P
pnewton
Guest
The second definition is the one I was using. I did not comment on how a child is born but on how they can behave. I will not be swayed on this. I have my own data.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
severus68
Guest
Never said you did. You responded to someone’s response to the one who used it. Have you forgotten?pnewton;11889517 [QUOTE said:]I used neither term. Why did you use quotations for your own words?
So you take the Bible literally. Do you think thieves should have their hands cut off?Yes, I take that part of the proverb literally. I do not think the foolishness mentioned can be a symbol. Exactly what do you think it could symbolize if not itself?
"
Sorry, have no idea what you mean.Naughty" is also a good word.
P
pnewton
Guest
You said
So now we take everything in the Bible literally?
My response was:
Yes, I take that part of the proverb literally. I do not think the foolishness mentioned can be a symbol. Exactly what do you think it could symbolize if not itself?
If you think “foolishness” is symbolic, what is it symbolic of?
I can think of no way to take this part of the proverb as symbolic. We can not dismiss Scripture that we do not agree with by calling it symbolic. If there is true symbolism, then why do you not answer the question? I find the idea that a proverb is symbolic to be ridiculous and contrary to the nature and context of a proverb.
So now we take everything in the Bible literally?
My response was:
Yes, I take that part of the proverb literally. I do not think the foolishness mentioned can be a symbol. Exactly what do you think it could symbolize if not itself?
No. The question is irrelevant.So you take the Bible literally. Do you think thieves should have their hands cut off?
If you think “foolishness” is symbolic, what is it symbolic of?
I can think of no way to take this part of the proverb as symbolic. We can not dismiss Scripture that we do not agree with by calling it symbolic. If there is true symbolism, then why do you not answer the question? I find the idea that a proverb is symbolic to be ridiculous and contrary to the nature and context of a proverb.
S
severus68
Guest
Who called what symbolic? You can find anything you want ridiculous. I find many things symbolic.You said
So now we take everything in the Bible literally?
My response was:
Yes, I take that part of the proverb literally. I do not think the foolishness mentioned can be a symbol. Exactly what do you think it could symbolize if not itself?
No. The question is irrelevant.
If you think “foolishness” is symbolic, what is it symbolic of?
I can think of no way to take this part of the proverb as symbolic. We can not dismiss Scripture that we do not agree with by calling it symbolic. If there is true symbolism, then why do you not answer the question? I find the idea that a proverb is symbolic to be ridiculous and contrary to the nature and context of a proverb.
I let the Church interpret the Bible for me. Tell me where in the Catechism does it say, its ok to spank a 13 year old or the way to bring up children is to beat them. Where did Christ say violence is the best policy for children?
P
pnewton
Guest
Then it is literal. This is not rocket science. I for one have no problem understanding this Scripture. As much as the Catechism is a Catholic Document, Sacred Scripture is more so. Catholics do not need to be shy about the Bible. It is, according to St. Paul, profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. Yes, this was the Old Testament Paul was speaking of.Who called what symbolic? You can find anything you want ridiculous. I find many things symbolic
Yes, then you should be careful, but I would note that the Catechism does not comment on this topic, thus it does not say that it is sinful. Therefore, if it is not sinful, then it is not sin. If the Catholic Church does not tell parents when to spank, why do people here think they know enough to tell others this?I let the Church interpret the Bible for me.
Tell me where in the Catechism does it say, its ok to spank a 13 year old
Neither of these are the topic here, unless you are just substituting words as a means of argument. In this case, it is the classic illogic of begging the question.or the way to bring up children is to beat them. Where did Christ say violence is the best policy for children?
S
severus68
Guest
Sorry, I meant to write “I find many things ridiculous.”Then it is literal. This is not rocket science. I for one have no problem understanding this Scripture. As much as the Catechism is a Catholic Document, Sacred Scripture is more so. Catholics do not need to be shy about the Bible. It is, according to St. Paul, profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. Yes, this was the Old Testament Paul was speaking of.
Yes, then you should be careful, but I would note that the Catechism does not comment on this topic, thus it does not say that it is sinful. Therefore, if it is not sinful, then it is not sin. If the Catholic Church does not tell parents when to spank, why do people here think they know enough to tell others this?
Neither of these are the topic here, unless you are just substituting words as a means of argument. In this case, it is the classic illogic of begging the question.
The Catechism incorporates Sacred Scripture.
I will tell off anyone who thinks its alright to abuse their children. We can say its wrong to kill babies in the womb but once they are born, all bets are off?
It is abusive to spank a child of 13. It should never be done by a father on his daughter and by either parent on a child of that age. It humiliates and only teaches that violence is okay. A parent who does more than tap a young child on the bottom or on the hands to deter,or hits an older child, has lost control of himself.
P
pnewton
Guest
The topic is spanking, not abuse. Changing terms is begging the question. Let us use at least a modicum of logic.I will tell off anyone who thinks its alright to abuse their children. We can say its wrong to kill babies in the womb but once they are born, all bets are off?
It is abusive to spank a child of 13.
Well, you are free to “tell off” who you want on the internet where it is safe to. However, it is not a Catholic opinion, in the sense of being Catholic teaching. It surely is an acceptable opinion to believe in spanking or not believe in spanking.
As Catholics, we should be more than willing to speak where the Church speaks. The Church does not however speak on spanking. Good Catholic parents should seek their own advise, the teaching of the Church and advice from those who are wise.
Strangers and busybodies are best ignored and their rudeness dismissed. There are always those walking around with beams in their eyes that want to pick out the specks from others. In this case, since there is not teaching from the Church, even the speck is in the eye of the one who interjects unformed opinions.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
S
severus68
Guest
Lol. Take some of your own advice. I note you are being rude from the safety of an anonymous internet forum. You have chosen to make personal remarks. Enjoy yourself.The topic is spanking, not abuse. Changing terms is begging the question. Let us use at least a modicum of logic.
Well, you are free to “tell off” who you want on the internet where it is safe to. However, it is not a Catholic opinion, in the sense of being Catholic teaching. It surely is an acceptable opinion to believe in spanking or not believe in spanking.
As Catholics, we should be more than willing to speak where the Church speaks. The Church does not however speak on spanking. Good Catholic parents should seek their own advise, the teaching of the Church and advice from those who are wise.
Strangers and busybodies are best ignored and their rudeness dismissed. There are always those walking around with beams in their eyes that want to pick out the specks from others. In this case, since there is not teaching from the Church, even the speck is in the eye of the one who interjects unformed opinions.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
L
LightBound
Guest
As others have posted, it really does no good to spank or hit a child as a form of discipline or punishment after age 6 or 7 and it is definitely not appropriate for the male parent to be spanking an almost 13 year-old daughter.Is spanking a soon to be 13 year old sin?
P
pnewton
Guest
I point out logical fallacies. That is hardly personal. I have not referred to you personally in a negative statement or engaged in any ad hominem attacks. It is not I that think my own opinion on child discipline should be visited on any other parent. There is a report function for anything you truly deem out of line.Lol. Take some of your own advice. I note you are being rude from the safety of an anonymous internet forum. You have chosen to make personal remarks. Enjoy yourself.
I will ask once again, since you said, “I will tell off anyone who thinks its alright to abuse their child”, can you show one place where the Catholic Church condemns spanking as sin? You know, the topic?
P
Portrait
Guest
Dearly beloved friends,
Cordial greetings and a very good day.
In its commentary upon the Fourth Commandment our current Catechism references Sirach 30: 1-2: “He who loves his son will whip him often, in order that he may rejoice at the way he turns out. He who disciplines his son will profit by him, and will boast of him among acquaintances” (CCC, para. 2223), which appears to sanction the continued use of physical chastisement. Neither the New Testament or Church teaching on the rearing of children specifically prescribe or prohibit the use of corporal punishment, but passively acknowledge it as perfectly legitimate option to enforce discipline.
The intense dislike of the physical chastisement of children is a result of the liberal propaganda of the so called child development ‘experts’. By the clever use of emotive sound bites and misguided ideology, they have wrongly asserted that even smacking is tantamount to uncontrolled ‘beating’ or a form of child abuse that breeds violence. Apart from being utter balderdash, this is surely an affront to the intelligence of the overwhelming majority of good decent parents who are fully able to tell the difference between smacking and violent beating. Alas, dear friends, recent decades have succeeded in demonising any parent who dares to stand by the tried and trusted methods of child discipline, including corporal punishment when it is called for. Multitudes have been duped by the liberal establishment into equating even the moderate use of corporal punishment of children with child abuse, a monumental example of wrongheaded thinking if ever there was.
Owing to the constant barrage of secular and liberal propaganda since the Sixties, with its repudiation of the Fall and Original Sin, men no longer believe that children are born with a wounded nature that is inclined to evil. This standing Church teaching is now regarded as belonging to exploded religious myths and superstition. Nevertheless, Sacred Scripture, which is venerated by Holy Mother Church, declares that “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him” (Prov. 22: 15). In other words there is a bias towards wrongdoing and obstinate dispositions cleave closely to their souls and are firmly ‘bound up’ in their hearts. Our own experience and observation tells us that this is so. Sometimes, therefore, physical correction will be required and according to the Divine author ought not to be withheld. Moreover, dear friends, if we truly love our precious children we will keep them under strict discipline so as to restrain them from wrongdoing. We will not hesitate to use corporal punishment when it is warranted and when less severe methods simply will not serve. To always refrain from physical chastisement is to abandon our children to their sinful and destructive ways, confirming them in bad habits and fortifying their self-will. This laxity in child discipline is not ‘loving our child to pieces’ but actually hating them by a shameful dereliction of parental duty: “He that spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes” (Prov. 13: 24 cf. Sirach 30: 1-2, referenced in the current Catholic catechism, para. 2223).
Let us be honest, dear friends, Western society has become increasingly suspicious of the whole concept of punishment for wrongdoing. Our judicial and penal systems tend to want to deal with criminals merely in terms of reforming and deterring them, rather than in terms of retribution. Herein lies the dangerous imbalance of a liberal society and I am afraid that this warped thinking has negatively influenced the discipline and training of children. Our godless age has completely lost sight of the whole idea of punishment, which has come to be viewed as something always associated with revenge. Thus it is hardly surprising that innumerable modern psychologists and so called tabloid ‘agony aunts’ have spared no effort decrying the whole notion of punishment as mistaken and unhelpful. It would admit of no doubt that many modern Catholics have been swayed by this liberal drivel and have allowed it to inform their own views on child rearing and discipline. Thus, it is now tacitly assumed that that even moderate physical chastisement of children is synonymous with child abuse and that those parents who resort to it have loss control of themselves. However, if this were true, then we surely must conclude that the Sacred writer of Proverbs and Sirach was gravely mistaken and encouraged the abuse of children down through the ages. Indeed, even the current Church catechism should not be referencing Sirach 30: 1-2, since that passage passively, at least, acknowledges the corporal punishment of children as a disciplinary option for parents. Why did we have to wait for so long to hear from modern child development ‘experts’ on how to raise and discipline children? What damage have their zany and misguided theories caused to our children?
God bless.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait
In Christos
Cordial greetings and a very good day.
In its commentary upon the Fourth Commandment our current Catechism references Sirach 30: 1-2: “He who loves his son will whip him often, in order that he may rejoice at the way he turns out. He who disciplines his son will profit by him, and will boast of him among acquaintances” (CCC, para. 2223), which appears to sanction the continued use of physical chastisement. Neither the New Testament or Church teaching on the rearing of children specifically prescribe or prohibit the use of corporal punishment, but passively acknowledge it as perfectly legitimate option to enforce discipline.
The intense dislike of the physical chastisement of children is a result of the liberal propaganda of the so called child development ‘experts’. By the clever use of emotive sound bites and misguided ideology, they have wrongly asserted that even smacking is tantamount to uncontrolled ‘beating’ or a form of child abuse that breeds violence. Apart from being utter balderdash, this is surely an affront to the intelligence of the overwhelming majority of good decent parents who are fully able to tell the difference between smacking and violent beating. Alas, dear friends, recent decades have succeeded in demonising any parent who dares to stand by the tried and trusted methods of child discipline, including corporal punishment when it is called for. Multitudes have been duped by the liberal establishment into equating even the moderate use of corporal punishment of children with child abuse, a monumental example of wrongheaded thinking if ever there was.
Owing to the constant barrage of secular and liberal propaganda since the Sixties, with its repudiation of the Fall and Original Sin, men no longer believe that children are born with a wounded nature that is inclined to evil. This standing Church teaching is now regarded as belonging to exploded religious myths and superstition. Nevertheless, Sacred Scripture, which is venerated by Holy Mother Church, declares that “Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him” (Prov. 22: 15). In other words there is a bias towards wrongdoing and obstinate dispositions cleave closely to their souls and are firmly ‘bound up’ in their hearts. Our own experience and observation tells us that this is so. Sometimes, therefore, physical correction will be required and according to the Divine author ought not to be withheld. Moreover, dear friends, if we truly love our precious children we will keep them under strict discipline so as to restrain them from wrongdoing. We will not hesitate to use corporal punishment when it is warranted and when less severe methods simply will not serve. To always refrain from physical chastisement is to abandon our children to their sinful and destructive ways, confirming them in bad habits and fortifying their self-will. This laxity in child discipline is not ‘loving our child to pieces’ but actually hating them by a shameful dereliction of parental duty: “He that spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes” (Prov. 13: 24 cf. Sirach 30: 1-2, referenced in the current Catholic catechism, para. 2223).
Let us be honest, dear friends, Western society has become increasingly suspicious of the whole concept of punishment for wrongdoing. Our judicial and penal systems tend to want to deal with criminals merely in terms of reforming and deterring them, rather than in terms of retribution. Herein lies the dangerous imbalance of a liberal society and I am afraid that this warped thinking has negatively influenced the discipline and training of children. Our godless age has completely lost sight of the whole idea of punishment, which has come to be viewed as something always associated with revenge. Thus it is hardly surprising that innumerable modern psychologists and so called tabloid ‘agony aunts’ have spared no effort decrying the whole notion of punishment as mistaken and unhelpful. It would admit of no doubt that many modern Catholics have been swayed by this liberal drivel and have allowed it to inform their own views on child rearing and discipline. Thus, it is now tacitly assumed that that even moderate physical chastisement of children is synonymous with child abuse and that those parents who resort to it have loss control of themselves. However, if this were true, then we surely must conclude that the Sacred writer of Proverbs and Sirach was gravely mistaken and encouraged the abuse of children down through the ages. Indeed, even the current Church catechism should not be referencing Sirach 30: 1-2, since that passage passively, at least, acknowledges the corporal punishment of children as a disciplinary option for parents. Why did we have to wait for so long to hear from modern child development ‘experts’ on how to raise and discipline children? What damage have their zany and misguided theories caused to our children?
God bless.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait
In Christos
P
Portrait
Guest
Dearly beloved friends,
Hello again.
The physical chastisement of children gains more than merely short term, immediate compliance, but is and always has been an effective form of behavioural modification - within the context of a loving family over the long-term. Those who vociferously argue to the contrary are those who have their own liberal agenda for wanting to say good riddance to the corporal punishment of children. These include the child-development professionals to whom multitudes of modern parents look to for ‘parenting advice’ because of the erosion of Christian faith in the Western world. These so called ‘experts’ on child discipline have placed a high premium on child welfare within the context of education and physical safety, yet have woefully failed to protect the most vulnerable children. Moreover, they have been conspicuously silent on the issues of divorce, the corrosive influence of ‘single parenting’ and homosexual ‘alternative families’, all of which have demonstrably adverse consequences upon children which far surpass any of the supposed deleterious effects of physical chastisement.
Our godless Western society, dear friends, is blighted by unruly and insolent children and youths and it is largely the fault of the parents. In recent decades children and youth have been dreadfully spoilt by excessive parental indulgence and have been allowed far too much say as to what they can or cannot do. In some ‘progressive’ style households they are treated as quasi-adults and as friends, which gives them a jolly unhealthy sense of being invincible. This has been a monumental mistake of the first order and has resulted in unprecedented youth insubordination and disaffection. The child experts have said that parents must ‘prove’ that their demands are reasonable and correct, but this has only undermined parental authority and gives the impression that actions and decisions must always be justified - even to immature rebellious children who simply want their own way. According to Catholic teaching families are not little democracies where everything must be put to the vote and where parents are put into the absurd position having to make out a compelling case before they are obeyed.
The urgent need of the hour, dear friends, is a return to the good old fashioned view of child education and discipline that produced multitudes of good men and women. What have these child development ‘experts’ given to us that is truly worthy and noble? They may well speak disparagingly of outmoded ideas and of new ‘studies’ which purport to prove this or that, but they have failed to arrest the worrying trend in youth anti-social behaviour. What we want is proper discipline of the young, including corporal punishment within the home and at school when it is called for. Children must early learn the habit of obedience; how to give orders and certainly how to take them. Alas, we witnessing rank insubordination by all classes of society, especially the young who think it jolly smart to challenge the wisdom of their parents and tutors. This revolt against authority does not bode well for the future and will, at length, reap a bitter harvest - indeed, it is already doing so on both sides of the Atlantic. We must awaken to our folly before it is too late and this includes a return to the proper discipline and training of children and youth. The radicals have been the occasion of an immense amount of moral damage and there is much ground to recover and a lowered public opinion that needs to be raised.
Finally, dear friends, Catholic parents must set a worthy example to their offspring and be true to honour, duty, moderation and decency. They must ignore the misguided child experts and turn to Holy Mother Church and Sacred Scripture for parenting guidance and wise counsel that has stood the test of time. If we look around us today what do we see? Violence, confusion, vulgarity, defiant chilldren and ever increasing moral and cultural deterioration. Is not time that we came to our senses and returned to the “old paths, where is the good way” (Jer. 6: 16), the godly paths in which our Catholic forefathers walked?
God bless and may I take this opportunity to wish all those perusing this thread a very blessed and peaceful Easter. Goodbye, dear friends, and thankyou for taking time to read this post.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait:tiphat:
In Christos
Hello again.
The physical chastisement of children gains more than merely short term, immediate compliance, but is and always has been an effective form of behavioural modification - within the context of a loving family over the long-term. Those who vociferously argue to the contrary are those who have their own liberal agenda for wanting to say good riddance to the corporal punishment of children. These include the child-development professionals to whom multitudes of modern parents look to for ‘parenting advice’ because of the erosion of Christian faith in the Western world. These so called ‘experts’ on child discipline have placed a high premium on child welfare within the context of education and physical safety, yet have woefully failed to protect the most vulnerable children. Moreover, they have been conspicuously silent on the issues of divorce, the corrosive influence of ‘single parenting’ and homosexual ‘alternative families’, all of which have demonstrably adverse consequences upon children which far surpass any of the supposed deleterious effects of physical chastisement.
Our godless Western society, dear friends, is blighted by unruly and insolent children and youths and it is largely the fault of the parents. In recent decades children and youth have been dreadfully spoilt by excessive parental indulgence and have been allowed far too much say as to what they can or cannot do. In some ‘progressive’ style households they are treated as quasi-adults and as friends, which gives them a jolly unhealthy sense of being invincible. This has been a monumental mistake of the first order and has resulted in unprecedented youth insubordination and disaffection. The child experts have said that parents must ‘prove’ that their demands are reasonable and correct, but this has only undermined parental authority and gives the impression that actions and decisions must always be justified - even to immature rebellious children who simply want their own way. According to Catholic teaching families are not little democracies where everything must be put to the vote and where parents are put into the absurd position having to make out a compelling case before they are obeyed.
The urgent need of the hour, dear friends, is a return to the good old fashioned view of child education and discipline that produced multitudes of good men and women. What have these child development ‘experts’ given to us that is truly worthy and noble? They may well speak disparagingly of outmoded ideas and of new ‘studies’ which purport to prove this or that, but they have failed to arrest the worrying trend in youth anti-social behaviour. What we want is proper discipline of the young, including corporal punishment within the home and at school when it is called for. Children must early learn the habit of obedience; how to give orders and certainly how to take them. Alas, we witnessing rank insubordination by all classes of society, especially the young who think it jolly smart to challenge the wisdom of their parents and tutors. This revolt against authority does not bode well for the future and will, at length, reap a bitter harvest - indeed, it is already doing so on both sides of the Atlantic. We must awaken to our folly before it is too late and this includes a return to the proper discipline and training of children and youth. The radicals have been the occasion of an immense amount of moral damage and there is much ground to recover and a lowered public opinion that needs to be raised.
Finally, dear friends, Catholic parents must set a worthy example to their offspring and be true to honour, duty, moderation and decency. They must ignore the misguided child experts and turn to Holy Mother Church and Sacred Scripture for parenting guidance and wise counsel that has stood the test of time. If we look around us today what do we see? Violence, confusion, vulgarity, defiant chilldren and ever increasing moral and cultural deterioration. Is not time that we came to our senses and returned to the “old paths, where is the good way” (Jer. 6: 16), the godly paths in which our Catholic forefathers walked?
God bless and may I take this opportunity to wish all those perusing this thread a very blessed and peaceful Easter. Goodbye, dear friends, and thankyou for taking time to read this post.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait:tiphat:
In Christos
W
Walking_Home
Guest
One thing “Portrait”. The negative way you portray children – does not exactly – give good/warm feelings about having children – and may end up --driving some away from marriage and parenthood.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
The original post didn’t say whether the 13 year old was a boy or girl, but I can remember at 13, my first year at high school that most of my friends had begun ‘womanhood’ and were developed to varying degrees. We did have a one teacher, Sr Nasty, who made a habit of wacking girls over the back with a wooden ruler when they got answers wrong, but I can’t imagine parents wacking us as punishment at that age. I think it would be an especially bad example for a father to spank his 13 year old daughter.
Spanking is something I felt comfortable using (only the palm of my hand) when my kids were young but I cring horribly when I see anyone wack their older kids especially with a dedicated implement like a belt or electric jug cord. It’s just a gut feeling that I trust in.
Spanking is something I felt comfortable using (only the palm of my hand) when my kids were young but I cring horribly when I see anyone wack their older kids especially with a dedicated implement like a belt or electric jug cord. It’s just a gut feeling that I trust in.
P
pnewton
Guest
Yet it is realistic, at least the part about discipline. I would say that disciplining children is the hardest part of parenting. Most parents would rather take ten-fold the punishment rather than dish it out on one they love, regardless of the method of discipline. Despite this, it is rare to find a Christian parent that does not speak of the joy of parenthood. It is the hardest thing, but also the most joyous thing.One thing “Portrait”. The negative way you portray children – does not exactly – give good/warm feelings about having children – and may end up --driving some away from marriage and parenthood.
I personally would not spank on that old. Eight or nine is the most I have gone. With my son who is now nine, the last few spankings have been done as a mercy and always at his choice. When he committed some willful act that simply must receive punishment, or had a set punishment attached to it, I have on occasion given him an option of spanking as punishment. My goal when I did that was always to inflict the quickest and least pain I could, yet enough to reinforce the need for proper behavior. I do not doubt it stung, but he could sit down and have no sense of pain immediately. Needles hurt. I use spankings like this as an inoculation against willful pride.
I think I could spank an older child though. It wasn’t that long ago kids got licks all the way through High School.
PS - Inoculations were the second hardest thing to do. My wife never could handle being the one to hurt the baby, so I drew that lot. Brrr… I am glad that is over.
P
Portrait
Guest
Dear pnewton,Yet it is realistic, at least the part about discipline. I would say that disciplining children is the hardest part of parenting. Most parents would rather take ten-fold the punishment rather than dish it out on one they love, regardless of the method of discipline. Despite this, it is rare to find a Christian parent that does not speak of the joy of parenthood. It is the hardest thing, but also the most joyous thing.
I personally would not spank on that old. Eight or nine is the most I have gone. With my son who is now nine, the last few spankings have been done as a mercy and always at his choice. When he committed some willful act that simply must receive punishment, or had a set punishment attached to it, I have on occasion given him an option of spanking as punishment. My goal when I did that was always to inflict the quickest and least pain I could, yet enough to reinforce the need for proper behavior. I do not doubt it stung, but he could sit down and have no sense of pain immediately. Needles hurt. I use spankings like this as an inoculation against willful pride.
I think I could spank an older child though. It wasn’t that long ago kids got licks all the way through High School.
PS - Inoculations were the second hardest thing to do. My wife never could handle being the one to hurt the baby, so I drew that lot. Brrr… I am glad that is over.
Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your excellent (name removed by moderator)ut to this discussion.
In my final post yesterday I had intended to mention the 1973 American made for television film, Outrage, starring Robert Culp. The film, “based upon reported incidents which took place on the West Coast of the United States”, tells the story of a suburban family who are terrorized by some privileged but feral and thuggish young men. At first, Mr. Kiler (Robert Culp), endeavours to reason with these youths but sadly his efforts are unavailing and the attacks upon his family only increase. Indeed, as the film continues these louts become more emboldened and dangerous as regards their attacks because they appear to be unstoppable and a law unto themselves.
However, dear friend, what is important as regards the topic currently under review is that the youths parents are guilty of a dereliction of duty in that they evidently failed to administer discipline to their sons from an early age. Now they are completely out of control and are running amok in the neighbourhood making the lives of this family and utter misery. Moreover, the parents of these youths woefully failed to set a good example and have only be concerned with providing for them materially. Thus it is hardly surprising that when Mr. Kiler visits the parents to discuss their sons anti-social behaviour, they refuse to accept that that they are capable of such actions and even have the nerve to blame Mr. Kiler for aggravating the situation. It is a sad fact that parents who have neglected their duty of parental correction never take responsibility for their children’s bad behaviour and seek to defend them and blame others. In addition to spoiling the young men in the film, the parents are indifferent to their sons dreadful conduct. Thus these parents are equally guilty if not more so for not training their children in the right way and teaching them respect for others.
The moral of the story, dear friend, is surely that we neglect parental discipline at our peril and that young men especially need a jolly firm hand from an early age. Sacred Scripture enjoins parents: “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying” (Prov. 19: 18, added emphasis mine). These wise words caution parents against a foolish indulgence of their children that are rebellious and unruly. Sometimes certain viciously inclined youths will not respond to reasoning alone and must be treated with greater severity, including physical chastisement. Had the parents of the feral youths in the* Outrage *film corrected the untoward dispositions of their sons as soon as they appeared, then there may have been some hope and they would not have turned out as they did. Bad behaviours in the young need to be checked immediately before they get head, take root, and harden into habit.
Parents and potential parents, dear friend, have a moral duty to administer discipline and train their children in righteousness. It is sheer folly to completely rule out physical chastisement of the young or wrongly equate it with child abuse, as the wrongheaded thinking of the child development ‘experts’ recommend - “Train up a child in the way that he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Prov. 22: 6).
God bless and a very Blessed Easter to you and all other contributors and viewers of this thread.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait:tiphat:
In Christos
- Status
- Not open for further replies.