Spare the Rod, Send the Child to Hell
From the Preacher's Homiletical
Proverbs 13:24
MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro 13:24
THE CHILD AND THE ROD
I. Pain is a necessary instrument in human training. The rod is to be included in the means of education. Some natures need an experience of pain to quicken their mentalcapabilities. Sometimes children are like untilled land (see Pro 13:23), they have large capabilities lying dormant, which will not awaken unless they are subjected to severe discipline and punished for their shortcomings. And what is necessary in intellectual training is also necessary in moral training. Children must be made to feel that pain is the outcome of transgression, and evil habits must if possible be crushed while in the bud. They can be overcome then at the expense of far less suffering than when they have taken firmer hold, and the pain is as nothing compared with that which the habits themselves will inflict if they are allowed to go on through life and enthrall the soul entirely. A thorn which has but just entered the skin can be extracted with a very small amount of suffering, even by an unskilful hand; if left for a few days it may produce a festering wound; if not extracted at all, it may end in mortification. The fear of suffering is also a great preventive of sin. The Great Father of men uses it as an instrument to dissuade men from breaking His laws. He warns them, over and over again, of the suffering which they will bring upon themselves if they disobey His commands and their experience of the suffering that has followed sin in the past often leads them to avoid it in the future. And what is effectual in the training of men is effectual also with children. They will often avoid the repetition of an act which they know has brought them punishment before and will do so again. This fear of pain is not the highest motive for abstinence from wrong-doing, but in both the child and the man it may be the foundation of an upbuilding of character which shall by-and-by go on growing in goodness without this instrumentality.
II. That infliction of pain is compatible with the highest love, and is often a token of it. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews tells us that God scourges His children whenever He sees that they need it. And yet they have become His children only by the exercise of His own Infinite love. But we know that He chastens not for His pleasure, but for our profit (Heb 12:10); that He has love and wisdom enough to see the “far-off interest of tears.” So it is the father or mother, who truly loves his or her child, who is willing to undergo the present suffering of inflicting pain in order to ensure a future blessing to their children. “You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for your iniquities” (Amo 3:2). What is true of the Divine parent is true also of the human. It follows—
III. That the neglect of chastisement is a proof of the want of real love. “He that spareth his rod hateth his son.” What should we think of a father who would see his child bleed to death rather than bind up the wound, because in so doing he would inflict some present bodily pain upon the child, and some mental suffering upon himself? Or of the physician who would not use the knife to stop the progress of mortal disease because the patient shrinks from the incision, and he himself is averse to the sight of blood? We should say they were destroyers of life which had been entrusted to them to preserve. But what shall we say of a parent who is so fond of his child that he cannot inflict pain upon him now for deeds that, if repeated until they become habits, will ruin him for time and for eternity? Such sickly sentimentalism in a parent makes him unworthy of his name, and turns him who should have been his child’s highest earthly blessing into his direst curse. Many inmates of our gaols are there because they have been the victims of this so-called love; and when God sums up their misdeeds a large portion of the guilt will fall elsewhere than on the child cursed by such a parent.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
Fond parents think it love (that spares the rod), but Divine wisdom calls it hatred.—-John Howe.
The discipline of our children must commence with self-discipline. Nature teaches us to love them much. But we want a controlling principle to teach us to love them wisely. The indulgence of our children has its root in self-indulgence.—Bridges.
This phrase “betimes,” or “early in the morning,” admonisheth parents to procure the means of their children’s welfare before all other matters; and, as it were, as soon as they rise out of their beds. The Lord be merciful to us for the neglect of this duty; for if we have any worldly business to do we go first about that, and then teach and instruct our children at our leisure. O reckless carelessness about the chiefest matters! Oh that as we use to feed our children in the morning so we could once be brought to instruct them also betimes.—Muffet.
Justice must be observed in the correction of children. 1. That there is a fault committed. 2. That the fault so committed deserveth punishment. 3. That the punishment do not exceed the quality of the fault, which will otherwise seem to rage and revenge rather than to chastise for amendment.—Spencer.
To spare the rod in the first clause being opposed to chastening in the second, by the rod must be meant not only that particular instrument of punishment, but everything besides that may prove the means of our correction and amendment. And by chastisement is here intended every instrument of correction, every means of effecting what we intend by chastising, whether it be reproof, restraint of liberty, disappointment of our children’s wills, or corporal punishment. By loving and hating is not here meant the exerting actually those passions in the heart, for then the text would be untrue, but the acting agreeably to the reason, and not the blindnessof those passions; the producing such effects as are in God’s account, and in wise men’s too, and in our own when freed from partial prejudices; the consequences and fruits of love and hatred acting regularly, such as are commonly esteemed the effects of those two causes, whether they indeed proceed from them or no. For if we are to reckon of love or hatred by the effects, then it is easy to discern when parents hate their children, namely, when, through neglect or fondness, they permit them to enter on a course of ruin, and so let them fall into such miseries as the utmost hatred of their inveterate enemies could neither wish nor make them greater, whatever love there may be at the bottom. A mother is as much a murderess who stifles her child in a bed of roses as she that does it with a pillow-bear (pillow-case). The end and mischief is as great, though the means and instrument be not the same.—Bishop Fleetwood.
He that spareth the rod from his son maketh him to be his rod, wherewith he whips himself, and wherewith God whips both of them. It is better thy son should feel thy rod than thou feel the sorrow of his wicked life. And do not hate him in not correcting of him, lest he hate thee by thy not correcting of him, and God shew His hatred against both by His wrath upon you.—Jermin.
The Koh-i-noor diamond, when it came into the Queen’s possession, was a mis-shapen lump. It was very desirable to get its corners cut off and all its sides reduced to symmetry; but no unskilful hand was permitted to touch it. Men of science were summoned to consider its nature and capabilities. They examined the form of its crystals and the consistency of its parts. They considered the direction of the grain, and the side on which it would bear a pressure. With their instructions, the jewel was placed in the hands of an experienced lapidary, and by long, patient, careful labour, its sides were ground down to the desired proportions. The gem was hard, and needed a heavy pressure; the gem was precious, and every precaution was taken which science and skill could suggest to get it polished into shape without cracking it in the process. The effort was successful. The hard diamond was rubbed down into forms of beauty, and yet sustained no damage by the greatness of the pressure to which it was subjected. “Jewels, bright jewels,” in the form of little children, are the heritage which God gives to every parent. They are unshapely and need to be polished; they are brittle, and so liable to be permanently injured by the pressure; but they are stones of peculiar preciousness, and if they were successfully polished they would shine as stars for ever and ever, giving off, from their undimning edge, more brilliantly than other creatures can, the glory which they get from the Sun of Righteousness. Those who possess these diamonds in the rough should neither stike them unskilfully nor let them be uncut … Prayer and pains must go together in this difficult work. Lay the whole case before our Father in heaven; this will take the hardness out of the correction, without diminishing its strength.—Arnot.
Correction is a kind of cure, saith the philosopher (Arist. Ethic.lib. ii.), the likeliest way to save the child’s soul; where, yet, saith Bernard, it is the care of the child that is charged upon the parent, not the cure, that is God’s work alone.—Trapp.
In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done is to conquer the will. To inform the understanding is a work of time, and must, with children, proceed by slow degrees, as they are able to bear it; but the subjecting of the will must be done at once, and the sooner the better; for, by neglecting timely correction, they will contract a stubbornness and obstinacy which are hardly ever conquered, and not without using such severity as would be as painful to me as to the child. I insist upon the conquering of the will betimes, because this is the only strong and rational foundation of a religious education, without which both precept and example will be ineffectual. But when this is thoroughly done, a child is capable of being governed by the wisdom and piety of its parents till its own understanding comes to maturity, and the principles of religion have taken root in the mind.—Mrs. S. Wesley.
It is his rod that must be used, the rod of a parent, not the rod of a servant.—Henry.
Proverbs 19:18
CRITICAL NOTES
Pro 19:13. Calamity. The word so translated is in the plural form, so as to express the continuance of the trouble.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro 19:13-14; Pro 19:18
DOMESTIC SORROW AND HOW TO AVOID IT
I. Two fruitful sources of sorrow. There are many fountains whence flow waters which sadly embitter the lives of men, but there is none outside of personal character which can more entirely darken their days than either of those mentioned in the thirteenth verse. To be either the father of a foolish son or the husband of a contentious wife is sorrow indeed. The first clause of this proverb is nearly the same as that in chap. Pro 10:1, for Homiletics on which see page 137. The contentious wife is here compared to a “continual dropping,” because although the discomfort would not be great if it was only occasional, its perpetual existence makes life wretched. A drop of water falling upon a man’s head is a very trifling matter, but one of the most dreaded tortures of the Spanish inquisition was that in which a man was placed in such a position that a single drop was constantly descending upon his head. Hour after hour, day after day, and night after night, the drops followed one another in regular and unbroken succession until the poor wretch first lost reason and then life. It is much harder to bear a burden which is never lifted from the shoulders than to carry one which is much heavier for a short time and for a very limited distance. So it is easier for a man to rise above trials which, although they may be almost overwhelming for a time, last but through a comparatively very short portion of his life. But the trial of a contentious wife is unceasing so long as the marriage bond continues, and it is this that makes it so greatly to be dreaded.
II. Means suggested whereby these sources of sorrow may be avoided. If so much depends upon our family relationships—if the character of wife and child have so much to do with our weal and woe—it becomes a most momentous question how to act so as to secure a prudent wife in the first place, and then to avoid the calamity of a foolish son. It must be remembered that the first is purely a matter of choice. A man’s “house and riches” may be “the inheritance of fathers,” his social position may depend upon his parents, but his wife depends upon his own choice, and as “a prudent wife is from the Lord,” if he seeks the guidance of Him who is alone the infallible reader of character, instead of following the leadings of his fancy or consulting his worldly interests, he may with confidence expect to avoid the curse and secure the blessing. The other relationship is not one of choice. Our children are sent to us by the hand of God, and we have no more voice in determining their dispositions and mental constitutions than we have the colour of their hair, or any other bodily characteristic. But of two things we are certain. 1. That they will need a training which will not be always pleasant to them. Where there is disease in the body a cure cannot often be effected without a resort to unpleasant—often to painful—measures. It is not pleasant to a surgeon to use the knife, but it is often indispensable to his patient’s recovery to health. And both experience and revelation testify to the fact that our children come into the world with a moral taint upon them—that they have a tendency to go the wrong way—that, in the words of the Psalmist (Psa 51:5) they are “shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin.” If a parent desires to avoid the calamity of a foolish son he must early recognise the truth that his child will not become morally wise unless he “chasten” him, unless he subject him to a system of moral training, unless he make him feel that punishment must follow sin. This will be as painful sometimes to the parent as to the child; the crying of the son will hurt the father more than the rod will hurt the child, but the end to be attained by present suffering must be borne in mind, and must nerve the heart and hand of him whose duty it is to administer chastisement. (On this subject see also Homiletics on chap. Pro 13:24, page 334). 2. That there is reason to hope that children, if rightly trained, will be a joy and not a sorrow. There is hope. When a river has but just left its source among the hills, and the current is feeble, its progress can be stopped with ease; but when it has flowed on for a few miles and there is depth of water enough to float a fleet, it is almost impossible to stop its onward course. So, when the power of evil in the human soul is in its infancy, it is a much more easy task to restrain it than when it has acquired strength by years of uncontrolled dominion. When the young oak is but a few inches above the ground, the hand of the woodman can bend the slender stem as he pleases; but when it has grown for half a century he is powerless to turn it from the direction which it has taken. So a child’s will is pliable to the wise training of the parent, and if the education of the moral nature be begun early, there is every reason to hope that it will acquire strength to overcome both sin within and without, and that a righteous manhood will in the future more than repay both him whose duty it is to chasten, and him upon whom the chastisement must fall.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
Pro 19:13-14. “A prudent wife” is not to be got by an imprudent mode of choice. The gift must be sought “from the Lord.” But this does not mean that the Lord is supernaturally to point out the individual. Our own discretion must be put in exercise, along with prayer for the divine superintendence and direction, so as to bring about a happy result. And then the precious gift should be owned, and the all-bountiful Giver praised for his goodness in bestowing it.—Wardlaw.
“Every good gift is from the Lord” (Jas 1:17) only, some in the ordinary course, others more directly from Him. Houses and riches, though His gifts, come by descent. They are the inheritance of fathers. The heir is known, and in the course of events he takes possession of his estate. But the prudent wife is wholly unconnected with the man. There has been no previous bond of relation. She is often brought from a distance. “The Lord brought her to the man” by His special Providence, and therefore as His special gift.—Bridges.
Pro 19:18. The great force of the rule is its timely application—while there is hope. For hopeless the case may be, if the remedy be delayed. The cure of the evil must be commenced in infancy. Not a moment is to be lost. “Betimes” (chap. Pro 13:24; Pro 22:15)—is the season when the good can be effected with the most ease, and the fewest strokes. The lesson of obedience should be learnt at the first dawn. One decided struggle and victory in very early life, may, under God, do much towards settling the point at once and to the end. On the other hand, sharp chastening may fail later to accomplish, what a slight rebuke in the early course might have wrought.—Bridges.
You are here taught further, that firmness must be in union with affection in applying the rod. The words seem to express a harsh, yet it is an important and most salutary lesson:—“let not thy soul spare for his crying.” The words do not mean, that you should not feel, very far from that. It was the knowledge that feeling was unavoidable, and that the strength and tenderness of it was ever apt to tempt parents to relent and desist, and leave their end unaccomplished,—that made it necessary to warn against too ready a yielding to this natural inclination. The child may cry, and cry bitterly, previously to the correction; but, when you have reason to think the crying is for the rod rather than for the fault, and that, but for the threatened chastisement, the heart would probably have been unmoved, and the eyes dry;—then you must not allow yourselves to be so unmanned by his tears, as to suspend your purpose, and decline its infliction. If a child perceives this (and soon are children sharp enough to find it out) he has discovered the way to move you next time; and will have recourse to it accordingly.—Wardlaw.
On the subject of Pro 19:15 see Homiletics on chap. Pro 6:9-10, page 79.
Proverbs 19:18-20
CRITICAL NOTES
Pro 19:18. Let not thy soul spare for his crying. The translations of most expositors here differ widely from the authorised version. Grotius, Maurer, Delitzsch, Zöckler, etc., read, “Let not thy soul rise to kill him,” “Go not too far to kill him,” etc., all understanding the precept to be directed against excessive severity. Cartwright renders it “Let not thy soul spare him, to his destruction.”
Pro 19:20. Latter end, rather afterwards.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Pro 19:18-20
RELATIVE DUTIES
We have before considered Pro 19:18 in connection with Pro 19:13-14. A reference to the CRITICAL NOTES will, however, show that there is an interpretation of the last clause which was not treated there. Pro 19:19-20, regarded separately, embody thoughts and precepts which we have had before. (See Homiletics on chap. Pro 14:17; Pro 14:29, pages 363, 386, and on chap. Pro 12:15, page 271.) But these verses, taken in conjunction with the other interpretation of the last clause of Pro 19:18, may be regarded as giving valuable advice both to those who have to enforce discipline and administer chastisement, and to those who have to endure them.
I. Counsel for parents. The reasonableness and necessity of chastisement has been considered before, but the additional thought which the other rendering of Pro 19:18 makes prominent is, that it must be administered from a sense of duty, and dictated by love. Parents are far too apt to punish their children, not because they have sinned against God, but because they have offended them,—and when this is the case, the anger manifested deprives the correction of its salutary effect. “When the rod is used,” says Wardlaw,—and the words may be applied to any form of parental chastisement,—“the end in view should be, purely and exclusively, the benefit of the child; not the gratification of any resentful passion on the part of the parent. Should the latter be apparent to the child, the effect is lost, and worse than lost; for, instead of the sentiment of grief and melting tenderness, there will be engendered a feeling of sullen hostility, … if not, even, of angry scorn, towards him who has manifested selfish passion rather than parental love.” The parent must regard himself as God’s representative, and must act, not as for himself, but for the Divine Master and Father of both parent and child. If this is done, there will be none of that “provocation to wrath” or “discouragement,” against which Paul puts Christians on their guard (Col 3:21; Eph 6:4), and there will be good ground to hope that the chastisement will bring profit.
II. Counsel for children. The reasoning here is akin to that used by the Apostle in the twelfth of Hebrews. It is admitted by him (Pro 19:11-12) that “no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous;” nevertheless, those who have to endure it are exhorted to accept it with submission because of the precious after-yield—they are counselled to give themselves up to the Divine pruner and suffer Him to work His will upon them now, in consideration of the “peaceable fruits of righteousness” which will be the result in the days of harvest. So Solomon argues here. He does not deny that “counsel” and “instruction,” or rather discipline, may often be unpalatable and irksome, but he holds up the wisdom that may be gained by them as an incentive to induce the young to “hear” and to “receive” them—he “reaches a hand through time,” and “fetches the far-off interest” of what at present seems grievous in order to give effect to his exhortations. The actions of men in the present are mainly determined by the amount of consideration they give to the future. There are men who live wholly in the present hour—who gratify the fancy or follow the passion of to-day without giving a thought of the needs of to-morrow, or of the penalty that they may then have to pay for their folly. Others look ahead a little farther—they fashion the actions of to-day with a due regard to the interests of their whole future earthly life, but they bestow no thought upon the infinite “afterward” that is to succeed it. The proverb counsels both the young and the old to bring this long to-morrow into the plans of to-day, and to let the remembrance of it open the ear to the words of Divine wisdom by whomsoever they are spoken, and bend the will to receive the “chastening of the Lord,” whether it come in the form of parental discipline or in a sterner garb.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
Pro 19:18-19. “Being in great wrath, remit the punishment; but if thou let him escape, yet apply (or add) chastisement again. (So Muffet renders Pro 19:19.) When thou are in thy mood, or burnest with fiery anger and displeasure, let pass for that time the correcting of thy child, lest thou passest measure therein, or mayest chance to give him some deadly blow. Nevertheless, if for that time or for that fault thou let him go free, yet let him not always go uncorrected; but when thou art more calm, according as he offereth occasion, correct him again.—Muffet.
Do not venom discipline by naked animosity. This is the human aspect. But now for the fine model of Jehovah. “He does not afflict willingly” (Lam 3:33). He follows this maxim: “Discipline thy son, because there is now hope.” But Solomon wishes plainly to declare that to kill him He does not lift up His soul. “He taketh no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, but that all should turn and live” (Ezk 33:11). It is evidently these great timbers of thought that Solomon is eyeing at the bottom of his structure. He is settling them along in place. Secularly, they may have but little connection; spiritually, they are all morticed close.—Miller.
Thank you for reading Von’s Substack. I would love it if you commented! I love hearing from readers, especially critical comments. I would love to start more letter exchanges, so if there’s a subject you’re interested in, get writing and tag me!
Being ‘restacked’ and mentioned in ‘notes’ is very important for lesser-known stacks so… feel free! I’m semi-retired and write as a ministry (and for fun) so you don’t need to feel guilty you aren’t paying for anything, but if you enjoy my writing (even if you dramatically disagree with it), then restack, please! Or mention me in one of your own posts.
If I don’t write you back it is almost certain that I didn’t see it, so please feel free to comment and link to your post. Or if you just think I would be interested in your post!
If you get lost, check out my ‘Table of Contents’ which I try to keep up to date.
Von also writes as ‘Arthur Yeomans’. Under that name he writes children’s, YA, and adult fiction from a Christian perspective. His books are published by Wise Path Books and include the children’s/YA books:
The Bobtails meet the Preacher’s Kid
and
As well as GK Chesterton’s wonderful book, “What’s Wrong with the World”, for which ‘Arthur’ wrote most of the annotations.
Arthur also has a substack, and a website.
Thanks again, God Bless, Soli Deo gloria,
Von
What people don't think about it is the fact that it only takes one time, when your dad lays into you with his belt because you did something dangerously wrong, for the message to hit home. There's a direct nerve between your butt and your brain that gets smashed hard. After that, you become the perfect little angel. Any further discipline usually consisted of five swats and a half-hour lecture on why you need to pay attention.
The First time my kid stole money from us, I busted him. The second time he did it because the ass-whipping didn't take, I walked him and his cousin down to the Sheriff's office and had the Sheriff tell them what happens to thieves and asked him to show them a cell.
Neither of them have so much as lied since then.