1 Introduction
Although many legal strides have been made around the world over the past one hundred years regarding child protection and children’s rights, children face a host of ongoing and newly emerging challenges.1 Children make up approximately one-third of the human population, and in countries rich and poor, many experience poverty, malnutrition, maltreatment, and a lack of adequate education and health care. Although not always in the news or public awareness, the enormous needs of children and their families are evident around the world. They struggle to meet even their basic needs under difficult circumstances, whether living in poor or prosperous countries or fleeing political unrest or environmental disasters. In addition to such ongoing challenges, new ways of exploiting children through social media and corporate marketing contribute to global increases in childhood depression, anxiety, and self-destructive behaviors.
Secular and religious initiatives, including many by diverse Christian communities and organizations worldwide, have sought to address these and other challenges. Although Christians differ in a host of ways, whether theologically, culturally, or politically, several biblical passages undergird their shared commitments to children, including mandates to love the neighbor and to seek justice for the poor and the orphan. The book of Isaiah, for example, provides a vision of all children flourishing that aligns with a host of Christian commitments to children. The book begins with the plea, “Cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, rescue the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the
Furthermore, Christian communities and organizations recognize that addressing such challenges requires collaboration and cultivating creative alliances across lines of difference. There can be no easy fix, since promoting child protection and well-being involves attending to a host of political, cultural, economic, educational, legal, medical, religious, and environmental factors. For example, Christians have worked across religious, secular, and political lines to address disaster relief, child marriage, the lack of educational opportunities for girls and the poor, and the global sex trafficking of minors.3 Child-focused Christian organizations, such as Viva Network, World Vision, and Compassion International, attract faith leaders from diverse branches of the church who hold differing theological views, such as about biblical interpretation, yet effectively work together to address the needs of children. The World Council of Churches has also worked together with UNICEF and other child-focused secular agencies to develop common statements and practical strategies regarding child well-being and children’s rights.
Given such creative global coalitions and shared Christian commitments to children, it is puzzling and troubling that Christians in the United States are not more effectively working together to address the tremendous challenges that many children and families in this prosperous country continue to face. For example, Christians left and right have not been able to get past disagreements about abortion and reproductive rights to work together to ensure that all children in the U.S. have clean water and air, housing, equal access to educational opportunities, or health care. All countries in the world have ratified the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) except
Furthermore, although sixty-five countries have now banned the corporal punishment of children in all settings,5 this practice is legally and politically tolerated in the U.S. All fifty states permit parents to utilize corporal punishment provided the force is determined to be “reasonable,” and several states still permit corporal punishment in schools.6 Only twenty-seven states ban corporal punishment in public schools, and only two states have laws specifically prohibiting corporal punishment in private schools. Throughout the U.S., regulations are lax regarding homeschooling. Some Christians strongly support laws that permit corporal punishment, others actively seek to repeal them, and still others ignore the issue altogether despite risks to children. Medical risks of corporal punishment include using excess force, and 28 percent of children in the U.S. are hit so hard that they receive injuries.7 In schools that permit physical punishment, teachers disproportionately punish boys, Black
The lack of a united efforts to address the corporal punishment of children in the U.S. is especially heartbreaking, given its widespread use and the now well-established evidence that physical punishment is not only ineffective but also harmful to children’s development.10 The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, which oversees the CRC, defines “corporal” or “physical” punishment as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light.”11 Most instances of corporal punishment occur in the home by parents or caregivers. UNICEF estimates “about 6 in 10 children worldwide (almost 1 billion) between the ages of 2 and 14 are subjected to physical (corporal) punishment by their caregivers on a regular basis,”12 and 75 percent of children between the ages two and four are regularly subjected to physical punishment by their caregivers.13 Although physical
Decades of research now clearly and consistently link physical punishment, including spanking, to risks of harm to children, and this research has prompted the emergence of many effective parenting programs that reject spanking and offer parents and caregivers alternatives. Studies that bracket out extreme forms of physical punishment and focus specially on spanking find that it is ineffective and associated with multiple risks, including impaired cognitive ability, low self-esteem, mental health problems, weaker relationships to parents, weaker moral internalization, an increased likelihood of aggressive behavior and substance abuse, and an increased risk for physical abuse.16 Spanking also increases the likelihood of antisocial behavior and mental health problems in adulthood and even “small effects can translate into large societal impacts.”17 In the light of the overwhelming evidence, social scientists, psychologists, physicians, social workers, and child advocates are calling for the end of spanking and other forms of corporal punishment in all settings, without exception, including the home. They are also offering parents and caregivers positive and effective educational programs that promote creative and compassionate alternatives to physical punishment.18
In addition to widespread acceptance of spanking in American culture, one clear and major obstacle within the church itself to working together to end physical punishment in all settings is widespread yet narrow assumptions about children and obligations to them built on selected passages or narrow interpretations of the Bible. Thus, one important way for Christians to move forward is not only by recognizing the harms of corporal punishment and offering alternative parenting practices but also by critically examining their assumptions about children and looking more closely at wisdom from the Bible and the Christian tradition. Indeed, as child advocates and faith leaders are finding, when Christians are presented with scientific evidence of the harms of spanking and, at the same time, are given an opportunity to reflect on this evidence in relationship to their religious beliefs, spiritual practices, and interpretations of the Bible, their attitudes change, and they are more likely to avoid or at least to consider avoiding spanking their children.19
In line with these findings, this chapter aims to motivate and empower more Christian individuals and organizations to help end the corporal punishment
Building specifically on biblical perspectives about children’s vulnerabilities, strengths, and agency and about discipline, discipleship, and limits of parental authority, the chapter claims that physical punishment of children is inconsistent with central Christian conceptions of and commitments to children. By outlining areas of existing agreement and robust biblical and theological grounds for banning corporal punishment in all settings, the chapter shows how diverse and sometimes polarized Christian denominations and faith-based organizations could widen their common ground and work together more effectively to protect children and promote their well-being. In this way, Isaiah’s powerful vision of shalom for children might be more fully realized both in households and in the larger society.
Although this chapter focuses on the U.S. and Christian grounds for rejecting the corporal punishment of children, it has implications for any secular or religious child advocacy groups that seek to reduce spanking and corporal punishment. For example, the chapter could be used as a resource in any program that includes Christian participants. Furthermore, since over 80 percent of the world’s population self-affiliates with a religious tradition, and corporal punishment is a worldwide problem, this chapter encourages child advocates to couple scientific evidence against corporal punishment with cultural sensitivity and attention to the religious beliefs and practices of the communities they are seeking to serve. Finally, the chapter can be a springboard for faith leaders and child advocates from diverse religious traditions to search for and emphasize not only scientific but also religious and spiritual grounds for ending corporal punishment in their faith communities.
2 Common Commitments and Areas of Cooperation
Although Christians in the United States have highly diverse understandings about many issues, they understand that children are vulnerable and in need of protection, and they share a commitment to addressing urgent needs of children. They take seriously biblical mandates to love the neighbor and to care for the poor, sick, and hungry, including children. Even though Christians might disagree about biblical interpretation, the relation between science and
In addition to emphasizing their responsibility to address urgent needs of children here and abroad, Christians in the U.S. across the political and ecclesial spectrum also affirm the importance of the family for protecting, ensuring the well-being of, and nurturing the faith of children. They understand that children are developing and need guidance, and that parents should provide for their children’s needs and play a central role in their physical, intellectual, moral, and spiritual formation. Many Christians, like Jews, refer to the famous lines from Deuteronomy when encouraging parents to talk about faith with their children: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. Keep these words that I am commanding you today in your heart. Recite them to your children and talk about them when you are at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you rise (6:5–7).” Christians also emphasize that the church should support families in this task, and thus churches across the country typically welcome families, offer a host of religious education and youth programs, and provide material and financial support for families in need.
Diverse denominational and nondenominational Christians also believe that strong family life serves not only children but also the larger society. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, strongly affirms the primacy of the family, claiming it is a divine institution and the basic unit of society, where children can fully and properly develop and appropriate important values, such as justice, that also help them contribute to the common good. As Pope Francis stated, “The family remains the basic unit of society and the first school in which children learn the human, spiritual, and moral values which enable them to be a beacon of goodness, integrity, and justice in our communities.”20
Certainly, in the light of mounting evidence of child sexual abuse cases not only in the Roman Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention but also other churches and organizations that work with children and youth (such as schools and sports facilities), the church has clearly failed children, and more churches are finally paying serious attention to preventing child abuse within their walls. Local congregations and national church bodies have a host of resources available to create substantive child-protection guidelines and policies.22 Christians are also working across religious and secular lines to find more effective ways not only to prevent but also to recognize and respond to child abuse. For example, churches are learning from and working with highly respected secular organizations, such as the Zero Abuse Project,23 and religiously affiliated projects, such as the Jewish organization Sacred Spaces.24 This work of child protection within the church slowly includes helping the church respond to the abuse and murder of Indigenous children in residential schools in the United States and Canada and around the world. For example, in response to calls for action that came out of Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Canadian churches are working with others to eliminate sexual abuse in the church and to ban laws that permit corporal punishment.25
3
Although nondenominational and denominational Christians alike affirm the significance of parents and the family for child well-being and understand the need for child protection within the walls of the church, they generally neglect to address the tremendous problem in the United States of child neglect and abuse in the home. Most cases of child abuse and neglect occur in the home. Approximately seven million child-abuse cases are reported each year in the U.S., and 90.6 percent of the victims are maltreated by one or both parents.26 Approximately five children die each day because of abuse, and 80 percent of fatalities involve a parent. However, few churches speak, teach, or preach about injustices that children experience at home, including physical punishment.
Furthermore, although conservative Protestants helpfully honor the importance of parenting and bringing up children in the faith, many affirm a parent’s right to spank their children. Some strongly advocate its use, while others consider it a last resort. Conservative Protestants in general are more likely than other parents to support and practice physical punishment.27 Those who actively support a parent’s right to use corporal punishment incorporate methods of spanking children into their books about Christian parenting, child rearing, and discipline. Some of the more extreme yet highly visible conversative Christian approaches to parenting allow and, in some cases, even encourage the corporal punishment of children with the “rod” as part of “disciplining.” Even though other conservative Christians have moved further away from the practice of spanking, they still leave the door open for spanking as a last resort. For example, the organization Focus on the Family and its founder, James Dobson, have paid attention in important and positive ways to strengthening families, child development, and faith formation. They do not equate discipline with punishment and absolutely and clearly reject child abuse. Nevertheless, Dobson’s popular book, The New Dare to Discipline, and the Focus on the Family website still allow spanking as a last resort.28 Parenting books by conservative Christians are so widespread in social media that
Whether they rigorously support spanking or consider it a last resort, conservative Protestants often refer to a narrow range of biblical texts to support their position, and they end up with narrow theological understandings of children and child-parent relations. For example, they tend to paraphrase and interpret selected passages from Proverbs, such as “Folly is bound up in the heart of child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him” (22:15), as providing a mandate for spanking their children. They also cite a passage in Ephesians that refers to “the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (6:4). Based on such passages, the role of parents is primarily understood as teaching and disciplining, and the role of children as learning and obeying. Conservative Protestants also tend to emphasize the authority of parents and parental rights, and they believe that obedience to parents cultivates obedience to God. Few resources talk about the limits of parental authority or the capacity of parents to sin or harm their children. In addition, some conservative Protestants stress that children are prone to egocentrism and sinfulness, and parents must therefore shape or even “break” their will because, if left to their own devices, children will defy their parents and God.29
For various reasons, the Roman Catholic Church and mainline Protestant churches have not aggressively challenged the practice of corporal punishment in the home, and they are less vocal about how parents should raise their children than highly visible conservative Protestant approaches. Some of the most highly respected approaches to faith formation in mainline churches, such as Godly Play,30 certainly help parents have a deep respect for children, their questions, and spiritual life. Yet parenting workshops and resources are less widely available or promoted among mainline churches. Liberal Protestant churches are vocal about social and environmental injustices and child abuse in the church but strangely silent about injustices against children and child maltreatment in the family.
Given the visibility of narrow yet popular religiously conservative conceptions of children, parenting, discipline, and faith formation, and the absence of more intentional conversations about parenting in many mainline congregations, other parents make assumptions about what “Christian parenting”
Even more tragically, when parents and faith leaders religiously justify or simply ignore child maltreatment, however “mild,” children can experience not only physical, emotional, mental, and intellectual but also spiritual harm. Thirty-four major studies, involving more than nineteen thousand abused children, demonstrate that even though religion and spirituality can play a positive role in coping with traumatic events, many children who are maltreated experience spiritual struggles or a loss of faith.31
4 Robust Theological Conceptions of and Commitments to Children
Thus, we see many branches of Christianity—whether right or left, conservative or liberal, whether they encourage spanking or say nothing at all about it—ignoring the dangers of corporal punishment for child well-being and neglecting to speak out against laws that allow corporal punishment in the home and other settings.
One important way that Christians can find stronger common ground for promoting child well-being and rejecting corporal punishment is by expanding their conceptions of and corresponding commitments to children. More robust and biblically based conceptions of children (also called theologies of childhood) strengthen adult-child relationships and empower the whole church to reject corporal punishment and help all children thrive.32
As we have seen, even though Christians might differ theologically and in their parenting practices, they already share at least two important conceptions of children and obligations to them. First, they understand that children
Even though these two central Christian perspectives about children’s need for protection and guidance are important, by critically and more closely examining the Bible and Christian tradition, Christians discover several additional perspectives that provide a stronger vision of children’s full humanity. These additional perspectives help the church view children not only as vulnerable and developing and thereby in need of protection and instruction but also as fully human persons with unique strengths and capacities who enrich and contribute to communities and deserve to be heard and respected.
Here are just two additional biblically based perspectives that provide the church with a more holistic and full-bodied understanding of children and obligations to them.
First, the Bible and Christian tradition emphasize that children are whole and complete human beings who are made in the image of God. Thus, adults are to treat children, like all persons, with dignity and respect. Respect for the equal worth of people, including children, is built on one of the most foundational conceptions of human beings in both Judaism and Christianity: All human beings are made in the image of God and possess a fundamental God-given equality. This conviction is based on Genesis 1:27, which states that God made all human beings in “the image of God.” Thus, all children, like all adults—regardless of race, gender, age, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, or any other difference—are made in God’s image, have intrinsic value, and are equally worthy of dignity and respect. Although we might consider it
The perspective that children are made in God’s image and are therefore to be treated as worthy of dignity and respect provides powerful grounds for Christians to reject corporal punishment in all settings. With this perspective, how could anyone bracket out some groups of children—whether two to four years, two to twelve, or any other age outlined in civil law or some Christian parenting resources—for corporal punishment when we do not consider such punishment appropriate for adults? In what way would spanking children, slapping their hands, or giving them “two smacks max” as a form of discipline convey to them their full humanity and dignity and our respect for them as fully human and made in the image of God? After all, if one hits an adult, we call it assault. If one strikes a partner, we call it domestic violence. Why dismiss hitting or spanking vulnerable infants and children who are made in God’s image and have intrinsic worth as mild discipline or as a parent’s right?
Second, the Bible also claims that children are models of faith for adults, spirit-filled, and endowed with strengths, gifts, and talents to contribute to their families and communities now and in the future. Thus, adults do not just teach children. From a biblical perspective, adults are to listen to and learn from them, honor their current relationship with God and their contributions to families and communities, and provide them with an excellent education so that they can continue to cultivate their gifts and talents and contribute to the common good, both now and in the future. The Bible depicts children and young people in striking and even radical ways as models of faith, positive agents of change, and prophets, such as in the stories of the boy Samuel (1 Samuel 2–4) and the young David (1 Samuel 17). In all three synoptic gospels, Jesus identifies himself with children and lifts them up as paradigms of receiving the reign of God, saying, “Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it” (Mark 10:13–16). The Bible also depicts children as Spirit-filled. As theologians across branches of Christianity,
This conception of children with its corresponding responsibility for adults to listen to, learn from, and recognize the contributions of children strengthens adult-child relationships and empowers child advocacy in a host of ways. For example, by listening more carefully to children, adults cultivate more meaningful and mutually rewarding conversations with them. By recognizing children’s strengths, adults more intentionally honor the ways that children and young people already enrich familial and community life. By realizing that the Holy Spirit is already moving in children’s lives, adults pay more attention to their ethical and spiritual questions and are more open to listening and learning from their experiences. In these ways and more, this perspective deepens respect for children and creates stronger adult-child bonds. Adults are thereby more likely to listen to, delight in, and advocate for children and less likely to physically harm, disrespect, or simply dismiss them.
Robust Christian understandings of children that incorporate the above four and other biblically based conceptions of children greatly strengthen commitments to and relationships with them. Full-bodied theologies of childhood help Christians see children in a multifaceted and paradoxical light. Children are developing in need of guidance and protection yet also fully human and worthy of dignity and respect. They are vulnerable and in need of protection and guidance yet also endowed with strengths and insights that contribute to our daily lives. Holding together and attending to these four and other important perspectives helps adults cultivate closer and more meaningful relationships with children in their midst and empowers stronger advocacy with and on behalf of all children. As Christian theologians around the world pay greater attention to the vulnerabilities and strengths of children, they are developing an increasing number of robust theologies of childhood as well as child-attentive theologies that, like Black, feminist, and other liberation theologies,
5 The Teachings and Example of Jesus
Robust theologies of childhood are also in line with the teachings and example of Jesus. Jesus taught his disciples and followers to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength and to love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:30–31), and he clearly included children as our neighbors. At a time when children occupied a low position in society, and child abandonment was not a crime, the gospels portray Jesus as blessing, welcoming, touching, and healing children.
If we look closely at just a few of the verbs used to describe Jesus’s interactions with children, we see his warm, compassionate, and respectful engagement. He blesses, heals, and takes children up in his arms. Furthermore, he equates welcoming a child in his name to welcoming himself and the one who sent him, claiming “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me” (Matthew 18:1–5; Mark 9:37).36 Here the Greek word for “welcomes” or “receives” (δέχομαι; dechomai) can mean “warmly receptive or welcoming” or “receptive with a high level of involvement.”
In addition, Jesus rebukes those who turn them away and even lifts children up as models of faith. When children are brought to Jesus so that he might bless and pray for them, the disciples try to stop them, but Jesus rebukes the disciples, saying, “Let the little children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs” (Matthew 19:14). In another passage found in all three synoptic gospels, Jesus uses a strong word meaning “cause to stumble” or “offend” and related to the English word for “scandal” (σκανδαλίσῃ, skandalisē) when he says, “If any of you put a stumbling block [σκανδαλίσῃ] before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea” (Mark 9:42; cf. Luke 17:2; Matthew 18:6).
It is also noteworthy that physical punishment does not appear in the New Testament picture of discipleship. Jesus never recommends hitting, spanking, or physically punishing oneself or others as a way to be a faithful follower or to love God and the neighbor. Rather, he calls his followers to be close to him and to be like him. Furthermore, the activities and practices Jesus carries out and encourages his disciples to emulate are loving others (including one’s enemies), repenting, forgiving, praying, serving the poor, fasting, caring for and healing the sick, washing one another’s feet, being humble, attending to the Word of God, and spreading the good news.37
6 Biblically Based, Christ-Centered Notions of Discipline and Discipleship
A robust understanding of commitments to children, Jesus’s teachings and actions, and a closer reading of additional biblical texts help to clarify for Christians what discipline and discipleship might properly mean in relationship to child-rearing and physical punishment. As noted above, Christians debates about child-rearing often refer to the notion of discipline and the passage in Ephesians on “the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (6:4). However, Christians interpret discipline in a variety of ways. As we have seen, some conservative Protestants strongly link discipline with physical punishment. Others offer a broader view of discipline yet still consider spanking to be part of a parent’s “discipline toolkit,” even if only as a last resort.38 Given this close and
Thus, clarifying the meaning of “discipline” and “discipleship” is important not only for conservative or evangelical but also for liberal or mainline Christians. Furthermore, clarifying the meaning of these highly contested terms is another important way to empower Christians across the ecclesiastical and political spectrum to come together with the shared goal of rejecting physical punishment in all settings, including the home.39 By reflecting more deeply on the meaning of “discipleship” and “discipline,” Christians can also think together in fresh and creative ways about positive faith formation and parenting practices that exclude spanking and any other form of physical punishment, as many parents and faith leaders are doing.40
In the English translations of the Bible, words for “discipline” and “discipleship” are translations of various Greek terms. When we examine more carefully their meanings in specific New Testament passages, we find some surprises. They have nothing to do with corporal punishment. Rather, as we see both in the Bible and in testimonies of positive faith formation experiences past and present, “discipleship” and the “discipline of the Lord” are cultivated by following Jesus’s command to love and serve the neighbor (which refers to all persons, including one’s enemies) and by carrying out central spiritual practices such as worshipping, praying, forgiving, and reading the scriptures.
The Greek word for “disciple” is μαθητής (mathētēs), and it refers broadly to a student, pupil, learner, or adherent of a particular leader or movement. In the gospels, we see Jesus calling his disciples to learn from him, to be in relationship to him, and to heal, preach, love, and forgive. “Learn from me,” he says, “for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls” (Matthew 11:29). Jesus appoints twelve disciples “to be with him, and to be sent out to proclaim the message” (Mark 3:14). In Luke, after healing all who were trying to touch him, Jesus preaches to a great crowd of disciples, teaching them to “love your enemies, do good to those who hate you” (Luke 6:27). Jesus later
Given this notion of disciple and discipleship, what can we learn further about the concept of discipline in the New Testament? None of the teachings or sayings of Jesus in the gospels refer to “discipline.” References to “discipline” are found only in some letters of the New Testament, where the word is often a translation of the Greek word παιδεία (paideia), which cannot be responsibly translated as “physical punishment.”
Paideia is a Greek term that generally refers to instruction, training, education, upbringing, or guidance.41 Paideia has been used in ancient Greek philosophy and even at some liberal arts colleges today to speak about the kind of wide-ranging education that can lead to excellence, virtue, and contributions as a citizen.42 Thus, for the ancient Greeks and for thinkers past and present, paideia refers to a broad and holistic education that includes training in moral, physical, and intellectual life. Even though some ancient Greeks did physically punish children as part of their upbringing, paideia is not a term that can be translated or understood as physical punishment but is much more closely associated with well-rounded understandings of education, formation, and training.
In the often-quoted passage from Ephesians 6:4, for example, the word translated as “discipline” is paideia, and it is used in the phrase, “discipline of the Lord.” Here, “discipline and instruction,” especially “discipline and instruction in the Lord,” cannot be equated with physical punishment. Furthermore, this passage even begins with a warning not to provoke children to anger or exasperate them. “Do not provoke your children to anger but bring them up in the discipline [paideia] and instruction [nouthesia] of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4).
Colossians also warns parents not to provoke their children “or they may lose heart” (Colossians 3:21), and this text and others address the qualities of those who find new life in Christ. The Greek verb used in 3:21 is ἀθυμῶσιν
The noun paideian is used in 2 Timothy to speak of “training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16), and here, too, there is no reference to physical punishment. Rather, the passage emphasizes that “training in righteousness” takes place by studying scripture. “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training [paideian] in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Greek word translated as “for correction” in this passage is ἐπανόρθωσιν (epanorthōsin), which refers to restoring to an upright state or straightening of the conduct of one who is crooked.
Some references to “self-discipline” or “self-control” can also be found in New Testament letters in relation to both discipleship and leadership, and they are translations of other Greek terms. For example, Titus 1:8 uses the Greek adjective ἐγκρατῆ (enkratē), translated as “self-disciplined,” “disciplined,” or “temperate,” to help describe one of the important qualities of a church leader, along with “hospitable,” “a lover of goodness,” “upright,” “devout,” and “prudent” (also translated as “sensible”). In 2 Timothy, self-discipline and love are contrasted with cowardice: “For God did not give us a spirit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline [σωφρονισμοῦ (sōphronismou)]” (2 Timothy 1:7).
The only passage in the New Testament that appears to link discipline (paideia) with suffering and possibly punishment are a few verses in Hebrews (12:5–9) that quote directly from Proverbs.43 Here the author of Hebrews speaks of the “discipline [paideias] of the Lord” and quotes Proverbs 3:11–12. However,
Given even this brief exploration of discipleship, discipline, and Jesus’s own teachings and example, Christians have ample biblical support to reject physical punishment, including spanking, as a proper form of Christ-centered discipline. Although some Christians have spanked or physically punished their children to “discipline” them or help them become disciples, the primary and biblically based spiritual practices encouraged by Jesus and among diverse forms of Christianity around the world, past and present, for becoming or raising disciples do not include physical punishment. Rather, among the most central practices are loving others, praying, repenting, forgiving, studying the Word of God, worshipping together, sharing bread and wine in remembrance of Jesus, being baptized, spreading the good news, and serving those in need.
Such spiritual practices, which are deeply rooted in the Christian tradition, are also the focus of several contemporary studies of healthy spiritual development and faith formation. For example, prominent social-scientific studies of the spiritual and religious lives of children and teenagers do not indicate that physical punishment promotes healthy child development or spiritual growth. Rather, social scientists who have studied Christian families and faith communities point to other factors that help children grow and develop in their faith and cultivate a larger sense of purpose, such as worshipping, praying, caring for others, and talking about faith at home and in their faith communities.44 Respected religious educators who have developed faith formation programs and resources for the church say nothing about corporal punishment, focusing instead on cultivating warm and caring child-adult relationships, talking
Even if one believes that corporal punishment truly does no harm, what positive role could it possibly play in nurturing a child’s spiritual development? Do adults who were physically punished as children talk about it as one of the most powerful and positive ways that they deepened their faith or connected more deeply with their parents? As testimonies of children who have been spanked, memories of adults who were physically punished as children, and the research of social scientists clearly show, physical punishment is much more likely to promote fear and anger, breed shame and resentment, and erode self-esteem and parent-child relationships.46
7
The church can also work together to advance its child-protection efforts by building on biblically informed perspectives on children, discipline, and discipleship to expose and dispel a narrow and destructive view of children that is widely and falsely assumed by religious and secular groups alike to be central to Christian parenting. This is the notion that children are primarily sinful and disobedient and that therefore a primary duty of parents is to assert their authority, ensure that their children obey them, and, if necessary, “break their wills” by spanking them or physically punishing them with their hand or a “rod.” Conservative Protestants are more likely to express this view, and they justify it primarily by referring to selected passages in Proverbs. Although studies find that conservative Christians do not abuse children at higher rates than other parents, they are more likely to spank or slap their young children.47 Furthermore, focusing on children almost exclusively as sinful has warped Christian approaches to children and led in some cases to child abuse and even death.
By referring primarily to Proverbs to justify their actions, Christians who rigidly hold this view neglect the rich and robust conceptions of children and corresponding obligations to them that we find in the Bible, as outlined above. Those who focus primarily on children’s sin also end up with distorted notions of children’s growing development and parental authority. They also overshadow Jesus’s central message of loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself with flat and negative notions of children and inflated and dangerously naïve views of parents.
The Bible and the Christian tradition do emphasize that children are moral agents with growing capacities and responsibilities, and that adults should seek to model for them compassion and accountability and cultivate practices and patterns of mutual confession, forgiveness, and renewal both at church and in the home. Connected to this perspective is an understanding that human beings have the capacity to harm themselves or others. In biblical language, they sometimes sin against themselves or others. As Paul wrote, all are “under the power of sin,” and “there is no one who is righteous, not even one” (Romans 3: 9–10; cf. 5:12).
Building on biblical wisdom, Christian theologians who have reflected seriously on sin do not focus on children’s sin but rather speak of sin in relationship to life’s harsh realities and injustices and underscore two related points about the human condition generally. On one hand, many theologians claim that all people are born in a “state of sin”; they live in a world that is not what it ought to be. Their families are not perfectly loving and just; social institutions that support them, such as schools and governments, are not free from corruption; and the communities in which they live, no matter how safe, have elements of injustice and violence. On the other hand, theologians also claim that human beings, as individuals, possess moral capacities and responsibilities and that adults, and even children as they develop and grow, sometimes carry out sinful, harmful actions. Social scientists and educators also recognize that as children and young people develop, they can recognize unfair and unjust treatment directed to them, whether by other children or by adults. Furthermore, children and young people can also act in ways that are unjust and harmful to themselves or others, and thus bear some degree of responsibility for their actions.48
This broader notion of sin is not a rationale for physically punishing children, and it helps expand our understanding and appreciation of children’s growing moral sensibilities and the need to play a positive role in helping them cultivate a conscience and appropriate important Christian virtues and values, including love and justice. A proper understanding of sin coupled with sensitivity to children’s needs, vulnerabilities, and development helps adults recognize children’s agency and their growing capacities to both help and harm. Attention to their agency, drive toward autonomy, risk-taking, and experimentation also corrects a simplistic view of children as pure and innocent. Such a naïve view leaves no room for appreciating a child’s own growing moral agency
A broader understanding of wrongdoing or sin also gives parents, caregivers, and mentors a language to talk with children about human mistakes and shortcomings—whether their own or those of others—as well as ethical responsibilities and the lifelong importance of having compassion for themselves and others. Since children, as they grow, both experience the harms caused by others and at times cause harm to others, adults can help children by modelling for them compassion and accountability and by cultivating meaningful and mutual practices at home and in their faith community of accountability, forgiveness, and renewal. Adults teach children much about humility and accountability and create deeper connections with children when they can say to children, “I’m sorry. I made a mistake.” Sadly, some parents are reluctant to apologize.49
In this way and others, a robust language of sin also corrects inflated notions of parental authority, thereby helping to protect children. Grounded in this broad and biblically informed notion of sin, serious theologians throughout the Christian tradition have addressed the nature and limits of parental authority. From a biblical and Christian perspective, one’s ultimate authority is God, not one’s parents. Several biblical stories depict the shortcomings and wrongdoings of parents and family members who harm children or demand absolute obedience to themselves instead of God.
Theologians across Christian denominations who honor parents and the family while also acknowledging the limits of parental authority also express the need for the church and civil authorities to protect children from unjust and harmful actions of parents, caregivers, and other family members. For example, the sixteenth-century reformer Martin Luther, whose ideas sparked the Reformation and continue to shape Protestant views of the family today, honored parents but also recognized their shortcomings and the need at times for church and state to intervene. Luther was a parent himself and a strong advocate of protecting and providing education for all children. He and his wife, Katharina von Bora, raised ten children, and he wrote movingly about the vocation of parents and the responsibilities of educating children and raising them in the faith. He wrote the Small Catechism for use in the household, encouraged parents to train children “with kind and agreeable methods”
Although he honored the vocation of parenting, Luther realized that parents are not perfect and can sometimes neglect their children, be unjust, and even become tyrants. He also recognized that parental authority is always limited, never absolute, because a child’s ultimate loyalty and obedience is to God. “Parental authority is strictly limited,” he says; “it does not extend to the point where it can wreak damage and destruction to the child, especially to its soul.” Parental authority is for “building up,” not “for destroying.”51 His view of the family is also intimately connected to his view of church and state. Luther emphasized the role of three estates—the household, the church, and the political state—to help secure peace and build societies in which all might thrive. He understood that parents, pastors, and political leaders all carry out particular roles and responsibilities that serve the common good and help individuals, families, and societies flourish. In cases of child abuse or maltreatment in the household, the church and state can and should intervene to protect children.
Attention to the limits of parental authority found in the Bible and Christian theology align with warnings raised by legal experts today about the risks to children of overprotecting parental rights. This is true in cases in which parents who harm their children or face possible child abuse charges seek to justify their actions based on their religious beliefs. Highly respected scholars, such as Robin Fretwell Wilson, also warn the state and policy makers to take seriously the risks to children and women of ceding authority for family disputes to religious bodies.52 As she states, and as almost everyone can clearly see, “Religious communities are not immune from family violence.”53
Given these realities and theological and legal warnings about the limits of parental authority, faith leaders should work more intentionally with civic authorities and policy makers to address the problem of lax or nonexistent laws regarding the corporal punishment of children in religiously affiliated private schools or in their own homes. They should also open their eyes to the
8 Conclusion
Building on theological and biblically based perspectives on children, the chapter has shown that the physical punishment of children is inconsistent with central Christian conceptions of and commitments to children. A robust understanding of children honors children’s full humanity, reflects the teaching and actions of Jesus, cultivates a Christ-centered and nonviolent understanding of discipline and discipleship, and acknowledges the limits of parental authority. Grounded in this larger vision, Christians are well-equipped and empowered to reject all forms of physical punishment of children, even spanking or other so-called mild forms, in their homes and faith communities, and to advocate for laws prohibiting corporal punishment in all settings.
The time is ripe for Christians to move beyond polarization and help end the physical punishment of children. Christians have proven they can work across lines of difference to promote positive change for children, and a host of partners would support and collaborate with them in ending corporal punishment. Social scientists have provided clear evidence of the harms of corporal punishment, including spanking. Pediatricians, child psychologists, and neuroscientists have revealed the unique vulnerabilities and amazing capacities of infants and children and the importance of warm and caring relationships for ensuring their healthy physical, emotional, ethical, spiritual, and intellectual development. Several child-focused secular and religious organizations fully support the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and scholars, theologians, and legal experts have shown how these rights are in line with Christian beliefs about the integrity and inherent dignity of all persons. Positive parenting programs are already in place. Multidisciplinary teams of child protection professionals are becoming more aware of the positive role that religion can play in child well-being. Since some Christian organizations already deem spanking a last resort, as they become increasingly aware of children’s vulnerabilities, the risks of spanking, and scriptural wisdom, they might eventually reject spanking in all situations. Theologians around the world are also becoming less adult-centered and more child-attentive, thereby offering fresh interpretations of Christian doctrines and practices that honor children’s full humanity.
For a brief introduction to strides and challenges, see Michael Freeman, “Children’s Rights Past, Present, and Future: Some Introductory Comments Michael Freeman,” in The Future of Children’s Rights, ed. Michael Freeman (Leiden: Brille, 2014), 3–15.
All biblical passages quoted in this chapter are taken from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). Isaiah declares, “Great shall be the prosperity [shalom] of your children” (54:13). For more on Isaiah’s vision, see Jacqueline E. Lapsely, “‘Look! The Children and I Are as Signs and Portents in Israel’: Children in Isaiah,” in The Child in the Bible, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 82–102.
Although he does not directly address children or children’s rights, Allen D. Hertzke shows how an unlikely and highly diverse alliance of Jews, Roman Catholics, American evangelicals, and other activists and religious leaders came together across lines of difference to address religious and other forms of persecution, sparking a global human rights movement that has championed other human rights cases, including sex trafficking. See Allen D. Hertzke, Freeing God’s Children: The Unlikely Alliance for Global Human Rights (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), 3.
See his chapter on “Why Suffer the Children? Overcoming the Modern Church’s Opposition to Children’s Rights,” in John Witte, Jr., Church, State, and Family, 238–73. See also Kathleen Marshall and Paul Parvis, Honouring Children: The Human Rights of the Child in Christian Perspective (Edinburgh: Saint Andrews Press, 2004); and John Witte, Jr. and Don S. Browning, “Christianity’s Mixed Contributions to Children’s Rights: Traditional Teachings, Modern Doubts,” in Children, Adults, and Shared Responsibilities: Jewish Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 272–91.
See the progress report on the End Corporal Punishment website, https://endcorporalpunishment.org/.
For statistics on corporal punishment, see the Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education. For a summary of statistics updated March 2023, see https://ocrdata.ed.gov/assets/downloads/Corporal_Punishment_Part4_Updated.pdf.
Victor I. Vieth, “Augustine, Luther, and Solomon: Providing Pastoral Guidance to Parents on the Corporal Punishment of Children,” Currents in Theology and Mission 44 (Jan. 2017): 32, citing Vincent J. Felitti and Robert F. Anda, “The Relationship of Adverse Childhood Experiences to Adult Medical Disease, Psychiatric Disorders and Sexual Behavior: Implications for Healthcare,” in The Impact of Early Life Trauma on Health and Disease: The Hidden Epidemic, ed. Ruthe A. Lanius, Eric Vermeten, and Clare Pain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 78.
Mark Keierleber, “‘It’s Barbaric’: Some US Children Getting Hit at School Despite Bans,” Guardian, May 19, 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/may/19/us-children-corporal-punishment-schools. Keierleber cites the lengthy report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office on “Discipline Disparities for Black Students, Boys, and Students with Disabilities” (March 2018).
See “Some Preliminary Data on Home School Child Fatalities,” https://www.hsinvisiblechildren.org/commentary/some-preliminary-data-on-homeschool-child-fatalities/.
See the many evidence-based and widely respected studies that demonstrate the ineffectiveness and harms of physical punishment, including spanking, such as: Elizabeth T. Gershoff and Andrew Grogan-Kaylor, “Spanking and Child Outcomes: Old Controversies and New Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Family Psychology 30, no. 4 (2016), 453–69; E. T. Gershoff et al., “The Strength of the Causal Evidence Against Physical Punishment of Children and Its Implications for Parents, Psychologists, and Policymakers,” American Psychologist 73 (2018), 626–38; E.T. Gershoff et al., “Strengthening Causal Estimates for Links between Spanking and Children’s Externalizing Behavior Problems,” Psychological Science, 29 (2018), 110–20; and J. Ma et al., “Associations of Neighborhood Disorganization and Maternal Spanking with Children’s Aggression: A Fixed-Effects Regression Analysis,” Child Abuse & Neglect 76 (2018), 106–16.
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), “General Comment No. 8 (2006): The Right of the Child to Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel or Degrading Forms of Punishment (Arts. 19; 28, Para. 2; and 37, inter alia),” Mar. 2, 2007, CRC/C/GC/8, https://www.refworld.org/docid/460bc7772.html.
UNICEF, Hidden in Plain Sight: A Statistical Analysis of Violence against Children (New York, 2014), 165–66. https://data.unicef.org/resources/hidden-in-plain-sight-a-statistical-analysis-of-violence-against-children/.
UNICEF, “A Familiar Face: Violence in the Lives of Children and Adolescents,” 2017, https://data.unicef.org/resources/a-familiar-face/.
UNICEF, Hidden in Plain Sight, 101.
Rates of spanking in the U.S. have recently been declining in some areas but vary across the county. David Finkelhor et al., “Corporal Punishment: Current Rates from a National Survey,” Journal of Child and Family Studies 28 (2019): 1991–97; and E. T. Gershoff et al., “Longitudinal Links between Spanking and Children’s Externalizing Behaviors in a National Sample of White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian American families,” Child Development 83 (2012): 838–43.
For the most complete analyses of outcomes associated with spanking see Gershoff and Grogan-Kaylor, “Spanking and Child Outcomes.”
Ibid., 465.
See Elizabeth T. Gershoff, Shawna J. Lee, and Joan E. Durrant. “Promising Intervention Strategies to Reduce Parents’ Use of Physical Punishment,” Child Abuse & Neglect 71 (2017): 9–23. The authors find that culturally competent parent education as well as the use of evidence-based practices that promote alternatives to physical punishment can support caregivers seeking to change harmful parenting practices. See also Joan E. Durrant, Positive Discipline in Everyday Parenting, 4th ed. (Stockholm: Save the Children Sweden, 2006) and other resources available on the website of the highly effective and internationally recognized program developed by Durrant called Positive Discipline in Everyday Parenting, https://pdel.org.
See, for example, Cindy Miller-Perrin and Robin Perrin, “Changing Attitudes about Spanking among Conservative Christians Using Interventions That Focus on Empirical Research Evidence and Progressive Biblical Interpretations,” Child Abuse & Neglect 71 (2017): 69–79. For more on the role of religion in cases of corporal punishment and the significance of sensitivity to the religious worldviews of parents, see Victor I. Vieth, “From Sticks to Flowers: Guidelines for Child Protection Professionals Working with Parents Using Scripture to Justify Corporal Punishment,” William Mitchell Law Review 40, no. 3 (2014): Article 3, https://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr/vol40/iss3/3.
Pope Francis, “Address of Pope Francis, Apostolic Journey of His Holiness to Seoul on the Occasion of the 6th Asian Youth Day,” Aug. 16, 2014, https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2014/august/documents/papa-francesco_20140816_corea-leader-apostolato-laico.html.
See Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 210–11. See the entire section in the Compendium on “The Family, the Vital Cell of Society”: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html.
See, for example: Joy Thornburg Melton, Safe Sanctuaries: Reducing the Risk of Child Abuse in the Church (Nashville: Discipleship Resources, 1998); Jeanette Harder, Let the Children Come: Preparing Faith Communities to End Child Abuse and Neglect (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 2010); Boz Tchividjian, Protecting Children from Abuse in the Church (Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press, 2013); and Boz Tchividjian and Shira M. Berkovits, The Child Safeguarding Policy Guide for Churches and Ministries (Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press, 2017)
For an introduction to these efforts, see Decolonizing Discipline: Children, Corporal Punishment, Christian Theologies, and Reconciliation, ed. Valerie Michaelson and Joan E. Durrant (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2020). See also Valerie Michaelson, “A Decolonial Approach to Formation and Discipline,” in Child Theology: Diverse Methods and Global Perspectives, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2021), 172–89.
See these and other statistics on child abuse and neglect: The American Society for the Positive Care of Children, https://americanspcc.org/child-maltreatment-statistics.
John P. Hoffman, Christopher G. Ellison, and John P. Bartkowski, “Conservative Protestantism and Attitudes toward Corporal Punishment,” Social Science Research 63 (2017): 81–94.
See The New Dare to Discipline (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale Momentum, 2018) and several references to spanking on the Focus on the Family website, including “How to Spank: To Spank or Not to Spank,” https://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/to-spank-or-not-to-spank/.
C. Miller-Perrin and R. Perrin, “Changing Attitudes,” 71.
Founded by Jerome W. Berryman. For more information and resources, see the Godly Play Foundation website (https://www.godlyplayfoundation.org/) and books by Jerome Berryman, including Godly Play: An Imaginative Approach to Religious Education (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991).
Donald F. Walker et al., “Changes in Personal Religion/Spirituality During and After Childhood Abuse: A Review and Synthesis,” Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and Policy 1 (2009): 130–45.
This section on theological conceptions of and commitments to children builds on several articles I have written on theologies of childhood, including “The Significance of Robust Theologies of Childhood for Honouring Children’s Full Humanity and Rejecting Corporal Punishment,” in Michaelson and Durrant, Decolonizing Discipline, 108–22. See also “Conceptions of and Commitments to Children: Biblical Wisdom for Families, Congregations, and the Worldwide Church,” in Faith Forward: Launching a Revolution through Ministry with Children, Youth, and Families, vol. 3, ed. David M. Csinos (Lake Country, BC: Wood Lake, 2018), 94–112; and “The Vocation of the Child: Theological Perspectives on the Particular and Paradoxical Roles and Responsibilities of Children,” in The Vocation of the Child, ed. Patrick McKinley Brennan (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008), 31–52.
Cyprian, Letter 64.3; in Letters, trans. Sister Rose Bernard Donna (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1964), 217–18.
See Amos Yong, “Children and the Spirit in Luke and Acts,” in Bunge, Child Theology, 108–28.
For an introduction to the specific task of child-attentive theologies, including child liberation theologies, see Marcia J. Bunge and Megan Eide, “Strengthening Theology by Honoring Children,” in Bunge, Child Theology, XIII–XXV; Craig Nessan, “Attending to the Cries of Children in Liberation Theologies,” in Bunge, Child Theology, 1–20; and the work of R. L. Stollar, including The Kingdom of Children: A Liberation Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2023).
For other relevant passages, see Mark 9:33–37 and 10:13–16; Luke 9:46–48 and 18:15–17; and Matthew 18:1–5, 19:13–15, 11:25, and 21:14–16.
For reflections directly on child abuse and Jesus’s teaching, see Victor I. Vieth, On This Rock: A Call to Center the Christian Response to Child Abuse on the Life and Words of Jesus (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2018).
See “Biblical Discipline: A Full Toolkit for Parents,” on the Focus on the Family website. Here, discipline is not defined as punishment, yet spanking still has a place in a parent’s “discipline toolkit” as a “last resort, done to capture attention and create clear understanding so that a particular behavior doesn’t happen again”: https://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/building-your-discipline-toolkit-from-a-biblical-perspective/.
This section on discipline and corporal punishment builds on Marcia J. Bunge, “Rethinking Christian Theologies of Discipline and Discipleship,” in Michaelson and Durrant, Decolonizing Discipline, 152–60.
See, for example, the work of Charlene Hallett and Ashley Stewart-Tufescu, who are facilitators for the Positive Parenting in Everyday Life program, including their coauthored chapter “Walking the Path toward Reconciliation: One Mother’s Transformative Journey from Parenting with Punishment to Parenting with Positive Discipline,” in Michaelson and Durrant, Decolonizing Discipline, 161–72.
See the entry for paideia, for example, in F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Dancker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2nd ed., rev. and augmented from Walter Bauer’s 5th ed., 1958 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979).
Luther College, a liberal arts college in Decorah, Iowa, for example, uses the word paideia as the title of a signature offering in its general education program. See “Paideia,” Luther College, https://www.luther.edu/academics/approach-to-academics/paideia.
For further discussion of Proverbs and Hebrews 12, see William Morrow, “What Do We Do with Proverbs?,” in Michelson and Durrant, Decolonizing Discipline, 93–107. For an expansive interpretation of Proverbs as a whole, see William P. Brown, “To Discipline without Destruction: The Multifaceted Profile of the Child in Proverbs,” in The Child in the Bible, 63–81.
See, for example, Christian Smith and Melinda L. Denton, Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005); Robert Wuthnow, Growing Up Religious: Christians and Jews and Their Journeys of Faith (Boston: Beacon Press, 1999); Eugene C. Roehlkepartain et al., eds., The Handbook of Spiritual Development in Childhood and Adolescence (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006); and Karen M. Yust et al., eds., Nurturing Child and Adolescent Spirituality: Perspectives from the World’s Religious Traditions (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006). See also the resources and ongoing studies of the Search Institute, https://searchinstitute.org/.
Additional resources on the spiritual development and faith formation of children in Christian communities include Merton P. Strommen and Richard Hardel, Passing on the Faith: A Radical New Model for Youth and Family Ministry (Winona, MN: St. Mary’s Press, 2000); Kara Powell, Brad Griffin, and Cheryl Crawford, Sticky Faith: Youth Worker Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011); John Roberto, Kathie Amidei, and Jim Merhaut, Generations Together: Caring, Praying, Learning, Celebrating, and Serving Faithfully (Naugatuck, CT: LifelongFaith Associates, 2014); Vern Bengtson, Families and Faith: How Religion Is Passed Down across Generations (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013); and Catherine Stonehouse and Scottie May, Listening to Children on the Spiritual Journey: Guidance for Those Who Teach and Nurture (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010). For more about the spiritual lives of children and adolescents generally, see, for example, S. Cavalletti, The Religious Potential of the Child (New York: Paulist Press, 1983); Robert Coles, The Spiritual Life of Children (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1990); and David Hay and Rebecca Nye, The Spirit of the Child (London: Fount, 1998).
For concise, compelling, and accessible introductions to social-scientific research on the harms of corporal punishment and on the perspectives of children who have been physically punished, see the following chapters in Michaelson and Durrant, Decolonizing Discipline: Joan E. Durrant, “’I Was Spanked and I’m OK’: Examining Thirty Years of Research Evidence on Corporal Punishment,” 23–25; and Bernadette J. Saunders, “Corporal Punishment: The Child’s Experience,” 36–50.
See Christopher G. Ellison, “Conservative Protestantism and the Corporal Punishment of Children: Clarifying the Issues,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35, no.1 (1996): 1–16; and Christopher G. Ellison, J. P. Bartkowski, and Michelle Segal, “Do Conservative Protestant Parents Spank More Often? Further Evidence from the National Survey of Families and Households,” Social Science Quarterly 77, no. 30 (1996); 663–73.
See the work by developmental psychologist William Damon, including The Moral Child: Nurturing Children’s Natural Moral Growth (New York: Free Press, 1988); and the book by educator Vivian Gussin Paley, You Can’t Say You Can’t Play, repr. ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).
J. Ruckstaetter et al., “Parental Apologies, Empathy, Shame, Guilt, and Attachment: A Path Analysis,” Journal of Counseling and Development 95, no. 4 (2017): 389–400.
Martin Luther, The Large Catechism of Dr. Martin Luther, 1529, in The Annotated Luther, Study Edition, ed. Kirsi Stjerna (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2016), 309–10; and The Estate of Marriage (1522), in Luther’s Works (LW), ed. Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1955–86), 45:40–41.
Luther, That Parents Should Neither Compel nor Hinder the Marriage of Their Children, and That Children Should Not Become Engaged without their Parents’ Consent (1524), LW 45:386.
Robin Fretwell Wilson, “The Perils of Privatized Marriage,” in Marriage and Divorce in a Multicultural Contexts: Multi-Tiered Marriage and the Boundaries of Civil Law and Religion, ed. Joel A. Nichols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 253–83.
Ibid., 283.