ABUSIVE
RELATIONSHIPS AND DIVORCE
I have had some interesting
conversations of late, in a variety of settings, but have had lots of things
happening that kept me away from the computer to get a blog out. One of the topics addressed was the issue of abuse
in relation to grounds for divorce and the biblical teaching. Included in it was an individual who had been
told that the only biblical grounds for divorce were adultery or abandonment by
an unbelieving spouse. But the question
was raised in regard to biblical teaching about abusive relationships, and
whether God required a Christian to stay in a marriage that involves
abuse. Sadly, this is a big topic, and
often a taboo topic in churches. So what
does God require?
Let me begin by saying that in terms of what God
requires, I think of verses like Micah 6:8 that talk about doing justice,
love kindly and walk humbly. And let me
then add that I believe that when we start off on the track of God’s
REQUIREMENTS, we sometimes relegate the issues of grace, mercy and forgiveness
to far down the list, a choice I believe is a mistake.
So does the scripture address the topic of
abuse? Well, somehow the Golden
Rule---treating others the way you would like to be treated—and Christ’s new
commandment to love one another just as Christ loved us both would
automatically exclude being abusive. In
fact, a careful reading of the end of Ephesians 5, where the outline of
marriage is provided as an illustration of Christ’s love for the church, would
also exclude abuse as being a part of any truly Christian marriage. So, it would seem to me that if one is going
to ask what God requires of someone in an abusive marriage, the first answer
would relate to the abuser,
not the abused!
Before I go any further, perhaps I should open the
door a bit wider for you in this arena.
I know of women whose husbands have beaten them severely. I know of a pregnant woman who suffered
beatings, and was literally hanging on the hood of a moving car, begging the
father of her child to not leave as he drove away until she fell off. And I also know of a man who would wake up in
the middle of the night to discover his drunk wife standing over him with a
broken beer bottle, threatening to slice his throat with it. And I know that sometimes, homes that would
appear all wonderful to others in a church can, in reality, be war zones behind
closed doors. Even to the point that
church leadership will unwittingly support a supposedly godly spouse who, in
fact, is the abuser in unscriptural marriage.
It is always wise to never assume you know the whole story, especially
if you have not really heard both sides of the story.
I would also be remiss if I did not mention that
abuse is not always physical, but can be verbal or emotional. Perhaps you have known, as I have, of
individuals who have been so browbeaten by a spouse that they consider
themselves worthless. Or an individual
in a relationship in which their life is a daily rollercoaster of emotions,
being controlled and insecure in any sense of love or commitment. The physical abuse at least has the visible
bruising to prove it is happening. The
internal bruises are much more subtle, much harder to define, and sometimes,
leave the abused second-guessing as to whether they are even being abused!
So, would Jesus choose the side of the abuser in a
bad relationship, or that of the abused?
It seems to me that scripture is pretty clear about all the times he
stood with the outcast, rejected and abused, and I think he would do the same
in judging a marriage.
Some would say that regardless, Jesus does not allow
the suffering of abuse as a valid reason for divorce. On the other hand, others (including myself)
believe that Jesus’s point about the grounds for divorce was not so much a
prescription of the only legitimate grounds as it was an exposé of the wrong
being practiced at the time of trivializing divorce. Burning supper is simply not good enough
grounds for divorcing your wife!
So should the abused spouse seek a divorce? Certainly not as the first solution, because
sometimes there are other ways to bring about an end to the abuse, such as
counseling, confrontation, legal complaints.
If there is a way for the abuser to be brought to humility, repentance and
change, that is the ultimate goal. But,
in the case of many I have known, abusers often prefer to blame anyone but
themselves, and deny that their actions are their own choices or
responsibility. In such cases, divorce
may accomplish two things: the safety of
the abused and the possible accountability of the abuser which might even lead
to repentance.
There remain those who deny that, even under these
circumstances, divorce is acceptable. I
believe that, sad though it is, divorce is a symptom of our fallen world, and
that God in his wisdom knew it and so provided guidelines even in the Mosaic
law of old. I also believe that though
divorce clearly does not live up to the biblical ideal of one man and one woman
become one flesh for life, neither does an abusive marriage live up that ideal
either. In fact, the divorce is probably
more a reflection of reality than the sham of an abusive marriage.
I tend to be most impressed with a story I once
heard about a church who knew of a young woman whose marriage was abusive in a
number of ways. There came a time when
the husband was away from the home for reasons beyond what I can explain here,
and in that time, the believers chose to rescue that woman by putting her and
her children on a plane with tickets the believers had purchased so that she would
never have to suffer at his hands again.
Somehow, that strikes me more as how Christ would respond than those who
like to pronounce that the abused must tough it out indefinitely, though I
doubt they would do the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment