|
CANADIAN Chief Justice Beverly Mclachlin was
conferred last year with honorary doctorates by Philippine
universities. She once ruled that child-beating by parents and
teachers is a necessary rite of passage in Canadian society. Her
perspective invokes religious spirituality as the basis of her
opinions, appearing to be anchored upon the principle of patria
potestas (supreme parental authority), in total disregard of
children’s human dignity.
If the chief justice reads more
on historical narratives of the world’s most influential leaders
regarding cruelties suffered at the hands of parents or teachers,
perhaps she might become more sensitive to the sensibilities of
children most affected by her peculiar view. British Prime Minister
Tony Blair had been cane-flogged by his teacher, who even required
his student to put down his pants for beatings at his buttocks to
guarantee that pain would be maximized as wood strikes flesh. Not
surprisingly, when Blair recently entered an exclusive men’s club,
he became infuriated to find out his abusive teacher was inside the
same room as he never forgot his teacher’s cruelty, which he
experienced some four decades before. Former American President
William Jefferson Clinton also complained about having been
physically abused and beaten by his own alcoholic father, who
eventually abandoned the Clinton family. In Britain, Putney Vicar
Giles Fraser is haunted by memories of continuous beatings, like
Tony Blair’s sordid experiences, which he received more than 30
years ago at prep school: that lonely wait outside the
headmaster’s study; the cane, the slipper, the table tennis bat,
even remembering his underpants filled with blood, seething with
frustration when they also beat his brother.
Debbie Pearl from No Greater Joy
Ministries, as Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin, shamelessly
advocates that corporal punishment is divine: “We are told that in
England it is a crime to spank children . . . Therefore Christians
are not able to openly obey God in regard to biblical chastisement.
They are in danger of having the state steal their children.” The
Pearls justify corporal chastisement through biblical scripture:
“He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him
chasteneth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24). Chastening begins early:
“For the under-one-year-old, a little, 10- to 12- inch long,
willowy branch (stripped of any knots that might break the skin)
about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient,” writes Michael
Pearl. With older children he advises: “After a short explanation
about bad attitudes and the need to love, patiently and calmly apply
the rod to his backside. Somehow, after 8 or 10 licks, the poison is
transformed into gushing love and contentment. The world becomes a
beautiful place. A brand-new child emerges. It makes an adult stare
at the rod in wonder, trying to see what magic is contained
therein.”
What makes such philosophies
extremely perverse is that it is done in God’s name. Apparently,
the “proper application of the rod is essential to the Christian
worldview.” The image of God punishing His son with crucifixion
for human salvation is an expression of tough love, distorting a
religion of forgiveness and compassion into something dark and
cruel. When such religious teachings penetrate into a philosophy of
child rearing, such incitement to child abuse is terrifying.
Spanking children is seen as punishment for rebellion just as divine
anger is deemed to be provoked by original sin of human
disobedience. In Ted Tripp’s monstrous bestseller Shepherding a
Child’s Heart, even babies who struggle while having their nappy
changed are deemed to be rebellious and need punishment. Lynn
Paddock of North Carolina beat to death her four-year-old son Sean
with a length of quarter-inch plumbing line—plastic tubing.
Sean’s autopsy describes layers of bruises stretching from his
bottom to his shoulder. Lynn Paddock turned to the Biblical
practices of the Pearls and Tripps on parenting, to whom
chastisement with plumbing line is “a real attention getter.”
What Jesus said about those who
harm children comes inevitably to mind—it is better for them if a
millstone is hanged around their necks, and drowned in the depths of
the sea. Perhaps, this liturgical provision should already start
being exercised, preferably commencing with chief justices and their
subordinates, who show no sensitivities to children.
|
