It is discouraging to find Catholic parents with kids who are clearly never spanked. They are loved and soothed but not confronted with consequences of selfish behavior. These parents have an important obligation to teach their children to “honor your father and mother,” and that should begin as soon as a child is not grasping that. The experiences of Israel in the Old Testament clearly establish a pattern of loving warnings by God and then punishment, with the goal of His people not ruining themselves with sin.
Every child is unique. For some they can be corrected by a simple stare. Others require the rod. The objective is constant, but one must remember that the variables are infinite as individuals. The only way to educate a child is to do so in accordance with that child's unique nature.
I think your analysis breaks down at the "real life" level: Increasingly, schools and workplaces are acceding to the soft parenting approach and extending it into the supposed adult years. That's also the case in the realm of "social services" (aka welfare), where recipients receive coaching and enabling rather than firm expectations of attempting to achieve. I have seen it corrode my local community over the past half century and as a result (plus disastrously low birth rates) the work ethic is in danger of disappearing. This anti-God mindset beings in the home, but it doesn't end there.
I read that exorcists say demons like spanking? I’m not sure how hitting children gets them to listen? I was spanked by a babysitter that did not have enough bathrooms in her home. she did not have a right to lay a hand on me.
Exorcists can say whatever they want. Hitting a child is different than a prudent spanking. It gets them to listen because it teaches them that there are real consequences to misbehaving. The author lays it out very plainly in his article. It seems you're conflating an abusive babysitter with a legitimate parental authority, which is a silly and obvious mistake frankly.
Thanks for this comment. I should only add that when the article went out this morning, it was mistakenly under my name, but it was written by John Mac Ghlionn.
Neither the author nor I said that "hitting a child is always the right thing to do". We both said it is a legitimate tool to be used prudently and without cruelty. You would recognize, as the author said, that a swift spank is different than a belt beating, correct?
oh yes, definitely. sometimes one little spanking can probably be enough that they will listen for a lifetime. apparently I got a small spanking when I was 10 months old because I pushed a plant over. I don’t remember that because I was a baby.
Maybe the solution to the crisis in the family that you mentioned--that people don't stay married, etc--is due to a lack of genuine and devout Christianity in our society, not a lack of corporal punishment. In my experience, even mild spankings administered as a loving last resort fed my anger and resentment. When I obeyed it was because it suited me or because I was afraid. The only thing that really changed my relationship with my parents in a substantial way was my conversion to Catholicism when I was thirteen. Despite that being a choice they didn't exactly approve of, they could and did observe that I became more respectful during the very teenage years which are usually described as times of rebellion.
I don't disagree that discipline should be contained with a Christian framework. That is presupposed by this article. I think when the author compares spanking to a punctuation mark rather than a sentence or paragraph, he is getting at the idea that it is part of a larger picture.
You raise a vital point: children do need authority, not appeasement. But I wonder if the Christian tradition invites a different kind of authority than we often assume, one that’s therapeutic, not juridical. The early Church Fathers taught that correction is meant to heal the heart, not just control behavior. It’s not about “winning the moment,” but forming the child through calm, dispassionate love. We fast from anger, even when correcting. And when a parent can’t discipline without agitation, the Church gently advises: wait until you can. The “rod” in Proverbs, after all, is also the shepherd’s staff. It guides, steadies... it doesn’t just sting.
I understand the need for authority and boundaries. But my own story taught me how easily discipline turns into anger. Growing up in a very conservative Catholic home, punishment often came in rage—belts, hangers, brambles—and I learned to believe that love and pain always arrived together. As an adult, I repeated that pattern, convinced my anger was justified because my kids “made me feel that way.” It even shaped how I saw God: more judge than healer. But I’ve learned that real discipline doesn’t come from fury or fear. It comes from love that corrects to restore. And that kind of love can be firm, without needing to harm.
There is no inherent reason to connect moderate corporal punishment with anger. Punishing out of anger is something every parenting manual strongly advises against. It is indeed possible to punish calmly, and this is what God Himself does, as Scripture repeats over and over again. We can't ignore the fact that the entire Christian tradition sees a place for corporal punishment; heck, even St. Benedict in the Holy Rule many times recommends it for children and refractory monks!
I agree that calm correction is possible in theory. But in a fallen world, our inner clarity is often compromised. As parents, we shaped by our own wounds, whether we know it or not. And it is easy to believe that we are acting in love, when in fact a reactive part is in the lead. Anger can wear the mask of conviction. Pain can sound like discipline. That’s why articles like this are risky: they assume an inner discernment that, for many of us, hasn’t yet been healed. And that’s not a condemnation. It’s just the reality of life in a world where so many of us were raised by pain masquerading as love.
I agree, and I didn't mean to come across as unsympathetic to your personal story. You are right that people act according as they have been formed, or act out if they have been acted out on, and that this requires serious discernment. This is where I would also say parents have to form a team, they need to talk to each other about discipline, and, in sense, "monitor" one another for accountability, so that nothing untoward slips in. Chances are, they will balance one another out.
The data doesn't support you. Large studies show that spanking not only fails to have positive short term impact, it also causes psychologic harm in children that is long lasting. But of even more importance, the way Jesus treated children doesn't support you. Not what he said about them nor how he behaved toward them. Disappointing article that misleads people into behavior that does not please God.
What data? Does the data split out prudent and infrequent spankings used as last resort from frequent spankings? Does it break things down by faith? Just because Jesus didnt have any children of His own to discipline doesn't mean it is unbiblical to exercise legitimate authority over your children. No one is making the case for beating and abuse, just that spanking is a legitimate tool when all other avenues have been exhausted.
I loved this article and Shane’s comments. I would, however, reframe “last resort.” Spanking should be used as the fulfillment of a promise: “You may not do that; if you do it again, I will spank you.” Last resort implies that the warning, counting to three (which I hated) and times out didn’t work. Way too much time avoiding the consequence! Another thought, borrowed from James Dobson, rip, Christian psychologist: discipline, in any form, should be given for willful disobedience, not for childish irresponsibility.
Finally, I believe that for very young children, “preverbal” if you will, spanking is the only thing that delivers immediate, understandable consequence to defiance. Case in point? Each of my four children received his/her first spanking at seven months for twisting over during diaper changes; after a couple of times turning him back over with a serious, finger-pointing, “NO”, he would glare at me with “The Look” (unmistakeable, non serviam) and flip over. A single slap on that little bare butt with “NO” ended the conflict once and for all.
I agree, when I say last resort I mean that it's really never our go-to if we feel that more diplomatic means can be used to resolve a situation. For some of our kids, time out and taking away privileges is enough to curb bad behavior. For some of our other kids, those methods did not work but spanking has. I hope that makes sense!
To be clear, I’m against beating of all kinds, even when someone turns “peace be with you” into a full-blown conversation.
It is discouraging to find Catholic parents with kids who are clearly never spanked. They are loved and soothed but not confronted with consequences of selfish behavior. These parents have an important obligation to teach their children to “honor your father and mother,” and that should begin as soon as a child is not grasping that. The experiences of Israel in the Old Testament clearly establish a pattern of loving warnings by God and then punishment, with the goal of His people not ruining themselves with sin.
Every child is unique. For some they can be corrected by a simple stare. Others require the rod. The objective is constant, but one must remember that the variables are infinite as individuals. The only way to educate a child is to do so in accordance with that child's unique nature.
Excellent. There is BIBLICAL support :”spare the rod spoil the child”
I think your analysis breaks down at the "real life" level: Increasingly, schools and workplaces are acceding to the soft parenting approach and extending it into the supposed adult years. That's also the case in the realm of "social services" (aka welfare), where recipients receive coaching and enabling rather than firm expectations of attempting to achieve. I have seen it corrode my local community over the past half century and as a result (plus disastrously low birth rates) the work ethic is in danger of disappearing. This anti-God mindset beings in the home, but it doesn't end there.
To Bend the Will as opposed to Breaking the Spirit.
I read that exorcists say demons like spanking? I’m not sure how hitting children gets them to listen? I was spanked by a babysitter that did not have enough bathrooms in her home. she did not have a right to lay a hand on me.
Exorcists can say whatever they want. Hitting a child is different than a prudent spanking. It gets them to listen because it teaches them that there are real consequences to misbehaving. The author lays it out very plainly in his article. It seems you're conflating an abusive babysitter with a legitimate parental authority, which is a silly and obvious mistake frankly.
Thanks for this comment. I should only add that when the article went out this morning, it was mistakenly under my name, but it was written by John Mac Ghlionn.
Edited to reflect that!
I just think hitting a child is not always the right thing to do.
Neither the author nor I said that "hitting a child is always the right thing to do". We both said it is a legitimate tool to be used prudently and without cruelty. You would recognize, as the author said, that a swift spank is different than a belt beating, correct?
oh yes, definitely. sometimes one little spanking can probably be enough that they will listen for a lifetime. apparently I got a small spanking when I was 10 months old because I pushed a plant over. I don’t remember that because I was a baby.
Maybe the solution to the crisis in the family that you mentioned--that people don't stay married, etc--is due to a lack of genuine and devout Christianity in our society, not a lack of corporal punishment. In my experience, even mild spankings administered as a loving last resort fed my anger and resentment. When I obeyed it was because it suited me or because I was afraid. The only thing that really changed my relationship with my parents in a substantial way was my conversion to Catholicism when I was thirteen. Despite that being a choice they didn't exactly approve of, they could and did observe that I became more respectful during the very teenage years which are usually described as times of rebellion.
I don't disagree that discipline should be contained with a Christian framework. That is presupposed by this article. I think when the author compares spanking to a punctuation mark rather than a sentence or paragraph, he is getting at the idea that it is part of a larger picture.
And this requires loyalty and dedication on your part.
You raise a vital point: children do need authority, not appeasement. But I wonder if the Christian tradition invites a different kind of authority than we often assume, one that’s therapeutic, not juridical. The early Church Fathers taught that correction is meant to heal the heart, not just control behavior. It’s not about “winning the moment,” but forming the child through calm, dispassionate love. We fast from anger, even when correcting. And when a parent can’t discipline without agitation, the Church gently advises: wait until you can. The “rod” in Proverbs, after all, is also the shepherd’s staff. It guides, steadies... it doesn’t just sting.
I understand the need for authority and boundaries. But my own story taught me how easily discipline turns into anger. Growing up in a very conservative Catholic home, punishment often came in rage—belts, hangers, brambles—and I learned to believe that love and pain always arrived together. As an adult, I repeated that pattern, convinced my anger was justified because my kids “made me feel that way.” It even shaped how I saw God: more judge than healer. But I’ve learned that real discipline doesn’t come from fury or fear. It comes from love that corrects to restore. And that kind of love can be firm, without needing to harm.
There is no inherent reason to connect moderate corporal punishment with anger. Punishing out of anger is something every parenting manual strongly advises against. It is indeed possible to punish calmly, and this is what God Himself does, as Scripture repeats over and over again. We can't ignore the fact that the entire Christian tradition sees a place for corporal punishment; heck, even St. Benedict in the Holy Rule many times recommends it for children and refractory monks!
I agree that calm correction is possible in theory. But in a fallen world, our inner clarity is often compromised. As parents, we shaped by our own wounds, whether we know it or not. And it is easy to believe that we are acting in love, when in fact a reactive part is in the lead. Anger can wear the mask of conviction. Pain can sound like discipline. That’s why articles like this are risky: they assume an inner discernment that, for many of us, hasn’t yet been healed. And that’s not a condemnation. It’s just the reality of life in a world where so many of us were raised by pain masquerading as love.
I agree, and I didn't mean to come across as unsympathetic to your personal story. You are right that people act according as they have been formed, or act out if they have been acted out on, and that this requires serious discernment. This is where I would also say parents have to form a team, they need to talk to each other about discipline, and, in sense, "monitor" one another for accountability, so that nothing untoward slips in. Chances are, they will balance one another out.
The data doesn't support you. Large studies show that spanking not only fails to have positive short term impact, it also causes psychologic harm in children that is long lasting. But of even more importance, the way Jesus treated children doesn't support you. Not what he said about them nor how he behaved toward them. Disappointing article that misleads people into behavior that does not please God.
What data? Does the data split out prudent and infrequent spankings used as last resort from frequent spankings? Does it break things down by faith? Just because Jesus didnt have any children of His own to discipline doesn't mean it is unbiblical to exercise legitimate authority over your children. No one is making the case for beating and abuse, just that spanking is a legitimate tool when all other avenues have been exhausted.
I loved this article and Shane’s comments. I would, however, reframe “last resort.” Spanking should be used as the fulfillment of a promise: “You may not do that; if you do it again, I will spank you.” Last resort implies that the warning, counting to three (which I hated) and times out didn’t work. Way too much time avoiding the consequence! Another thought, borrowed from James Dobson, rip, Christian psychologist: discipline, in any form, should be given for willful disobedience, not for childish irresponsibility.
Finally, I believe that for very young children, “preverbal” if you will, spanking is the only thing that delivers immediate, understandable consequence to defiance. Case in point? Each of my four children received his/her first spanking at seven months for twisting over during diaper changes; after a couple of times turning him back over with a serious, finger-pointing, “NO”, he would glare at me with “The Look” (unmistakeable, non serviam) and flip over. A single slap on that little bare butt with “NO” ended the conflict once and for all.
I agree, when I say last resort I mean that it's really never our go-to if we feel that more diplomatic means can be used to resolve a situation. For some of our kids, time out and taking away privileges is enough to curb bad behavior. For some of our other kids, those methods did not work but spanking has. I hope that makes sense!
Honestly, I recommend you do your own homework on this. There are 50 years of studies available to choose from. Many large scale.
I've never seen a study with those nuances like I have detailed, which is why I asked what widely accessible studies you knew of that did.