Can Christianity “cause” domestic abuse?
I personally think that the only “cause” of domestic abuse are the warped morals of those who engage in it. That said, what factors can encourage the abuser in his or her abuse?
A report by the Church of England suggests that, “misguided and distorted versions of Christian belief have contributed to domestic abuse in Britain.” Here are the sore points (as reported by The Times):
- A bride’s traditional marriage vow to “obey†her husband could be used to justify domestic violence as could referring to God as “He†and “Lord.”
- Bad theology, such as using the Virgin Mary “to reinforce norms of female passivity and obedience,” has been used to convince victims to forgive their abusers and not take action against them.
- The theology of self-denial and redemptive suffering in the Crucifixion of Jesus has “undermined people’s recognition of the evils being done to them and implanted masochistic attitudes of acceptance, or even celebration, of their afflictions.”
- Using religious texts such as “submit to your husband†to justify abuse.
- The Old Testament, where the attribution of violent actions and attitudes are attributed to God.
An average of two women a week are killed by their partner or former partners in England and Wales. The report does not say what percentage of abuse is encouraged (consciously or subconsciously) by Christian doctrine
This is kind of a chicken or egg question. It seems to me that a person looking to justify abuse is going to be able to find his justification somewhere if he looks hard enough. Slavery had its own scriptural tradition in the US. Throughout history, people have been able to justify all manner of war, pillage, and rape by pinning it on God. Are they doing that to ease their conscience or is they able to commit abue because the “abundance” of “justification” causes what might keep the abuser in check to become unchecked.
It seems to me that the answer will really depend on where you stand personally in regard to religion. I tend to think the need for justification drives the misguiding and distorting rather than vice-versa. However, if religion is of value as a tool of socialization at all, it must be able to shape behaviors. I think this is truly done from the inside out. The baptism of fire refines us and drives out some of these tendencies and therefore our own tendency to wrest the scriptures lessens the closer we are to God.
To borrow an analogy from ETB, the blaming Christianity approach is akin to the take the man out of the ghetto approach, while I would tend more to the change the man from the inside and he will take himself out of the ghetto approach. This approach is not conducive to statistics and social science but I think it is truer to the way God really works.
Comment by Doc — October 3, 2006 @ 1:12 pm
Some scholars have been making the same argument about any mono-theistic religion lately – tracing the origin of all violence to a belief in one true and living God. So they might as well ask, is God responsible for all the evil in the world?
Comment by Mark Butler — October 3, 2006 @ 3:04 pm
I’m with Doc. People will justify anything, even the unjustifiable.
Does anyone have, or know where to find, stats on domestic abuse for athiests and polytheists?
Comment by Proud Daughter of Eve — October 3, 2006 @ 3:18 pm
The problem is that there is abuse in other religions. (i.e. Buddhism) I think blaming it on religion is just a nice scapegoat whereas the real issue deals with economics, education and the human psyche.
Comment by Clark Goble — October 3, 2006 @ 3:41 pm
I like what the Lord told Ezekiel in chapter 18 verse 4: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
This is akin to what President Hinckley talked about in the Priesthood Session of General Conference this weekend. “Arise ye men of God,” and “Arise from the dust and be men!” as President Christofferson quoted Lehi. i.e take responsibility for your own actions.
What the church of England is basically saying here is “the devil made me do it.”
So no, our actions are our own faults. We have to accept the consequences of them, and not lay blame on any institution, group, ethnicity, identity, or the devil himself.
Comment by Dan — October 3, 2006 @ 4:10 pm
Could be a British thing. I once at dinner at One Eyed Jack’s in Newcastle, a Limey told me it was ok for a Christian to beat his wife because Jesus was silent on the matter. At the time, I thought it was a joke, but I guess he was serious. No wonder you guys banned guns.
Comment by Steve EM — October 3, 2006 @ 4:55 pm
There are about a billion Christians, so it seems reasonable that at least some of them abuse their wife who would not had they been raised atheist or buddhist or what have you.
This is half the story. To know how Christianity affects the number of abuses that occur, you’d want to subtract off all the beatings that would occur but don’t, owing to a person being Christian. I would guess that the net effect would be in Christianity’s favor.
Comment by Frank McIntyre — October 4, 2006 @ 1:02 pm
What is your opinion of this, Ronan? To me, this is shocking.
The theology of self-denial and redemptive suffering in the Crucifixion of Jesus has “undermined people’s recognition of the evils being done to them and implanted masochistic attitudes of acceptance, or even celebration, of their afflictions.â€
This point, to me, seems like a denial or refutation of the very core of Christianity. Self-denial and the redemptive suffering of Jesus Christ are now bad and this is suggested not by a punk rock band or a secularist college professor but by the Church of England itself.
Where are we when even churches — as influential a church as the Church of England — begin teaching that good is evil?
Comment by john f. — October 6, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
Any time religion is blamed for a condition of humanity, it’s entirely a scapegoat. Even in Mormondom, there are those who would justify child or spousal abuse as a priesthood perogative despite the fact the church speaks out abhorably against any such acts. And what justification was given for the Crusades, the Grand Inquisition, and even modern Gihad (sp?) terrorism.
The average convert or born-in-the-faith of any religion relates to their faith in a way that best fits their lifestyle. An abusive man will find principle in a religion to support his lifestyle, as will a passive, tolerant woman. And let’s not forget how big a role societal tolerance plays in family abuse.
Abuse is not just in England…American society is wrought with child and spouse abuse. Does anyone know the statistics? I remember they’re pretty bleak!
Even if Christianity didn’t speak out against such abuse (and it certainly does!), the person who commits the abuse and the society that supports it bare a much greater share of any blame.
In regards to 8, I can see how many people have in fact taken “the theology of self-denial and redemptive suffering” to an extreme, which does undermine their sense of personal protection. It is bad to overemphasize any doctrine or theology, even though the theology itself is good and true. (Ref GC talk, “O Be Wise”) Indeed, too much good at times can become evil. No need to slam the Church of England for pointing that out.
Comment by Jon Felt — October 6, 2006 @ 3:31 pm