How Should The Church Deal With Domestic Violence

[phkrause]

Facing A Harsh Reality

In his book,

Domestic Violence: What Every Pastor Needs To Know

, Reverend Al Miles challenges the church to honestly appraise the situation of domestic abuse. The book reads, “Abuse, whether physical, sexual, verbal, or emotional, cannot possibly depict God’s attitudes or actions.” It makes sense that clergy would tread lightly as not to put the church under scrutiny for invading families or worse causing divorce.  Whether the church decides to confront the issue or not, it’s there and will continue to be both a social and theological matter. Here are some tips from Rev. Miles on how Christians should respond.

Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Galleries/How-Should-The-Church-Deal-With-Domestic-Violence.aspx#reqGpUvdjruIGvyO.99

 

[Gregory Matthews]

I cannot fairly evaluate the book without reading the book, which I have not done.  I have only read the  few summarized statements that were posted by "beliefnet."  In reading those, I have some concerns.   My concerns are that he can be misunderstood and he often should have been more forceful and expanded upon what he wanted to say.

 

1) He calls "submission" a Biblical doctrine.  I think that he  was not clear enough and should have been more forceful.

2) Saving marriage:  All to often, violence have takenthe marriage beyond the pont where it can be saved.

3) His statement on never using violence is poorly worded in my thinking.

4) His statement on believing and listening the story is good.

5) So also is his advice to get professional help.  However, in my thinking, he down plays the immediate need to deal with symptoms.

6)  His advice to have a "safety plan" is excellent.

7) Telling people to get training is good.  But, what does that mean?

[phkrause]

Good points Gregory. I also have not read the book.

[Gregory Matthews]

1)  The level of emotion that you present in your comment suggests that this is a very real, personal issue for you.

 

2)  The following statement would be considered to be abusive by many.  It is very  controlling.

 

 

 

Some Adventist publications I will not even have in my house. . .

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I think Lyndon makes a valid point.  Most domestic violence reports and articles are slanted towards the woman as the victim.  But there are many occurrences of men being victimized by the woman.  I think perhaps one reason for less reports of men being abused is because they feel ashamed to speak up, as if it would demean their character in some way....perhaps fearing to appear "weak"..... 

 

While I know it happened 130 years ago, my great grandfather divorced his wife on grounds of physical and mental cruelty.  I read the original divorce papers and was appalled at what his first wife had done to him.

 

Women can have the same tyrannical nature that exists in some men.

 

Men have no business abusing women.  But women have no business doing it to men, either...

[Gregory Matthews]

The fact that you ask how your controlling behavior is abusive demonstrates that you do not understand what is abusive.

 

I assume that there is at least one other adult living  in your home--probably a spouse.  You claim that you would not allow that person (a spouse) to bring into your home an Adventist publication that you did not approve of.  That is controlling another adult.  That controlling behavior is the foundation for much of the abuse that happens against spouses.

 

As to my comment regarding your emotional level:  No, it hardly rose to the level of analysis.  If you think that it did, you simply do not understand analysis.  Rather, it simply pointed out what was very clear in your post.  Your emotional level was high enough that it did not need analysis to see.  You posted it.  It was fair game for comment.  If you do not want comment on something, do not post it here.

[Gregory Matthews]

It will be your choice not to respond to any of my posts.

 

However, whenever you post in a public forum, you can expect that I will respond, if I chose to do so.  I will respond due to the fact that this is a public forum and my response will be directed to that public.   IOW, you cannot come to a public forum such as this and expect to make public statements that will not be responded to.

 

Your choice, as long as you post in a pubic forum will simply be to decide whether or not to post.

 

If you chose, you can ask to have a private forum set up for you.  In that private section, only those who you select will be allowed to read and post.  That will no longer be a public forum and it will be limited to those who want to participate and you allow to aprticipate.  But, if you want the larger audience of a public forum then anyone who wants to respond to you will be able to do so.

 

As to having a dialogue with me, you clearly do not have to  have any dialogue with me.  You do not have to respond to anything that I say or post.   I am fine with that.

 

 

The choice is yours as to what you do.  As you have stated that you will not further respond to me, I will expect that you will not respond.

[Gregory Matthews]

 Lyndon has clearly demonstrated his desire to control--the magazines that enter the home and who and what is posted here.

[Gregory Matthews]

On a personal basis, I find that my life is much easier when I do not attempt to control others.  I have enough on my plate that I am quite willing for others to take responsibility for their life and I do not want it.

[debbym]

 

Facing A Harsh Reality

In his book,

Domestic Violence: What Every Pastor Needs To Know

, Reverend Al Miles challenges the church to honestly appraise the situation of domestic abuse. The book reads, “Abuse, whether physical, sexual, verbal, or emotional, cannot possibly depict God’s attitudes or actions.” It makes sense that clergy would tread lightly as not to put the church under scrutiny for invading families or worse causing divorce.  Whether the church decides to confront the issue or not, it’s there and will continue to be both a social and theological matter. Here are some tips from Rev. Miles on how Christians should respond.

Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Galleries/How-Should-The-Church-Deal-With-Domestic-Violence.aspx#reqGpUvdjruIGvyO.99

 

 

The harsh reality is that only 10% of rapes are reported, and only 10% of those reported result in any conviction.  Many of these occur on dates, and within relationships and in families.  Far fewer acts of violence, and controlling behaviors within families are reported, or addressed. 

 

The issue of accountability in this area is something nebulous, with so little reporting.   The effect of abuse and controlling in relationships results in so much blurring of what is right and what is acceptable and what is not.  To imagine the church has some means of holding individuals accountable, or should be controlling abuse and stopping it in their congregations is beyond comprehension.

 

My suggestion is that the church is called to meet these problems with the Gospel. The Gospel alone brings divine power to lives to change motivations and  behaviors.

 

Of course we should offer options for safety to victims, men, women, and children when it is recognized to be a need and is a desire.  At least be aware of the local shelters or nearby locations of protective shelters. The problem is that many who are victims do not seek safety,  they instead seek to equalize the power relationship that leaves them at a loss, and in some measure intimidated.  Controllers justify themselves and it seems they by example teach the victims to believe it is ok.

 

There are so many endless variables in these kinds of social issues, and every degree of control or aggression.

 

Our conference does maintain a safe house to address domestic violence, providing safety, and counseling for victims. And it is the power of the Gospel that is brought to these families.

[Gregory Matthews]

Conference maintained safe houses:  Outstanding!

[Stan]

 Lyndon has clearly demonstrated his desire to control--the magazines that enter the home and who and what is posted here.

 

 

There are some magazines that I would not want in my home..  I would accept almost all the official ones, but some of the others ...  well I can choose not to have them in my home/office and I do that.

[Gregory Matthews]

Stan:  If you were living with another adult in your home, would you attempt to control what they wanted to read.

 

Perhaps Lyndon is not living with another adult.

[LifeHiscost]

Stan:  If you were living with another adult in your home, would you attempt to control what they wanted to read.

 

Perhaps Lyndon is not living with another adult.

I know your question was to Stan but in case others are permitted to comment, we had some relatives in our home for a couple of days, who were more conservative than we are re: to what media came into their home. Our previous decisions which included primarily religious programming, was circumventing it by nicely asking us to turn it off. Out of consideration for our guests we didn't bother to protest but we knew they had not listened long enough to recognize the content so we assumed they had determined any TV had to be bad. If they had stayed a measurably lengthy span of time we would not have felt it impolite to let them know we preferred to watch the programming. Besides, the information presented might have been helpful in establishing a measure of grace in their lives. In the meantime our patience was strengthened by God's grace.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Stan]

I am living with another adult, I trust her judgement on what she acquires, and she generally trusts mine.  I would not refuse any magazine she would choose even if I did not read it.

[Gregory Matthews]

Life:  There is a difference in my mind between a guest temperoraly in one's home and say a spouse.  Previously we had a family living in  our  home who needed a place to stay.  When their behaviour became unacceptable we transitioned them out.  There is also a difference between someone who is a spouse and one who is no relation.

 

Stan:  Quite appropriate response.

[LifeHiscost]

Life:  There is a difference in my mind between a guest temperoraly in one's home and say a spouse...........  When their behaviour became unacceptable we transitioned them out.  There is also a difference between someone who is a spouse and one who is no relation.

 

Stan:  Quite appropriate response.

What might be considered appropriate when making effort to follow this counsel.

 

17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 2 Cor 6

 

Is that not to be applied when the married partner chooses a life in direct contradiction to the Word? I do remember the principle that does seem to answer that, although since I'm not living under those circumstances now, I cannot speak for others. In fact I might say that I did live for many years in the past, where I needed to practice that principle, and we both are still bound for the Kingdom.

 

12But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her.13And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. 1 Cor 7

 

I'm glad I don't have to define how or what others accept as their responsibility, especially when even Paul made a distinction between what the Lord said and what he said.

 

6But this I say by way of concession, not of command.40But in my opinion she is happier if she remains as she is; and I think that I also have the Spirit of God. 1 Cor 7

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Gregory Matthews]

Lyndon:  Tell me, do you want me to respond?  Do you want to dialogue with me on this?  Are you simply wanting to write, with no response from me?

 

Let me know.  As I understood a previous statement from you, you were pledging neither to respond nor to enter into a dialogue with me.  If you have changed your mind, let me know.  If I have misunderstood, let me know.

 

You have the ball, so to speak.

[Gregory Matthews]

Lyndon:  Dialogue, conversation and discussion can lead to understanding and reconciliation.  Do you want that?

 

Perhaps you have been misunderstood?  Do you want that?

 

You may even have misunderstood me?  If so, do you want understanding?

 

Statements made in public may need to be resolved in public.

 

I am prepared to go over you recent post, point by point, in an effort to reach understanding and reconciliation.  Do you want that?

 

I do not have a problem with what you posted.   This is a public forum.  Post as you will.  But, one who posts here, to include me, should expect that any post  will be responded to.

[Gregory Matthews]

Lyndon:  As to my understanding that you were pledging not to respond to me, I must have misunderstood you.  I based my thinking on what you said in post # 9:

 

I am not going to try to make any response of any sort to your post.

  Perhaps, you changed your mind.

 

As to your personal life:  I see no reason to bring any specifics of your personal life into the discussion.  If you think it would be necessary, that simply is where you are.  In any case, the specifics of your personal life, as far as I am concerned would be inappropriate, unless you wanted to bring them in and in such cases still might be inappropriate.

 

NOTE:  To say that a post of yours reveals a high level of emotion, or that it pressents you in a specific way is not an accusation.  It is simply an observation, as I see it.  That observation my not be valid.  IOW,  if I were to tell you that you present yourself as a person who makes a living robbing banks, is not an accusation that you do such.  It is simply an observation that as I see it you present yourself as doing such.  [NOTE:  This is an example.  I do not see you as presenting yourself in that manner.]

 

When I make such an observation, the ball in in your court as to how to respond.  You can chose not to respond.  You can ask me to explain how it is that I see you in that manner.  You can chose to present yourself in another manner.  There are other ways in which you  can respond.  In any case, it is your choice.

[Gregory Matthews]

All knowledgeble people acknowledge that abuse can come from either sex.  It can be physical, emotional, seuxual and financial.  It is grosely underreported both by males and females.     But, the kown nkumbers are that females are generaly more victims than are males.

 

Speaking personallly, have far more experience with females as victims than I do males

 

Yes, Lyndon, I do have experience.

 

Much abuse comes from a desire to control another. It is not alwyays true.  But, it often is.  That may involve friends, talking on the telephone, reading e-mail, reading material, television programs and much more.  Of corse, partents have a right to train their children.  But, adults have God-given rightss to do wrong.  When one adult attempts to control another adult there may be real issues/problems that are involved in the relationship.

[Gregory Matthews]

Lyndon, you may not be controlling.  I do not know.  I only know how you potentially presented yourself and you have a choice as to how you present yourself in the future.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

may I add that everyone's "observations" of others are colored through their own life's experiences, and may or may not accurately reflect the person being "observed", whether in person, online, or in any other particular venue... 

 

such observations may include a another person's psychological and/or spiritual status.  Some people, however, have more professional experience in making observations... and are often correct in the assessment....but not always...

[Gregory Matthews]

Of course.  Observation may not be reality.