Pope ok'd spanking?!

[Kat]

Ok, first, I'm typing from my iPad so I can't tell if this has already been addressed elsewhere. But I saw this on fb, so I wanted to share. I find this terribly disappointing, if it's true. :-(

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/2015/02/05/pope-francis-spanking/22958757/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hermana Linda]

I hadn't seen it elsewhere here. How sad. Thanks for sharing.

Sent by Tapatalk from my phone

[ArmsOfLove]

this is such a bizarre thought/disconnect being expressed :think

Pingleton believes that spanking done reactively, in a way that does not take into account leaving permanent physical damage or that has not been explained to a child, is wrong. But he believes if a family handles spanking proactively, by deciding on the punishment ahead of time and explaining the reason for the punishment, that it is helpful. He also believes it should be done in private and with a child clothed, so as not to cause humiliation.

"Discipline comes from the root word disciple, to teach, and punishment is angry, often out of control, motivated by emotional activity," Pingleton said.

[Aerynne]

He only said it was okay if it preserves the dignity of the child. Since spanking doesn't preserve the dignity of the child, spanking is not okay.

[ArmsOfLove]

He only said it was okay if it preserves the dignity of the child. Since spanking doesn't preserve the dignity of the child, spanking is not okay.

Except that disconnect is where I see the problem.

Like with this Pingleton guy - "reactive discipline that is punishment isn't okay" - spanking is for teaching so it's great if done this way we've outlined our book on it . . . .

[Aerynne]

I know there is a problem in the disconnect. I just had a weird reaction to the statement like I would have a problem with any oxymoron like that "It's okay to yell as long as you don't raise your voice" or "It's okay to stick out your tongue at someone as long as your tongue stays in your mouth."

[ctab]

I haven't read the full passage that this came from, but one thing I have learned about this Pope is that he is often taken out of context, mistranslated, ect. I also think he doesn't do the best job realizing that he when he speaks the whole world will take it as a message as opposed to him just talking to the person in front of him.

He also was a church leader in a part of the world where I am guessing corporal punishment in any form is still very accepted. So, he may be coming from the view that there can be progress in a good direction away from abuse if that makes sense.

And, most importantly I remember as a practicing Catholic that every statement the Pope says is not infallible. He is only infallible during with a very small set of circumstances when declaring church dogma. This is not that case. So in other words, I am free to disagree :). Obviously, any non Catholic is free to disagree no matter what. I just want folks to know that this is not an explicit church teaching.

[rjy9343]

I don't really think this is going to matter one way or another. This is not a matter of church doctrine, so it is not something that is infallible. For that reason people who don't spank will shrug it off and say that it is his opinion. People who do spank will say the pope approves of it, but know because it is not an area where he is infallible, it is just another opinion. People on the fence will take his words into consideration, but that won't be the final word. And then you have all the non Catholics who don't care what the pope says because he is not their leader. This will die down in a few days and next year most people will not even remember that he weighed in on spanking let alone what he said.
Most people do not want to spank. Even in my conservative bible belt area, it is not something a lot of people want to admit. It is a last resort. Books that range from semi helpful like Love and Logic to the not so helpful like Creative Corrections are selling because parents know there must be a better way and are actively seeking it.

[Hermana Linda]

I read the stories in Spanish with the untranslated quotes. The translations I've seen so far seem fair. The part people are jumping on is that a man said that he sometimes spanks his son, but never on the face. The pope said that he thinks that was good. He did not say that everyone should spank, but he did commend a spanker for not hitting in the face. He assumes that parents spank. They usually leave out the part where he cautions against being controlling. He said to correct children strictly and firmly but not to be harsh. He says that discipline is important (which is is) and his background is such that I'm sure that the idea of discipline without spanking never crossed his mind.

For those who speak Spanish:
http://www.lavanguardia.com/vida/20150204/54426841393/papa-recomienda-padres-no-corregir-hijos-bofetada.html



Sent by Tapatalk from my phone

[Sparrow]

I take it with a grain of salt. I think that's he's old - so from a generation that did spank, from a part of the world where spanking is normal.

Spanking reactively - hitting in anger you (universal) you are more likely to hit harder ad cause more physical damage.

Commending someone for not hitting In the face is a good step.

[Hermana Linda]

I take it with a grain of salt. I think that's he's old - so from a generation that did spank, from a part of the world where spanking is normal.

Spanking reactively - hitting in anger you (universal) you are more likely to hit harder ad cause more physical damage.

Commending someone for not hitting In the face is a good step.
Exactly!

Sent by Tapatalk from my phone

[rosesnsnails]

I was disappointed, but I hope that Hermana Linda and ctab's thoughts are correct.

[HadassahSukkot]

He also was a church leader in a part of the world where I am guessing corporal punishment in any form is still very accepted.
Argentina banned corporal punishment last year.

The prohibition of corporal punishment is found in Title VII of the Code (“Parental Responsibility”), Chapter 2 (“Duties and rights of parents: General rules”), article 647 (“Prohibition of ill-treatment):
“All forms of corporal punishment, ill-treatment and any act that physically or mentally injures or impairs children and adolescents are prohibited.
Parents may request the assistance of guidance services by state agencies.”
The new Code will replace the Civil Code 1869, which in article 278 provides for the “power to correct”. There is no such power in the new Code.
http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/progress/prohib_states.html#Argentina


To me, it sounds like he assumed hitting and condoned not being harsh or hitting in the face. :shifty In a way, it was back-handed support for corporal punishment which is illegal in many countries with a high Catholic population. :-/


Defending the pope's remarks, Rev. Thomas Rosica, who collaborates with the Vatican's press office, said Francis was not condoning violence or cruelty against children, but speaking about "helping someone to grow and mature."
"Simply watch Pope Francis when he is with children and let the images and gestures speak for themselves! To infer or distort anything else ... reveals a greater problem for those who don't seem to understand a pope who has ushered in a revolution of normalcy of simple speech and plain gesture," Rosica wrote.
http://www.dw.de/spank-the-kids-but-let-them-keep-their-dignity-pope-says/a-18237408


The Catholic Church, in a follow-up statement, said the Pope was not advocating for beating children, but for "helping someone to grow and mature."
The German Bishops Conference simply said "We don't speak for the pope."
http://www.thelocal.de/20150206/popes


OTOH, there is this:
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/02/04/pope_tells_fathers_to_be_examples_of_love_and_dign ity/1121497


I can't find anything on Radio Vaticana (http://www.news.va/en) or the Vatican news site (http://www.news.va/en/) that references this comment... but I'm having difficulties thinking straight today with a stuffy head.




---------- Post added at 06:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:32 PM ----------

I take it with a grain of salt. I think that's he's old - so from a generation that did spank, from a part of the world where spanking is normal.

Spanking reactively - hitting in anger you (universal) you are more likely to hit harder ad cause more physical damage.

Commending someone for not hitting In the face is a good step.
Yes, and odds are, it was a shocking statement and "Oh, that's good" was better than saying "WHAAAAAAT? have you lost your MIND?!" :shrug3

[Hermana Linda]

I did not realize that Argentina had banned spanking.

Sent by Tapatalk from my phone

[ctab]

Just because a country has banned something doesn't mean it isn't happening especially in more rural areas.

I have always found the Catholic communities I have been a part of to be very positive parenting oriented. I have never been taught anything in my religion education, or in the catechism that advocates spanking.

Like I said, unless it is a from a homily that I can access online in whole, an encyclical, etc. I take anything this Pope is quoted saying with a huge grain of salt for the reasons previously stated. And, at the end of the day he is human, and this is not an idea that was declared dogmatically and not infallible. I can just flat out disagree with the statement and move on.

And, I don't see a single Catholic that doesn't spank doing an about face, because of this statement. Someone that already spanks may be reassured by the statement, but if they do hit there child in the face they may also rethink things as well. But, honestly the bulk of my family and friends are Catholic and this quote has barely made a blip on the radar.

[Kat]

After reading these comments, I feel somewhat relieved. From the looks of things, spanking seems to be more of a Protestant thing, especially in Fundamentalist churches. That being said, part of my own family comes from a Catholic background. It seems like they either used the belt or threatened to use it on me and my cousins for every little thing. (I lived with them for two years.) I also know of a couple of Catholic families where spanking is used quite frequently. But I'm hoping that these are exceptions to the rule, and not the norm.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Dovenoir]

I come from an area that still reminisces over nuns with rulers. Despite Catholicism, corporal punishment is assumed.

[ctab]

I suspect spanking in catholics families depends largely on region as opposed to church teaching. I am in my thirties, have lived in four states and Ireland, and I literally have never heard a priest advocate spanking.

I suspect you will see more Catholics spanking where the general public is largely spanking and less where less are spanking

and, of course there are abusers in any faith.

[MariJo7]

The statement of the Pope worries me anyhow. In the last few years, he has made many statements about family matters that seem sound and Biblical, such as his statement about homosexuality. He said that he is not there to judge anyone but the Catholic Church is never going to approve it. I know people who have turned Catholic because of this. They want to belong to a church that preserves the traditional biblical values. And now the Pope presents spanking as a part of the traditional, biblical value. At least, that's how many people will interpret it.

I'm afraid this will give many people a wrong idea about the Bible and about what is biblical. I'm afraid it may turn some people off the Bible and the Christian faith.

I symphatize with this new pope in many ways, but I wish he had not said this thing.

[Beth1231]

Very interesting...in a concerning sort of way.
I appreciate the Catholic members weighing in to give me more perspective.

My first thought was,"he's like a great-grandpa who would be cautioning a parent to not be too harsh,they are only little" sort of a thing. But the great-grandpa is old and from a different time. I can't really expect him to say spanking is wrong.(Although it would be nice for sure!)
It's unfortunate that the comments were made.

[Zooey]

Very interesting...in a concerning sort of way.
I appreciate the Catholic members weighing in to give me more perspective.

My first thought was,"he's like a great-grandpa who would be cautioning a parent to not be too harsh,they are only little" sort of a thing. But the great-grandpa is old and from a different time. I can't really expect him to say spanking is wrong.(Although it would be nice for sure!)
It's unfortunate that the comments were made.
This is how I understood it, as well.

[ctab]

The pope did not say spanking was a biblical teaching, period. He commented on one particular situation, and we will probably never have the full context in which is was spoken.

Sorry, I realized upon rereading this came across as harsh. But, I don't want anyone leaving this thread with the lasting idea that pope declared spanking a biblical principle. He did no such thing.

[MariJo7]

Sure, I believe you are right, the Pope did not say spanking was biblical, but I'm actually more worried about what people make of it rather than what the Pope actually said. Some people have heard his words that way. It may not have been the Pope's intention, but some "pro-spankers" will take his words as most welcome, and they will also twist his words to suit better to their purposes.
I live in a country where spanking has been illegal for 30 years. And when I look at the discussion forums of Women's magazines and Child Care magazines, I see many pro-spankers come "out of their closets" because of what the Pope has said. I'm sure he did mean well and believe he would not even be happy to see some things these people are writing. I hope this does not strenghten the "pro spanker's camp" here, but I am worried.

---------- Post added at 08:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:43 PM ----------

The local web-papers have used headings, such as: "The Pope says: Children can be and should be corporally punished." This is probably a misinterpretation of what he actually said, but it may cause harm anyway.

[Hermana Linda]

What he said was that they should be strictly (rigorously) corrected. That is open to interpretation.

Sent by Tapatalk from my phone

[rjy9343]

What he said was that they should be strictly (rigorously) corrected. That is open to interpretation.

Sent by Tapatalk from my phone

Right. I correct Ivy when she is wrong. Punishment does not mean correction. It is just the mentality of his generation that correction without spanking is not possible.

[MariJo7]

Yep, I agree that "strictly corrected" is open for interpretation, and that is probably which really has been said. But our newspapers used a word that really means "corporally" in English. They had made their interpretation already, and it is spreading around. And that's what is worrying me.

[MaySunflowers]

I hope it is alright to add this link to the pope talk. The pope is not calling couple's who choose not to have children "selfish" while not long ago he criticized people for having too many. :-/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2950860/The-Pope-declares-couples-choose-not-children-selfish-condemns-depressed-societies-seeing-offspring-burden.html

I am feeling like he is speaking out of place (whether he considers himself in official pope mode or regular person mode).

Why would we call people who don't have children by choice selfish? I respect people's ability to recognize that having children is the wrong choice for them... sure there may be some who do it for selfish reasons but that is alright. I'd rather they decide not to than have children they resent and mistreat because of it.

I feel like the Pope is actually not being encouraging to people and these comments are unhelpful about punishment, how many children not to have, not having children, etc.

[ctab]

The pope already clarified his statement about people having too many children. He was repeating the teaching of the church that says we don't have to have children no matter what, but are free to use nfp when there is a serious need for it (example a woman that has had many c sections and has been told it is no longer safe to have children can use nfp with no fear of sinning). He has written and spoke many times in favor of large families.

I have not read this selfish statement yet, but keep in mind that one of the three things every Catholic agrees upon to have a valid marriage is that they are open to having children. To purposely enter marriage with no intention of having children actually means your marriage is invalid in the eyes of the church.

[MaySunflowers]

Wow, that bothers me more that the Catholic church thinks not trying to have children means your marriage is invalud.

[ctab]

Wow, that bothers me more that the Catholic church thinks not trying to have children means your marriage is invalud.

I want to be clear that if you are infertile it doesn't affect the validity of your marriage (your marriage is valid as long as you are open to children so actual ability can't go back in time and invalidate it).

If you get married, and find that one of you is incapable of taking care of children (let's say because of severe psychological or physical limitations) and you decide to use nfp that can't invalidate a marriage that was open to life at it's start.

Okay... I am now having trouble finding the passage in the catechism so I could very well be wrong. I do know that the church does teach us that openness to life is the plan for a married couple, and that we must have serious reason for using nfp. It is one of the three questions you are asked during the wedding ceremony before it begins. But, I can not say for a fact that is attached to the validity of your marriage. Though it would most definitely be a sin to lie in church, and a sin to use nfp without serious reasons.

---------- Post added at 01:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 PM ----------

Here is a passage I could find from a legitimateCatholic site, but it doesn't quote the catechism either
"What is the difference between a valid and an invalid Catholic marriage?

Just as individual states have certain requirements for civil marriage (e.g., a marriage license, blood tests), the Catholic Church also has requirements before Catholics can be considered validly married in the eyes of the Church. A valid Catholic marriage results from four elements: (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they freely exchange their consent; (3) in consenting to marry, they have the intention to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; and (4) their consent is given in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized Church minister. Exceptions to the last requirement must be approved by church authority."

I would like to ask that a mod keeps an eye on this thread. I very much hope that this doesn't become a bash the Catholics and their weird beliefs when it has nothing to do with parents being overwhelmed by the idea of having to spank. Especially, because this was a look at what the pope said post and not someone reaching out for help in how to deal with his statement and disciplining their own children.

---------- Post added at 01:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 PM ----------

Here is the entire translation of the Papal Audience from Wednesday. The fact that the quote listed above is what people ran with demonstrates the media's desire to use what this pope says in whatever way suits them best in the moment.

http://m.vatican.va/content/francescomobile/en/audiences/2015/documents/papa-francesco_20150211_udienza-generale.html

[CelticJourney]

Admin Note: Ladies we are starting to get far from the topic of this forum. If anyone would like to return to the subject of teachings on discipline, please do so, but this is not a good place to discuss marriage issues.


Just me: I think the Pope had no intention for his comment about one particular situation to be taken as 'teachings' in the same what parenting authors and lecturers do. :no