A Friend and civil rights activist says,”hurt people hurt people.My father was the fifth or sixth generation of violent spousal abuse and child abuse. This was early in the twentieth century. They were all part of a devoutly religious New England Calvinist family. I doubt that their pastor ever knew or thought to ask the question about domestic abuse and family violence. Fortunately, my father and uncle ended this evil tradition. Barbara

I noticed something about Dr Patterson’s story. I’m not assuming it is un-embellished, nor that the basic premise (just stay and pray) is at all correct. But even if true: He advised the woman to pray SO THAT THE HUSBAND WOULD NOTICE. Just as he’s just about falling asleep, but not while he’s really asleep, or really awake, or away. She’s to kneel down by the bed–not in her closet. Some might see this as a finely tuned manipulation attempt. Not answered prayer, but THE ABUSER’S SEEING AND HEARING her “quietly” pray “to be seen by men” drove him to church. So manipulation is the real name of the submission game. (And “authority” is the real name of the love game for husbands, btw.)
David

Thank you, thank you, thank you for addressing this! When is this crazy way of thinking ever going to stop? Unfortunately, with pride amongst people I don’t think it ever will.

I taught an online class for a college called Violent Encounters in the Family. I had the students read “No Place for Abuse” by Catherine Clark Kroeger and Nancy Nason-Clark. Almost all of the students were surprised that abuse happens among families in the church and the lack of response women receive from pastors.

It horrifies me that the church allows this to continue. And, with the way that most churches are headed today, I’m surprised that people (especially women) are willing to look past abuse and the way that the church continues to place women in a subordinate position to men.

Another good book for pastors to read is “Dangerous Marriage” by S.R. McDill and Linda McDill.

Dee
Oh, no–I mean the real occurrences embellished by Dr. P. to make it better sermon material, not by you!

OK, what’s a “season?” One of those wise, theological sounding, undefined, winsome words to say in a pretty way something so very ugly?

Great exposing article btw. I saw that Piper clip a while ago…giggling…ridiculous. Well, if I were being abused, could I pick the “season?” ‘Cause where I live spring’s the shortest.

This is an excellent article, but I think he misses one of the main reasons for the “disconnect”. Frankly, he is far too charitable towards pastors.

I have been in or around the Reformed, Patriarchal, Reconstructionist, and Homeschooling movements (and their various combinations) for nearly 20 years, so I am not speaking as merely an outside observer. I wish what I was proposing were not true, but I have personally witnessed it too many times to count. Reliable third-party evidence is legion to anyone who looks.

If a pastor confronts domestic abuse (or even identifies a behavior as abuse), it is essentially a challenge to the authority of a father/husband in his home. It means that there is an external standard by which the exercise of domestic authority can and should be judged and to which a man can be held accountable.

But this would also mean that their own use of authority in both the ecclesiastical and domestic spheres is subject to, and can and should be measured against an external standard.

Now, this is the one thing that must *never* be allowed to happen under any circumstance! It’s kind of a perverse version of “Judge not, lest ye be judged”. It is also why elders and pastors brought in to address an abuse allegation between a pastor and some part of his flock will inevitably, like clock-work, find in favor of the pastor, even in egregious and obvious examples of abuse.

Put bluntly, when you believe that the exercise of authority is the most vital element of the pastorate (or parenthood, husbandhood, society, etc.), then the exercise of authority must be protected at all costs.

Naturally, this is the the opposite of what the NT actually teaches about authority and its exercise. But that should come as no surprise to anyone who follows this or similar blogs….

Piper’s words make me sick to my stomach. So why do some pastors fail to stand up for the abused women and children in their churches?

Cowardice. Plain cowardice. Many probably do not want to get on the bad side of any man prone to violence, so they work to calm the wife down in the hope the mess will go away.

These pastors are like mini-popes surrounded by yes men who do their bidding. They want to be insulated.

Also, my wife has said she thinks most men have difficulty conceiving of being overpowered by someone much stronger. A man can usually fight back, but in many cases it is hard for a woman to physically hold her own unless she is armed.

I hate how Piper opened his talk. He immediately discounted the issue by questioning the type of abuse and how serious it is. No word at all of how evil any man is who would abuse his wife or children. I think Piper has evil in his heart to say what he did.

I think it would be ideal for a woman to be able to bring an account of abuse to her pastor, but knowing how it goes nowadays, I think that’s a dangerous move. I think she should contact a domestic abuse center and if she’s a Christian, ask to speak with another Christian there.

I believe in giving credit where credit is due. I remember many years ago when I still went to Calvary Chapel, the founder (Chuck Smith) taught from the pulpit that a woman is under no scriptural obligation to stay in an abusive marriage.

Calvary Chapel also went on to lend both ministry and financial support to various safe houses in the OC where abused women & kids would have a place to escape to.

Ted said, “Also, my wife has said she thinks most men have difficulty conceiving of being overpowered by someone much stronger.” I agree. A man who spoke at our church several times is an exception. He had been repeatedly imprisoned and beaten by the (communist) POLICE in Romania, for preaching the Gospel and importing bibles. He prayed for his persecutors, but when God gave him a chance at freedom, he took it. Did any pastors counsel him to go back and get beaten some more, out of submission to the “powers that be”?
Some years after he escaped, he traveled to Tel Aviv, and asked the taxi to take him to a cheap hotel. Before he could get in the door, some thugs assaulted him. Would any pastor suggest at that point he ponder whether or not those beating him were asking him to sin? As he fought for his life, he screamed out, Jesus Help Me (in Romanian). As the muggers fell back briefly in shock, did God trick them into attending church? No! According to our friend, God immediately sent a POLICE officer to scare away the evildoers and transport him to the safety of a not-so-cheap hotel.

My take is that a man who has abused his wife or child has forfeited his right to be called a man and has forfeited any authority he has. Thus, since he is not following the Word in his treatment of his wife or child, the abused is no longer required to submit. He has broken the relationship, and the abused is no longer bound. All that remains is to end the legal relationship between husband and wife or father and child. And any pastor who argues submission to abuse should be barred forever from ministry.

If the abused were close to my location, I would represent them in getting a protective order, which in Texas can include the abused spouse getting the house, the bank account, a car, and police protection. I would also assist them in getting a divorce or termination the parent-child relationship. One of my good friends is the Exec Dir of a center for victims of family abuse. BTW, family abuse is Texas is typically treated as a felony and does not need the abused to testify to be prosecuted.

These pastors who advocate submission to abuse are giving the church a black eye, and might should experience one themselves.

You can tell…I am not a Piper fan, nor a fan of this scripture twisting, perverse religiosity that men like Bruce Ware teach which says if you do not do this “godly” submission, then you are failing in your God given role and are, consequently, a failure in God’s eyes.

Excellent post! Thank you for exposing John Piper and Paige Patterson’s callous, ignorant, and extremely dangerous responses to spousal abuse. I feel for women who have been betrayed by Piper, Patterson, and other pastors and thrown back to the hands of their abusers in the name of Jesus.

Part of me believes it’s possible that the bubble they live in keeps them from acknowledging the magnitude and the real problem of domestic abuse. Mostly, though, I believe it’s an elevation of men, their distorted views of a man’s place and a woman’s place in marriage and the home, and their hardened hearts toward women who are suffering at the hands of their husbands.

Such good comments! I’m enjoying reading this thread because it means that hurting people can find help from Christians. Just look at all of these responses!

15 years ago I was working on my master’s thesis regarding pastors knowledge and views of domestic abuse. For the most part, the pastors that I spoke with knew the law – that they were required to report child or spousal abuse. However, almost all of them did not feel prepared to deal with individuals who were experiencing abuse at home. The sad irony behind pastors who advise the women to stay with their husbands is that almost all states require pastors to report abuse. I’m sure most of them don’t and counsel women to stay home and submit.

I still don’t think that most pastors are prepared to deal with people who experience abuse. And, I also think that most are “afraid” to go to sources outside of the church for help. We can’t have any outside influences in the church for goodness sake.

Ok, i’m calmed down & have untwisted enough now to rephrase my original comment. I apologize for sounding, I dunno, superior when I said “I don’t think of myself as a christian — that’s just an insult to too many of my highest values.”

I’d like to say it again, but better. Perhaps it goes without saying, but so much of what christianity has become associated with (because of many of its adherents, especially the loudmouths) is ignorant, unkind, insincere, manipulative, arrogant, hateful, and nonthinking / stupid / unintelligent / nonintellectual.

I’m quite pleased that my standards are higher.

Deb –

I have a hard time believing that the “Jesus” who gave us the Beatitudes would tell a woman who was slapped by her husband to “put up with it for a time.” I picture this “Jesus” having strong words directly to the husband who takes advantage of his wife in this way.

Hi, Dee.

Yes. “christian”, “republican” — you know, political terms & such.

I have utmost respect — beyond respect — for God, for Jesus Christ, for the Holy Spirit. It’s just people that mess everything up.

Hi Dee and Deb, and all.

I see a couple of comments have been made about Chuck Smith and Calvary Chapel. I wonder if you all have heard of a blog called “Calvary Chapel Abuse” by a fellow who grew up in the home of a Calvary Chapel pastor by the name of Bob Grenier? The blogger’s name is Alex Grenier and he has a brother Paul. His blog is his chronicle of trying to expose the abuse he, his brother, and his mother endured throughout his childhood and his efforts to get justice with Calvary Chapel concerning his abusive father (step father, actually). He isn’t having any success with any of the Calvary higher ups (Raul Reese, Smith, et al). They are all taking Bob Grenier’s side whether passively by letting this go on without comment or action, or actively by defending Bob Grenier and denouncing Alex Grenier and his efforts to get justice.

It so happens his latest post (Nov 4) is about the video of that judge abusing his daughter.

Here is a comment he makes under a picture taken from the video which sums up his experience:

“Godly Discipline”? “Over-spanking”? Or, Child Abuse? Calvary Chapel and Chuck Smith and Calvary Chapel Visalia’s Board and Elders call this sort of thing acceptable, by their continuing endorsement of Calvary Chapel Visalia Pastor in good standing Bob Grenier. This was mild compared to what happened in our home, but no problem, it’s “In the past”…”Nothing can be done”….”Leave it to the Lord”….”It’s Scriptural corporal punishment”, etc etc. Chuck Smith and Calvary Chapel is condoning and facilitating Child Abuse, so is the Visalia Police Department. Bob Grenier is a Calvary Chapel Pastor and VPD Police Chaplain in Good Standing, this moment.

Alex Grenier met with Smith on September 9th and blogged about it on Sept 24 (Smith had asked him to observe a 2 week period of silence on the matter, which Alex explains). Things did not go well at all with this meeting. The abuser is being protected and the victim experiencing further abuse from the CC leadership due to lack of regard and the attitude that Alex is supposed to let bygones be bygones and stop trying to get justice for this. So while they don’t deny the abuse happened, they do deny that anything should be done about it.

Here’s his blog:

http://www.calvarychapelabuse.com/wordpress/

From what little I know about abuse at Calvary Chapel, it sounds more than plausible. One of the most authoritarian-ish church “leaders” I’ve ever come across was/is a Calvary Chapel person for many years before taking a position at That Church.

This individual is, in some ways, a nice person, but very caught up in ideas that made me raise my eyebrows even back then… as in always thanking God for saving us from death and hell whenever said person had an opportunity to pray out loud. The focus was clearly on hell, not on love, redemption, mercy – that sort of thing. The harshness was very grating.

Very calvinista, in many respects.

Addendum to earlier post. When my father was 14 and taller than his father, he confronted him when he came drunk and said, “If you hit my mother again, I’ll kill you. His father responded, “I believe you would, George.” My father answered, “Count on it.” That stopped the abuse, which my father and uncle ended in their own families. President Clinton revealed he did the same thing to an abusive step father. My question, what is current generation of young boys learning by growing up in churches where women and mothers are blamed for their abuse? Will they in turn be husbands and pastors who believe it is all right to demand this absurd vicious and irrational submission? I am the mother of a married son
who treats his wife like the queen she is.

I also think “malice” is part and parcel of most every sermon out there that pits Us against Them, no matter who They happen to be.

Living in the world but not being of the world is NOT the same thing as making adversaries of the rest of society, or of automatically assuming that people who “aren’t like us” are adversaries.

To my way of thinking, there is far too much polarization (and consequent demonization) coming from far too many US-based pulpits and church websites. There is no place for Jesus, let along the good Samaritan, in this kind of thinking.

Seeks help from the church. Er…no John Piper, seeks help from the COPS! The Church can find out after the fact as far as I’m concerned. My gosh…the church is now charged with legalling dealing with crimes against humanity? I thought that was the whole biblical point of the state and its authorities! No…to the Calvanista, the church is the beginning and end of all authority, and the final say in every aspect of life, no matter how poorly equipped (e.g. sexual abuse). If this moniker wasn’t already taken, I’d change my blog name to No Longer Reformed.

We rail against abortion and euthanasia, but we won’t rail against the abuse of our own young children and Christian sisters? Read Corinthians! What is love? Where in there could you ever get to tolerate the abuse of those who cannot defend themselves? I’m so grieved over this.

Arce – sorry, can’t agree on this one. A deliberate “painful flick to the ear” isn’t “absurd” in my book.

Abuse is abuse is abuse – and that “flick” is more than likely accompanied by hurtful words and actions.

Yikes!Apologies, Zeta – I was referring to your comment, not to anything Arce said.

[still feeling groggy this a.m.]

yep – see my 10:42.

Hi Orion’s Belt,
Sorry, but we’ll have to disagree on this one. My thinking will simply not allow much room for interpreting the circumstances (though, I’m not saying that every instance will result in the same consequences…obviously a flick in the opinion of the law is less egregious than a punch to the face; where I’m rigid is the wrongness of the action, the heart, the intent, and if any woman feels afraid, regardless of the physical contact, I’d advise leaving the relationship). I do not think my statement was absurd at all. Any physical contact of any nature that is violent or some kind of unwanted sexual touching is simply off limits. We are Christians. We JUST DON’T DO THAT. A playful flick is one thing, and accidental elbow to the gut while wrestling or goofing around in a playful way is fine, but when you flick anyone with the intent to cause pain because you are angry at your spouse, that’s abuse to me. A desire to inflict pain upon the “wife of your youth”, the one that you’ve become “one flesh” with is not absurd. It is kind and it is gentle and it is loving.

Sorry…totally messed up that last line. Meant to say: Being against a desire to inflict pain upon the “wife of your youth”…is not absurd. It is kind and gentle and loving.

To me, abuse of a spouse is being unfaithful to the marriage vow, just as much as sex with another person other than the spouse.

Hi Zeta,
I might be a little confused; this happens, so forgive me. 🙂 I’m thinking that our perspectives, in terms of the points we are trying to make are a little different; which, maybe we are not “debating” just “stating”.

I agree with most of what you posted; and I don’t mean at all to imply that I think you were condoning abuse. Not at all! I agree that instances of “painful” physical contact, may not all necessarily result or call for the exact same level of response, eg. divorce, separation, or law enforcement intervention. I understand that the necessity for such serious responses will depend on many things, and indeed, perhaps the culture of what is acceptable (though, Biblically speaking, I cannot see where it would be okay in any circumstance to intentionally inflict physical pain upon your spouse, but I suppose that is debateable…if there are verses to the contrary, I’d like to examine them). So, though I may classify something as abuse (where you may not, necessarily) it doesn’t mean that I’m calling for the same drastic response in each case. I’m not saying that one flick of the ear necessarily requires a police report; what I am saying is that I find it inappropriate in any situation, unless striculty jocular, and could be a warning sign in a relationship that worse things are coming and that concern may be warranted. Certainly if there was fear or discomfort on the part of a party involved, then that could very well be an abusive relationship and I would counsel that person to tell someone.

Here is where I disagree with you: I do not think it appropriate, nor would I ever, I like to think, slap or flick my spouse hard enough to inflict pain for any reason, even for looking at someone of the opposite sex, or any other “sin”. I would not do this, and I would not expect my wife to do this. We simply do not physically interact this way, and I do not think it’s acceptable. Now, I suppose that if both parties are OKAY with it, and mutually understood in the context of their relationship, then, well…it’s their marriage, I suppose, but one would need to be very clear that it is in fact okay, and if the other person says it’s not, then one would need to cease immediately (or never start), or I would classify that as physical abuse. Also, I would not and do not yell at my spouse for not taking out the garbage; I do not criticize her for not doing this or that, or demean her verbally. If there are patterns of concerning issues in our lives, then we approach each other in gentleness and respect and discuss it. If an impass results, we get counsel from respected friends; ultimately, I may decide to relent, and have, or my wife will relent, and she has. We try very hard to not scream, or yell, or degrade. Now, are we perfect? Of course not, but here’s another thing. I do not believe that an instance of “yelling”, or “criticizing” should evoke the same amount of concern as an instance of punching or slapping one’s spouse. I think that physical abuse is much more concerning, and the consequences, in general, much more severe for a single instance. Certainly patterns of yelling and degrading can become abusive, but when you cross into the realm of physical assault, I believe that is quite a different level altogether. I would never lump them into the same batch when discussing abuse.

Hi, Zeta.

RE: “in our society there can be no discrimination of that sort (it can not be both ok for a woman to flick a man on the ear yet a criminal offense for a man to flick a woman on the ear)”

I understand what you are saying in your overall comments. I just wonder about this comment above. A woman can do such a thing and it would be very nasty, indeed. But not threatening. A man doing such a thing, who is generally taller, bigger, with more muscle mass is entirely threatening.

Even a man making a gesture or the very beginning of an agressive stance, like making a fist or the tensing of arms and shoulders in the heat of the moment, is terrifying. I’m speaking as a 5’4 female.

And it’s not only a matter of physical size and muscle mass. I’m generalizing, but in my observation men are bigger and louder and more aggressive in their “essence”. I think it’s not unusual in a family conflict situation that as soon as dad enters the picture a new threatening or fearsome component is added to the mix. Perhaps the words “threatening” or “fearsome” are somewhat too strong — but something close in meaning is valid.

elastigirl:Hi, Zeta.

And it’s not only a matter of physical size and muscle mass. I’m generalizing, but in my observation men are bigger and louder and more aggressive in their “essence”. I think it’s not unusual in a family conflict situation that as soon as dad enters the picture a new threatening or fearsome component is added to the mix. Perhaps the words “threatening” or “fearsome” are somewhat too strong — but something close in meaning is valid.

I understand EG, men are in general, bigger, stronger, more threatening. Their voices generally command more authority and they are generally more aggressive. This is how we are made. I am sure this is a factor in Paul’s admonition to husbands (which receives no end of disdain) for men to treat the woman as the ‘weaker vessel’. It isn’t the same when a 5’4″ woman of 125 lbs hits a 6’2″ man of 195 lbs as it is when the situation is reversed.

But our laws are not allowed to make that difference LEGAL. We are not allowed to recognize that when a man berates his wife it’s generally a little different that when the women berates her husband – it is more physically threatening. They might have comparable effect psychologically (though generally in different arenas), but the man is scarier. fear is the usually dominant component when a man is hostile to the wife. It is less likely for the man to actually be afraid of the wife if she is acting out the same kind of physical attack (well, unless she has a knife, baseball bat or gun, or he is 5’4″ 125 lbs and she is 6’2″ and 195 lbs).

Zeta

But our laws are not allowed to make that difference LEGAL.

??? It is just plain common sense, Z. (btw, I’m not upset with you – just feeling a bit like ranting today.)

No matter which way we all wanna slice it here, sooner or later there will be a legal decision handed down regarding the clergy and the reporting of abuse. A high ranking Catholic bishop in Kansas City has already been charged with complicity in a sex abuse scandal in his diocese.

It’s only question of time before some poor woman in an authoritarian/patriarchal religious sect (protestant) winds up dead after one too many times getting the poo-poo beat out of her.

God forbid that this happens!!! Piper and others are often touted as being such smart cookies? We’ll see if they’re smart enough to sniff the winds of change and avoid the shoals the Catholic church has run aground on.

Hopefully they’ll realize as the health insurance companies did that it’s far cheaper to authorize the procedure than to pay out a multi-million dollar wrongful death lawsuit.

It’s too bad the analogy has to be put into such crass and banal terms, but maybe they’ll start to realize that it’s better to send a molester/abuser packing than to jeopardize a whole ministry.

When you’re taught that your human heart is wicked, deceitful, and totally depraved, you take that to the bank with no if(s) and(s) or but(s). Imago dei only goes as far as they say it does.

Dee: How ministries can protect the abusers is beyond my imagination. Is it possible that they are playing Christian? What is wrong with their hearts?

In many cases it’s not really that simple Dee. There are several factors that muddy the waters. But I’m not going to go too deep into what those might be – I’m not trying to excuse bad or flawed actions. But I will say this.

Many, many times in my life I have thought I knew about something when I really didn’t. Seminaries turn out children to lead congregations and make decisions in situations like this based on book learning that is often itself wrong. Some seminaries won’t even take an individual who has real life experience – I know for sure some missions organizations won’t. They are looking at the number of years of service expected and other financial issues rather than the quality of that service.

We can’t judge the heart itself, the real standing of the man/woman before God. Remember King David was a man after God’s own heart, yet he committed adultery, then had the husband of the woman he took killed to get him out of the way! Yet this guy was in the end a truly Godly man, a man whom God hand picked and whom God honored in spite of all that.

So it seems to me better to attack the deeds. Call them on the table for ignorance, mistakes, bad doctrine etc, but let God figure out if these deeds spring from them being wolves vs. ignorant or stumbling sheep.

Zeta