There has been quite the conversation on Twitter in regards to a story SWBTS president Paige Patterson told back in 2000. There is much more to the story than this, but some of it is that Patterson had counseled a young woman to remain in an abusive relationship and not pursue a divorce from her husband. There was no mention, really, of calling the authorities or of separation. I would also say that I don’t think Patterson intended to give an exhaustive answer nor do I really care to discuss all the hullabaloo surrounding Patterson. Instead I’d like to share how my views on this have changed over the years.
I will begin by saying that early on in my ministry I would have given advice very similar to that of Paige Patterson. There are two main reasons for this. First, I had a bit of a Messiah complex. I wanted to fix problems and people. And I certainly did not want to outsource a spiritual issue to the police. Secondly, I had heard several stories, similar to the one Patterson shared, of God using a wife’s humble submission to win over her husband. I wanted to see redemption and reconciliation happen. And I suppose I had read those stories into 1 Peter 3:1.
But here is what I wasn’t considering. It’s not my call. I don’t have the authority to direct someone else’s martyrdom. If criminal activity has taken place then it is my job as a pastor to report this. My calling, first and foremost, is to protect the abused person. Stories of reconciliation and redemption are not contrary to responsibly protecting victims.
I’m still not convinced that divorce is something you must counsel. But I’m also not convinced that it isn’t appropriate. Where I’ve changed my view on this is that I no longer believe it’s under the purview of my call as a pastor. There are things in this situation which would be my job and some thing which wouldn’t.
A Few Presuppositions
It’s important that you know a couple of the presuppositions I have. First, I believe it is permissible for a wife to stay. I also believe it is permissible to leave. If a husband has abused his wife he has broken covenant with her. (I realize that point is debatable, hence me admitting my presuppositions). Because the husband is the one who has already broken covenant she is not under obligation to continue in the marriage. No matter the depth of the sin against us it is never permissible for us to respond in sin, but that is not the issue here.
John Bunyan struggled with this as he faced persecution and came to the conclusion that flying and standing are both biblically warranted.
He that flies, has warrant to do so; he that stands, has warrant to do so. Yea, the same man may both fly and stand, as the call and working of God with his heart may be. Moses fled, Ex. 2:15; Moses stood, Heb. 11:27. David fled, 1 Sam. 19:12; David stood, 24:8. Jeremiah fled, Jer. 37:11–12; Jeremiah stood, 38:17. Christ withdrew himself, Luke 19:10; Christ stood, John 18:1–8. Paul fled, 2 Cor. 11:33; Paul stood, Acts 20:22–23. . . .
Do not fly out of a slavish fear, but rather because flying is an ordinance of God, opening a door for the escape of some, which door is opened by God’s providence, and the escape countenanced by God’s Word, Matt. 10:23.
Secondly, I believe the gospel really is powerful. I believe repentance, redemption, and reconciliation really can happen. I also understand the cycle of abuse and how easily it is for an abuser to use the hope of redemption as a further excuse to abuse. Yet, even so we must not neuter the gospel and its power simply because ungodly people may abuse it. Therefore, I will always lean towards leaving a door open to reconciliation and seeing the gospel work. Gospel hope is my default posture (or at least I want this to be true).
How My Views Have Matured
However, that is not my decision to make. And this is where my views, I believe, have matured over the years. I’ve come to understand that it is my job to exercise the authority given to me in helping the church to pursue biblical avenues like church discipline to bring about repentance. But that does not mean a wife is wrong to allow a husband to bear the full weight of the consequences of his sin against her. I can encourage her to leave the door open for reconciliation but I must present this in such a way that one is not seen as dishonoring Christ if fleeing is what the conscience and Spirit allow.
Abuse is heinous but it is not the unforgivable sin. An abuser needs the gospel. Deeply. This doesn’t mean they need to be given full access or a free reign to continue abuse. But we must not pretend that an abuser is a lost cause. We must pursue repentance and healing and restoration through Christ. This must happen in the context of continually protecting the wife.
So my views on a pastoral response to those being physically abused by a spouse has matured over the years. I’ve not moved one bit towards accepting or giving a free pass on unbiblical divorce. But I have, through experience and study, come to acknowledge my counsel in the past would have overstepped my calling. Thankfully, the Lord did not give me situations where this was much more than theoretical. He preserved others from hearing unhelpful counsel from me.
I also would say I know my heart through every step of this maturing. I would have never wanted to see a woman abused. I was not coming from this out of a position of misogyny. It was a position of ignorance fueled by a deep gospel hope. I wanted to see redemption happen. And I wanted to see redemption happen so bad that I would have given poor counsel and overstepped my pastoral authority.
—
Photo source: here
A really good article which outlines the position I would hold is this: A Pastoral Response to Physical Abuse in the Family.
