Editorial
From the Newsletter of Revesby Presbyterian Church
April 2009
Rev Dr Peter Barnes
It is frightening that these days the case for non-abusive corporal discipline is invariably dismissed without much argument. So far as public policy is concerned, this has come about in just a few short decades. It was therefore something of a surprise to read a letter in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics which was full of common sense and insight. Joan Durrant and M. A. Straus had emerged as two earnest advocates of an absolute ban on physical punishment. Dr Robert Larzelere of Oklahoma State University did not mince his words in his response: ‘The scientific evidence for this viewpoint is so weak that such evidence would be immediately dismissed if used to oppose a medical treatment.’
According to Dr Larzelere, the Swedish ban on all forms of physical punishment, dating back to 1979, has done more harm than good, and has coincided with an increase in the frequency of criminal assaults. Indeed, he saw the demand for the outlawing of corporal discipline as just another attempt by one group to impose its will on another. One should be grateful that one can sometimes find wisdom in the strangest of places. Hara Estroff Marano in Psychology Today in 2004 had the temerity to argue that we are overly concerned with protecting our children from all adverse experiences, and this is leading to the long-term effect of making them less able to cope with life’s troubles. One child told a child psychologist in Massachusetts: ‘I wish my parents had some hobby other than me.’
The concern to build up a child’s self-esteem actually promotes anxiety in the real world. Children are not encouraged to learn how to cope with and recover from failure, either on the sporting field or in the exam room. ‘The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.’ Somehow the result of all this seems to be more violence and more fragility – at the same time.
The Daily Telegraph excitedly reported on 5 January 2009 that ‘Child homicide rates could be slashed if parents are banned from smacking their children’. New Zealand has banned smacking, and its example was lauded as one that Australia ought to follow. Indeed, there are experts everywhere who will tell us that corporal discipline is unloving, ineffective, and damaging.
The Bible says otherwise. There is a wrong use of discipline, and it is possible for parents to provoke their children rather than encourage them (Eph.6:4). But rightly used, corporal discipline is a loving act. Both Testaments tell us that ‘the Lord reproves him whom He loves, as a father the son in whom he delights’ (Prov.3:12; Heb.12:5-11). God’s chastening is always an expression of His love (Rev.3:19). The godly parent will learn from that, and take note that the book of Proverbs tells us that ‘Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him’ (Prov.13:24).
Corporal discipline can be quite effective. The sinner may need a beating with a rod to deliver his soul from hell (Prov.23:13-14). He will learn that sin has miserable consequences, which is a most necessary lesson indeed. There is little evidence that a good smack will cause lasting damage to a child. In fact, it was precisely David’s lack of discipline of young Adonijah that played a part in his growing up to be a selfish and rebellious young man (1 Kings 1:5-6).
Why does the Bible tell parents that corporal discipline needs to be part of their armoury in raising children? The use of corporal discipline is related to the fact that we human beings are born sinful – foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child (Prov.22:15). Sin is not a minor irritant in the lives of angelic beings who are naturally inclined to do only what is good. It is bound up in the heart of a child, and indeed in the hearts of us all (Matt.15:19; Jer.17:9). In contrast to this, modern Western people by and large do not really believe that there is such a thing as sin or that God punishes sinners. The god of modern Western society would not intentionally hurt a fly, but the God of the Bible is just and His justice must be satisfied (Rom.3:25-26).
Christians ought not to think that this is a side issue. The experts are on the warpath, but they need to be resisted. Their track record down through the ages is by no means compelling. Indeed, David Butler made the wry comment that ‘The function of the expert is not to be more right than other people, but to be wrong for more sophisticated reasons.’ The Bible, on the other hand, is to be trusted as God’s book dealing with real people in a real fallen world.
Peter Barnes