Tag: discipline

Posted on

Pondering Punishment In the Light of God’s Love

The first reading today from the Book of the Prophet Amos has God speaking of some rather strong punishments coming Israel’s way due to her lack of repentance. God says the strong shall be brought low and the swift shall not escape!  There is also a vivid line in the psalm that read: Consider this, you who forget God, lest I rend you and there be no one to rescue you. He that offers praise as a sacrifice glorifies me; and to him that goes the right way I will show the salvation of God (Ps 50:22-23)

We have become rather “soft” in modern times (at least in the Western World). We have been taught in the “God is Love” school which is not wrong but has often understood that love in sentimental and simplistic ways. Modern notions of love are usually soft, permissive and non-directive. Love is often thought to be exclusively “supportive” and “affirming.” The understanding that love could or should include setting limits, correction, admonishments or punishments is usually downplayed if not explicitly rejected as pertaining to love. For this reason parenting in our culture has been severely undermined.

God too has largely been relegated to being essentially an affirmer. He is the one who “understands.” One man recently told me that God didn’t care if he went to Church or not. When I quoted the 3rd Commandment and another scriptural passage he just brushed it aside and said, “God understands my heart.” A couple divorcing once told me that God was OK with them divorcing since God “wouldn’t want them to be unhappy.” When I read scriptures that indicated that God wasn’t too impressed with divorce they just brushed it aside and indicated that God wouldn’t want them to go on suffering since they were both in love with other people. A homosexual “couple” recently insisted that since God is about love he has no problem with any two people loving each other. Scriptural quotes as usual had no impact on these men who simply said, “God is not a homophobe.”

So in the end it would seem that God’s main job is to affirm us in whatever we want to do. This reinvented “God” just want us to be emotionally happy and have plenty of self esteem.

Of course in this climate, the notion of God not merely disapproving of something we do but actually punishing us for it seems an outrageous and untenable position. And yet over and over again Scripture is filled with God sending forth punishments on those who persist in sin. It is true many passages speak of his patience but there comes a time when, after warning through the prophets and others,  that God does punish. Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments are filled with warnings of punishment and also its execution.

Now it remains true that God is Love. But he is true and real Love. His love is strong and rooted in what is actually best for us, both as individuals and as a community. Hence when God punishes it is a manifestation of his love.

We also have to recapture a proper understanding of punishment and its purpose. Too many people today think that punishment is the same as vengeance. Hence the one who punishes is merely exactly revenge or getting back at some one for what they have done. Perhaps too many think of punishment as merely a way for the more powerful to vent their anger on the less powerful. It is true that sometimes a parent may punish with mixed motives. Perhaps they are at times venting their anger  as they punish a child. But they are imperfect parents. God however, is a perfect Father and when he punishes it is not admixed with these sinful qualities. But distorted notions of punishment as synonymous with revenge or a mere venting of anger are common today. Thus a proper notion of punishment must be recovered.

What then is the proper understanding and purpose of punishment? In effect the purpose of punishment is allow the one punished to experience the negative effects of bad behavior in a small way so that they do not experience the bad effects in a far worse way. Consider a child who has been commanded by his parents not to cross the busy street without an older person to escort him. This warning is issued in love. The parents are not trying to take away his fun or merely limit his freedom to no purpose. They are trying to protect him from grave harm. But what if the child does cross the street unescorted and the parents discover it? Likely they will or should punish him. Perhaps his father will have him stay in his room for three hours alone as a punishment. Now notice what is happening here. A smaller injury is inflicted to avoid a much worse injury. After all which is worse, a three hour “time out” in a boring room, or being struck by a car and possibly paralyzed or killed? It is clear that the purpose of punishment is to allow a small amount of pain to avoid a much worse situation.

And thus when God punishes he is surely acting in the same manner. He will allow pain or inflict it so that we will avoid far worse pain eternally in Hell, or also pain here as our bad behavior spirals downward into far worse and dangerous matters. Punishment when properly applied (and it always is by God) is salutary. It helps to bring an end to bad and ultimately hurtful behavior and usually issues forth in good and constructive behavior.

Hence punishment is integral to love. But love here must be understood as the strong and vigorous love that speaks the truth and insists upon it for us as the only basis for real and lasting fulfillment.

The Letter to the Hebrews has a remarkable passage that spells out the true contours of punishment and discipline rooted in God the Father’s true and vigorous love for us:

“My son, do not disdain the discipline of the Lord or lose heart when reproved by him; for whom the Lord loves, he disciplines; he scourges every son he acknowledges.”  Endure your trials as “discipline”; God treats you as sons. For what “son” is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are without discipline, in which all have shared, you are not sons but bastards.  Besides this, we have had our earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them. Should we not (then) submit all the more to the Father of spirits and live? They disciplined us for a short time as seemed right to them, but he does so for our benefit, in order that we may share his holiness. At the time, all discipline seems a cause not for joy but for pain, yet later it brings the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who are trained by it. So strengthen your drooping hands and your weak knees. Make straight paths for your feet, that what is lame may not be dislocated but healed. (Heb 12:5-13)

As a final observation note that this passage says that those who are without discipline are called  “bastards.” It is interesting that this word,  which originally refers simply to child that does not have a father in his life, has come to mean some one who is obnoxious self centered, or incorrigible. When a child grows up without the discipline of a father they often become a  “bastard”  in both the ancient and modern sense of the word. In our use of this rather impolite word we are connecting what happens to a person who does not know discipline.

It is a true fact that many children today have not known proper discipline and this leads to any number of ills: bad and self destructive behavior, arrogance, disrespectful attitudes, incorrigibility, hostility, selfishness, greed, insensitivity, lack of self-control and many other sociopathic tendencies.

We need to rediscover that punishment is part of love. It is not love to leave a child undisciplined. We are not helping them in any way when we fail to discipline. Surely discipline must be rooted in love and when it is it leads to many good effects. God too shows us his love in disciplining us and punishing. I have quoted these words of St. Thomas before and it is good to finish with them: [F]raternal correction properly so called, is directed to the amendment of the sinner. Now to do away with anyone’s evil is the same as to procure his good: and to procure a person’s good is an act of charity, whereby we wish and do our friend well. (II, IIae, 33.1).

In this video Fr.”Bing Crosby” warns the young men of the school of what comes from bad behavior.

Posted on

On Prudential Judgment and the Question of Corporal Punishment

There was an interesting debate segment today on Fox News on the topic of Corporal Punishment, or “paddling.”  You can see the debate, hosted by Megyn Kelly at the bottom of this post. (cf also Washington Post article).

Not having been born yesterday I realize that the concept of spanking children is controversial to say the least. Paddling children in school is almost unheard of today though I was surprised that it is still legal in over twenty states.

Prudential Judgment – The question of paddling and the use of corporal punishment in certain cases exists in an area of decision making known as “prudential judgments (or decisions).” Prudence is one of the four cardinal virtues and I recall from Thomistic Philosophy that it was defined as recta ratio agibilium (right reason applied to practice). Essentially Prudence is the virtue whereby we are able to properly judge, using sound reason and moral principles, the best way to come to a desired end. That it is called an act of judgment means that we have a decision to make as to best means to an end using the virtue of prudence.

Now “prudential judgments” are not mathematical in the sense that they may vary from person to person. Reasonable men and women may differ within limits as to what is the best means to attain a given end.  This is because circumstances may vary from case to case and from culture to culture. Prudential judgments consider many factors such as the individuals involved, the various means available, the circumstances that both precede and follow from an action, age and or gender factors, cultural norms, moral norms and the like. Hence, as already stated, reasonable people may often differ in prudential judgments.

I point this out because I have noticed that many people treat the question of paddling or similar forms of corporal punishment as something that should be an absolute moral norm. Either they think it should be absolutely and in all circumstances banned or they think it is something that should be prescribed in accord with biblical or other traditional norms. I think the moral absolutism is more common on the anti corporal punishment side but it does exist on both sides.

Corporal Punishment is a Prudential Judgment – In discussing a topic like this it seems important that we should remember that we ARE  talking about a prudential judgment. Parents will often make different judgments about whether this form of punishment is helpful unto achieving the end (e.g. discipline or maturity) which they seek. Since there are many variables in each situation there will be different approaches. If we see the debate in this light it may be more possible for us to allow variability without all the harshness. (It should  be clear that severe beatings causing serious or permanent harm are to be excluded from any notion of prudential judgment).

There are many other issues in our culture which involve prudential judgment. But we seem to live in a culture where we want to make lots of rules for each other. There ARE rules that are essential to make but there are also many areas that admit of variability within limits. (Even our recent discussion on modesty admits of certain prudential judgments within limits).

Other things in the Church admit of prudential judgment such as what kind of music to allow in the liturgy, how and when to apply the Church’s social justice tradition to specific issues, how and when bishops should discipline lay people or clerics who stray from Church teaching, what is the best catechetical method, etc. We are surely free to try and influence each other’s thinking and priorities but we also do well to keep charity in mind since, in prudential judgments, reasonable men and women may differ.

As for corporal punishment I will say it worked for me. I was paddled in school and occasionally spanked at home. My parents did not often spank us but when we were young there was what I would call a judicious use of it. In school I was taken to the Principal’s office and paddled on several occasions in my errant youth. I once recall that Mr. Bulware the principal turned the school PA system on once while I was paddled. This is because I and another boy started a school yard brawl and I and the other instigator were publicly paddled to dissuade others from such actions. For me these paddlings had a salutary effect and my behavior improved. The Principal was skilled in that he did not seriously harm me but my back side stung enough that I was encouraged to avoid the paddle in the future. As I say it several such paddlings to bring the lesson home but I learned that misbehavior had embarrassing and unpleasant consequences.

Now this is MY story I do not say that every one’s experience was mine. Comments are open and you will surely have your own thoughts. But remember, this is a matter of prudential judgment and reasonable people can and do differ.

In the video debate you will see all the women are respectful of each other though one wants to impose, through federal legislation, a ban on paddling. She is free to attempt that of course but here is where I wonder why our culture insists on legislating in prudential matters. What do you think?

Posted on

Critical Keys for Catholic Catechesis: Discipline and Content

Almost no one in the Church would claim today that we have done a good job of handing on the faith to our children. Depending on how we reckon it we have lost two or three generations to an ignorance and inability to articulate the  faith. Even the most basic teachings are unknown to the young.

A few years back I was talking to Catholic sixth graders about Adam and Eve and it became clear to me that they had little idea of who Adam and Eve were except that they were “in the Bible or something.” That was it. I collected all the glossy page religion books and instituted a “back to basics” curriculum at every grade level. We started with creation and the fall of man  and used the Biblical narrative along with memorized questions and answers and culminated  the year with a “religion bee” wherein the children were expected to demonstrate their mastery of the material for prizes. The  kids did well and they whooped their parents. The following year we instituted a parallel program for the parents. While their kids were in Sunday school class the parents were being instructed in the same material by yours truly.

I am no expert in pedagogy (educational theory) but it seems rather clear to me that we seriously lack in two major areas of catechetical instruction: discipline and content. Pretty devastating gaps it would seem! Not much is left over except self-esteem and slogans like “God loves you.”

In terms of content, it seems we have made improvements. The publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and stricter standards that our Catechetical materials conform to it,  has been the single greatest reform. Our materials are more orthodox, and the content is more substantial than the darkest years of the 1970s and 80s. Several good series have been published as well which have good content and are visually pleasing as well. I will not mention them by name since this is a blog of the Archdiocese and it is not appropriate for me to single them out. (It seems to me that you are free to speak of series you like in the comments since the Archdiocese does not endorse every comment that appears here). So I think content is improving.

But content is not enough. Academic discipline is also required. All the best material and visually beautiful as well cannot alone help children master the faith. Stronger and more rigorous academic discipline must be reasserted in the catechetical process. There are a number of elements of this academic discipline that I would like to mention and perhaps you will add more.

  1. Repetition – There is an old Latin saying: Repetitio mater studiorum (repetition is the mother of studies). Learning requires a lot of repetition for it to sink in and become second nature. One of the major flaws in the current catechetical process in most parishes and Catholic Schools is the way the curriculum is divided up. In second grade we talk about Holy Communion and Confession (but never again). The fourth graders are talking about Commandments – but never again. In fifth grade we talk about the Church (history and structure) – but never again. The sixth graders are talking about the life of Jesus – but never again. And so forth. The catechetical process is compartmentalized and doesn’t always seem to build on mastery of what came before. To discuss things but once hardly seems effective, especially if the material does not build on what came before. Back in public school, at least in my day,  mathematics did a great job of a kind of spiral curriculum which combines repetition with increasing mastery as new material was introduced. First we learned numbers. Then we used numbers to count. Then we used numbers and counting to go backward and forward by adding and subtracting them. Then we used numbers and counting and adding and subtracting to learn multiples and divisions. Then we used numbers and functions to realize that whole numbers can be fractioned and that numbers could have negative values and we learned how to count in fractions and to add and subtract them, multiply and divide them. And the material continued to build and the mastery of what went before was not left behind but folded into the new material and was used in an upward spiral. It is true that faith is not so simple as Math but the narrative of the faith does build in a spiral way. From God to creation to fall to promise of salvation to paschal mystery, to the life of grace by the sacraments to ultimate restoration with God forever in the paradise of heaven.  These basic elements must be reviewed over and over in an ascending spiral that respects human development at its various stages. But just talking about creation and the fall in the early grades and not at all later is bound to lead to a forgetful and confused student. If the wound of original sin and the loss of a relationship with God is forgotten, how will redemption make sense? No wonder it all seems “irrelevant” to many of them.
  2. Memorization –mastery of material is almost impossible without good old fashioned memorization. We just have to know things like the seven Sacraments, the Ten Commandments, the seven deadly sins, the basic prayers, the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. Further, basic definitions like grace, redemption, Mortal and venial sin, incarnation, etc have to be memorized and understood. Answers to basic questions like why God made me, who were our first parents, what is the Church, who were the prophets etc. Answers like these need to be committed to memory. Without these basic building blocks being committed to memory very little building is going to go on. These basic memorized things are like hooks on which many other things hang. Without the hooks, everything falls flat. Early in school I memorized my ABCs and then many words and how they are spelled. So much depended upon my simply committing these basics to memory. The same was true with my multiplication tables. My parents and teachers were clear, just memorize them! Do the work now and everything else will be easier and make sense as you go. I struggled but I got it and I have never lost them. Give me any two numbers between 1 and 12 and I’ll give you their product instantly. Memorizing those tables opened a whole world for me and simplified life enormously. Why should the faith be any different? In memorizing and knowing the seven deadly sins I am greatly assisted in examining my conscience, grasping the deeper drives of sin in my life, understanding and anticipating the moves of the world, the devil and the flesh, and helping others understand the negative drives in their life. It all starts with simply memorizing and grasping basic concepts.
  3. Time – Most people spend barely an hour a week trying to master their faith. This is not enough. Mastery of any discipline requires something more than one hour a week. We cannot expect magic. If we only ask kids to spend an hour week with no homework or expectations in between, we should not expect any mastery of the material. Another time related problem is that catechetical instructions in parishes are not year-round. Most Protestant Churches I know would never think of cancelling Sunday School  for the summer. They attach the same priority to Sunday School that we attach to mass. Sunday School is every Sunday almost without fail. In the Catholic Church we call the whole thing off from May through mid September. And every single three day weekend also seems to get lumped in as well. In many parishes the children have religious instruction only half the weeks of the year when summers, holidays and snow days are subtracted out. In my parish we are gradually increasing the coverage with the goal of making Sunday School year round.
  4. Accountability– at some point we need to expect young people to demonstrate mastery of the material. Things like tests, religion bees, presentations etc. should be used. Why should children take religious education seriously if they will never have to render an account for what they have done or failed to do? Things like religion bees can be fun and challenging. Rewards can be offered. Religious “It’s Academic, or Trivial pursuit formats can be fun but serious ways of assessing mastery of the material. Things like this and tests also impose certain deadlines for mastery of  the material. Deadlines are really lifelines since they awaken urgency and discipline. In the end both student and teachers must be accountable. Accountability must be returned to the catechetical process.
  5. Resourcefulness – In school I could not learn everything. But one of the disciplines I learned was how to find answers. I remember trooping off the school library and being taught the Dewey Decimal System and how to use a card catalogue. We were introduced to encyclopedias, journals, and later in College, to abstracts. Today things are easier with the Internet but we sill have to teach young people how to find answers. Sites like newadvent.org ; The EWTN Libraries; and the Bishops Website and many others are places where answers can be found. In the end, one of the best fruits of my education was how to be resourceful.

OK. That’s enough from me. How say you? You will surely have some thoughts to add to this discussion on Catechesis, particularly in terms of  content and discipline. Especially helpful are things you have found to work. What further disciplines would you add to the list?  We can all stipulate we’ve done a poor job in the Church of late. Content and resources are improving but what of discipline?

This video is a good commentary on the problem of content which I did not develop as fully here. Msgr. in the video does mention a Catechetical series. Again I must issue a disclaimer that posting this video does not amount to an official endorsement of the series. I am not empowered to make such endorsements on the part of the Archdiocese. But the video is a good reflection on the need for content as well as technique and discipline. (Hat tip to Patrick Madrid for the video)

Posted on

The Story of Eli: A Moral Tale on the Peril of Poor Parenting and Unfaithful Priestly Ministry

In the reading from today’s Mass we are introduced to Samuel for the first time. We also see are rather stunning portrait of poor parenting and poor priestly leadership in the person of of High Priest of the Sanctuary at Shiloh, Eli. Consider this line from the Scripture today:

Samuel was sleeping in the temple of the LORD where the ark of God was. The LORD called to Samuel, who answered, “Here I am.” Samuel ran to Eli and said, “Here I am.  You called me.”“I did not call you,” Eli said.  “Go back to sleep.” …..At that time Samuel was not familiar with the LORD, because the LORD had not revealed anything to him as yet. (1 Sam 3:3-5).

Now let me ask you, how could it be that Samuel, a young boy living in the temple of the Lord and under the foster parentage of the High Priest was “not familiar” with the Lord? Some may argue he is but a young boy. Still, he is old enough to speak with Eli, to hear and heed Eli’s instructions. Has Eli told him nothing of the Lord? It would seem so. Ah, but you say, the text has indicated that Samuel knew nothing because the Lord had not yet revealed anything to him. The text seems to root the cause of his unfamiliarity in the Lord rather than Eli. But Eli is still without excuse for it remains true that God reveals himself to us not usually as a voice in the night, or some unusual theophany. Rather, God reveals himself to us through parents, priests, religious and other elders. For a young and already talking Samuel to be unfamiliar with the Lord while living under the care of the High Priest supposedly ministering in the very House of The Lord is unconscionable. It is a dereliction of duty. Eli has failed thus far as a parent and a priest. Children should be taught of God from their first interactive moments. Among the first things they learn should be Bible stories and prayers. They should be made aware of and become familiar with the “still small voice”  of God as he whispers his presence to them.

I have only a few memories of being a very young child of about 5 years of age. But one of the memories I most cherish is how plainly I heard the voice of God and felt his presence. There was a very beautiful statue of the  Sacred Heart near my dresser and God surely spoke to me from there and I was familiar with his calming and loving presence. But I could understand what I was experiencing because my parents had made me familiar with the Lord. I knew who it was that was speaking to me in those quiet and calm whispers. It was the Lord. Sadly, as I grew older and the flesh became more alive I lost my ability to hear the “still, small voice” of the Lord. I have sought it ever since my conversion back to the Lord and am only in recent years beginning to experience it again in moments of contemplative prayer.

I knew who spoke to me and had been made familiar with him, but Samuel did not and this is a very serious dereliction of duty on the part of Eli. When asked he finally did tell Samuel of the Lord but Samuel should not have had to ask.

Perhaps you think I am being too hard on Eli or reading into the text a bit. Maybe Eli was a busy man being High Priest and all. Or perhaps I am just plain wrong and Eli was actually a good father figure for Samuel. But I do not think I am wrong nor am I being too harsh for poor parenting and poor priestly leadership are a pattern for Eli. Consider another story about the two priestly sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas:

Eli’s sons were wicked men; they had no regard for the LORD. Now it was the practice of the priests with the people that whenever anyone offered a sacrifice and while the meat was being boiled, the servant of the priest would come with a three-pronged fork in his hand. He would plunge it into the pan or kettle or caldron or pot, and the priest would take for himself whatever the fork brought up. This is how they treated all the Israelites who came to Shiloh. But even before the fat was burned, the servant of the priest would come and say to the man who was sacrificing, “Give the priest some meat to roast; he won’t accept boiled meat from you, but only raw.”  If the man said to him, “Let the fat be burned up first, and then take whatever you want,” the servant would then answer, “No, hand it over now; if you don’t, I’ll take it by force.” This sin of the young men was very great in the LORD’s sight, for they were treating the LORD’s offering with contempt……Now Eli, who was very old, heard about everything his sons were doing to all Israel and how they slept with the women who served at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting.  So he said to them, “Why do you do such things? I hear from all the people about these wicked deeds of yours. No, my sons; it is not a good report that I hear spreading among the LORD’s people. If a man sins against another man, God may mediate for him; but if a man sins against the LORD, who will intercede for him?” His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke, for it was the LORD’s will to put them to death…..Now a man of God came to Eli and said to him, “This is what the LORD says:  Why do you scorn my sacrifice and offering that I prescribed for my dwelling? Why do you honor your sons more than me by fattening yourselves on the choice parts of every offering made by my people Israel?’ “Therefore the LORD, the God of Israel, declares: …those who despise me will be disdained. The time is coming when I will cut short your strength and the strength of your father’s house, so that there will not be an old man in your family line …” ‘And what happens to your two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will be a sign to you—they will both die on the same day. I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his house, and he will minister before my anointed one always.  (1 Sam 2:selected verses)

The basic facts are these:

  1. The priestly sons of Eli, Hophniand Phinehas, are wicked men. They violate the sacred liturgy and and take more than their portion, a portion that belongs to God. They scandalize the faithful, act unjustly toward them and have illicit sexual relations with the young women assigned to care for the Shrine at Shiloh.
  2. But Eli does nothing. When it is called to his attention he gives a verbal rebuke. But he must do more than this. They have acted so scandalously that they must be removed. They are a threat to others by their exploitative and opportunistic behavior. They should have been removed. It is a true fact that we struggled with this very same thing in the clergy sexual abuse scandal of recent years.
  3. God rebukes Eli for his weak rebuke and tells him that his weak response indicates that Eli favors his sons more than God and also scorns the sacred liturgy.
  4. God cannot allow Eli and his sons to minister at Shiloh any longer. He will bring Eli’s family down and replace him with a priest who is faithful and will do what is in God’s heart and mind. In a word, Eli has been replaced. Samuel will soon enough take up the holy priesthood. Hophni and Phinehas will die soon for their sins, and Eli’s line is at an end.

How has all this happened? Poor parenting and an unfaithful priestly ministry. In failing to raise his children in the fear of the Lord and in failing to punish wrongdoing Eli has brought grave harm upon himself, his family and his sons. In addition, when Samuel was placed in his care he continued with his pattern of failing to preach the Lord and make Samuel familair with him.

This is a moral tale for our times as well. How many young people today have not been raised in the reverential fear of the Lord, have not been raised to be familiar with the Lord, have not been properly disciplined by parents  and trained in righteousness? How many of them have not been instructed in God’s ways and have been allowed to fall deep into sinful habits and patterns.

In the Church  too some have not at times been willing to discipline where necessary.  Sin is often not rebuked from our pulpits, children are poorly instructed in the faith. We celebratete compassion but sometimes to a fault where sin is tolerated and grows very serious in people’s lives. Silence by many clergy and Church leaders in the face of serious sin can and  is taken to be tacit approval of sin and has led to a widespread moral malaise. Disobedience in the clergy has sometimes been tolerated. Liturgical norms and the sacred liturgy have often been abused. And yes, as we sadly know there has been abusive and illicit sexual activity too.

Thank God there are signs of revival and renewal in many of these areas in the Church and in some of our families. But the story of Eli is an important moral tale for our times that God wants us to take serious our obligation to raise our children to know the Lord and walk in his ways. Through proper discipline and instruction we are summoned to have our children be familiar with the Lord at the very dawning of consciousness and reason. To fail in this regard is something God takes very seriously. Thank God for good parents, clergy and religious who have done their very best in this regard. Hopefully the story of Eli for most of us is simply an encouragement to do what we are already doing. But for those who fail to take seriously their obligations in this regard it should be seen for what it also is: a warning.

Since this was a rather heavy post, perhaps you’ll allow me to post a humorous video. As I have pointed out, Parents and priests should teach Children to pray. But this video by Tim Hawkins tells us what to avoid when teaching children to pray. In a phrase: “Don’t be spooky!”