Over on The XY Code, I have started a multi-Monday series about spousal abuse. So I figured I should say something about it here as well.
I have always assumed the kind of man who beats, controls, or emotionally abuses his wife doesn’t follow a blog called “The Generous Husband”. So I don’t think this is going to directly reach men who are doing those things. However, there is plenty of abuse out there and that should concern all of us.
Getting a clear picture of abuse by Christians is difficult, and who we look at matters. Author W. Bradford Wilcox (link at end of post) says, “My research suggests that the most violent husbands in America are nominal evangelical Protestants who attend church infrequently or not at all.” However, he also says, “churchgoing evangelical Protestant husbands were the least likely to be engaged in abusive behavior”. Similar findings apply to most non-evangelical Christians, but not to those who are very closed and legalistic. So men who are really following Jesus are less likely than any other groups to be wife abusers, but men who are Christian in name only are the most likely. What a strange dichotomy!
The Bible has long been used by those who care more about themselves than God to justify their wrong behaviour. The crusades, inquisitions, witch trials, slavery, and the attempted annihilation of the Jews are all examples. So when some guy who’s not following Jesus tells me the Bible supports him “putting his wife in her place”, I don’t blame God or the Bible for what he’s doing. He is not part of the church and, because of that, the church can’t help him change. HOWEVER, the world sees such men as part of the church and paints all the rest of us with his twisted scriptural claims.
In addition to doing all we can to eliminate the (thankfully rare) spousal abuse in our churches and change public opinion about this issue, we need to make sure the world knows we don’t approve of such behaviour. If we stay silent, we let pretend Christians speak for us, and that makes Jesus look bad. That hurts the church, and it makes it more difficult to share Jesus with those who think we are okay with a man beating, controlling, raping, or emotionally violating his wife. We need to do all we can to ensure that both abusive church-going men and the world at large know that such behaviour is contrary to the Word of God. Additionally they need to know we are not going to stand for it.
A post worth reading:
CT | Evangelicals and Domestic Violence: Are Christian Men More Abusive? ◄ A great article by a PhD who uses and links to quality peer-reviewed research.
All I Ever Get for Christmas is Blue
I forget who put us onto the husband-wife duo, but if you enjoy a bit of blues you will dig this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reAw6rushxg
Image Credit: © Kevin Carden | stock.adobe.com, BillionPhotos.com | stock.adobe.com& Mohammad Metri on Unsplash
Shop Amazon ♦ Shop to give links page
We’re donation supported Thanks for your help!
This post may contain affiliate links, see my disclosure for info.
I think men who abuse are only a small part of the overall problem. There is some research in Australia (Anglican Church from memory) that shows those infrequently attending fringe dwellers are most likely to attend a Church that pushes a strong male headship model. Interestingly it also showed a high number of ministers abusing there wives. (I will try and find you a link). From memory it also showed that women in those Churches receive little to no support when reporting said abuse. ‘Husband is your head, pray for him’ nonsense.
Sadly there will always be abusers – child, wife – it is how we respond to that situation that will make the most difference.
@Neil – You are right about the kind of churches attended by those who abuse their wives. But it’s not really the headship model that is the issue. The article I linked to said, “In the United States, in fact, it looks like men’s commitment to family-centered beliefs is a more important predictor of their wife’s happiness than their beliefs about gender roles—at least for Christian men.”
If a man is serious about serving God, rather than using religion to support what he chooses to do, is influenced away from violence. As the article put it, “it looks like churchgoing may well help men steer clear of violence“.
Neil,
You say “I think men who abuse are only a small part of the overall problem.” It seems you think the “overall problem” is actually churches “that push a strong male headship model.” In my opinion, you have been misled. I hope the following will cause you to reconsider your position.
It would seem that you haven’t read the article by Brad Wilcox. I believe it references the research you mentioned that was done by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-18/domestic-violence-church-submit-to-husbands/8652028). Having lived in New Zealand for ten years, I think a comparison between the cultures, especially religious, in Australia and the United States would show they are not nearly as similar as you might think. I especially note that article’s many references to Barbara Roberts, a self-proclaimed advocate for domestic violence victims, particularly those involved with churches. I find her written work to be problematic, highly skewed against Christian churches and their leadership. Her perspective is hardly surprising, as it seems she was a victim of egregious abuse from her husband. It’s also to be expected that she has quite a following of fellow abuse victims (it’s my opinion that women will quickly and strongly gravitate toward anyone who supports their perspective).
Wilcox, however, points out that it seems to be the men who almost never attend church that are the abusers, in contrast to the regular attenders who are significantly less likely to be abusers. Wilcox says, “men who attend religious services several times a week are 72% less likely to abuse their female partners than men from comparable backgrounds who do not attend services.” Yes, 72% less likely than their non-attending peers! I repeat that number a third time for emphasis: 72%! If that’s not enough to cause you to wonder why there is such a difference between these groups, I don’t know what will.
In fact, I think that 72% may help explain why evangelical preachers and church leaders do not often address the topic of domestic violence. Why would they spend significant effort and time to teach about something that is relatively uncommon?
Out of curiosity on this topic, I recently asked my mother, married to my preacher father for all of his 40 years of ministry, how often they had heard of this problem in the evangelical churches he had served. The answer was never. I know that’s anecdotal but it seems in line with the 72% number.
As Paul states below, “But it’s not really the headship model that is the issue.”. This is likely contrary to what you have heard. Brad Wilcox, in his article says “I found that women married to churchgoing evangelical men—compared to women married to men in other major religious traditions or women married to unaffiliated men—report the highest levels of happiness.” Since the evangelical churches are the ones that would most closely adhere to a male headship, I think this is strong evidence that the male headship model is not the primary cause of abuse.
What really bothers me most about this issue is that most non-Christians and many well-meaning Christians seem to be ignorant of the true prevalence of domestic violence. Instead of a reasoned response, the emotive nature of the subject causes the reported degree of this behavior to be imagined as only the tip of the iceberg. I suspect this belief has been exacerbated, primarily through high levels of media reporting, by various instances of Christian leaders found to be guilty of sexual misconduct and especially the sexual abuse of boys in the Roman Catholic church. Not surprisingly, those who dislike or hate the Christian church will gladly report these instances and do their best to spread the information to feed the “Christians are such hypocrites” crowd. The end result is the common assumption that there must be much higher levels of domestic violence than is actually reported.
@OKRickety – You’re talking about the same error I made when I wrote about this seven years ago. (I address that in today’s post.) The data I found back then didn’t make me happy, and I felt it should not be correct, but what I could find said the problem is as bad in the church as in the world and so I went with that.
The problem is those studies identified someone as “in the church” if they claimed to be Christians – even if they rarely or never showed up at church. I get why the world does this, but sadly some Christians doing this kind of research have done the same thing.
The anti-abuse community is their own worst enemy. They tend to function more on emotion than facts, and that means some of what they say is innacurate. I support what they are doing, but I wish they would do it in a way that showed more integrity. And when you dare to say something like I just said, you get labelled as encouraging abuse!
I found it interesting that a headship focus didn’t have any negative impact on abuse. Honestly, I would have expected a mild correlation. Apperntly the headship that is being taught is a loving, healthy version. More good news!
Your final pharagph is spot on.
I wonder if part of the problem that Christianity gets such a bad reputation when it comes to abuse is not because of the perpetrators that only attend sporadically or because of the fringe churches but rather because many big household name pastors appear to be soft on abuse. Either in interviews or in sermons. I remember being a young women (late teens) and I was listening to a focus on the family radio episode where abuse was being discussed. He was absolutely advocating for counseling and separation as a last resort. He also made his stance clear that if she left and divorced him she would be in as much if not more trouble with God. He isn’t the only one. Some of the stats I have read over time about the percentage of pastors who say separation only for a short time and divorce never is horrifying. Whether it’s fair or not. These pastors are the faces and voices people associate Christianity with.
@Active Mom – You make a valid point. That has changed for the better, but not enough, and it’s not been publicised. A man who abused he wife or children is worse than a heathen, and needs to be seen and treated as such.
Hallelujah! 72% less likely. We have so j to be proud about.
Paul, you love statistics and etc. Can you please tell me what ‘72% less likely’ translates to in terms of bums on seats?
@Neil – I assume it means there are only 28% as many wife abusing men in churches as in the rest of society.
Of course there should be none, so we still have a proobme to deal with. But it’s good to see that the Gospel is having a signficiat positive affect on husbands
There has to be a figure that ‘76%’ is based on. What is it? If the general population has an incidence of relationship violence of 1 in 10 (as an example) then being happy about your Church having a rate of 1 in 40 isn’t so good. Particularly if you have – say – 100 couples in your Church
@Neil – As I said, it’s not good.
But we’ve been told by the world and a lot of Christians that we are just as bad, meaning the Gospel is not changing men. So it’s nice to find out that’s a lie.
Should we do more? Yes. But apparently we are already doing better than the world, and I’m frustrated with those who spread the lie we were not. (And that includes me!)