In the last few days, I have followed tragic news stories of people falling from hills where we have walked and dying, and kids falling through ice and drowning: and yet I still let the kids go out on the iced ponds to skate and we still go for family walks in the hills.
Is this just perverse?
I don’t think so. I think the virtue to consider here is prudence. I think that prudence means both avoiding unnecessary risk, and also being prepared to engage with necessary risk.
I clearly don’t want my children to have serious or fatal accidents; but I think in our modern culture there is another danger, less obvious. which is that the children grow up as cowards, afraid of the wrong things.
I want my kids to fear evil, not potential hazards. And I hope that by teaching them that they can assess and mitigate risk in the natural realm, I will give them the courage to avoid evil when they can, and fight it when they must.
To put that another way, I think that trying to remove all physical risks from kids' experience of life is a very risky strategy for their development and well-being.
In the meantime you might spare a prayer for those who have died in the recent severe weather, and their families.
LENTCAzT 2025 – 32: Saturday of the 4th Week of Lent – What shall we give
back?
-
The Roman Station is San Nicola in Carcere. Fr. Troadec gives us
perspective on what the Lord has done for us. The wonderful Benedictines of
Gower Abbey at...
10 hours ago
1 comment:
It's an interesting phenomenon that I've observed 3 or 4 times at first hand: parents very protective about what their off-spring eat, where they play etc. But once they turn 16 they're allowed out late at night (including in night clubs) where the moral dangers (drugs, binge-drinking, sexual activity) are far worse and knowingly ignored by parents ("What can you do?", they say).
Post a Comment