Compounding their efforts is the fact that human beings are so incredibly complex.  As our faces differ, so do our needs, and more often than not, our response to stimulus as well.  As such, one technique that works favorably for one might to another be absolutely disastrous.

     For this reason, there is almost unanimous agreement among the experts that how to get the most and best out of children will never be reduced to an exact science.  No panaceas will be forth coming, and those who seek for a one-size-fits-all solution are deluded souls foolishly chasing after a myth.  Small wonder then, that there should be so much conflicting voices around the issue of corporal punishment.  As a rule, however, the opposing camps reach consensus on two things namely (1) That man is born with an almost ravenous appetite for pleasure, and (2) An aversion to pain.  In this view of some, this fundamental premise about human nature legitimizes corporal punishment as a behavior modification tool, since corporal punishment is by definition the use of physical force to bring about pain. People in this camp feel that if judiciously applied when a certain infraction is committed, the pain inflicted will act as a logical deterrent.  Not all are prone to agree.  The dessenters armed with results from surveys, show how gender and race biases have been committed as disciplinarians in schools went about discharging their flogging duties.  See Mcfadden and Associates (1992) and Gregory ( 1997)

     Additionally, it is asserted that flogging children, sends a mixed message, implying as it does that violence is acceptable under certain circumstances.  Yet another objection is that corporal punishment, associated with humiliation and fear, does much to warp the emerging personality.  Overshadowing all the above is the ugly specter of physical abuse that is a possibility that comes intact with the package.  Since the subject is being explored in a school setting, every conscientious teacher will be in some way affected by the objections of shaping children''s minds is of greatest import.  The diverse composition of our class room has made it possible for us to celebrate our differences. 

     Inequality of punishment is a cardinal sin, and evidence abounds that it regrettably exists.  There is the very real danger that the intended message of the strap will be misinterpreted, and the potential for abuse will not go away.  In the face of these opponents of the strap, and there are many, even my beloved colleagues might be tempted to join with Mcfadden and colleagues and say "Punishments may actually serve to increase the frequencies of the very behaviors they are intended to eliminate (1992 p. 142).

     They may well say that, but they wont be speaking from a bible based perspective, for the bible expressly declares that "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child, but the ROD of correction will drive it from him.  (Prov. 22:24).

     As if that wasn''t enough, this Divine edict is re-inforced in (Prov. 13: 24) which says in part that he that spareth his Rod hateth his son".  These words are complete in their unambiguity and just for the record, no mention was ever made of the strap leading to a warped personality.  As Christians we believe that the bible is the infallible word of God.  We hold this as an inviolable tenet of our faith.

     Concomitant with this is the holy conviction that we are fearfully and wonderfully made in the image of the creator no less.  The intricate complexities of our organism will never be fully fathomed by our finite minds.  The construction is literally mind-boggling.  God alone is omniscient.  He it is who made it, and it is something He perfectly understands.  Thankfully, when He bequeathed it to us - His sacred house of clay - He did not omit to include the operating manual.  He asked us to train up our children and He showed us how; with reason and rod.  He also endowed us with a generous rear-end to cushion the force of the disciplinarians'' whip. 

     As a check against excess for those who think that whimsical punishment of a child is permitted; Ephesians 6:4 rings loud and clear "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord".  Taken in context, this means that teachers should administer punishment intelligently.  Jesus himself endorsed the use of whips (straps)) which he swung with vigorous dexterity about the money-changers backs who desecrated the temple with their illicit trading.  See Matt. 21:  12-13.

     Some 300 years before Christ appeared, Aristotle, that great Logician that academics still today revere, exclaimed:  "The generality of men are naturally apt to be swayed by fear rather than reverence, and to refrain from evil rather because of the punishment it brings than because of its own foulness".

     Secular humanists who clamor about changing the culture of the classroom by removing the strap do well to listen and heed the voice of one of their forebears. Failing that they can always resort to the Bible before it is too late, realizing as it says, that there is a way that seemeth right unto a man but the end thereof are the ways of death.

     Since the foolishness of God is wiser than men (1Cor 1: 25) my wish is that in the aftermath of counsellors'' week which was so rich with historical significance, everyone of us may resolve to endorse the Belt, the Strap, the Rod, however insane it may seem, so that by this simple act of obedience an entire generation of children can be saved.

Clifford Pemberton

Guidance Counsellor

Advancing the Christians'' perspective