Decolonizing Discipline: Children, Corporal Punishment, Christian Theologies, and Reconciliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This edited collection brings an interdisciplinary, while mostly theologically driven, perspective to decolonization and reconciliation by examining corporal punishment in a Christian context. Building on a two-day symposium held at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, in 2017, the editors bring together some involved with the symposium and new voices to build on the “Christian Theological Statement in Support of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Call to Action 6,” which was generated through the symposium. Overall, the book focuses on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s (TRC) Call to Action 6 to repeal section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada, which “justifies the use of corporal punishment by parents and those standing in the place of parents” (1–2). All the chapters are anchored by chapter 1, written by Reverend Mark MacDonald, which situates Canada’s residential school system within “the broader systemic evil that is called colonialism” (18) as well as the church’s role in this evil.The book opens with an introduction from the editors as well as a copy of the “Christian Theological Statement.” There are another nineteen chapters divided into four sections. Section 1 provides context for Call to Action 6, including psychology research on corporal punishment, childhood reflections on experiences of abuse, as well as a critical discussion of the systems of power that pervaded the residential school system. This section is well suited for readers in child and youth studies, Indigenous studies, as well as nonacademic audiences (i.e., parents). Section 2 presents “Christian Theological Reflections on Corporal Punishment,” including discussions and reflections on well-known scripture that has provided the rationale for corporal punishment in some places and times (65). This section is well suited for audiences in religious studies but also Christian families interested in a perspective of discipline that does not involve corporal punishment. Section 3 includes traditional Indigenous perspectives on parenting and discipline, positive parenting, as well as spirituality among children and would be of interest to those in Indigenous studies, education, child and youth studies, and religious studies. Section 4 returns to the foundation of the book, the “Christian Theological Statement,” to present a vision of reconciliation that focuses on the well-being of children and youth.Much of the book provides a Christian rereading of scripture regarding corporal punishment, which it connects to the treatment of Indigenous children in residential schools and colonial policy more broadly. The book is unique in its appeal to diverse audiences, including child and youth studies, psychology, religious studies, Indigenous studies, and nonacademic audiences—notably parents, Christian or not, interested in progressive discipline.The book provides insight into the positive and negative experiences of Indigenous youth in Canada and globally, both inside and outside residential schools, while focusing on the Canadian context. The editors could be critiqued for the chapters’ diverse writing styles and purposes, including literature reviews, personal testimonies, sermon exemplars, and more, but this contributes to its strength as a book that appeals to many audiences. Furthermore, the way in which the sections are organized adds to the overall rationale of the book and the way it works toward a vision of reconciliation that upholds child well-being. With the purpose to present a case for the TRC’s Call to Action 6, the editors effectively bring together firsthand experiences and scholarly literature to provide an important entry into conversation about the lack of congruity between the use of corporal punishment in the church and its relationship to colonialism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".