INTERPRETING
THE HEADLINE
(way long, sorry, but it’s important!)
Yesterday, as I was working through some tasks
on the computer, a headline popped up on the browser at the MSN site. The headline reads:
“Southern Baptist leader pushes
back after comments leak urging abused women to pray and avoid divorce”
The article is written by Michelle Boorstein
of The Washington Post. I will summarize
some of it, but here is the link if you would like to read the whole
thing: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/southern-baptist-leader-pushes-back-after-comments-leak-urging-abused-women-to-pray-and-avoid-divorce/ar-AAwvUYN?li=BBnb7Kz
For those of you who don’t read the article,
let me summarize by saying that Paige Patterson, president of Southwestern
Baptist Theological Seminary in Texas, is described as teaching that “abused
women should focus on praying and ‘be submissive in every way that you can’ and
not seek divorce.” He is directly quoted
as saying, “It depends on the level of abuse, to some degree…I have never in
my ministry counseled anyone to seek a divorce and that’s always wrong
counsel."
The article includes other
quotes, that indicate Patterson’s position as being that separation may be
necessary, but that he is opposed to divorce.
At one point in the article, he is quoted as saying, “I have also said
that I have never recommended or prescribed divorce. How could I as a minister of the Gospel? The Bible makes clear the way in which God
views divorce.”
That is enough of a summary, though the
article describes much more about the wrestling within the Southern Baptists
(which I am not, by the way), and among other very conservative Christians, and
even points out that there is a higher-than-average divorce rate in the U.S
among Evangelical Christians. I have
also read elsewhere that there is also a higher rate of physical abuse among
the more fundamentalist type Christians (as well as other religions) due to the
authoritarian structure created there.
I
would like to suggest that there are lots of dynamics going on in the subtext, both
in the interview, and behind the scenes I suspect, that I think might be very
enlightening for our consideration.
First off, I join many others in questioning
the idea that the best advice for an abused woman in a marriage is for her to
go back home, submit and pray.
Ridiculous!
Even Jesus knew that
it was wrong to intentionally test God for protection by jumping off of the
Temple pinnacle, how is going back into a dangerous and abusive situation not
similar to the risks Jesus refused to take?
When Jesus interacted with the woman at the well, who had split up with
five different husbands, Jesus did NOT demand that she go back into any of
those bad relationships and pray!
I
truly believe that God can change a husband’s heart and behaviors (or the
wife’s if she is the abusive one), and I also believe that prayer is a critical
factor in such situations. But to offer
a blanket statement that refuses the option of divorce and insists an
individual return to a dangerous environment is a different matter. I wonder how Mr. Patterson would feel had the
woman he described had gone home and returned not with merely black eyes, but
battered to death. That is a
consideration for any pastor who seriously seeks to minister to those suffering
at the hands of an abuser. Let me also
add briefly, I note that he seems only concerned with physical abuse, or sexual
assault, but there are many who suffer in their marriages from psychological
and emotional abuse that is just as devastating. Those people need a voice, as well.
I would like to offer a number of comments,
and many of you already know that most of these issues are addressed in my
books. First, what DOES the Bible say
about divorce? Well, people like Mr.
Patterson would likely quote Malachi’s phrase that says that God hates divorce,
as well as Jesus’s comment that divorce was given because of our hardness of
heart, but was never the original intention.
Both of which are, indeed, true.
What people of this bent do NOT point out, however, is that God’s
attitude in the Bible is that it was a necessary evil in a broken world, and
the Bible makes provision for it even in the laws of Moses at the formation of
the nation of Israel. It is also an
option provided for in the words of both Jesus and Paul.
I would suggest that the core of the biblical
teachings are that they are strongly opposed to divorce on trivial grounds, but
there is always indication that in a fallen world, there is a place for
divorce, tragic though the experience is.
What of Patterson’s suggestion that the woman
needs to continue to be submissive and be praying instead of pursuing
divorce? First, let me comment on that
idea of being submissive. Extreme conservatives
often hammer that concept at women inappropriately, in my opinion, and let me
explain why I say that.
One of the
primary passages where this phrase occurs is in Ephesians 5, but the passage
says far more than merely that wives are supposed to submit. First, the phrase occurs in a context where
ALL people are called to be submitting to one another with reverence for
Christ.
Secondly, the expectation for
husbands in the passage, which is not quoted nearly as often, is for the man
to be the kind of husband who lays down his life for his wife, who does
everything he can to honor her, who goes out of his way to overlook her faults
and cherishes her and nourishes her life.
This is the kind of thing Paul is suggesting wives must submit to, not
some oafish and bullying type of behavior by a self-important man with a
superiority complex. Peter indicates
that a humble attitude by a wife may change a husband’s heart if the husband is
out of line. However, people who focus
on these passages often neglect to highlight that men are also called to be in
submission, not just women, and that the real submission is to the Lordship of
Christ, not just some notion of a woman submitting to her husband as “lord of the manor”!
Patterson
is in a segment of Christian society in which a very legalistic interpretation
of scripture currently dominates. He is
in a hard place. His wording is very
careful. He says that he never “advises
anyone to get a divorce.” He may feel it
is necessary for him to say that, because if he said otherwise, he may well
lose his standing and his job, as the legalistic folks only see things in black
and white, and would reject his leadership.
But, honestly, I could say the same thing; I don’t advise people to get
a divorce, either!
Probably few
ministers do. That isn’t how good
pastoral counseling works…I don’t tell people WHAT TO DO in lots of ways. I walk with them as they seek to understand
God’s will for themselves. Most people
who come to me with marriage problems, and in the midst of it choose to
divorce, don’t come needing me to tell them whether or not to get one. They know they are the only ones who can make
that choice. What they need is someone
who can help them think clearly about their situation, about their options, and
challenge assumptions they may have about what a divorce would be like. They need a pastor to pray with them about
their struggles, and a pastor who will seek to help them experience God’s best
for their lives.
They need to know that
there is such a thing as GRACE…that the love of God is not found in some
legalistic interpretation of scripture.
A larger
question that is in the subtext of this discussion is the way in which divorce
is viewed. The interviewer (nor the
article) does not ask Mr. Patterson nor Christians in his theological camp
other relevant questions, such as whether a divorced person has a place in the
church, and what that place might be.
To
those in the legalistic camp, divorced persons are usually not allowed to serve
as pastors or to be leaders in their churches, in much the same way as women
are also not allowed to be in leadership roles.
They make an exception if you happened to have gotten divorced before you became a Christian, but generally speaking,
their practice says loud and clear that grace and forgiveness only go so
far.
Several
years ago, I was on a panel discussion as part of a radio show, in a panel that
included a pastor from such a church. At
the end of the program, the moderator encouraged anyone listening who had been
divorced or struggling in a divorce to consider attending his church if they
didn’t have one, and the pastor indicated that any such person who did come
would be welcome indeed.
Yet these
things were said by the speakers without any awareness that many of the
pastor’s comments throughout the program had already made clear to anyone
listening who had been through divorce, that though they would be welcome to
attend, they would remain second class citizens in that church. Like Mr. Patterson, there was a total
disconnect between the statement of belief, and the realities of life in the
church for people struggling with divorce.
I suspect
that Mr. Patterson is, in many ways, a very caring and compassionate man; you
can’t be an effective pastor without those characteristics, and obviously he
has a significant history in pastoral ministry.
But the comments as represented in the article DO reflect the reality
that, within Christianity, there is a harsh and judgmental segment who, much
like the legalistic Pharisees whom Jesus challenged, are so focused on their
application of all the rules on the lives of others, that they fail to see the
primacy of grace, or their own need for grace and forgiveness for their own
harshness. It is wrong lump all
Christians, all Southern Baptists, or even all conservative Christians into one
group and assume they all would be as skewed in their understanding of
scripture as Mr. Patterson appears to be. (It
is also wrong to lump all of the Pharisees of Jesus’ day into the same harsh,
judgmental camp, too!) But for those of
us who know the experience of divorce, there is almost a sixth sense, a radar
if you will, that warns us about those who, like those legalistic Pharisees,
care more about their own theology than they do about the people whose lives
are mowed down as they apply it.
Let me
offer a couple of closing comments. God
does not reject people because they have been divorced…only people do
that. God NEVER sides with those who
abuse others. Never. And the Bible that Mr. Patterson says is so
clear, does indeed clearly make provision for divorce in certain circumstances,
because God understands the pain in which some people are forced to exist, and
God’s desire is for something better.
Enough said.
