T
TheLittleLady
Guest
No, a parent is a parent. Parents who are like friends do their children a disservice.
- Status
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
It makes you sound like a loving son 
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
So it’s sometimes not only morally acceptable but even a moral imperative?
GospelOfMatthew
New member
Touching your child is always wrong. No spanking no beating. Always wrong always a sin always ineffective
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
The Church teaches the parents are authority figures, in fact God places them in authority over their children. Read the entire section, but, here are snips. Bold added:
[2223] Parents have the first responsibility for the education of their children. They bear witness to this responsibility first by creating a home where tenderness, forgiveness, respect, fidelity, and disinterested service are the rule. The home is well suited for education in the virtues . This requires an apprenticeship in self-denial, sound judgment, and self-mastery - the preconditions of all true freedom. Parents should teach their children to subordinate the "material and instinctual dimensions to interior and spiritual ones."31 Parents have a grave responsibility to give good example to their children. By knowing how to acknowledge their own failings to their children, parents will be better able to guide and correct them:
He who loves his son will not spare the rod. . . . He who disciplines his son will profit by him.32
Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.33
[2217] As long as a child lives at home with his parents, the child should obey his parents in all that they ask of him when it is for his good or that of the family. "Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord."22 Children should also obey the reasonable directions of their teachers and all to whom their parents have entrusted them. But if a child is convinced in conscience that it would be morally wrong to obey a particular order, he must not do so.
As they grow up, children should continue to respect their parents. They should anticipate their wishes, willingly seek their advice, and accept their just admonitions. Obedience toward parents ceases with the emancipation of the children; not so respect, which is always owed to them. This respect has its roots in the fear of God, one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
[2223] Parents have the first responsibility for the education of their children. They bear witness to this responsibility first by creating a home where tenderness, forgiveness, respect, fidelity, and disinterested service are the rule. The home is well suited for education in the virtues . This requires an apprenticeship in self-denial, sound judgment, and self-mastery - the preconditions of all true freedom. Parents should teach their children to subordinate the "material and instinctual dimensions to interior and spiritual ones."31 Parents have a grave responsibility to give good example to their children. By knowing how to acknowledge their own failings to their children, parents will be better able to guide and correct them:
He who loves his son will not spare the rod. . . . He who disciplines his son will profit by him.32
Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.33
[2217] As long as a child lives at home with his parents, the child should obey his parents in all that they ask of him when it is for his good or that of the family. "Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord."22 Children should also obey the reasonable directions of their teachers and all to whom their parents have entrusted them. But if a child is convinced in conscience that it would be morally wrong to obey a particular order, he must not do so.
As they grow up, children should continue to respect their parents. They should anticipate their wishes, willingly seek their advice, and accept their just admonitions. Obedience toward parents ceases with the emancipation of the children; not so respect, which is always owed to them. This respect has its roots in the fear of God, one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
E
edwest211
Guest
I was raised in the 1950s. Everybody got spanked, not beaten. It was normal. The promotion of anything other than that came later. My parents came to this country, the United States, from a foreign country. This was nothing strange or weird. Once we all got a bit older, most of us had learned our lessons. I was once called to see the principal (a nun), and got a few swats in the behind for misbehaving in class.
It was unthinkable to talk back to your parents. And parents taught us different things as we got older, meaning age-appropriate.
It was unthinkable to talk back to your parents. And parents taught us different things as we got older, meaning age-appropriate.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
It’s impossible to have these discussions with someone born in the last couple decades, since any discussion of physical discipline will cause them to conclude the person speaking was “regularly beaten”.
In the 20th century up to about 1980, there were indeed people who were regularly beaten, in an abusive sense, by their parents (and teachers), then there were people all along the sliding scale from that down to just an occasional slap or one or two spankings, and then some kids who were never physically disciplined at all. By the time I reached high school, I don’t think I knew any peers who had never, ever been physically disciplined in their life by anyone for anything. However, the vast majority of them had not suffered from physical abuse. I would actually say emotional abuse from parents was a much bigger problem than physical discipline.
The norm was pretty much what edwest said - kids would normally get spankings by a parent and occasional swats by a teacher (not limited to nuns and it also happened in public school at least until the 1960s). When kids hit teenage, occasionally they would get into some kind of a physical altercation with a parent. Many a short story, novel or film about “coming of age” involved these sorts of altercations as they were difficult emotionally for everybody involved.
In the 20th century up to about 1980, there were indeed people who were regularly beaten, in an abusive sense, by their parents (and teachers), then there were people all along the sliding scale from that down to just an occasional slap or one or two spankings, and then some kids who were never physically disciplined at all. By the time I reached high school, I don’t think I knew any peers who had never, ever been physically disciplined in their life by anyone for anything. However, the vast majority of them had not suffered from physical abuse. I would actually say emotional abuse from parents was a much bigger problem than physical discipline.
The norm was pretty much what edwest said - kids would normally get spankings by a parent and occasional swats by a teacher (not limited to nuns and it also happened in public school at least until the 1960s). When kids hit teenage, occasionally they would get into some kind of a physical altercation with a parent. Many a short story, novel or film about “coming of age” involved these sorts of altercations as they were difficult emotionally for everybody involved.
Last edited:
GospelOfMatthew
New member
‘Obey’ is too harsh of a term. Obedience really has no place in any type of relationship. It should be complying out of love not out of requirement or compulsion
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
Apparently you need to take that up with the Catholic Church.
P
PennyinCanada
Guest
I remember in grade school we had homework and the teacher would check who did it and if you did not finish it, you stood at the black board. You held out your hand and got a good smack with the yard stick for each question not answered.
If someone was disrespectful to the teacher, they were sent to the principal’s office and got the strap. It was broadcast over the PA system. Not sure what those details were, if it was on the hands or the bottom, but it reinforced the idea of consequences for unruly and disrespectful behaviour.
It was a different time.
If someone was disrespectful to the teacher, they were sent to the principal’s office and got the strap. It was broadcast over the PA system. Not sure what those details were, if it was on the hands or the bottom, but it reinforced the idea of consequences for unruly and disrespectful behaviour.
It was a different time.
W
Wesrock
Guest
It’s not an either/or between out-of-love and natural obligation.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
NO. Your parent is NOT like your friend. My mother must have said that to me 1000 times : “I’m not your friend, I’m not your buddy, I’m your mother, it’s different.”
It is a big mistake for parents to try to be their children’s friends. It is also the parents’ responsibility to punish a kid sometimes when punishment is deserved. The punishment does not need to be physical, but kids need discipline from parents in order to grow up right.
With respect to obey, kids do not learn to obey out of love right away and you still need to keep your toddler, or even your teen, from acting up in ways that could be very detrimental.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
Obedience is necessary. Without it, anarchy occurs. In the case of Church teaching, obedience is required, along with understanding. Children, even in stable homes, are not born emotionally or intellectually complete. They need guidance and yes, discipline. Following the rules was practical and good for you. Those who disagreed with those rules would sometimes tell you to reject them. And for what? To do anything you wanted? That’s not how civilized societies work. That’s not good citizenship.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Obedience to those in authority is a basic part of the Christian life. Christ was obedient to his earthly parents, an example to all of us.
E
edwest211
Guest
My father and mother weren’t perfect but they were good parents. They loved us.
N
niceatheist
Guest
I’d say hitting anyone who doesn’t have a reasonable ability to defend themselves, and furthermore who hasn’t actually threatened meaningful violence against you, is immoral.
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
I would agree with that standard for adults, excepting that they don’t need to specifically threaten me with violence.
I disagree for children.
GospelOfMatthew
New member
Obedience is still not the right term. It implies degradation and servitude. It implies inequality. Parents are buddies, but buddies with wisdom. If your parent isn’t your buddy, that is sad 
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
No one is advocating hitting children. Spanking is one form of discipline, it is not hitting.
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
Parents and minor children are not equals.
Parents are buddies to their older children. Not to their three-year-olds.Parents are buddies, but buddies with wisdom. If your parent isn’t your buddy, that is sad
- Status