wired to be on hair-trigger alert, explains Perry.  Regions that were activated by the original trauma are immediately reactivated whenever the child dreams of, thinks about, or is reminded of the trauma (as by the mere presence of the abusive person).  The slightest stress, the most inchoate (early stage) fear, unleashes a new surge of stress hormones.  This causes hyperactivity, anxiety, and impulsive behavior.  ‘Kids with higher cortisol levels score lowest on inhibitory control,’ says neurologist Megan Gunnar of the University of Minnesota.  ‘Kids from high-stress environments (have) problems in attention regulation and self-control’ (p. 32)” (Kuzma, 2006, p. 412-413).

We can see a cycle here.  The more trauma that happens to the young, developing brain from being physically punished, the more likely the child will misbehave due to this harm.  The more young children misbehave, the more frequently they will get hit.  At least until the child is old enough to start using psychological coping skills and their minds, spirits, wills, and brains are totally broken.

It is clear that using corporal punishment with children has detrimental effects on their brains and minds, and therefore, should never be used with them.  As I continue to point out throughout all of my series, it is God Who created us.  He knows exactly how our bodies work from conception.  Since He knows how harmful spanking is to His youngest children, surely He never intended the rod verses to be taken literally.  If He had then none of these detrimental effects would occur no matter how the physical punishment is administered.  After all, the way in which rod verses are worded are harsh.  To take them literally would require beating children with a walking stick.  I would like to share Dr. Kay Kuzma suggestion of how we are to interpret these rod verses.  Kuzma (2006) states, “Some suggest that the biblical ‘rod of correction’ was a common measuring instrument to determine certain standards.  The analogy could be made that if children didn’t meet standards, the ‘rod’ would be used to make the necessary corrections—not by beating, but by pointing out error” (p. 416).  Given the biblical explanations to the rod verses that I have provided throughout my series, and the fact that the Bible does in fact speak of using a rod to measure things (Ezekiel 40:5-6; 42:16-19; Revelation 11:1; 21:15-16), I believe this is another accurate way to interpret these rod verses.  After all, God continues to lovingly discipline His people as He freely offers and grants us forgiveness.  “But with you there is forgiveness, so that we can, with reverence, serve you” Psalm 130:4.

How Do We Know the Research Against Corporal Punishment is Reliable and Valid?

Many pro-spankers, especially Christians, often claim that the research proving that all corporal punishment is harmful is biased and inaccurate.  They also claim that corporal punishment and physical abuse get lumped together in many of these anti-spanking studies.  As I described in Part 2 of this series, due to pro-spankers being very divided over where the line is separating a “spanking” from abuse, it is impossible to separate different intensities of hitting.  Hitting a child, no matter how mildly is intended to punish the child and inflict pain upon the child, and therefore, is harmful to the child.  Since the definition of abuse is clear that anything that is harmful to children is abuse, it is virtually impossible to separate corporal punishment from abuse.  But even in studies where “loving” spankings are researched, the results are the same in most cases; it is harmful.

So, how can we be sure that these studies showing corporal punishment to be harmful are accurate?  All valid and reliable studies are done using the scientific method.  The experimenter, who is an experienced professional in the field, comes up with a hypothesis to be tested.  A hypothesis is a hunch or idea that the experimenter wants to see if it’s true.  Using the scientific method, the experimenter conducts the study in order to maintain objectivity.   This means keeping all biases out of the research being conducted.  There are three main things that the scientific method requires of all research.  The first is reliability.  Reliability means conducting the study in a manner that guarantees accurate results each time it is conducted with the same subjects but using different methods.  The second is validity.  Validity means that the test or instrument used in the study measures precisely for which it is intended.  For example, many studies done on corporal punishment use surveys or other high tech instruments to measure the amount of harm done to children and/or adults participating in the studies, and special care was taken to ensure these instruments measured the results accurately.  Finally, replicability guarantees that other researchers can perform the exact experiment, and have similar results.  “Assessing objectivity, reliability, validity, and replicability of studies prevents the dissemination of inaccurate or untrue information that can result from such research pitfalls as poor research design, researcher bias, inappropriate or inaccurate use of statistical methods, insufficient size of population studied, or inadequate or unclear instructions and procedures for research subjects” (Puckett, Black, Wittmer, & Petersen, 2009, p. 25).

I believe all of the research studies that I have presented throughout this series meet the criteria of the scientific method.  And all of the research presented in this study is from credible, well-known scholars in this field.  Yes, there have been a few studies released that claim corporal punishment isn’t harmful to children, but the overwhelmingly majority of studies done say that it is.  Plus, all of the true stories that we have read throughout this series further prove that the research is correct.  Many of these anti-spanking studies are done by Christians as well as by non-Christians.  As Joan Durant, a professor at the University of Minnesota states after completing a recent 20-year study in Canada, “Here, we have more than 80 studies, I would say more than 100, that show the same thing (about corporal punishment), and yet we keep calling it controversial” (French & Wilson, 2012, http://health.yahoo.net/news/s/nm/spanking-kids-can-cause-long-term-harm-canada-study).  It’s due time we begin to take all this research seriously!

Conclusion

In this series we have seen the many negative effects of using physical punishment such as denial and repression, lack of empathy, anger, aggression, fear and anxiety, fear of God, sadomasochism, guilt and shame, low self-esteem, depression, higher risk for domestic violence, Stockholm Syndrome, inhibited brain development, and the continuing cycle of abuse.  I pray that series has further proven that God does not want children to be physically punished.  To end this series, I would like to share two more stories.  One is straight from the Bible.

Rehoboam was the son of King Solomon.  King Solomon may have been blessed by God with wisdom, but he also sinned against God by having many wives and building alters for his wives’ gods.  Children were even sacrificed on these alters.  King Solomon treated Rehoboam very harshly as a child and physically punished him.  How did Rehoboam turn out when he became king after his father died?  Not too well according to 1 Kings 12:1-24.  I am only going to cite 1 Kings 12:10-14 for our purposes.  I highly recommend reading this entire passage because it seems clear that Solomon treated children rather poorly from the way the young men who grew up with Rehoboam advised him.  1 Kings 12:10-14 states, “The young men who had grown up with him replied, “These people have said to you, ‘Your father put a heavy yoke on us, but make our yoke lighter.’ Now tell them, ‘My little finger is thicker than my father’s waist. 11 My father laid on you a heavy yoke; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.’”

12 Three days later Jeroboam and all the people returned to Rehoboam, as the king had said, “Come back to me in three days.” 13 The king answered the people harshly. Rejecting the advice given him by the elders, 14 he followed the advice of the young men and said, “My father made your yoke heavy; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.”  Obviously, Rehoboam turned out even worse than his father.  Yes, this was all part of God’s ultimate plan for us (v. 15), but this does not mean that God was pleased about this.  And we must ask why God put Rehoboam’s story in the Bible if He was pro-spanking?  I believe God was trying to show His people what happens when parents treat their children harshly.

The second story I want to share with you also sums up everything that I have presented to you in this series.  Though Chloe was only spanked once as a child, it affected her quite negatively. Her brothers were spanked much more than she was, but sadly, she also fell victim to the very negative effects the spankings had on them.  Here is what Chloe relayed to me in an electronic message dated February 10, 2012:

“I come from a white, upper middle class family.  Though neither of my parents graduated from college, both of them were lucky enough to find incredible jobs and raised their family in comfort, if not leisure.  They had four children, two boys followed by myself, a girl, and another girl.  At least two of their children(the oldest and youngest) were mistakes due to lack of family planning. My parents spoke of divorce quietly, mulling the idea over, unbeknownst to their children, for over ten years while the middle two children(myself and my brother) primarily grew up.

They were not happy with each other.  My father worked long hours, six or seven days out of the week and drank excessive amounts of alcohol when he arrived home.  My mother was suffering from mild depression coupled with a thyroid disease that was later improved by surgery.  This hormonal complication led to impatience and exhaustion and she had no energy to deal with the four of us. She left it up to our father to “deal” with us when he got home.

My father loved us when we were young.  As a young child, I adored him, and went to such lengths as to wait for him outside of the bathroom when he showered in the morning just so I could be the first one there when he opened the door.

Maybe my father loved my older brothers as much when they were young, but all I remember of the interactions between the three of them was rage.  My brothers constantly fought and needlessly were mean to me and my father only dealt with this one way–he would drag the boys into his office and spank them with his belt.  Our father was never one to talk to us before or after we had disobeyed him or made him angry.  We always knew what we had done to upset him and apparently that was enough communication.

Although my brothers were seemingly always in some form of trouble, I never was.  I was an obedient child by nature, aiming to please, and my parents disapproval of my actions through one glance was more than enough for me to repent any misdeed or stop any tantrum.  Later into my adolescence, it was confirmed to me that both of my parents knew how sensitive I was–and my older brother, similarly–and this knowledge enrages me further.

When I was seven, in the 2nd grade, either at the very beginning or the very end of the school year, I made a new friend in class.  She was a new student and she made me promise that I would visit her that night at her house, a block away from my own home, or else she wouldn’t consider me her friend any longer.  Swayed by peer pressure, I asked to go ride my bike that evening after school and though I knew it was against the rules to go off our street, I turned off of our road and peddled down four houses to her new residence to play with her.  We jumped on her trampoline with her older sister, distracted by our game until I noticed it was growing dark.  At the same moment I spotted my father’s truck rushing past the front of the house.  He did not notice my bike lying in their driveway, but I knew with an ache and a jolt that it was time for me to go home.  I raced down the street and hopped off my bike in the front yard of my house, tracing through the unkempt grass of our front yard diagonally as we always did when coming up to the front door.

My father barreled out onto the front porch and demanded where I had been, not waiting for an answer.  He told me he had been out to the major, traffic heavy road looking for me.  I was not to go anywhere the next day.  I leaned my bike against the brick siding, and, unable as always to meet his eyes, I snuck past him into the house.  I caught my mother’s eye in the hallway just as my father struck me for the first and only time in my life.

I was in the second grade, barely 50lbs, and my father was 6″2 and 220lbs.  I was wearing jeans and he only hit me once, on my bottom, open handed and yet my bladder lost control as I ran up the stairs into my bedroom.  I remember crying, and initially I’m sure it was from pain but I was still crying after I changed and went to bed.

This is a normal, all American 1990′s scene.  I was a willfully disobedient child and my father, in a non-abusive manner, disciplined me as he saw fit to teach me never to scare him and Mom like that ever again.  I am positive that he hit me because he had been so afraid of never seeing me again, and he had my best interests at heart, just as with every other time he hit my brothers and younger sister.  I understand in so many ways that I have nothing to complain about when compared to other children in abusive homes.

But I will say a number of things: My parents knew that all of us were sensitive children and we could have learned better if they had had a little more patience with us, even if that patience just staved off hitting us.  All three of my siblings and I are still angry about the way our father physically disciplined us, and we’ve talked this over as adults.  Further, my father admits to being sorry about spanking us.  Not just ‘the way’ he punished us, but the fact that he hit us at all.

Also, my brother, three years my elder, was the most angry about it, far angrier than I could ever be.  He expressed his anger over our father’s spankings by taking it out on me.  My brother beat the ever loving (expletive deleted) out of me when we were children and well into our teenage years, and it escalated to my brother raping me when I was 15.  I am not saying that this is a math equation; that our father hitting my brother directly caused this event that tore my family apart in 2003, but it certainly was a root of the problem.  And while my brother lashed out with his anger, I kept mine hidden.

Ever since I was a very small child, I found spankings sexual.  As an adult woman with sexual relationships in my past and present(although they are continually a work in process, given my history) spanking in the bedroom has always been a desire of mine that has thankfully been fulfilled by generous young men.  In no way am I saying that my father meant anything sexual by spanking me, nor do I perceive that event in any way sexual.  However, being spanked as a child and wanting that specific sensation as a sexually active adult does tend to complicate and convolute my sex life in a very unpleasant way.  I would also like to address the stereotype that childhood spanking leads to adulthood fetishes: I am not saying that.  I’m not saying there is much of a connection between the two.  I am, however, saying that if your child is predestined by nature and temperament (as I was and am) to enjoy that type of sexual conduct, I assure anyone that spanking that child when they are young will not help them in any way, shape or form.  It will only confuse them.

Overall, my parents raised us right.  I love them both.  But I know I could love my dad so much more than I do.  But my trust was broken as a seven year old.  He was supposed to love me unconditionally.  He had all the tools necessary at hand; all he needed to do was not give in to the temptation to hit a child in front of him that scared him and pissed him off.  In his heart, he did have my best interests.  But he caved into his own interests–he caved into the relief that he would feel after dishing out his anger on me.  And, believe me, I have looked at this from all angles.  Some might say that if my father had sat me down, explained why I was being punished, and then calmly spanked me after having me wait in my room, I would feel different.  Less violated.  Less angry.  I assure you, no; I would feel more violated, more angry.  I am glad my father lost control with us.  If he had the nerve to come to the conclusion that I would somehow benefit from being hit in a logical manner, he would be entirely mistaken.

The way I would have learned my lesson would have been this: I had raced home after seeing my father driving in his truck, and saw him approach me on the front porch. From there, if he had bent down to my level at four feet from the ground and told me that he had been so worried that I had been hurt, or taken from him, or lost or scared.  If he had told me that he had been so frightened, that he was about to call the police and have them search for me. . . I would have cried and clung to him and told him I was sorry and that I hadn’t meant to disappoint him or worry him or scare him because I thought the world of him.  I loved him and it was scaring me to see him so scared.  I would have understood that.

And I wouldn’t have spent the next ten years of my life wondering why I was so afraid of my father.  He is a good man, like most men who spank their children. But I beg of anyone to remember how strong and important and loved you are in the eyes of your children, and understand what power you hold in your hands, and at what expense.

I am a 24 year old woman, and when I look at my father, I see a man who would scratch my back while lying together in front of the TV watching Star Trek and I see a man who sacrificed his dream to study history in college to work his entire life and who spent that money on my college education and I love this man.  I wish I could shake this distrust of him, and this sadness that follows my siblings and I from our childhoods.  My brothers both have children, and neither of them have laid a hand on the very well behaved 9, 4, 3, and 2 year olds.  And every time my father talks to any one of us about our childhoods, the regret always shines through.  This is how spanking has effected my entire family.”

Maybe you have read all of this series and have already spanked your children.  Is it too late to change?  No, it is not!  If your children are still young, I urge you to take them in your arms and apologize for spanking them.  Trust me, they will forgive you!  Then tell them that you will no longer spank them, but that they will have consequences for their actions.  Doing this will undo some of the damage that has been done to them.  Be prepared for them to act out more at first as they finally feel safe with you to show you their big emotions.  Be patient with them and yourself as you make this transition with them.  Pray often.  If your children are grown, I still strongly urge you to apologize to them and tell them you were wrong.  This will help them to hopefully stop the cycle with their children.  Whatever happens, never give up on your children!  Grace is for parents too!

God does not want children to be hit.  I pray that people will open their hearts to His Truth!  In my next series entitled, “Discipline without Harm,” we will discuss how to discipline children in gentle but firm ways in order that they may be led towards our loving God instead of away from Him.  For now, I leave us with this touching imagery by Dr. Kay Kuzma as we turn our focus away from punishment and towards discipline as God intended:

“If I focus on Jesus as a disciplinarian, I see Him calling to a disobedient child, ‘Come unto Me.’ Then I see Him gently lifting that child into His arms, establishing eye contact, and talking to him seriously.  I hear Jesus pointing out the folly of disobedience and the consequences that will result.  I see Jesus taking time to listen to the child’s feelings.  Then I see Jesus pointing out the love that God has for His erring children and how God established limits so they wouldn’t hurt themselves, others, or things.  Then with tears in His eyes, I see Jesus praying with the child that he will turn from his disobedience and be willing to obey his parents’ reasonable rules and God’s rules.  I can even see Jesus imposing a meaningful consequence if the lesson needs reinforcing.  And then as the little one runs off to play, I see Jesus noticing the good things he does and giving the child a smile of approval.  For your children’s sake, I invite you to discipline as you think Jesus would” (Kuzma, 2006, p. 416-417).

I say amen to that!

References:

French, C. & Wilson, R. (2012). Spanking Kids Can Cause Long-Term Harm: Canada Study. http://health.yahoo.net/news/s/nm/spanking-kids-can-cause-long-term-harm-canada-study

Freyd, J. J.  (2009). What is a Betrayal Trauma?  What is Betrayal Trauma Theory? http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/defineBT.html

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

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

Keim, B.  (2011). How Abuse Changes a Child’s Brain. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/12/neurology-of-abuse/

Keith, K. L. (2011). The Cycle of Abuse.  http://childparenting.about.com/cs/familyissues/a/childabusecycle.htm

Kunsman, C.  (2012). What It’s Like to Experience Only the Right Side of the Brain in the Way that Children Do (A Neuroscientist Experiences a Stroke on the Left, Analytical Side of the Brain).  http://undermuchgrace.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-its-like-to-experience-only-right.html

Kuzma, K.  (2006). The first 7 years.  West Frankfort, IL: Three Angels Broadcasting Network.

Levy, A. R.  (2009). Tribal Intelligence.  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/tribal-intelligence/200909/mackenzie-phillips-and-the-stockholm-syndrome

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

Puckett, M. B., Black, J. K., Wittmer, D. S., Peterson, S. H.  (2009). The Young Child (5th ed.).  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Ramsland, K.  (2011). Hearst, Soliah and the S.L.A.  http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/terrorists_spies/terrorists/hearst/1.html

Riak, J.  (2011). Plain Talk About Spanking.  http://www.nospank.net/pt2009.htm

 

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.

Does God Spank His Children?

Carissa Robinson delves into the question, “Does God Spank His Children?

Commandments for Parents

Dulce de Leche explains how some parents inadvertently set themselves up as idols in The 10 Commandments for Parents: No Other Gods.

Alison Strobel explains Golden Rule Parenting.

Elizabeth Esther Explains the Popularity of TTUAC

Elizabeth Esther explains How “To Train Up A Child” Got So Popular in a video.

Meanwhile, Dulce de Leche considers Defiance and the Thought Police in a very important post.  Are you punishing your children for obeying but with a defiant attitude? Are you expecting them to obey right away with a convincing smile? If so, you are ordering them to pretend to feel something they don’t. You are ordering them to lie and be hypocrites. God does not have a problem with emotional outbursts, but He hates lying and hypocrisy. Dulce also warns,

The child is left with two options: lie convincingly or never question anything internally, not even to understand it better . . .  Over years of practice, both options are exceedingly dangerous. You wind up with a compulsive people pleaser who will lie convincingly without qualm or someone who believes everything and never thinks for himself.

 

The Effects Of Spanking Part 5 *Sensitive*

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

In the previous piece we discovered that fear is the main effect of corporal punishment that all children experience despite the Bible clearly stating that fear is not from God. We also saw in the previous piece that “loving, godly” spankings are indeed harmful to children despite what many pro-spankers continue to claim. The research and numerous anecdotes (personal stories) show that hitting “in love,” and in the Name of God often has damaging effects on children even if they deny and repress these effects. In this piece we will be discussing an effect of “lovingly” spanking that has only recently come to my attention. Many people are unaware of the fact that “love” spankings causes sexual problems for children and adults as they seek to turn something painful and out of their control into something pleasant and somewhat controllable. This brief discussion may cause discomfort. We will also discuss how physical punishment often leads to depression, shame, and guilt as spanking never makes one feel good about oneself.

“Love” Spankings Continued—“Children are not sexual beings.”

Many people, in general, believe the above statement to be true. While children do not understand sexuality in the way that adults do, they have the ability at birth to become somewhat aroused and to feel pleasure. This is why young children very innocently explore their bodies during diaper changes and baths. This is a very normal and healthy part of the young child’s development. By the age of two, most young children are beginning to notice the differences between males and females and will ask questions out of pure curiosity. Simple, honest answers are all that young children want and need. While a child’s budding sexuality should be respected, their innocence and purity must be protected.

But does spanking respect and protect them in this vulnerable area of their development? It does not appear to as research shows that spanking “in love” can cause children to become sadomasochistic as they grow up. Here is the definition of sadomasochism from dictionary.com:

“1. interaction, especially sexual activity, in which one person enjoys inflicting physical or mental suffering on another person, who derives pleasure from experiencing pain.
2. gratification, especially sexual, gained through inflicting or receiving pain; sadism and masochism combined” (www.dictionary.com).

While I am no human sexuality expert, knowing what I do know about how young children learn and process information with their constantly developing young brains, I can see why this is a very real effect of physical punishment for many children. Also, if we need further proof of this effect, all we have to do is type “spanking” into Google without specifying children in the query and a whole slough of pornographic sites and images pop up portraying lovers spanking each other. Getting back to how young children learn and process things, everything a child experiences is a learning experience for him/her. They must act on things or experience them to completely understand a concept. If the concept is not made real and concrete to the child, he/she will not truly understand it despite the ability to rattle off memorized rote facts. The facts are virtually meaningless to the young child without the ability to somehow see, hear, smell, taste, or touch what the child is learning. As I point out throughout all of my series, parents tell the child that they love the child before and after the spanking if they are truly committed to spanking the child the “correct, loving” way. Therefore, from infancy and/or toddlerhood, the child begins to equate pain with love. This, as we will see, can cause the brain to develop in such a way that it can no longer separate feelings of pain and pleasure. John William Money, a psychologist, sexologist, and author, studied how lovemaps are formed. Lovemaps are how the brain determines what is sexually pleasurable (Straus, 2006). “Money argues that because the centers of the brain that process feelings of sexual arousal and feelings of pain are in such close proximity, when they are stimulated simultaneously many times over a long period of time, the brain can no longer separate the two. So feelings of sexual arousal and pain become forever woven together. This fusion is especially likely because the most common age for spanking is two to six, which substantially overlaps the age that Money regards as most vulnerable for lovemap vandalism” (Straus, 2006, p. 124-125).

We will return to how physical punishment often affects brain development, but I want to explain that young children crave some control over their lives. This is developmentally appropriate, and young children should be given an appropriate amount of control when possible—not too much, as it will overwhelm them—but not too little or they will do everything in their power to gain control even if it is only mentally. So, as children continue to learn that physical punishment is done by their parents out of “love” for them, children may begin to use their often-vivid imaginations to turn something that is painful and scary into something pleasurable as well as something that they can control. What many parents and advocates of spanking fail to realize or acknowledge is that the buttocks are connected to the genitals—physically and mentally. The buttocks contain many highly sensitive nerve endings, which is precisely why advocates of spanking advise parents to spank their children on the bare bottom in order to cause the most pain to the child. Despite the pain that physical punishment causes children, because the buttocks are connected to the genitals, arousal can occur during the spanking. “Corporal punishment commonly focuses upon a child’s buttocks, the anal area in the back being the most frequently beaten part of the body. However, the anus, as Freud and many others have known, is one of the most erotic zones of the body, closely linked with the genitals and responsive to orgasms and erotic pleasures, a source of pleasure and pain for children and adults alike. The assault upon the buttocks thus becomes far more consequential than most of us ever recognize” (Greven, 1992, p. 184). This is quite true because, as with the other effects of physical punishment, children, adolescents, and adult children are not likely to tell their parents how spanking has affected them. This is especially true if the child winds up becoming a sadomasochist. What child discusses their sexual preferences with their parents even if they are normal, healthy preferences?

As I pointed out at the beginning of this section, many parents and advocates of spanking are either ignorant about or are in denial of children’s normal, healthy sexual development. By using physical punishment with their young children, parents may very well inadvertently force the re-wiring of their children’s brains. As Greven (1992) states:

“The absence of sexuality as always been one of the central illusions of advocates of corporal punishments for children. Most advocates of physical punishment appear oblivious to the sexuality of children at any age prior to puberty. Having spent many centuries denying or prohibiting all forms of sexual experience or expression in children, Christian advocates of corporal punishment generally overlook the dimension of children’s experience with punishment that subsequently transforms pain into pleasure: the erotic component of the assaults upon the buttocks and other parts of the body by people who say they love the child they are beating” (p. 183-184).

MC, who has been graciously telling me how being spanked by his Christian father throughout his childhood has affected him for the purpose of this series and book, struggles with sexual problems as a direct result of being “lovingly” spanked. In an electronic message dated September 29, 2011, MC conveyed the following to me:

“My full understanding and acknowledgment of this harm remained insidiously buried in my subconscious, until I began to come to awareness in my junior and senior years of college. Before my junior year, I still lived under the delusion that I was spanked and turned out fine. I also believed that if I wanted to be a Christian parent, in the future, I would have to Spank my children. To hold these delusions, I had to repress a lot of what I have now acknowledged as truth. The downfall of this repression occurred when I had the epiphany that spanking had always had an odd sexual meaning to me. From the time I was 5, I can remember playing with myself, while thinking about being spanked. When I was a teenager, I had always masturbated to thoughts about spanking, or being spanked. I used to seek out stimuli, to cater to this interest, through scenes of corporal punishment in books, movies, etc…. And yet it took me until college to come to the realization that corporal punishment had a sexual meaning to me. When I had this epiphany, I realized that I could never justify using corporal punishment on a child, when CP was a part of my sexual orientation.

This epiphany was both a blessing and a curse. It was a blessing because it led me to seek out research. It caused me to understand how my childhood experiences with CP distorted my sexual development, and it led me to become the staunch anti-spanking advocate that I am today. However, this also became a curse, because it threw into doubt my basic trust of anything that the church had ever taught me. I now knew that the church had lied to me. I discovered that their is no biblical basis for the corporal punishment of children, even though countless of adults, Sunday school teachers, AWANA leaders, and pastors had taught me that it was God’s will for parents to Spank their children. I realized that I had been mistreated with the church’s blessing, and that such mistreatment had violated my sexual development. Obviously, this infuriated me.”

MC isn’t the only one who struggles sexually as a direct result of receiving “love” spankings as children, Carol, whom we met at the end of Part 4 of this series also struggles with sadomasochistic tendencies.

“I tried so hard to be good. But sooner or later I always found myself face down across my mother’s lap getting yet another spanking. I just couldn’t control it – except in my fantasies. In fantasy I could make everything happen just so, as if it really were under my control. My mother’s preferred discipline method emotionally upset me so much that I sexualized it – everything about it: the kind of clothing she wore and I wore, the things she would say before and after my spanking, the position she put me in, on and on. Fantasy let me cope with my trauma and get a pretend feeling of control over something really out of my control. When I imagined myself as a naughty girl over her Mommy’s lap getting her bare little bottom spanked I pictured myself crying and begging the Mommy to stop. Yet it was my fantasy so really I had total control. And by eroticizing, I made something awful and frightening into something delightful and pleasant.

And it worked. Becoming a spankophile at an early age kept me from falling apart. It comforted me when nothing else could. It made me feel in control when I wasn’t. And it gave me a make-believe escape from something for which there was no true escape. (How do you escape when it’s your very own Mommy who is hurting you???) And now I am stuck with it for the rest of my life.

Parents who say, “it didn’t do me any harm so it can’t do my child any harm” just don’t get it. Everyone is different. My mother got spanked when she was little, and she carried on the same tradition with my sister and me. But my mother didn’t become a spankophile. And although my sister got the same kinds of punishments as I did – across the same lap and from the same palm – she didn’t become a spankophile either. But I did. There is no way you can tell beforehand which of your spanked children will have a guilty sexualized fixation for the rest of her life. So any parent who spanks their child is putting them at risk. Punishing your child with spankings is just like playing a lottery where if you “win” you mess up your kid for life. 
Most spanked kids don’t turn out as obsessed as me. But some of us do. And we aren’t rare. Growing up I knew two other little girls who both got spanked by their parents and who both loved to play House the same way I did: with play spankings, play spankings, and more play spankings all afternoon without ever getting bored. (At least two of us were strict disciplinarians of our dolls, too!) One girl would even get me to pretend to be her real life mother so we could re-enact actual episodes for which she had been disciplined in her home. For me to meet two others so like myself in this way would be almost impossible if kids like me were rare.

Now I am retired, unmarried, childless, on medication for depression. At a tender age I used my budding sexuality to cope with something I didn’t know how else to cope with. And it has left its mark on me forever. I’ve been paying the price all my life and I will never stop paying. I am unmarried because the circuits in my brain that should have been used for romance were vandalized by spankings instead. I am childless because I never married. So there is a direct link between my spankings, how I coped with them, and my being sexually abnormal, and hence never marrying and having any children of my own” (Neddermeyer, 2006, http://ezinearticles.com/?Loving-Spankings–Part-I&id=373269).

I get the same comments from pro-spankers insisting that spanking isn’t harmful because they don’t feel that they have experienced any of the harmful effects about which I have written. Sadly, these people have denied and repressed whatever effects they have experienced in order not to have to deal with their pain. (See Part 2 for more info). However, as I pointed out in Part 3 of this series, it is extremely egotistical to assume that all children come out undamaged after years of being physically punished. While not all children will become sadomasochistic, it is obvious that some do. While we never know which of these effects that I have discussed in this series will affect children and to what degree, it is obvious that all children are affected negatively by physical punishment.

We need to remember that God created each and every one of us in our mother’s womb (Psalm 139:13-15). He created our bodies to enjoy sex in the context of marriage between a husband and a wife. “’Haven’t you read,’ he replied, ‘that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’  and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?  So they are no longer two, but one flesh” (Matthew 19:4-6). Since God created our bodies to enjoy sex within the context of a loving marriage, shouldn’t we protect our children’s bodies from having a seed of sin planted in them from us “lovingly” inflicting pain on them in the name of “discipline?” If God created our bodies to develop how He intended over time, then He obviously knows what will harm or inhibit healthy growth and development. Therefore, God would never command us to beat our children with a rod that He knows will affect brain development and lead to sin. As Straus (2006) states, “Under average childhood conditions, the lovemap is heterosexual and relatively uncomplicated. But when lovemaps are ‘vandalized,’ the child comes to connect erotic arousal with acts that for most people have no sexual connotations” (p. 124). If we are honest, much of what many Christian advocates of spanking tell parents to do to their children would be highly frowned upon if the child was replaced by another adult. Do we really want to risk creating a seed in our children that may lead them to struggle with sin for the rest of their lives? Whether or not children develop this sadomasochistic tendency, many children who are spanked often deal with guilt, shame, and depression throughout their lives.

Guilt, Shame, and Depression—“Spanking relieves children of their guilt.”

Many Christian advocates claim that physical punishment is supposed to relieve children of their guilt from the sin that they committed. But this is often not the case. MC dealt with guilt and shame from his sexual struggles as a child, and the spankings he received only made him feel worse. MC conveyed to me in an electronic message dated September 29, 2011 the following:

“I experienced this difficulty most vividly between the ages of 11 to high school, when I felt constant shame and guilt over the natural act of masturbation. I felt like this was a horrible sin based on my father’s reaction when he barged into my room, without knocking, to catch my 11 year old self in the act. I had no knowledge about sex, and was absolutely terrified and shamed when my father blasted me in front of my mother. He accused me of being sexually active, a term I did not understand, and kept threatening to take me to the doctor to have me examined in order to see if I was guilty of what he was accusing me of. Therefore, every time I would masturbate I would be struck with this horrible sense of guilt and shame. I would get down on my knees, pray for forgiveness, and promise never to do it again. But, I broke all those promises every time I felt the natural urge. I could not accept any grace on this issue. I felt like I must not truly love God if I could not stop. I began to doubt whether I was saved, or whether I was elect ( a new theological concept that I was being introduced to in my High School). I kept expecting punishment. Every time I gave in I imagined that that was one more strike against me in God’s book, and that when I finally did meet God he was really going to let me have it.”

How sad that MC was never taught about God’s amazing grace and forgiveness as a child, and obviously did not feel a sense of relief from his guilt and shame through the spankings that he received. Is this relieving guilt through punishment even biblical? I have touched on this subject somewhat in my “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” series. Let’s delve a bit deeper into this subject now since shame, guilt, and depression are some of the main effects of physical punishment. Jesus Christ suffered and died for all of humanity’s sins—this was done for all ages and all groups of people—past, present, and future! Because of what Christ did for us on the cross, all that is required of us is that we come to Him and accept His gift of forgiveness and grace by repenting of our sins. He does not require us to be punished before we can be forgiven of all of our sins and alleviated from the guilt and shame our sins cause us. There is no condemnation in Christ. “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1). Yet, we make children pay for their sins. When we hit children for their misbehavior, we are teaching them that they deserve to feel pain for their sin, and that they are unworthy of grace. After all, love never inflicts pain. The Bible is very clear about what love is and is not, and that God is love. (See Part 4 of this series for more info regarding love).

When children grow up believing that they deserve painful punishment for their sins, it makes it much more difficult for them to accept grace. Physical punishment does not teach children about the loving, gentle yet firm discipline that our Heavenly Father provides us. While none of us are worthy of the grace and forgiveness that God so freely gives us through Christ, there comes a point when children that are physically punished in Jesus’ Name feel so unworthy and unlovable that they reject God’s gift of salvation. They think things such as “How could God ever love me?” or “I am unforgivable by God.” It is true that God wants us to be humble (Psalm 147:6; Proverbs 3:34; Matthew 23:12), but He does not want us to feel bad about ourselves or feel worthless (Psalm 103:10-12). In fact, look what Jesus says as He prays to His Father in John 17:13, ““I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them.’” He wants us to have His joy and have it to the fullest!
Despite what many Christian pro-spankers claim, physical punishment does not create joyful children and adults. It may seem to make children happy and cheerful but this is because the children have learned that they must always be happy and cheerful around their parents in order to avoid more physical punishment. It’s hard to believe that parents “slap their children silly,” but, sadly, they do. However, when given the opportunity to be honest about how being spanked truly makes them feel, children will testify that spanking makes them feel bad about themselves. Here are two testimonies from the wonderful book entitled This Hurts Me More Than It Hurts You by Nadine A. Block and Madeleine Y. Gomez:

“Girl, Age 13, Ohio

I feel so stupid when I get spanked for things I forget are bad…When my mom hits me, I feel like running away, and I have often planned to run away” (Block & Gomez, 2011, p. 9).

“Boy, Age 16, Ohio

Why does he want to hit me? I never do anything bad…I work hard and study and have no friends…I stay out of his way…I feel real bad inside…” (Block & Gomez, 2011, p. 9).

The research backs up what these children are saying. Children that are spanked, even “lovingly,” have higher rates of depression. “Based on a sample of 649 students from 3 New England colleges, this study examined the long-term effects of childhood corporal punishment on symptoms of depression and considered factors that may moderate or mediate the association. Similar to national studies, approximately 40% of the sample reported experiencing some level of corporal punishment when they were 13 years old. Findings indicated that level of corporal punishment is positively related to depressive symptoms, independent of any history of abuse and the frequency of other forms of punishment” (Turner & Muller, 2004, http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/25/6/761.abstract). Another study conducted by The National Family Violence Survey shows a clear link between corporal punishment and depression. Here are the findings of this study:

“The National Family Violence Survey involved 6,002 adults respondents, including adults who were living with a spouse, living common law, or a single parent living with one or more children. They were asked the question: ‘Thinking about when you yourself were a teenager, about how often would you say your mother or stepmother used corporal punishment, like slapping or hitting you?’ A second question was asked concerning their father or stepfather. About half of the subjects reported memories of having been hit during adolescence. Respondents were asked five questions to find out if they had suffered sadness, depression, feelings of worthlessness, hopelessness, feelings that nothing was worthwhile, or suicidal thoughts during the past year.

For the men, [in the study], there is a clear tendency for depressive symptoms to increase with each increment of corporal punishment. For the women in the sample, the slope starts out even more steeply than for the men, but then declines for the highest categories of corporal punishment…the significant effect of corporal punishment occurs despite controlling for possible confounding with five other variables – SES, gender of the child, husband to wife violence, excessive drinking and witnessing violence between parents. The data showed that ‘with increasing amounts of corporal punishment [during teen years], …thinking about suicide [in adulthood] increased” (Robinson, 2009, http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin5.htm).

Because of the ways in which young children learn and process things, even if parents are trying to focus on correcting behavior, when we physically punish young children, it is conveying to them that they are “bad” and deserve to be in pain. As I have pointed out so many times throughout all of my series, pain and fear inhibit a child’s learning process, so even if parents do tell the child what to do instead, it will not completely sink in. Plus, young children learn through repetition, so it is unrealistic to expect a child to remember what to do next time. Therefore, the message that young children hear repeatedly as they get spanked is a very negative message about who they are instead of about what they did. Young children are just gaining self-awareness, so being physically punished is an assault on their entire beings. They cannot separate their behavior from who they are. Because of this, young children often feel anger, confusion, and much anxiety from this assault done to them by people that that they love. When they display these negative feelings through crying too long or acting out, they usually get punished again. This teaches them to deny and/or repress their true feelings. But when anger and anxiety are not properly worked through, this can, and often does, lead to depression as the child grows and internalizes all of his/her negative feelings as well as the repetitive negative message he/she receives from his/her parents from being hit. This buried anger and anxiety causes one to become aggressive towards oneself by repeating the message, “I deserve pain because I’m bad and worthless.” This is so sad because the child grows up truly believing the age-old adage of so many pro-spankers, “I was spanked and I deserved it.” Greven (1992) states, “While the etiology undoubtedly is complex, punishment in childhood always has been one of the most powerful generators of depression in adulthood…depression often is a delayed response to the suppression of childhood anger that usually results from being physically hit and hurt in the act of discipline by adults whom the child loves and on whom he or she depends for nurturance and life itself” (p. 132). This is very sad since God has entrusted us to help His little ones grow up in His love, grace, and joy.

What is even more interesting considering that Jesus wants us to have His joy to the fullest is that history shows that the conservative and fundamental sects of Christianity have a persistent theme of depression. Of course, it is these sects that also consistently advocate and practice physical punishment in order to break their children’s wills. Greven (1992) explains the following:

“Melancholy and depression have been persistent themes in the family history, religious experience, and emotional lives of Puritans, evangelicals, fundamentalists and Pentecostals for centuries. Assaults on the self and on self-will are the central obsession of vast numbers of men and women from the early seventeenth century to the present. Suicidal impulses frequently appear in these Protestants’ self-portraits as well, although those who write memoirs and autobiographies are usually survivors, not suicides. They may have successfully thwarted their inner impulses toward self-destruction, but the experience of conversion and the new birth rarely relieved them fully of their depressive symptoms” (p. 132).

While no one can be happy all the time, God gives us a sense of joy that should never stop. Happiness is circumstantial, but joy is continual as it is based on the hope we have in Christ, knowing that there is so much more to this life than what is seen. Let’s look at what the Bible says about joy despite the trials and sufferings that all Christians go through. Romans 12:12 says, “Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer.” 1 Peter 1:8 states, “Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy.” And finally Philippians 4:4-7 says to “Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice!  Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near.  Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God.  And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.” Therefore, no matter what our circumstances are, Christians should have a certain amount of joy and peace within them. Chronic depression should not be plaguing Christ followers as it has for centuries. All we have to do to see this plague of depression is to pick up biographies of certain Christian historical figures. As Greven (1992) states:

“Many evangelicals, generation after generation, voiced their anxiety and depression in their diaries, letters, and autobiographies. In some families, such as the Mathers, melancholy afflicted fathers and sons for at least three successive generations. The persistence and, indeed, the centrality of melancholy and depression for an understanding of religious and secular experience in America from early-seventeenth-century Puritans to late-nineteenth-century Victorians has been explored brilliantly by John Owen King in his illuminating book, The Iron of Melancholy. Some of the most compelling historical evidence we possess concerning the nature and history of depression comes from the religious tradition associated most directly with Calvinism and evangelical Protestantism over the past four centuries” (p. 132-133).

Of course, I do realize that there are many other causes for depression. But we cannot deny the fact that corporal punishment is a main theme when it comes to depression in conservative and fundamental Christians. Due to the fact that many Christian pro-spankers believe in the necessity of breaking a child’s will at a young age, they fail and/or refuse to realize that they are also breaking the child’s spirit. Young children are just learning cause and effect. As I explained earlier in this piece, young children learn through experience—i.e., sight, sound, touch, smell, and taste. But unless the experience of cause and effect is logical to young children such as the fact that blowing a toy windmill makes it spin, or that dropping a block on a hard surface makes a loud sound, they will fail to process it as something that makes sense to them. Therefore, being hit by a parent who loves them for random things that the parent deems wrong or bad is not logical for young children, especially for infants and toddlers. Yes, they may learn to avoid these things that the parent says are bad or wrong, but it isn’t because the children truly understand, but because they are afraid of being hit and hurt by their parents. Being forced to become broken by their parents hinders their natural development, and causes feelings of anger, rage, and self-doubt in children which then become feelings of unworthiness and hopelessness later on in life.

“Depression rooted in anger remains so potent because it often begins so early—in the first three years of life, precisely the period corporal punishment advocates have always stressed as critical for the start of physical punishments and the suppression of children’s wills and self-assertion. The first assaults upon children’s bodies and spirits generally commence before conscious memory can recall them later. The unconscious thus becomes the repository for the rage, resistance, and desire for revenge that small children feel when being struck by the adults they love. The impact of pain and physical violence is most severe because the children are unable to protect themselves from the blows. Though they cannot remember consciously what happened to them during the first three or four years of life, the ancient angers persist while the adult conscience directs rage inward upon the self. The psyches of so many Puritans, evangelicals, and others who have suffered from adult depressions bear witness to this process” (Greven, 1992, p. 134).

It is clear that being hit, even “lovingly,” makes children feel as though they are only loveable when they are pleasing their parents which may mean that they rarely measure up to their parents’ high expectations. “Once we connect the pains of early childhood and the experience of violent physical assault with the feelings of anger and resentment, the subsequent moods of self-assault and self-deprecation characteristic of depression will make far better sense than has been the case hitherto” (Greven, 1992, p. 135). Sadly, throughout history, and even in today’s society, a child’s self-worth often depends upon their behavior in many fundamental Christian families who use spanking as a way to control their children. As I pointed out in Part 6 of my series entitled “The Christian History of Spanking,” the need for Christian parents to control their children dates back to the early church. It seems that as long as children obey their parents, they are loveable, but as soon as children disobey, they deserve painful punishment. “Obedience was the be-all and end-all—parenting relations were based on authority and control, rather than affection. The word ‘love’ is almost never mentioned, in reference to children, in surviving documents from this era. Literature produced before the late 18th century tended to refer to children with annoyance. Few violent means were spared in extracting obedience from the ‘little devils’” (Grille, 2005, p. 52). I find it especially sad and rather disturbing that of all the groups of parents it is the Christian parents who do not teach unconditional love to their children when Christ demonstrated the ultimate unconditional love for us by dying on the cross for us while we were still sinners (Romans 5:6-8). To get an even better view of this amazing unconditional love for us, look at what Isaiah 53:5 states, “But he was pierced for our transgressions, 
he was crushed for our iniquities; 
the punishment that brought us peace was on him, 
and by his wounds we are healed.” This does not say that He punished us first, but that He took our punishment upon Himself so that we would not have to suffer the punishment. And yet, Christian advocates of spanking tell parents that they must inflict painful punishments upon their children using not only the rod verses but also Ephesians 6:1 and Colossians 3:20 that tell children to obey their parents in order to justify their teachings. Heimlich (2011) states:

“’The Bible states that obedience must be complete…Children are not to obey their parents only when and if they feel like it. God wants them to respond to their parents’ authority and to learn to obey them in every area,’ writes Roy Lessin in Spanking: A Loving Discipline. Along the same vein, The Secret of Family Happiness, a book published by the Watchtower and Tract Society, tells Jehovah’s Witness parents that children need discipline ‘constantly.’ Also, an article in the Witness magazine Awake! states that ‘permissiveness is hateful.’ Meanwhile, others also state that parents should rule their homes with a commanding presence. ‘God has established the institution of the parent as one of His ruling authorities on earth,’ writes J. Richard Fugate in What the Bible Says about… Child Training. ‘To this position has been delegated both the right to rule children and all the power necessary to succeed in training children according to God’s plan.’ To drive this point home, he quotes Deuteronomy 21:18-21, which states that parents of a rebellious and drunken son should have him publicly stoned to death. ‘As you can see,’ Fugate writes, ‘God is very serious about children being obedient’” (p. 87).

Obviously, these Christian advocates of spanking do not understand God’s unconditional love for us, nor do they understand that nowhere in the Bible does God give parents such absolute “commanding authority” over their children! This is like saying that husbands have absolute “commanding authority” over their wives. Neither statement is biblically true. In fact, as I’ve pointed out in Part 7 of my series entitled “Spanking is NOT God’s Will,” the exact opposite is true as Ephesians 6:4 and Colossians 3:21 tell parents not to exasperate their children. Also, pro-spankers fail to understand that Ephesians 6:1 and Colossians 3:20 are speaking directly to the children, not the parents. Parents are not supposed to force children to obey them, but are to teach children how to do this and to provide help to children when they are having a hard time following this biblical instruction. This teaches children that their parents and God love them unconditionally even when they are struggling. After all, as I just pointed out, God loves us unconditionally and does not punish us when we sin. God lovingly corrects us and gives us natural consequences when necessary, but He does not punish us or withdraw His love from us. Look at how the apostle Paul puts it in Romans 5:16-18. “Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.  For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!  Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.” What an awesome God we have!

When children are physically punished, it does not make them feel loved unconditionally by anyone. Here is one such example. Heimlich (2011) states:

“An example is thirty-six-year-old Alex Byrd, who grew up in a fundamental Pentecostal household in the southeast part of the country. As Byrd told me on November 23, 2009, he was spanked just about any time he was seen as being ‘bad.’ ‘And by ‘bad,’ says Byrd, ‘I mean pretty much anything from laughing at specific words during mandatory family Bible reading to wrestling with my sister in a way that the parents did not approve of to not going to bed at a specific time or going outside of the yard or talking to people my mom did not want me talking with.’ These tough standards meant Alex was sometimes spanked four or five times a day. ‘I would be made to pull a switch off of a tree, be whipped with it, basically be told in some cases that I had sinned against God because I had disobeyed my parents, and would pretty much be made to pray and essentially repent to God’” (p. 89).

As I mentioned at the beginning of this section, many Christian pro-spankers claim that spanking helps relieve children of their guilt. But as we have seen thus far, the exact opposite is true for many children. Another reason that physical punishment does not relieve guilt and causes children to feel bad about themselves is that verbal shaming is used along with physical punishment as seen in the above example with Alex Byrd as his parents would tell him how he had sinned against God whenever he made a mistake. Sometimes shaming is used to threaten the child before physical punishment is used. Some parents who may not use physical punishment with their children but believe that children deserve some type of punishment of use shaming to control their children’s behavior. “Verbal punishment is common in almost every home and school. It relies on shame as the deterrent, in the same way that corporal punishment relies on pain. Shaming is one of the most common methods used to regulate children’s behaviour” (Grille, 2005, p. 194). Like spanking, shaming gives children negative messages about who they are instead of what they did. Its no wonder children who are spanked have higher incidences of depression with both a physical and emotional assault on their entire beings. And even if children are not hit, being punished with shaming is still an assault against their entire beings. “Shaming is designed to cause children to curtail behaviour through negative thoughts and feelings about themselves. It involves a comment—direct or indirect—about what the child is. Shaming operates by giving children a negative image about their selves—rather than about the impact of their behaviour” (Grille, 2005, p. 194). Guilt and shame really go hand-in-hand with corporal punishment as many pro-spankers, in addition to telling the child that he/she sinned against God, will also tell the child that they hate that they must spank the child, and that “this hurts them more than it hurts the child.” All of this makes children feel very shameful and guilty inside. They truly begin to believe that they deserve to feel a great deal of pain in order to try and resolve some of the guilt and shame as they grow older. What ends up happening to some children as they enter adolescence is that they feel so poorly about themselves as they have internalized the negative message that they deserve to feel pain when they make mistakes so they begin to intentionally inflict physical pain upon themselves after being spanked. Lisa, who we met in Part 2 of this series, began inflicting pain upon herself after her dad would spank her to help her feel relieved of her guilty feelings. Lisa writes:

“My parents, who followed to Pearl’s advice, spanked in this very Pearl-esque way, where the children are talked to prior to the spanking, told that the parents hate to hurt them but they have no other choice. That it hurts them more than it would hurt me. This particular sentence inflicted tons of guilt on me. I hated to be spanked or hit, obviously, but I loved it at the same time. I needed it. I hated myself so much, so deeply, that I sometimes wished my Dad would really hurt me, really beat me, in order to be free of that guilt. It’s very hard to explain how I felt.

I started this self-destructive behaviour around the age of 8 or 9. I remember that my mother cried a lot because she felt overwhelmed by all the kids. She cried even more when there was a spanking, and they were daily business at our house. My Dad would hit me and I still hated myself for doing this to them. Once the spanking was over, I was given some quiet time to calm down and freshen up. I went to the bathroom and cried endlessly, not that much because of the spanking but because I felt my mistake wasn’t punished properly. I felt the need to feel more pain, and I didn’t want to burden my parents with spanking me. I decided to do it myself. I looked for some sort of thing, a hard thing, to cause myself more pain and to remove the guilt I felt. It could be anything really, like a hairbrush, a stick, a wooden spoon, whatever was at hand. At first I started hitting myself on the legs and thighs until it really hurt. For some time, it was enough to do this three or four times to remove the guilt, but as I grew older, more and more pain was needed to calm my conflicts.

Sometimes I didn’t do it for weeks, then I did it every day, then stopped it for some weeks again. It really depended on my emotional situation. I never felt like I was doing something wrong. After all, I wasn’t cutting myself, so I was much better than those people. What I did was right. It was the holy spirit leading me to do this. How else could I feel so much relief in it?

Time passed and my self punishments on my legs grew harder, more severe, more painful. One day my mother saw my bruised legs after a really tough session and asked me what that was all about. I told her I fell really bad playing outside in the garden and didn’t realize I was so bruised up.

I had to hide it much better, find a better way to do it. More pain, less bruises. It took me just a few days to figure out a part of my body where nobody could see my bruises. My head. All the bruises and bumps would be hidden under my long hair. I felt like I had found the holy grail. It was the perfect plan. But it didn’t last long. The pain inflicted by my hands beating on my head was really severe, and I was 12 or 13 at that point. But this pain wasn’t enough. I went back to anything hard to increase the pain level. And when that wasn’t enough anymore, I really hated myself. I hated myself for having no way of causing such severe pain as to fulfill my need for feeling really repentant. This anger caused me to be even harder on myself, try it any way I could. I went on for minutes, hitting myself on the head with a hairbrush and crying, and it wasn’t enough pain. I started tearing my hair out and screaming at myself, the most vicious things I could imagine, using words which would set me up for another spanking if my parents heard me say them.

I remember a day where I had gotten a spanking and it didn’t satisfy my need to feel real pain. I sat in the bathroom, hitting my head with a hairbrush, not feeling the pain I wanted to feel, shrieking out in shrill screams then cursing at myself. You are a piece of (expletive deleted), everybody hates you, you are worthless, you can’t do anything, you will go to hell and marry the devil and God will laugh at you, your parents hate you, you’re going to hell anyway so kill yourself right now and release them from this burden, you piece of dirty dog (expletive deleted). I whispered these things to myself in a snakelike manner so my parents wouldn’t hear, but they certainly heard the screaming. My Dad came knocking on the door, telling me that I needed to stop the screaming or else I’d get another spanking. I hushed up quickly and answered “Yes Dad” as cheerful as I could. I started tearing my hair out, hitting myself with everything that wasn’t nailed to the ground, and it didn’t satisfy, so I hit my head against the wall, hoping it will finally start bleeding so I could stop. But it didn’t bleed. It never did. After 15 or 20 minutes, I gave up. I was defeated. I couldn’t cause enough pain. My head was dizzy, spinning and painful, but it still wasn’t enough” (Lisa, 2011, http://brokendaughters.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/cutting-eating-disorders-selfdestructive-behaviours/).

Sadly, Lisa isn’t the only one who felt the need to inflict more pain on themselves in order to try and resolve the guilt that that they felt. MC would often think about intentionally inflict pain on himself due to feeling so poorly about himself after internalizing the message that he deserved to feel pain whenever he made a mistake. In an electronic message dated September 29, 2011, MC conveyed the following to me:

“Sometimes, I would think about hurting myself. I had this weird idea that if I hurt myself, then maybe God would have pity on me, and would forgive me, and save me. Basically, I was conditioned with this idea that I had to be punished and hurt before I could be accepted and forgiven. Therefore, a large part of my Christian experience has been fear based, rather than love based. Fear has motivated me rather than love, and that is why I am more of an orphan than a son, when it comes down to my relationship with God.”

Research shows that depression, guilt, and shame from being harshly punished as young children often leads to self-destructive tendencies later on in childhood and adulthood. “All absurd behavior has its roots in early childhood, but the cause will not be detected as long as the adult’s manipulation of the child’s psychic and physical needs is interpreted as an essential technique of child-rearing instead of as the cruelty it really is. Since most professionals themselves are not yet free from this mistaken belief, sometimes what is called therapy is only a continuation of early, unintended cruelty” (Miller, 1994, p. 132). It is also true that if children are not taught to treat themselves with love and kindness as young children that they will have a difficult time doing so as adults. “The way we were treated as young children is the way we treat ourselves the rest of our lives. And we often impose our most agonizing suffering upon ourselves. We can never escape the tormentor within ourselves, who is often disguised as a pedagogue, someone who takes full control in illness; for example, in anorexia” (Miller, 1994, p. 133). This message of not being good enough often begins in infancy when most parents who believe in control use shaming to control infants’ crying and other behaviors that are typical and developmentally appropriate for infants. “A five-month-old baby is lying in his mother’s arms. He is close to sleep, then wakes and begins to grizzle. His mother tells him that he should stop being a naughty boy, and that she will be cross with him if he doesn’t sleep” (Grille, 2005, p. 193). Unfortunately, many pro-spankers and people who use shame don’t understand just how impressionable and vulnerable young children are when it comes to such negative messages punishments instills in children. I know for myself, I still often put myself down much of the time in my head. It is extremely difficult to escape such negative messages about oneself which are imparted by the very people children love and by whom they want approval and acceptance. Grille (2005) states the following:

“Since children are more vulnerable and impressionable than adults, shaming messages received in childhood are significantly more difficult to erase… To understand the damage wrought by shame, we need to look deeper than the goal of ‘good’ behaviour. If we think that verbal [or physical-added by Steph] punishment has ‘worked’ because it changed what the child is doing, then we have dangerously limited our view of the child to the behaviours that we can see. It is too easy to overlook the inner world of children; the emotions that underlie their behaviour, and the suffering caused by shame. It is also easy to miss what the child does once out of range of the shamer” (p. 196, 197).

Finally, being spanked and taught that any negative emotion and opinion one has deserves punishment has led some adults who were raised in this manner to later struggle in their marriages. This is exactly what is happening with Dave who was raised in a strict Amish home as a child. Dave’s wife explained to me in an electronic message dated November 10, 2011 the following:

“For the first few years of our marriage I almost worshiped him because he was just so awesome. I kid you not I thought he was “perfect”. :)
One thing I noticed right away, though I overlooked for a while, about my amazing man was that he wouldn’t argue with me…about anything!
My husband’s parents were Old Order Amish and Mennonite. He was always punished with a belt when he did anything “wrong”. And, speaking his mind was in the “wrong” category. He was expected to always “be respectful” to adults and telling his mom that (for example) he didn’t like what she’d prepared for lunch was disrespect and punishable with the belt. Squirming (showing any boredom) in church was punishable by the belt. Arguing with his parents or questioning them in any way was punishable with the belt.

According to him his parents never did it in anger or did anything he felt was “abusive”. He said he always got a “talking to” before hand and that his dad always had this demeanor that said he was really not happy having to do it. He said his dad even cried once n’ a while afterwards and often said he hated doing it. (This is sad for his parents!) So, this is why I think that as far as followers of “To Train Up a Child” would look at my husband’s parents and give him an “A+” and say he did everything “right.”

Because my husband actually had an extraordinary relationship with his parents and lived that kind of old fashioned life on the mission field where his work in the family was “necessary” for the family’s survival, he never felt any desire to “rebel” against his parents. He ate when he was told. He got up when he was told and went to bed when he was told. He sat still no matter how long the church service was. He didn’t complain about sleeping on dirt floors in village huts or about having to eat weird food. Living on the mission field he ate food at least once a week that made him want to gag without expressing anything. Sometimes they went without food. But, he never complained. He never disagreed with his parents. He never questioned his parents. He never challenged them. He was the “model child”. Had the Pearls known the family they’d have looked at my husband as a shining example of how their parenting practices are right and God’s way because my husband was so obedient! :(

So, he grows up, and gets married to me and, he treats me exactly the way he was trained to treat people: Don’t argue. Don’t express dislike. Don’t complain. And, it is not working. Every year that we’ve been married has just been this slow steady progression from awesome to where we are now in total separateness and depression. We have like “no” relationship at this point.

His parents maybe wanted a child who’d never ever give them any “trouble” and preferred him to be complacent and obedient, but, that doesn’t work for a spouse. You can’t ever get to know someone who has no opinion. I don’t know what he actually thinks about things or what he thinks about what I think. I don’t even know what he actually thinks about anything, because he was trained to agree with whoever he was talking to or it was being disrespectful. He thinks he is “keeping the peace” and that things “aren’t worth fighting about”.

Now, had his parents had the attitude that he should not do or say the same things, but had taken a totally different approach to it by talking to him and discussing the things he said with him, then, they would have learned things about their son. They would have gotten to know him and even if they’d have ultimately said, “Look, mom has limited things to choose for us to eat and even if you don’t like what she’s made you need to just eat it,” it would have taught him a totally different lesson and would not have made him just simply shut down. That approach would have taught him that his opinions mattered and they were ok to have but sometimes we need to do things we don’t like. The way he was taught he learned that to express a negative opinion was “disrespect” and that expressing it was painful. He learned that his opinions didn’t matter and that trying to do anything with them would not change his world at all and so it’s better just to not have them at all.

I believe that being spanked changed everything in the world and his whole future for him. It changed everything about him. And, now it’s destroying our relationship and though we don’t fight (because he can’t) our kids sense that we have no relationship and they don’t like it. My oldest daughter cries and says if this is how it is she never wants to even get married because it’s terrible.

Did this consistent use of the rod produce a happy child (like the Pearls say?) I’d say he’s miserable. I’d say he knows he’s missing out on life. I’d say he feels alone all the time. I’d say he feels frustrated and sad because he’s not running thru houses every day saving little kids but he is facing me every day and can’t connect with me. On the one side of him he’s a hero and on the daily side of him he’s a total failure in his eyes. He is still that same little boy lying awake at night paralyzed unable to get up and go to anyone for help when he’s uncomfortable. He does what he was “trained” to do to be “a good boy” but it doesn’t work anymore. Now, his wife wants from him exactly what his parents punished him for: for him to think on his own and to be himSELF. And, he just can’t do it. He has…no joy in life. He is a man who would literally give you the shirt off his back and would do anything for you, but, he has no joy. The whole situation makes me so angry every day because if you “raise a child up in the way you think they should go and you do it all wrong…when they are old…” they will struggle like heck to depart from it…”

It is quite clear spanking and shame do not produce truly happy people, and it is extremely sad how Dave and his wife as well as a great deal of others who have been raised to be obedient robots struggle greatly as adults. “Many studies have indicated that shame causes a host of relationship difficulties. This is not surprising, since relationship skills depend on emotional intelligence” (Grille, 2005, p. 198).

As with the sexual problems from being spanked “lovingly,” children, whose young brains are in the midst of critical development, that are exposed to high levels of stress, anxiety, and pain on a daily basis causes stress hormones that forever change children’s brain structure that can lead to a lifelong struggle with depression—sometimes leading some to commit suicide. Straus (2006) states:

“At a 1991 conference attended by specialists on depression, there was wide agreement that depression is a mental health problem with many causes, but that it probably involves a biological process in which there are lasting changes in the structure and chemistry of the brain (Holden, 1991). A speaker at the conference reported that ‘One fact that could play a role in such long-term changes is stress. Both animals and people who experience chronic stress respond by secreting ‘stress hormones’ [that are] the most robust biological concomitant of depression—showing in up to 50 percent of cases, especially severe ones’ (Holden, 1991, p. 1,451). Several other permanent changes in brain function were reported in both animals and humans who experience continuing stress. For children, one such continuing stress may be corporal punishment by their parents. It often begins in infancy and is particularly frequent for toddlers, many of whom are hit almost daily. Moreover, we have seen that corporal punishment continues into the teen years for a majority of American children. The changes in brain structure and function associated with the stress of having been physically assaulted for 13 or more years might explain the link between corporal punishment and depression” (p. 78-79).

Conclusion

It becomes clearer and clearer that physically punishing children “in love” is nothing but harmful. It sends the message that love and pain go together, which is very dangerous for the host of reasons I have discussed throughout this series thus far. It is also clear that physical punishment does not relieve children of their guilt, and that this is not even biblical as Jesus has paid for all of our sins once and for all. Instead, physical punishment eats away at a child’s self-worth, putting children at risk for depression as they become adolescents and adults. Finally, spanking has been shown to cause permanent changes in the brain that can lead children to struggle with sexual problems and depression. God never intended for all this. We continue to see that spanking implants seeds of sin rather than discouraging sin. Sin does not lead to joyfulness in Jesus. As 1 Thessalonians 5:16-22 states, we are to “Rejoice always,  pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.   Do not quench the Spirit.  Do not treat prophecies with contempt  but test them all; hold on to what is good,  reject every kind of evil.”

In the next part of this series we will learn about Stockholm’s Syndrome, the cycle of abuse, more on how pain and stress affects the young child’s brain, and how we can know that the anti-spanking research is not biased as pro-spankers strongly claim.

( Continued )

Reference:

Block, N. A. & Gomez, M. Y. (2011). This hurts me more than it hurts you: In words and pictures. Columbus, OH: The Center for Effective Discipline.
Greven, P. (1992). Spare the child. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Grille, R. (2005). Parenting for a peaceful world. New South Wales, Australia: Longueville Media.
Heimlich, J. (2011). Breaking their will. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Lisa. (2011). Cutting, Eating Disorders, Self-Destructive Behaviours. http://brokendaughters.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/cutting-eating-disorders-selfdestructive-behaviours/
Miller, A. (1994). For your own good. New York, NY: The Noonday Press.
Neddermeyer, D. M. (2006). Loving spankings—Part 1. http://ezinearticles.com/?Loving-Spankings–Part-I&id=373269
Robinson, B. A. (2009). Child corporal punishment: Spanking Results from studies in 1985 & 1986. http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin5.htm
Straus, M. A. (2006). Beating the devil out of them. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Turner, P. A. & Muller, H. A. (2004). Long-Term Effects of Child Corporal Punishment on Depressive Symptoms in Young Adults. Journal of Family Issues. 25 (6), 761-782. http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/25/6/761.abstract

 

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.

Behaviorism at the Root of Child Training

Carissa Robinson explains that “If you observe most recommended Christian parenting practices today, you might be surprised to discover a secular influence: behavioral psychology” in Awaken Their Hearts.

Meanwhile, Greenegem explains the error in thinking that we have to DO anything more than believe in order to be saved in No Assembly Required.

A Wrong Turn On The Parenting Journey

Dulce de Leche shares how she made a Wrong Turn in her parenting and how she corrected it.  Here is more about Correcting the Course.

Reflecting the Character of God

The Hippie Housewife discusses how we should reflect the character of God for our children.  She looks at how attachment parenting looks a lot like how God cares for us and warns us about 3 heresies which are cropping up in many Christian teachings.

Along the same lines, Pearl In Oyster (PIO) explains that we should imitate how God disciplines His children.  She uses her testimony of how God treated her when she was out of His will as an example.

 

 

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.

The Effect of Spanking on Children

Carissa Robinson shares a true story of how spanking affected one child growing up in Lock ‘Em Up, Throw Away the Key.

Fruits of Gentle Discipline

Dulce de Leche explains how she came to chose Gentle Discipline 7 years ago and examines the fruits of her decision in  7 Year Harvest.

Responses to Our Critics

pFamilyGal considers the question of whether it is right for Christians to condemn the Pearls’ teachings in Called to Judge.

Pearl In Oyster (PIO) responds to her critics in More Thoughts on Biblical Parenting where she discusses Divine Punishment vs. Grace, Spanking for Danger Situations and the Rod Verses.

Book Review: Thy Rod and Thy Staff, They Comfort Me, Part II

Dulce de Leche has finally posted part 2 of her book review of Samuel Martin’s book, Thy Rod and Thy Staff, They Comfort Me where she discusses the content of the book chapter by chapter.

Appearances

BarefootBetsy writes about how worrying about what others think affects our parenting on Dare to Disciple.

Understanding The Nature of Children

Discipleship Parenting writes about Understanding the Nature of Children in which she looks at what the Bible says about the nature of infants and children and what our response to them should be.

Dulce de Leche also writes about the sin nature of babies in Sons of Adam Daughters of Eve.

The Christian History of Spanking Part 3

( Part 1 ) ( Part 2 )

Jonathan Wesley (1703-1791) is known as the founder of Methodism, and for the effects he had (and still has) on the education of children and adults.  In Part 2, I looked at the child-rearing practices of his mother, Susanna Wesley, whom many Christian advocates of spanking hold up as a model for Christian mothers.  Susanna gave John special attention as he almost died in one of the house fires.  John deeply loved his mother, and it has been said that he didn’t think he could ever find a woman like his mother to marry.  Now, before we say that his mother’s child-rearing practices couldn’t have been that bad if he loved her that much, it is well documented that abused children that have been taken away from their abusive parents will cry and ask, “If I’m really good tomorrow, can I go home to my mommy and daddy?”  As I point out in Part 5 of my series called, “Spanking is NOT God’s Will,” children have a very forgiving nature and love their parents no matter what.  That’s how I was with my dad despite his physical abuse.  He said he was sorry many times throughout my childhood, and I always forgave him.  Now some pro-spankers may argue that there’s a line between abuse and spanking.  My dad never left marks on my body, but it was indeed abuse as he’d hit and be rough with me for things out of my control.  My mom only spanked me once, and though she never apologized, I forgave her within the week.  Though both my parents were wrong for hitting me, I’ve long forgiven both of them and have a great relationship with my mom.  So, for all those who claim spankings didn’t hurt them, I must ask that they truly think about how they felt right before, during, and afterwards because when children are hurt by the closest people in their lives, it does harm and hurt, otherwise there wouldn’t be so much denial and controversy over using physical punishment with our children!  And if spanking (hitting) children was ordained by God, then there would be NO questions or controversy among Christians and the secular world regarding the amount of harm spanking a child does as Scripture clearly states, “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

Romans 8:28 Or that all things work together for good to those who love God, who; or that in all things God works together with those who love him to bring about what is good” (NIV, www.biblica.com).   Therefore, it is no surprise that John Wesley loved his mother and chose to care for her during her final years of life.

I want to remind us that my purpose in digging into the history of spanking is not to point fingers or make anyone look bad.  My purpose is to show where some of the topics I brought up in Part 1 of this series come from—particularly that they are not from God!  Spanking is from man.
John Wesley did much good in his lifetime.  It has been said that he would go out into the country and proclaim Christ to the people who lived in those rural places, winning many souls to Christ.  He also started Methodism.  And many credit him for the creation of Sunday school.  He created schools for children in which they studied many of the traditional subjects as well as the Bible.  He made sure poor children were able to be educated in his schools as well as girls.  Sadly, John followed in his mother’s footsteps when it came to his beliefs regarding child rearing and the education of children.  Though John didn’t have any children of his own, we will see these practices in how he ran the schools and in his sermons about children.

First, I want to briefly take a look at common Puritan belief and Calvinism because Susanna and John Wesley’s beliefs seem to fit into this belief system.  The use of catechisms was the primary way that the Puritans as well as some other Christian sects taught doctrine during the 18th and 19th centuries.  They put a high importance on Scripture as authority, which is absolutely correct, as the Bible is an absolute authority given by God.  This made literacy training a must for all children.  However, “The Puritans accepted the Calvinistic interpretation of total depravity.  This belief carried over to their view of children.  Out of concern for the souls of little ones, Puritan ministers sometimes preached sermons particularly for and to children.  The aim of these children’s sermons was to replace childhood vanity with ‘early piety’” (Reed & Prevost, 1993, p. 275).  Now, I’ve pointed out throughout my series that, yes, children are born with a sinful nature as “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23.  However, children do not completely understand sin, nor do they purposely sin until they reach a certain age—that age is different for every child.  Plus, in the 18th century children were expected to act like adults as soon as possible.  People didn’t have the knowledge and research of typical child development that we do today.  Therefore, developmentally appropriate behaviors of young children were seen as sinful.  This usually led to the harsh treatment of children despite Jesus never calling for such treatment.  People thought young children went to Hell.  (See Part 3 and  Part 7 of “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” and Part 1 of this series for more information).  While children should indeed be introduced to piety at an early age, to expect that developmentally appropriate behaviors be replaced by piety is completely unrealistic and will lead to unnecessary frustration in the child and parent.

 

Also, during this time period using physical punishment with wives and slaves as well as children was completely acceptable and legal by society.   White males were dominant, and anyone weaker or different from them were under their rule and authority.  In essence, wives, slaves, children, and servants were considered property of the white male.  “We no longer permit the hitting of servants, apprentices, wives, prisoners, and members of the armed forces.  All of these were legal until the late nineteenth or early twentieth century… Research on corporal punishment of children can result in information that may speed up the process of bringing children to the same protection members of the military, employees, servants, wives, and prisoners now have” (Straus, 2006, p. 10).  Even up until the 1960s, it was totally legal for husbands to hit their wives as long as they didn’t leave a mark or injure her.  “Before the late 1960′s, a husband’s slap of his wife was not regarded as an act of abuse. Today, that same act is unquestionably viewed as abusive (society still has a long way to go before wives are equally regarded as batterers for assaulting their husbands). The “spanking” of children is viewed in the same light today as wife hitting was viewed before the 1960′s: NOT abusive by legal standards. Additionally, if an employer “spanked” the buttocks of an employee, it would be grounds for sexual assault” (Couture, 2007, http://stophitting.blogspot.com/2006/01/back-in-good-ol-days-and-other.html).  Thus, it appears that children are still considered as property of their parents since parents still have the right to spank them as long as they don’t leave marks on the children.  I find it sad that so many Christians seem to have completely missed the message Jesus Christ brought to us.  “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” Matthew 7:12.  It is interesting that throughout history we Christians have failed miserably in applying the Golden Rule; especially when it comes to how children are treated!

 

I do not believe that the Wesleys took the Golden Rule into account with their child rearing beliefs and practices.  This seemed to have delayed John’s salvation as he did not consider himself a born again Christian until the date of May 24th, 1738.  “Upon arriving back in England, John became involved in a Pietist society organized by Peter Boehler, a Moravian.  In 1738, during a meeting on Aldersgate Street in London, John became convinced that salvation came only through faith in Jesus Christ.  He called this his conversion, and it profoundly changed his life” (Reed & Prevost, 1993, p. 275).  Since so many Christian advocates of spanking hold Susanna Wesley’s child rearing philosophy as a model for Christian mothers, I must wonder why John didn’t actually receive Christ until he was 35 years old.  If such a harsh way of parenting our children is supposed to lead them to Christ, or at least make it more likely for them to come to Christ, why did John not feel Christ’s Love until the age of 35?  Yes, every child is different, and no matter what we do the child may not come to Christ.  But so many Christian pro-spankers seem totally convinced that by spanking children that it will teach them to respect authority and to be fearfully reverent to God and their parents.  That if they learn to submit to authority then they will find it easier to submit to Christ.  However, submitting to Christ and authority out of fear is much different than submitting out of love, respect, and reverence!  While some children who grow up and were “lovingly spanked” by their Christian parents do receive Christ completely, I know of others who seemed to accept Christ at an early age but the minute they left home, they rebelled and fell away from their faith.  For example, I once knew a great Christian family who did their best to raise their three children in the Lord.  They were quite strict with them.  As teenagers they were not allowed to go to movies, dances, or wear two-piece swimsuits.  As children they were “lovingly” spanked.  They went to church every Sunday, and the children were involved in youth church activities.  They prayed and studied God’s Word as a family regularly.  These parents did everything in their power to raise their children in the way of the Lord.  And while all three of the children accepted Christ as children and were baptized as believers, all three absolutely rebelled against God the minute they left home.  Two of them became pregnant the first year after leaving home.  One became an alcoholic after leaving home.  And what’s worse is that they totally abandoned their faith.  Today they’re all married with children, and have semi-returned to their faith as they go to church and occasionally ask for prayer, but Christ is not the center of their lives.  I mean we all are sinners and rebel, but to completely abandon our faith as they did the second we leave home sounds like we weren’t spiritually healthy.  We are supposed to be free in Christ.  Why then do so many children raised in strict Christian homes feel the need to exercise their new founded freedom through rebellion?  Could it be that their parents didn’t accurately teach their children what Jesus meant when He proclaimed, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” John 8:31b-32?

 

This seemed to be the case with John Wesley as well even though he did not rebel against his faith or his parents.  Nevertheless, it is clear from his letters that he wrote to his family while at college and graduate school before his conversion that he did not have an accurate understanding of the freedom Christ offers.  In a letter to his mother concerning a conversation he had had regarding Christian Liberty, John Wesley (1734 [1915]) states,

“2.  For Liberty as to Rites and Points of Discipline.  So Mr. Whiston says: ‘Though the Stations were constituted by the Apostles, yet the Liberty of the Christian Law dispenses with them on extraordinary Occasions.’

3.  For Liberty from denying ourselves in little things; for trifles ‘tis commonly thought we may indulge in safely, because Christ hath made us free.  This notion I a little doubt, is not sound…

5.  Christian Liberty is taken by some for a Freedom from Restraint as to Sleep or Food.  So they would say, Your drinking not one glass of Wine, or my rising at fixed hours was contrary to Christian Liberty.

Lastly, it is taken for Freedom from Rules.  If by this he meant making our Rules yield to extraordinary occasions, well: If, the having no Prudential Rules, this Liberty is as yet too high for me, I cannot attain to it” (p. 54).

It seems John believed that in order to be a good Christian, one had to have strict “Prudential Rules.”  This undoubtedly came from how his mother raised and taught him.  This is, as I pointed out in Part 2 of this series, legalism and Jesus warned the Pharisees and Teachers of Law about legalism time and time again during his ministry.  As I point out throughout my “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” series, we are free from the Law of Moses.  We are now under the Law of Grace thanks to Jesus’ sacrifice for all of our sins.  “For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him” Hebrews 9:24-28.  We are free in Christ!

 

Just four years after John wrote the above to his mother, he came to know Christ.  Just a few months before his conversion, John wrote about struggling with darkness and bitterness.  “He contrasts it with an earlier day, January 8.  Then he was ‘in the midst of the great deep’ and ‘bitterness of soul.’” (Eayers, 1915, p. 60).  In a letter to his brother and sister where he describes his conversion experience to them, John Wesley (1738 [1915]) states, “But that is all past, and serves only as a dark background for the brightness and beauty of the evening of May 24, when a light shone from heaven upon him” (p. 61).  I speculated in Part 2 of this series that all of the Wesley children may have suffered from emotional problems as adults due to how they were treated.  I think what John Wesley described in his letter is proof that he was struggling with emotional problems.  Yes, we all battle our own demons, but being raised in such an abusive, controlling, and harsh environment has been proven to put people at a higher risk for emotional problems.  “For a child who can barely walk or talk (the age at which most children are most likely to be hit), it can truly be traumatic if the most loved and trusted figure in the child’s life suddenly carries out a painful attack.  The consequence can be a post-traumatic stress syndrome that creates deep, lifelong psychological problems such as depression and suicidal thinking” (Straus, 2006, p. 10).  Now, many parents say that their child is perfectly happy after they’ve been spanked.  Children are usually resilient.  They don’t dwell on things too long.  Therefore, it can be quite difficult to tell exactly how a young child is truly feeling.  And children usually act out in order to try to show us how they are feeling which is misinterpreted as bad (sinful) behavior by parents leading to more punishment for the child.  I once had a good Christian friend who had two young children.  One day while I was visiting, her 18 month old happened to touch something that was dangerous.  She told him no, but being a typical toddler, he smiled and did it again.  She calmly took his hand and swatted it and said, “Dangerous!”  He looked at her then at his hand and then smiled and did it again.  So she calmly took his hand again, swatted it a little harder than before, and said, “Dangerous!”  I could tell that this swat hurt more than the first, but he didn’t cry.  He looked confused at his mom, got up, walked a little ways, sat down on the floor and looked as if he was trying to process what had just happened.  It broke my heart, and it was all I could do not to say anything.  I wonder what his mom was actually thinking watching this.  Did she see his confusion, or did she see that hitting got the job done as he didn’t touch the dangerous item again?  Since she was very pro-spanking, I wonder if she was in denial about the harm she was doing to her children.  Also, the toddler only sat looking confused for about a minute or less before he was up happily playing again.  While I knew them, the children seemed happy.  The older child was a bit aggressive at times which concerned me as he was spanked and research shows that children who are spanked have higher rates of aggressive behavior (Straus, 2006; Brazelton, 2006).  I wouldn’t be surprised if they ended up having some emotional problems now that they are older just as John Wesley seemed to have before his conversion.  The children’s parents may never know as teenage and adult children don’t always feel comfortable talking to their parents about the emotional problems that they are having.  “Many people who have experienced suffering as children are able to live productive lives. However, these people may harbor self-destructive tendencies, and interpersonal difficulties in that aren‘t apparent to onlookers. Adults who were mistreated in childhood are often insecure, mistrusting, defensive, authoritarian, passive, withdrawn, apathetic, in denial or quick to sarcasm. Those who transcend childhood suffering are often highly resilient people who have sought to process and understand how their childhood history currently impacts their lives” (Couture, 2007, http://stophitting.blogspot.com/2006/01/back-in-good-ol-days-and-other.html).

 

After his conversion, John Wesley seemed to really grasp the concept of grace.  The night of his conversion, he went quite unwillingly to Aldersgate Street to hear William Holland read a preface written by Luther to the book of Romans.  In a letter describing his whole experience that night to his brother and sister John Wesley (1738 [1915]) writes,

“With regard to my own character, and my doctrine like-wise, I shall answer you plainly.  By a Christian I mean one who so believes in Christ as that sin hath no more dominion over him: and in this obvious sense of the word I was not a Christian until May the 24th last past.  For till then sin had dominion over me, although I fought with it continually; but surely, then, from that time to this it hath not—such is the free grace of God in Christ.  What sins they were which till then reigned over me, and from which, by the grace of God, I am now free, I am ready to declare on the house-top, if it may be for the glory of God…

My desire of this faith I knew long before, though not so clearly till Sunday, January the 8th last, when, being in the midst of the great deep, I wrote a few lines, in the bitterness of my soul, some of which I have transcribed; and may the good of God sanctify them both to you and me” (p. 62).

The rest of John’s letter regarding his conversion is absolutely beautiful and heartwarming.  For the first time in his life, he truly felt and fully grasped God’s love and grace for him!

 

Sadly, I must question why this knowledge of God’s grace, love, and mercy that John Wesley gained the night of May 24, 1738 was not applied to his beliefs about child rearing or to the schools he created?  He did not have children of his own, but he touched the lives of many children through his Methodist schools and his sermons regarding children.  In his sermons, which date all the way to 1783, long after his conversion, he discussed the need for children’s wills to be broken beginning in infancy just as his mother did.  Because he was a preacher, I expected to see more references to Scripture in order to at least try to back some of his beliefs up with the Word of God, but he used the same verse as his mom, “Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it” Proverbs 22:6 (2011 NIV).  Most of us know this verse as “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.”  Obviously, Bible scholars believe that “start” is more accurate to what God is saying than “train” is.  John Wesley does not use any other verses to back up what he says in his sermon titled “On the Education of Children”  (1783) in which Wesley states, “To humour children is, as far as in us lies, to make their disease incurable. A wise parent, on the other hand, should begin to break their will the first moment it appears. In the whole art of Christian education there is nothing more important than this. The will of the parent is to a little child in the place of the will of God. Therefore studiously teach them to submit to this while they are children, that they may be ready to submit to his will when they are men. But in order to carry this point, you will need incredible firmness and resolution; for after you have once begun, you must never more give way. You must hold on still in an even course; you must never intermit your attention for one hour; otherwise you lose your labour” (http://new.gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/95/).  Yes, we must teach our children to submit to our authority, but to break a child’s will is not biblical.  (See Part 1 of this series for more information about breaking children’s wills).  John Wesley goes on in this same sermon to explain how his mother broke their wills as infants.  Wesley (1783) states, “My own mother had ten children, each of whom had spirit enough; yet not one of them was ever heard to cry aloud after it was a year old. A gentlewoman of Sheffield (several of whose children I suppose are alive still) assured me she had the same success with regard to her eight children. When some were objecting to the possibility of this, Mr. Parson Greenwood (well-known in the north of England) replied, “This cannot be impossible: I have had the proof of it in my own family. Nay, of more than this. I had six children by my former wife; and she suffered none of them to cry aloud after they were ten months old. And yet none of their spirits were so broken, as to unfit them for any of the offices of life.” This, therefore, may be done by any woman of sense, who may thereby save herself abundance of trouble, and prevent that disagreeable noise, the squalling of young children, from being heard under her roof” (http://new.gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/95/).  Again, nowhere in Scripture does it say to break a child’s will.  Children are already humble when it comes to believing in Christ or Jesus would not have held them up as models for adults in Matthew 18:1-4.  As I continue to point out in all of my series, Ephesians 5:21 says that we are to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”  Wives are to submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22, 24), and yet, this does not give husbands the right to treat their wives harshly.  Just as Ephesians 6:1-2 says, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— 3 “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth” does not give parents the right to treat children harshly.  God must have known that humans would have a tendency to treat the weaker (or perceived weaker) one harshly as in both cases He warns that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church (Ephesians 5:25), and for parents not to exasperate their children (Ephesians 6:3).  Why didn’t John Wesley understand this?  Maybe because he couldn’t stand to go against what his beloved mother’s teachings.  He wasn’t strong enough to break the cycle of abuse despite having the power of Christ within him.

 

John Wesley ran the schools that he created much like his mother ran her home when he was a child.  The children at his schools were on an extremely strict schedule, and were never allowed to play.  “What others noticed, however, and what is most often remembered, is the strong element of religion, and the rigor of the schedule and discipline.  The rules for the children at Kingswood meant rising at four A.M. and retiring at eight P.M.; starting the day with two hours of private and public devotion and an hour of public evening prayers; having no time during the day for play; and spending from seven to eleven A.M. and one to five P.M. ‘in school.’  Students at all times be in the presence of a teacher and never be allowed to roam free or have contact with the colliers’ children in the neighborhood” (Heitzenrater, 2001, p. 288).  This sounds more like a military base than a school for children.  And if a child broke a rule or misbehaved, he or she was physically punished.  As I pointed out in Part 2 of this series, research shows that young children learn best through play and concrete (real) experiences.  How did Jesus teach?  He used stories and parables that people who were open to Him could understand and relate to for the most part.  He also taught through concrete experiences and miracles.  One example that comes to mind of Jesus using a miracle to teach His disciples faith is when Jesus fed five thousand people with a five loaves of bread and a couple of fish (John 6:1-15).  His disciples said that no one had enough money to buy enough food for all the people, and yet when a boy brought up a basket of food, Jesus blessed the food and all five thousand people had more than enough to eat.  This taught exactly what faith in the Lord can do.  Jesus also taught by asking open-ended questions to make people think.  He was a gentle Teacher.  He also enjoyed boat rides and hanging out with people.  Jesus even went to weddings and turned water into wine (John 2:1-12).  Heaven will be one big wedding and party!  I can imagine Jesus smiled at children running around playing, otherwise why would He have gotten so angry at His disciples for trying to prevent parents from bringing their children to Him?  Also, why did God create children with such a playful nature if He did not intend for children to play?  And the Bible continually talks about the joy we are to have in the Lord.  Therefore, I do not believe that it was biblically accurate for the Wesleys to require children to follow a very strict schedule.  Yes, routines are very important for children as they need to know what will happen next in their days.  Children thrive on routines because routines are flexible in order to meet the children’s needs.  Schedules are not designed to meet children’s needs.  They are more for adult’s convenience, and to keep children under control.  While there are stories of revivals and salvation that occurred in John Wesley’s schools, I can’t help but question whether the good out weighed the potential harm that was done to the children.

 

John Wesley didn’t see children as human beings, but instead, saw them as “a unit for salvation. Gross views Wesley’s concept of salvation: “He never considered a child as a child, but rather as a unit for salvation, bred in sin, apt to evil, and altogether as a ‘brand to be plucked out of the burning’” (Towns, 1970, p. 323).  However, John seemed to contradict himself at times as to whether children were inheritably evil or innocent.  Heitzenrater (2001) states the answer John Wesley gave regarding infants suffering, “Why do infants suffer?  What sin have they to be cured thereby?  If you say, ‘It is to heal the sin of their parents, who sympathize and suffer with them’; in a thousand instances this has no place; the parents are not the better, nor any-way likely to be the better, for all the sufferings of their children.  Their sufferings, therefore, yea, and those of all mankind, which are entailed upon them by the sin of Adam, are not the result of mere mercy, but of justice also.  In other words, they have in them the nature of punishments, even on us and on our children.  Therefore, children themselves are not innocent before God.  They suffer; therefore, they deserve to suffer” (p. 294).  While it is true that infants are born with a sinful nature, they are in no way capable of purposely sinning.  To say that infants, or anyone for that matter, deserve to suffer is very un-Christ-like in my opinion.  God made infants and provided crying as their way of communicating with us.  This is not sinful!  John Wesley was also heard saying that children are also innocent.  “Take, for example, his observation at the home of an English gentleman and his family in Holland: ‘Here were four such children (I suppose seven, six, five, and three years old) as I never saw before in one family: Such inexpressible beauty and innocence shone together’” (Heitzenrater, 2001, p. 294).  I wonder if John based this observation either on their outward appearances and/or their behaviors.  If the children would have been behaving as typical children, would he have commented on their beauty and innocence?

 

Overall, from what I have read from and about John Wesley, the impression I get is that he mostly believed that children were evil from birth.  As I’ve pointed out throughout this paper, he believed that children were capable of having a religious life, but that it required that they be strictly educated and harshly punished.  “As it has introduced a new state of things, and so fully informed us of the nature of man, and the end of his creation; as it has fixed all our goods and evils, taught us the means of purifying our souls, of pleasing God, and being happy eternally; one might naturally suppose that every Christian country abounded with schools, not only for teaching a few questions and answers of a catechism, but for the forming, training, and practicing children in such a course of life as the sublimest doctrines of Christianity require” (Wesley, 1783, http://new.gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/95/).  I wonder what he meant by “sublimest doctrines of Christianity require” because while we are required to teach our children God’s Word from a very young age (Deuteronomy 6:6-8), we are not required to be harsh with them.  In fact, we are required to teach in a loving, kind manner (Colossians 3:16.)

 

Since John Wesley believed that infants were sinful from birth, he felt that infant baptism was an absolute must in order to wash their sins away and save their souls from Hell if they should die.  “Infants are in a state of original sin and they cannot be saved ordinarily unless this is washed away by baptism. They are included in the covenant with God and capable of solemn consecration to him. This consecration can only be made by baptism. They have the right to come to Christ, to be ingrafted into him and ought to be brought to him for that purpose. Baptism regenerates, justifies and gives the infant all the privileges of the Christian religion” (Towns, 1970, p. 322).  While many Christians do believe in infant baptism, the Bible seems very clear that baptism is for people who have accepted Christ into their hearts; receiving the gift of salvation offed by Christ.  Baptism symbolizes the person’s death to sin and his/her rising with Christ as a new person in Christ.  “We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life” Romans 6:4.  (See also Colossians 2:12 and 1 Peter 3:21).  Infant baptism does absolutely nothing as far as salvation is concerned.  And I have repeatedly said in this series and my “Spanking is NOT God’s Will” series, infants and young children go to Heaven if they die since they are not capable of purposely rejecting Christ.  They know Him and easily believe in Him!  Just as infant baptism does nothing to save children, neither does spanking and controlling them do anything to save them.  From all of the research I’ve pointed out in this paper, and from what we know about John Wesley’s life, I think it is safe to say that spanking children puts them at higher risk for rejecting Christ as they are not receiving an accurate portrayal of Christ’s love and grace for them.

 

Jonathan Wesley did much good for the Kingdom of God.  Many poor children were able to be educated because of him.  He also helped a great deal of people come to know Christ as their Savior.  However, among all of the truly good things that he did throughout his life, I think it is wise to ask how much harm did he also do?  After all, he did not seem to rely on God’s Word for his beliefs on how children should be treated and educated.  For this reason, John Wesley should not be used as a role model for Christians and Christian education.  While none of us is perfect, we must remember that the pedestal in which he is often placed among Christians is cracked.  Children should be taught through love, gentle firmness, concrete experiences, and much grace!  “What do you prefer? Shall I come to you with a rod of discipline, or shall I come in love and with a gentle spirit?” 1 Corinthians 4:21.

 

“Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight” 1 Peter 3:4.

 

Not a complete list of references:

 

Eayrs, G. (ed.)  (1915).  Letters of John Wesley.  London, England: Hodder and Stoughton.

Towns, E.  (1970).  John Wesley and religious education.  Articleshttp://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/towns_articles/16.

Wesley, J.  (1783).  Sermon 95.  On the education of children.   http://new.gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/95/.

*** A full reference section on all my work will follow.

(Continued)

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.

 

Biblical Perspectives on Spanking

Ordained Minister( and Parenting and Relationship expert)  Thomas Haller has written an article with Chick Moorman called, Biblical Perspectives on Spanking in which they take a closer look at the typical verses which are considered to command parents to spank.

Samuel Martin’s book, Thy Rod and Thy Staff They Comfort Me, also studies those verses, as well as Jewish attitudes towards children in Biblical times.  Brenda King of Positively Feminine has a book review of his book and is also offering a chance to win a free copy of it.

In other news, I have updated yesterday’s post with part III of the series.

Analyzing the Schatz Tragedy

Cindy, from Under Much Grace, analyzes what causes people like Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz to harm their children in a new series:
Why Good People Make Dangerous Choices (Pondering Pearl and Lydia Schatz)

An Introduction

Part I: Virtue In Place of Unquestioned Obedience.

Part II: How Dehumanization (and Declaring War Against Family Members) Causes Moral Disengagement

Part III: Defining Aggression as Normal, Acceptable, and Desired Behavior

An Addendum Note About Lydia Schatz and the Correction She Suffered for a Mispronounced Word: Liberian Adoption and Reactive Attachment Disorder

Part IV: The Milgram Experiment and the Pressure to Commit Evil for the Common Good

Part V: Pondering the Atrocities of the Jewish Holocaust and its Relationship to the Study of Obedience

Bad Apples or Bad Barrels? The Short and Long Versions of Zimbardo on the Lucifer Effect

Part VI: The Calm Before the Storm Following the Schatzes’ “Guilty” Pleas

Part VII: The Breaking the “Diabolical Will” of Infants in the IFB – Even at Hephzibah House

Part VIII: There But For Grace

Part IX: Using the Milgram Study to Understand How Pearl Becomes Appealing

Part X: The Schatz Family is Not Unique

Why Do People Blame the Pearls?

This post by Elizabeth Esther was written in Feb of 2010 as a response to the Schatz Tragedy.  It is a great post for sharing as it contains a careful explanation of the Pearls’ teachings and how they relate to Lydia’s death as well as her own personal testimony. A link to this post can also be found on In Depth Analysis of Pearl’s Teachings.

Gentle Discipline 102

So, if we should not spank our children, how then should we discipline them?  We have started looking at gentle discipline.

Purple Kangaroo has a long post explaining her methods of Handling Hitting and Hurtful Words.

So, what about time outs?  Are they a good tool?  The Peaceful Housewife looks at that in To The Time Out Corner .

The Peaceful Housewife recommends that you take a look at this post from Adventures in Mommyhood called What Is Gentle Discipline Anyways? It is part testimony and part What Gentle Discipline is NOT.  We will be watching for a follow up post of What Gentle Discipline IS in the near future.

I would also like to mention Dulce de Leche’s post about showing grace instead of punishments called, Wha’cha Gonna Do About It? in which she looks at the question of whether we should “let them get away with it.”  She shares a very touching example in this post.

Spanking is NOT God’s Will Part 8

( part 1 ) ( part 2 ) ( part 3 ) ( part 4 ) ( part 5 ) ( Part 6 ) ( Part 7 )

What is grace?  This is the question running through my head as I wrestle with a bit of discouragement as children continue to be harmed by well-meaning people who want so badly to obey God in their parenting.  As I continue to hear the same comments from pro-spankers who seem almost desperate to defend themselves for fear of being wrong.  As I hear on the morning news that two teenagers were shot and killed by their own mother because they were being “mouthy.”  As a book that advocates spanking infants may be being used by people that I know.  What is grace?  Who deserves grace?  Is the Bible Truth or something that can be used however we want in order to support our own beliefs?  What does it mean to be Spirit led and to take up our crosses and follow Jesus?  Why do some Christians proclaim, “God hates fags?”  Why is there so much division in the Body of Christ when God commands us to be “like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind” Philippians 2:2?

Another thing that keeps popping up in my mind and during my Bible study is the following verse:

“So he said to me, ‘This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the LORD Almighty” Zechariah 4:6.

This verse is in context with an angel showing Zechariah a vision seemingly related to the coming of a future Messiah to rescue the people.  Yesterday in church, the pastor discussed the uneventful way that Jesus quietly came on the scene amidst the crowds that were waiting by the Jordan River in order to be baptized by a relative, John The Baptist (Matthew 3:13-17).  Everyone thought that the Messiah would come and mightily restore Israel with a mighty sword.  But instead, Jesus came as an infant and lived in humble settings.  He didn’t even look like a powerful king that everyone expected Him to be.  Look how Isaiah the prophet described Jesus:

“He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by mankind,
a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
he was despised, and we held him in low esteem” Isaiah 53:1-3.

Is this what God meant in Zechariah 4:6b“Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit.” Possibly.  Especially since Christ didn’t come on Earth by might nor power.  But what about grace?  We actually can see the first act of grace given to man by God in Genesis 3 after Adam and Eve were tempted by the devil and ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  In the midst of telling Adam and Eve about the consequences that are to come to them and all of mankind because of their sin, God allows them to live until their natural lives ran out, and God allowed them to multiply—having children!  In all reality, Adam and Eve did not deserve to go on living after sinning against God—NONE OF US DO!  But God let them live and allowed them to multiply.  God is huge.  He is bigger than any of us can imagine.  He is the most powerful Being of the entire universe.  He could have easily wiped Adam and Eve off the face of the Earth and started over, creating new people who would constantly obey and worship Him like robots, but He didn’t!  Then in Genesis 4 we see Cain murder Abel.  Again, grace shows up when God puts a seal of protection on Cain before allowing him to wander out from His Presence and marry and have his own children (Genesis 4:13-18).  This continues throughout the entire Bible with its climax being Jesus healing, forgiving, loving, extending grace and mercy to people who did not deserve it.  He bared our punishment for us that we might live!  “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them” John 3:36.

“I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand” John 10:28.

“Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” John 14:6.

But again, what is grace and who deserves it?  I think about the Samaritan women at the well.  Jews did not associate with Samaritans.  Yet in John 4:1-42, we see Jesus, a Jew, ask a Samaritan woman for a drink of water.  Then we see Jesus engage the woman in conversation.  Again, this was unheard of for that time period.  When Jesus’ disciples come back and find Jesus talking to the Samaritan woman, they quite surprised (John 4:27).  In the midst of Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman, her sinful life gets revealed.  Yet, how does Jesus handle her?  Let’s look:

“Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”

11 “Sir,” the woman said, “you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12 Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his livestock?”

13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”

15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.”

16 He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.”

17 “I have no husband,” she replied.

Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband. 18 The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.”

19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he” John 4:10-26.

Jesus reveals Himself as the Messiah to her!  He did not condemn her because she was a Samaritan or because of the sinful life that she was living.  He gracefully offered Himself to her and she not only believed, but went and told other Samaritans about Him.  They came to see Jesus as well and they too believed (John 4:39-42).  He offered forgiveness to all of them despite Him being a Jew and God Himself!  Is this grace?  I believe so.

But, again, I must ask what is grace?  Who deserves grace?

I think of the woman who wiped Jesus’ feet with her tears and hair, and then anointed Him with sweet perfume in Luke 7:36-38.  The woman was a sinner, and the Pharisee who had invited Jesus to dine with him was appalled that Christ didn’t seem to know who this sinful woman was that was touching Him.  “If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is—that she is a sinner” Luke 7:39. Religious teachers of the Law did not associate with “sinners” like this particular woman who may have been a prostitute.  And yet, we see that Jesus didn’t shrink away or become angry with her for wiping His feet with her hair.  How does He respond knowing exactly who she was, and knowing the Pharisee’s thoughts about what was happening?  Let’s look:  “Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to tell you.”

“Tell me, teacher,” he said.

41 “Two people owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. 42 Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he forgave the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?”

43 Simon replied, “I suppose the one who had the bigger debt forgiven.”

“You have judged correctly,” Jesus said.

44 Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45 You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. 46 You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. 47 Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little.”

48 Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.”

49 The other guests began to say among themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?”

50 Jesus said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” Luke 7:40-50.

Allow me to point out that people’s feet during New Testament times were quite dirty from walking barefoot with sandals on dirt roads.  So the fact that this woman was washing Jesus’ feet with her hair and tears shows that she more than likely knew that Jesus was more than just a “teacher.”  But, Jesus, being God, knew exactly who this woman was and what she had done.  Again, instead of condemning her as the Pharisee did, He FORGAVE her and rebuked the Pharisee for his lack of hospitality.  He also used this moment to try and teach the Pharisee about forgiveness instead of punishing either the Pharisee or woman.  Grace!

I think of the 3-year-old who doesn’t pick up when Mommy says to.  Mommy asks, “Are you going to obey or do you want a spank?”  For whatever reason, the child does not obey even though the child knows what’s about to happen.  Mommy says, “Ok, let’s go to your room.”  The child begins to cry and plead, “Please don’t spank me, Mommy!”  The child’s heart is racing as he cries, struggles to get away.  Mommy calmly holds him and says, “You didn’t obey me when I asked you to pick up your toys.  Jesus wants me to discipline you.”  Then she calmly slaps the child’s bare bottom a few times as the child cries out in pain.  Then she holds him and tells him how much she and Jesus love him, but that he must obey Mommy.  As the child tries to calm down, his bottom still stinging, he mutters, “I’m sorry.”  Though the child doesn’t truly feel sorry. He has learned that this makes Mommy happy.  As they pray and hug again, he’s relieved it’s over even though deep down pain is gnawing at him.  He happily runs out and plays—until the next time he misbehaves or doesn’t obey…

Grace?

I think of a 2-year-old in a similar situation. Mommy says, ”It’s time to pick your toys.  Please put them in the bucket.” “No!”says the child.  Mommy says, “I know you were having fun playing with your toys, but it’s time to clean up.  Please help me.”  Mommy puts a toy in the bucket as the child watches with somewhat of a defiant look on his face.  Mommy asks, “Are you going to pick up your toys or do you need me to help you?”  The child says, “No!” and starts to run off.  Mommy stops him and says, “I see you need help.”  She picks him up as he struggles and cries.  She holds him firmly and says, “I’m sorry this makes you angry.  I will hold you for a minute while you calm down, then we will pick up your toys.”  The child cries then begins to melt into Mommy’s body knowing that he’s safe and that she isn’t allowing him to spin out of control.  She gently puts a toy in his hand while slowly scooting to the bucket.  He looks at the toy and then at the bucket, still feeling Mommy’s gentle but firm hold on him as he sits in her lap.  He slowly drops the toy into the bucket and looks up at Mommy.  Mommy smiles and says, “Thank you!”  This continues until all his toys are picked up, only laughter becomes louder and louder as they take turns putting toys in the bucket!  Then the child proudly gets off Mommy’s lap, picks up the bucket and puts it on the shelf.  Then he runs back to Mommy where once again he’s embraced in her firm, loving arms.  She says, “Thank you for picking up your toys!  I love you sooo much and so does Jesus!”  Then she begins singing “Jesus Loves Me” with him as he snuggles deeper into her arms.

Grace?

32 Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. 33 When they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots” Luke 23:32-34.

“But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many” Romans 5:15.

“In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace” Ephesians 1:7.

“Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need” Hebrews 4:16.

We are free from sin and the death and pain that comes through sin because of God’s amazing grace.  Grace that we don’t deserve one bit.  Shouldn’t we pass that on to our children as they learn to obey us?

“I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Galatians 2:21.

Grace is for everyone!

“Amazing grace,
How sweet the sound,
That save a wretch like me,
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see!”




Creative Commons License
Spanking is NOT God’s Will by Steph is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at www.whynottrainachild.com.

Prodigal Son

Carissa Robinson reflects at how spanking is hitting no matter how it is done and then looks at what we can learn about God in the story of  The Prodigal Son.

Is Punishment Biblical?

Rach at The Incorrigible Gingers discusses the question, “Is Punishment Biblical?“  Notice that she is not just referring to corporal punishment here but all punishment.   Now, that is a really radical thought.

Spanking is NOT God’s Will Part 7

( part 1 ) ( part 2 ) ( part 3 ) ( part 4 ) ( part 5 ) ( Part 6 )

The Rod

What about the “rod” in the 5 verses in Proverbs that pro-spankers take literally to mean spanking young children?  In Crystal Lutton’s book, Biblical Parenting, she includes an in-depth study of the rod as it is used throughout the Old Testament.  Interestingly, as I will show in a bit, there are only two verses in the Old Testament in which the rod is used to hit someone!  For now, let’s look at the Hebrew word for rod.

The Hebrew word for rod is shebet.   Shebet is defined in Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon #7626 as “rod, staff, branch, offshoot, club, scepter, tribe:

a) Rod, staff

b) Shaft (of spear, dart)

c) Club (of shepherd’s implement)

d) Truncheon, scepter (mark of authority)

e) Clan, tribe”

(Lutton, 2001).

Here is Strong’s definition of rod: “From an unused root probably meaning to branch off; a scion, for example literally a stick (for punishing, writing, fighting, walking, ruling, etc.) or figuratively a clan.”  In the KJV of the Bible, rod is used for tribe 140 times; rod 34 times; scepter 10 times; staff 2 times; and miscellaneous 4 times (Lutton, 2001).   It is quite interesting that shebet or rod is used to symbolize tribes.  Also, while it is considered a tool (see Leviticus 27:32, Psalm 23:4, Psalm 2:9, Isaiah 28:27, and Exodus 21:20) in all 34 places in which the word “rod” is used, it is in conjunction with the full council of God.  It is clear that if we look at all the places in which shebet is used for rod in the Old Testament, it is used as a symbol of authority the majority of the time.  It symbolizes the authority of God, nations, and parents as in Proverbs.

In Exodus 20:21 a rod is used to hit someone.  Let’s take a look at the verse.

“Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result” (NIV).

Obviously, the rod is being used to hit an adult, not a young child.  And if the slave dies from being hit with the rod which is a heavy instrument, then the person who hit them is to be punished.  Obviously, people had slaves back then and God did not want masters beating their slaves to death.  The rod can easily cause death in a young child.  Even if you measure a stick in proportion to the child as some pro-spankers suggest doing, with the right force, it could still kill a child.  An adult hitting a young child with their hands could also, with the right force and with repetition, severely injure or kill a young child.  As many pro-spankers and Psychology point out, a child who is spanked regularly often must be hit harder and harder in order for the spanking to still be effective.  This can easily become physical abuse and outright dangerous if the adult hits hard enough to cause injury to the child.

In 2 Samuel 7:14, it appears that the rod is again being used to actually hit someone.

“I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands” (NIV).

Again, this is talking about an adult, not a child.   And it isn’t even talking about punishment in this sense.  God is talking to David about who will build His Holy Temple.  This verse, in the context of 2 Samuel 7:1-17, seems to be talking about Jesus!  Even though Jesus did no wrong in the eyes of God, He did do wrong in the eyes of men by not upholding the Law of Moses through claiming to be God.  Therefore, He was still beaten by the hands of men!  It is obvious that the rod in this verse is also being used to symbolize the authority of God.

Authority can be used to “beat” people with wisdom of God.  In order to drive home a point, God often makes it come up repeatedly in a person’s life through His Word, church teachings, the Holy Spirit convictions, and natural and logical consequences.  He never beats or spanks His people.  The rod verses in the book of Proverbs are not saying to spank children.  If it did then pro-spankers are doing it wrongly by not using a rod, which again, would be very dangerous to use on a small child!  As parents and caregivers, God has given us some authority over children in order to teach and guide them with firmness as well as love, gentleness, kindness, and humility.

“What do you prefer? Shall I come to you with a rod of discipline, or shall I come in love and with a gentle spirit?” 1 Corinthians 4:21. It seems even the Apostle Paul understood that it’s better to come in love and gentleness than with harshness.

Children as Representatives of Jesus Christ

The book, The Child in Christian Thought edited by Marcia J. Bunge, gives us an even better glimpse into what life was like for children during New Testament times, and how Jesus’ teachings affected them.  While not much information is available on childhood in Christian traditions is available to us, we can gain much insight by looking deeply at the different perspectives offered by historical and contemporary Christian theologians.  One major concept that seems to play a major role in the view and treatment of children throughout Christianity is original sin.  Interestingly, original sin can either lead to the harsh treatment of children, or to a gentler treatment.  Bunge (2001) states, “More specifically, it shows that notions of original sin and ‘breaking the will’ are complex and do not automatically lead to the harsh punishment of children, and that the idea of original sin, set within a particular larger theological framework, has in some cases fostered the more humane treatment of children” (p. 9).  It is clear from the Scriptures that we are born with a tendency toward sin, but there is not a precise age at which we become accountable to that sin.  “For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out” Romans 7:14. As we shall soon see, while children are indeed born with a sinful nature, they are also given immense spiritual knowledge of God by God for His Glory!

While some theologians have viewed children as gifts from God, others have viewed children as ignorant and in need of strict discipline and religious education. Many Christians have really emphasized the fact that children are to obey their parents in the Lord (Ephesians 6:1 and Colossians 3:20), but seem to ignore Ephesians 6:4 and Colossians 3:21 which states, “Fathers, do not embitter your children, or they will become discouraged.” As I mentioned before, “Fathers” can also be translated into “Parents.”  “It is important to note that grounds for this obedience vary, and in most cases obedience is not absolute” (Bunge, 2001, p. 23).  It is dangerous and inappropriate for children to be taught absolute obedience to humans as humans are sinful.  The child could be going against God by always obeying a human.  Children should be taught to think for themselves in order to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God” 1 John 4:1a. Bunge (2001) states, “For example, although Barth believes that parents are ‘God’s natural and primary representatives’ for children, he claims that raising children ‘in the discipline of the Lord’ excludes provoking them to the anger, resistance and rebellion that emerges through the ‘assertion of Law, or the execution of judgment.’  Instead, parents are ‘joyfully’ to invite children to ‘rejoice’ with them in God” (p. 23).  Of all the social institutions with which children come in contact, the family has the highest potential for teaching children about God (Bunge, 2001).

So, how were children viewed and treated in the New Testament?  There were two primary social groups that held somewhat conflicting beliefs about children and childhood.  The first group was first century Greco-Romans.  While the Romans loved and valued their children as heirs of the family and keeping the family’s economical status, they also viewed children as non-humans.  “The Roman philosopher Cicero wrote concerning childhood, ‘the thing itself cannot be praised, only its potential,’ and categorically denied the desirability of reverting in any sense to the state of childhood” (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 32).  The Roman law gave fathers full authority and power over their children.  Fathers decided whether a newborn lived or was left to die unless another person found the infant and decided to care for him/her (Gundry-Volf, 2001).  Because children were viewed so negatively by the Romans, they were sometimes beaten to death; imprisoned; put in chains; or forced to work in the fields by their fathers.  It appears that the Roman society was a violent one with a great deal of power.

The other primary social group in the New Testament period was the Jews.  For the most part, Jewish children were viewed positively by their parents.  They were seen as blessings from God.  To be childless was to be cursed in the Jewish religion.  “You will be blessed more than any other people; none of your men or women will be childless, nor will any of your livestock be without young” Deuteronomy 7:14. However, children were also seen as ignorant and in need of strict religious education.  Gundry-Volf (2001) explains that they had “a view of children falling short of the ideal represented by the adult male law-observant Israelite.  The fundamentally positive significance of children, however, is not thereby negated” (p. 35).  The Jewish people rejected the harsh practices of the Romans who were their contemporaries.  Jewish fathers had complete power and authority over their children as well, but the “Jews distinguished themselves from many of their contemporaries by rejecting brutal practices toward children, including abortion and exposure of newborns, which can be traced to less positive views of children, and by placing limits on the Jewish father’s power over his children” (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 35-36).

Jesus changed everything for children.  In Matthew 18:1-4, Jesus held children up as models for adults.  Matthew 18:1-4 states, “At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”

2 He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. 3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”

This was quite radical as children were never held up in such high esteem in the various cultures of the New Testament.  “Now children shared the social status of the poor, the hungry, and the suffering, whom Jesus calls ‘blessed.’  For this reason, apparently, he insists on receiving children into the reign of God.  John Dominic Crossan may be overstating his case when he asserts that Jesus taught a ‘kingdom of children’ in the sense of a ‘kingdom of nobodies,’ for ‘to be a child was to be a nobody’ (italics added)- an overstatement because children were emphatically not ‘nobodies’ in the Old Testament-Jewish tradition.  Nevertheless, it is still probably correct to say that children’s vulnerability and powerlessness seem to lie at the heart of Jesus’ extension of the reign of God to them” (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 38).  Another interesting thing regarding Jesus holding small children up as models is that children were not required to obey the Law of Moses, and, of course, they did not fulfill it.  As usual, Jesus has taken what the Jews believed was required for entering the Kingdom of Heaven (obedience of the Law), and has completely turned it upside down.  “Jesus can be taken to challenge the perception that adults who are under obligation to the Law, and do fulfill it, are thereby qualified to enter the reign of God.  Egger thus concludes that the phrase ‘as a child’ means ‘as one who has neither obedience nor obligation to the Law’” (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 39).   It is clear that God wants adults to have humility, love, forgiveness, and openness like children do.  We are to treat children, as well as others who are low on the social ladder, with kindness, love, and respect in keeping with God’s equal love for all.  To mistreat children by spanking and harshly punishing them is to go against God’s precepts.

“For God does not show favoritism” Romans 2:11.

“If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. 9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it” James 2:8-10.

Caring for children was, and sadly still is, considered a low status job that was primarily for women during the New Testament time period.  However, in Mark 9:36-37, it says, “He took a little child whom he placed among them. Taking the child in his arms, he said to them, 37 “Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me.” Being kind to children in Jesus’ Name isn’t what Jesus is implying here.  We are to serve children.  “’Receive’ or ‘welcome’ (dechomai) in the New Testament is used especially for hospitality to guests, which implies serving them (see, e.g. Luke 10:8; 16:4).  Jesus’ taking the child into his arms demonstrates such service.  This action is more than a display of affection” (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 43).  So, how are we to serve our children in order to be great in the Kingdom of God?  By sacrificing for them; by patiently teaching them when it would be easier to punish them through spanking or an isolating time-out; by guiding with tender firmness as God does us, especially after redirecting a toddler for the twentieth time in an hour.  God implores that the humblest work is what makes us truly great in His eyes for both men and women.  We need to treat one another with patience and humility.  This includes children! “Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience” Colossians 3:12.

“Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction” 2 Timothy 4:2.

Children were, and still are, representatives of Jesus Christ even though they were never sent to speak and heal as the disciples were.  Rejecting a child could be related to rejecting Jesus.  Why?  Because, as I pointed out earlier, children were treated with much brutality in the New Testament period, especially by the Romans.  If we look at Mark 9:30-32, which states, ”They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were, 31 because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.” 32 But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.” It is clear that Jesus is speaking of His own suffering and death.  Jesus goes on in Mark 33-37 to teach about welcoming children in His Name in order to be great in the Kingdom of Heaven.  This is NOT mere coincidence!  God’s Word is placed where it is throughout the Bible for a specific purpose.   The child is weak and needy.  “The child thus represents Jesus as a humble, suffering figure (Author’s italics) (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 45).  This absolutely brings tears to my eyes.  Jesus can relate to the harsh punishment of humble, precious children because He went through it as a humble, suffering servant so that we wouldn’t have to.  “In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!” Philippians 2:5-8.

As Gundry-Volf (2001), so beautifully states, “To welcome a little child in Jesus’ name, I therefore propose, is to welcome Jesus himself in the sense that he humbled himself like a little child and endured the worst lot of the little child in carrying out his God-given mission” (p. 45).  I believe that it is safe to say that Mark, inspired by God, purposely links Jesus’ suffering with the child because of that society’s awareness of child brutality.  It is not surprising that Mark’s audience would clearly see this link.  When read closely and with open hearts, we too can begin to see this link.  This shows that spanking or otherwise harshly punishing children is frowned upon by Christ.  “And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward” Matthew 10:42. Whatever we do to each other, including children, we also do to God Himself!

Children have a miraculous knowledge of who Christ is.  This is funny considering that adults in the New Testament thought children were ignorant.  Let’s look at Matthew 21:14: “The blind and the lame came to him at the temple, and he healed them. 15 But when the chief priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he did and the children shouting in the temple courts, “Hosanna to the Son of David,” they were indignant. 16 “Do you hear what these children are saying?” they asked him.  “Yes,” replied Jesus, “have you never read, “‘From the lips of children and infants you, Lord, have called forth your praise’?” Instead of the chief priests and scribes, who were well educated in the religion, proclaiming Christ as the Son of God and Messiah, it was the supposedly “ignorant” children doing so.  We see this throughout the entire Bible.  In fact, Jesus even thanks His Heavenly Father for hiding Godly things from the wise and revealing them to children.  “At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do” Luke 10:21. “In the gospel tradition, children are not mere ignoramuses in terms of spiritual insight.  They know Jesus’ true identity.  They praise him as the Son of David.  They have this knowledge from God and not from themselves, and because they do, they are living manifestations that God is the source of all true knowledge about Christ.  Jesus’ affirmation of the children’s praise of him in this periscope is thus an affirmation that children who ‘know nothing’ can also ‘know divine secrets’ and believe in him” (Gundry-Volf, 2001, p. 47-48).  This why young children never question if God truly exists.  Young children know God is real.  Yes, they need to be taught about God through reading developmentally appropriate Bibles, but they are already, in a sense, believers.  It isn’t until, through exposure to the world and satan’s influence, that older children may begin to question God’s existence as they struggle with their sinful nature that has now become much more defined in them.  This is why spanking them in Jesus’ Name is so dangerous.  Instead of being sinful yet innocent for as long as possible, they are taught and made aware of their sinful natural before they have the power to choose Christ in order to be able to truly fight the constant battle.  Children are weak.  They may know Christ, but they are not strong enough to fight this battle.  Then we inflict pain on them for not winning the battle.  Over time, this creates even more sin within them, and a very distorted view of God, whether they acknowledge it or not.  If adults struggle with sin all the time, is it really fair to punish children for their struggle before they can truly understand it?  Look at what Paul says about his own struggle with sin:

“So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!” Romans 7:21-25.

We are to use God’s Word to lovingly admonish each other. “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God” Colossians 3:16.

“Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification” Romans 14:19.

Lastly, yes, children are to obey their parents in the Lord (Ephesians 6:1 & Colossians 3:20).  However, as with Ephesians 6:4 and Colossians 3:21 regarding parents not provoking their children to anger, we also leave out Ephesians 5:21 that prefaces the entire section of Christian household behaviors.   Ephesians 5:21 states, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” This is exactly what Christ was talking about in Mark 36-37.  Children are to submit to parents in the Lord.  But, parents are also to submit to and serve their children in the Lord by treating them with love, kindness, and respect!

May we be blessed for obeying God’s Truth in Christ!

( Continued )

Creative Commons License
Spanking is NOT God’s Will by Steph is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at www.whynottrainachild.com.

Brandy Explains How She Disciplines

Brandy of Brandy’s Brood tried the Pearls’ method and found it to have a very negative impact on  their toddler so they gave up spanking and moved towards more gentle discipline.  She tells her story in her post, Ask Brandy: Discipline.  While still using non-corporal punishments, they strive to be gentle and are still on their learning journey. <3

I do feel compelled to mention that she highly recommends Lisa Whelchel’s Creative Corrections.  I do not.  While I’m sure it contains some very good ideas, it also contains some bad ones, including putting a drop of hot sauce on a child’s tongue for lying.

For more information about Creative Corrections, please see psychological torture as ‘creative correction’

Spanking is Wrong

Molly  explains why spanking is wrong according to the Bible.

Who is God?

Molly asks, “Who is God?“  as she shares her testimony of how she learned to see God as a Gentle Parent, rather than a Vengeful Judge.