Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Love, Joy, Feminism

Home
Nonreligious
TTUAC: Life without Struggle Has No Achievement

TTUAC: Life without Struggle Has No Achievement

Last updated on: February 22, 2018 at 5:00 am by Libby Anne

TTUAC: Life without Struggle Has No Achievement 2018-02-20T11:43:55-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

To Train Up A Child, chapter 20, part 5

This week we continue looking at the letter to his sons that Michael Pearl included toward the end of his child-training manual. In this week there are a few pieces of good advice—mixed with the bad and the very confusing.

Sometimes I feel like Michael would have benefited form a proof-reader who would point out that certain pieces of his advice are in direct contradiction to each other—or at least need further explanation.

Boys, guide your wives in understanding training and discipline. Don’t take for granted that they are automatically prepared to be mothers. Some mothers don’t have the courage to discipline and will tell the children, “Just wait until your daddy gets home, he will spank you.” When you walk through the door, you will want the kids to all come climbing your legs and pulling on your arms, not cowering in a corner. Three hours of dreading Daddy’s coming home can be devastating programming. Cause your wife to do her own discipline.

Holy patriarchy, Batman!

I’m struck by the phrase “cowering in a corner.” It reads like an admission on Michael’s part that the sort of discipline he advocates results in children cowering in a corner. And it’s not like he objects! His concern here is that he wants the sort of discipline that results in children cowering in a corner to be meted out by the children’s mother, rather than saved for their father’s return.

I do agree with Michael that putting children’s discipline on hold with the “wait till your father gets home” threat is a terrible idea. I just don’t agree with his reasoning. Michael doesn’t want the father to be the bad guy. I don’t think discipline should be set up to be punitive and frightening to begin with.

Notice Michael’s insistence that some mothers are soft and need to be caused (by their husbands) to properly discipline (i.e. spank) their children. Urging parents discipline their children physically more harshly than they are comfortable with is a terrible idea, but that is what Michael is doing.

Check yourself for balance by asking the question, “Do my children view me as a stern and severe disciplinarian or as a cheerful and wonderful companion and guide?” Your judgments and punishments should be lost in the many hours of happy communion.

Um. Okay.

“Do my children view me as a stern and severe disciplinarian,” asks the same man who advises parents administering a whipping that “if the crying turns to a true, wounded, submissive whimper, you have conquered.” You see what I mean about wanting an editor?

It’s almost like Michael can’t decide what he wants—to be the bossest boss ever with submissive, obedient children who jump at his every word because they know they’ll be whipped if they don’t, or to be the fun dad, doing all sorts of projects with laughing, happy, frolicking children. And because he can’t decide, he creates some sort of weird amalgam out of both.

Newsflash: Your kids won’t be able to speak their minds around you if they know that speaking their minds could result in being hit with paddles or plumbing supply line. You can’t be this punitive, and also have a truly open and familiar relationship with your children.

This also strikes me as wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Michael wants children who are completely obedient to his every whim and jump when he says jump—but he also wants to play at being the happy, laughing, friendly dad that all the kids love. Michael’s desire to be loved by children does not fit well with the sadism that is nearly palpable in the sections where he describes beating children.

At this point, Michael changes topic:

Lastly, as your children develop, let them feel a part of the struggles of life. Don’t become so “successful” that you can provide everything they need or want. If you find everything is coming too easy, give it all away and start over under more difficult circumstances.

Several readers have pointed out that there were times in Michael’s career and ministry when money was so tight his children subsisted on almost nothing. Michael doesn’t seem to see that as a problem. Perhaps because he has never met with great financial success, he does not appear to see financial success as a marker of manly success—instead, he seems to see struggling and living on almost nothing as a signifier of true manhood, regardless of what his wife and kids have to go through.

Also, look again at his statement—don’t become so successful that you can provide everything your children need. Not just everything they want.

I am all on board with not giving kids everything they want. I give my children an allowance in large part so that they can learn to save up for the things they want (or wait for a birthday or Christmas), rather than expecting me to jump and buy them anything they ask for. Learning the value of work is important. But Michael is advising parents to never become so successful that they have enough money to provide for all of the things their children need.

Life without struggle has no achievement. If they lose their shoes, let them go without until they can make the money to buy more.

Again, I’m game with having children contribute to replacing things they have lost or destroyed. One of my brother-in-laws had to save money, as a child, to repay his parents for a window he carelessly broke with a baseball. He learned a lesson—that actions have consequences and things aren’t free. But that’s not the same thing as making your kid go without shoes when you have the money to buy new ones.

The Pearls, of course, advocate homeschooling, so a kid raised in this system could still do school even without shoes. But that child couldn’t go anywhere—to the store, a library, etc.—or safely do certain work in the barn or outside without shoes. You can teach the child a lesson by making them save to pay for the replacement shoes without making them wait for the replacement shoes.

This whole section reads like a glorification of poverty, which I suppose it is. I’m sure that those who grew up poor (and I did not) would have a lot to say about Michael’s treatment.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!

Uncategorized

To Train Up a Child

Previous Post

February 21, 2018

Wyoming Lawmakers: Same-Sex Marriage Is an Unconstitutional Establishment of Religion

Next Post

February 23, 2018 Voice in the Wind: Marcus, King of Gaslighting

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the first book of the New Testament?

Select your answer to see how you score.

John Matthew Luke Mark