To Train Up a Child (Paperback)

To Train Up a Child, written by Michael and Debi Pearl has been linked to Abuse and Murder cases. The Authors claim to be teaching an Amish tradition in child rearing (p 10), that is based on Amish mule training (Introduction). Parents who are fleeing from the anti spanking teachings by experts in modern child psychology mistakenly seek comfort in the teachings of the Pearls. What the Pearls are actually transmitting is a suspicious view of human nature gained from Freud, protestant reformers, and the application of punishment techniques gleaned from early 20th century behavioral psychology, animal training, and their own upside down version of Christianity, where God often acts like the Devil. These become their inspirations for teaching the use of systematic over-punishment techniques in child rearing--that lead to abuse and murder. Most Parents don't think they can train their little children. Training doesn't necessarily require that the trainee be capable of reason; even mice and rats can be trained to respond to stimuli. Careful training can make a dog perfectly obedient. ......... If you wait until your dog is displaying unacceptable behavior before you rebuke (or kick) him, you will have a foot-shy mutt that is always sulking around to see what he can get away with before being screamed at. Where there is an absence of training, you can no more rebuke and whip a child into acceptable behavior than you can the family dog. No amount of discipline can make up for a lack of training (p 2) What the Pearls are forgetting here is that Dogs reach adulthood in one to two years. Rats reach adult hood in only a few months. The simple things that animals have to learn as they approach maturity are not a suitable direct comparison for training an infant human or small toddler. By development itself, infants and small toddlers are not suitable for training exercises like that described above. They do not understand, they generalize the anxiety to unplanned "stimuli," or household objects, or to the parents themselves. Although animals might be trained this way without damage to the master/animal-servant relationship, entering this strategy to the parent child relationship seems counter intuitive at best. Moreover, they are not similar to "head strong young men (p 3)," who enter the military at adulthood, at age 18, who respond with full attention at the words "Tenn-Hutt (p 3)," as the Pearls suggest. Nor should the over use of bodily punishment be likened to the training exercises these young men go through, where the military uses "real bullets (p 53)," as the Pearls also suggest. Analogies can be good if applied correctly. So far the Pearls do not apply them correctly since it gives them license to advise doing unethical things to children. The Pearls attempt to make pious their mix of early modern behavioral psychology and animal training for child rearing by errantly proposing that God tempted Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden to partake of the forbidden fruit: "But that is tempting the child you say!" you say. Did not God do the same for Adam and Eve? (p56) The Pearls have given us a mix of modern behavioral psychology, animal training, and upside down Christianity where God is the tempter: When God wanted to "train," his first two children not to touch, He did not place the forbidden object out of their reach. Instead, He placed the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" in the "midst of the garden" (Gen 3:3). Since it was readily accessible in the middle of the garden, they would be exposed to its temptation more often. God's purpose was not to save the tree, but rather, to train the couple. Note that the tree was not just "knowledge of evil," but "knowledge of good and evil." By exercising their wills not to eat, they would have learned the meaning of "good" as well as "evil." Eating the tree's fruit was not only the way in which they would come to knowledge of good and evil, but it was a forbidden shortcut. No, Adam and Eve were not oblivious to the meaning of Good and Evil except for God's supposed "training" exercise. Before we explore all this let's see where the Pearls are coming from for their belief in Adam & Eve's supposed state of stupidity: At their creation, Adam and Eve were complete physically, but morally undeveloped. A four-month fetus, still in the mother's womb, is a living soul. Though all of its tiny members match those of a mature adult, it is yet an incomplete creation needing further growth before becoming distinct from its mother. In like manner, a three-year-old child, in its soul has all the tiny features of a morally responsible adult--a knowledge of right and wrong, a sense of justice, accountability, conscience, duty, guilt, shame, etc. Yet, none of the moral faculties are developed to the point of being fully operative and independent. (p17) Again the Pearls confuse the abilities of adults (Adam and Eve) with those of toddlers. This explains the Pearls' pious reasoning for prescribing severe punishment for training infants and toddlers. To them God punished Adam & Eve who were purportedly like three year olds, with INCOMPREHENSIBLE severity--cursing the ground, casting them out of the Garden etc. But why are the Pearls wrong? Adam and Eve were created in the Adult state (Ott, 104-105) and most adults have no problem in not touching trees. But that is the depth of thought given to this story by the Pearls. But the matter was more serious. The tree contained knowledge that was only proper to God, which as sons of God, Adam and Eve had no problem honoring God's wishes for this. In fact, Adam & Eve were quite smart (104, 105, Ott): God brought Adam the animals for him to name (Gen 2:20). Adam knew the status and tasks of the woman (Genesis 2:23). Adam & Eve knew how to till the Garden etc. God gave Adam and Eve, "the first educators of humanity (104, Ott), " infused knowledge for their natural aims (to glorify God) and their supernatural destiny--to be with God in Heaven (104, Ott). Thus when God told Adam and Eve about not eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil lest they would surely die, they understood completely. They knew Good and Evil already from the standpoint of the information given them--"Do not Eat. . . or You will surely die." But it was not simply knowledge that God infused into Adam & Eve to pass this test of their Honor for him. Adam and Eve had virtuous hearts: The elevation to the state of grace is indicated by the intimacy between God and the progenitors of the human race in Paradise. A scriptural proof is provided by St. Paul's teaching on the Redemption. The Apostle teaches that Christ, the Second Adam, restored what the first Adam had lost, the state of original holiness and justice. But if he [Adam] had lost it, he must previously have received it. CF Rom. 5:12 et seq.; Eph 1:10 ; I Cor. 6:2; 2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15; Rom 5:10 et seq. ; 8:14 et seq (Ott, 103). For more of my book review, go to- *******