The Church's
Response to Domestic Violence and Child Abuse: Definition, Discovery,
Direction.
January 1999
© J. L. van
Popta
The reality of
domestic violence and sexual abuse is one that we as office bearers face more and
more often. There is more than one reason for the rise of incidents of family
violence. The first reason, I think, that we are confronted with more and more
violence in family situations derives from the fact that the church, along with
the world, has become less tolerant of violence in family situations. I am
quite sure that we have become more aware of the problem. That, in itself, will
uncover more incidents. Our lower tolerance and growing refusal to turn a blind
eye to it will make the number of cases increase. That on the one hand.
On the one hand,
our society entertains itself with violence. Think of the video games even our
own boys play (if we let them). When I was a boy, we played cops and robbers or
cowboys and Indians. "Bang, bang you're dead! Hey, if you don't fall down,
I'm not playing anymore!" and we would go home with our hands in our
pockets. Now young boys (and not so young) play video games in which mayhem,
blood and gore are spattered across the computer screen and they shout, "I'm
going to kill you!" Movies and
television programming has increased in violence. Novels have become more
graphic in their description and depiction of violence. This is a strange and
frightening sociological phenomenon.
Yet it seems that
our society despises real violence. The rights of the individual are promoted
over the rights of the many. The rights of special interest groups prevail over
the rights of society at large. The UN declares the International Year of Women
and The International Year of the Child. All over the world there are groups
and organizations that defend the rights of women and children. And yet a judge
in BC rules that possession of child pornography is protected by the Charter of
Rights and Freedoms. Owning and distributing child pornography (even depicting
violence against children) is not harmful to anyone, therefore it is a
protected form of personal expression.
We live in a
society that is rapidly developing a split personality. On the one hand it
protects the depiction of violence. On the other hand it abhors real violence.
The church is not free from these influences. All sorts of movies and videos
come with the warning: extreme violence. All sorts of pornographic materials
are available in the magazine rack, in the video store, and now on the
Internet. We would be naïve if we believed that members of Christ’s church are
immune from these influences. Especially the Internet allows anonymous
participation in pornography and violence.
Someone responded
to the invitation sent out for this conference suggesting that in dealing with
this topic, we are simply following the lead of the world. This is not the
point of this conference. It is exactly because there is a tendency to follow
the world, also by office bearers, that we need as churches of Jesus Christ, to
address this issue head-on. If we do not then our responses will be a
piece-meal adaptation of the world’s responses.
One caveat,
however. I do not in any way suggest that I have the answers to these matters.
I present this paper as a discussion starter, not as the final word. One matter
here. Often in this presentation I speak of “the church.” Sometimes I mean the
office bearers, sometimes the congregation. I hope that it is clear what I mean
in each instance.
We must turn to
scripture in order to define the biblical view of domestic violence and how to
deal with it. Again, extremes must be avoided. On the one hand, we cannot
accept the world’s victim mentality, which focuses on individual rights and
freedoms. We live in a culture of victimization. Everything wrong in our lives
is to be blamed on someone else. We are all victims of others. Members if our
contemporary society have difficulty taking responsibility for their own lives.
What then is abuse or violence?
While we do not
have a biblical primer or handbook on domestic violence, there are Mosaic laws
that relate to violence in general, expounding and applying the sixth
commandment. Some deal with particular abuses in the family.
If you have a NIV
Study Bible (the Original pg 271; the 10th Anniv. Pg. 267. ) you will find a
listing of texts that the authors of the notes consider to reflect the major
social concerns of the covenant which the Lord established with his people.
I would like to
use this list as a starting point for defining what we call domestic violence
There is a real
need for Canadian Reformed people to think in terms of social concerns. I think
that we have created a false separation between what we think historical
redemptive interpretation should be and application in the lives of God’s
people. Scripture teaches us about matters of social interaction at all levels.
The listing in the study Bible can help us.
Though not all 16
categories are as crucial for us today we should perhaps reflect on some if not
most of them.
The first one:
1. (I will not
treat them in the order presented) Everyone’s person is to be secure. The first
Exodus 20:13 and Dt. 5:17, is “You shall not murder.” This is the 6th commandment. This is the fundamental law that pertains
to our topic today. The HC interprets the 6th commandment in this way:
What does God require in the sixth commandment?
I am not
to dishonor, hate, injure, or kill my neighbour by thoughts, words, or
gestures, and much less by deeds.By forbidding murder God teaches us that He
hates the root of murder, such as envy, hatred, anger, and desire of
revenge, and that He regards all these
as murder.
When God
condemns envy, hatred, and anger, He commands us to love our neighbour as
ourselves, to show patience, peace, gentleness, mercy, and friendliness toward him, to protect him
from harm as much as we can, and to do good even to our enemies.
The HC gives us
an interpretation of the 6th Commandment that is comprehensive. It “covers all
the bases,” so to say. There is a
negative: you may not and must not do this. There is the positive: you must do
this. And there is the background: the root of murder is violence and hatred.
We can work with
this in family situations.
Exodus 21:16ff
gives us laws protecting individuals from having their security violated.
Kidnapping, the stealing of persons and selling them is a capital crime. This
is the ultimate violation of the eighth commandment “you shall not steal.” This law protects the security of all and
every individual, regardless of age. Each person has a right to dignity and
security of person in the community. This is a fundamental value from which
flow many other norms. As church, God’s covenant community, we have an
obligation to see to it that security of person is enjoyed by each and every
member, young or old, male or female, it matters not.
Those who curse
their parents are to be put to death. Those who attack their parents are also
liable to capital punishment. We might think that this is rather harsh but
these are sins against the 3rd, 5th, and 6th commandments. We see then that
family violence, both verbal and physical is taken seriously by God. Family
violence can take the form of “granny bashing”. This is not uncommon. Office
bearers should have an eye open for this sin.
These laws
continue with respect to slaves. No master may mistreat his slaves. This is
reiterated in the NT in Ephesians 6 where Paul writes about the relationship
between fathers and children; between masters and slaves.
4. It becomes
clear then that it is possible to use excessive force in order to implement
orders. Deut 25:1-5 demand fairness in punishment. Fathers who are violent sin
against the 6th commandment. Those who raise their hands violently against children or wives or
parents need to understand this.
11. Husbands are
to love their wives as Christ loves the church. The husband is to be willing to
die for his wife. Each husband should live with this in his heart: She is “To
die for”! The 7th Commandment demands sexual purity in marriage.
Leviticus 18:6 demands purity in the family. Incest is forbidden. Chapter 18
begins by saying do not do as the Egyptians did, nor as the Canaanites did. It
ends with that also. Between are the listing of unlawful sexual relationships.
And we should not do as Bill Clinton did and dispute what sexual relations are.
The world’s definition is sufficient I think. Any act which seeks to gratify
the human sexual urge is included. If the church is not willing to say this
clearly, we too will defile the covenant inheritance and we too will be vomited
out. Let us clearly lay out before the members of Christ’s church who are in
our care the consequences of this sin.
5. Each member of
the covenant has dignity and right. The laws concerning Hebrew slaves, fellow
covenant members (Ex 21:2ff) shows that no fellow covenant member may be
treated as anything but belonging to God. This is underlined by the laws
concerning the Year of Jubilee when debts and slaves were to be freed and
restored.
6. No woman is to
be taken advantage of. Women in OT times had little status. God’s law protected
them from abuse, violence, and exploitation.
12. The weakest
members of the nation were also protected. Though children are not specifically
mention we can transfer this to the realm of children. They, being the weakest,
demand the greatest protection. On the other hand we need to defend the
position of the accused.
2. Everyone is to
be secure against false accusation (Exodus 23:1-3).
13. Everyone is
allowed a fair trial and access to the courts.
15. Yet, no one
is above the Law.
We see then that
scripture is quite clear about violence and sexual relations. We can and must
go to God’s word to understand that he desires gentleness and purity in family
life. Violence and incest are forbidden.
The church must,
however, be careful in the discovery process. On the one hand, we must not
adopt worldly viewpoints and see “abuse” in every imperfect, fallen action.
Today, many people view any exercise of authority as abusive by definition.
(Think of those who are striving to make any physical, corporal punishment,
including spanking a crime.) But
authority is not always abusive. God has delegated authority, to governments,
teachers, parents. Those in authority must use it wisely and judiciously. That
means that there is God given right to exercise that authority. Not every
charge of abuse is valid.
On the other
hand, we should not think that every mention of abuse is part of a liberal
conspiracy to get social workers into every home. We must listen carefully to
complaints from children, from wives, from students, from the elderly. An
article I read on this topic asked:
Why must women in
danger have nowhere to go but to a feminist shelter for battered women? Are the
only alternatives to stay, to be hurt, or to die? Why must truly oppressed
victims face a church that increasingly treats people humanistically rather
than biblically? People, including church members, are sinners, capable of
cruelty, violence, and lying to cover their sins. We Reformed Christians, above
all others, should take total depravity seriously. Sinners sin. Should we be
shocked? Grieved, yes; shocked, no.
I believe that
office-bearers need to hear the complainant with sympathetic ears. It will not
happen easily that a child, or wife, or senior (or husband for that matter)
will complain to the office-bearers about sexual or physical abuse. When they
do, we must take the matter seriously. We must be attuned to the signs and
symptoms of dysfunctional families. We must be able to identify children at
risk. Who are we to close our eyes to these matters?
But how should
this discovery process begin and what should we do. First of all we should
remember that any sexual relations with a child under 14 in Canada is a crime.
There is no consensual argument allowed. In Canada criminal assault charges can
be laid, and often are, simply because of verbal threats. It is against the law
to threaten someone. When physical attacks follow the threats, it is called
assault and battery. When fathers, or other family members, teachers engage in
sexual relations with children this is a crime.
We need to
understand the relationship that the church has with the state.
The old Christian
Reformed Church Order (the one we used for the first decades) in Article 71
helps us. (Personally I think it a great loss that this article was changed so
drastically into our Article 66). Though the old 71 does not have binding
character in our churches there is a lesson we can learn from it.
It read: As Christian Discipline is of a spiritual
nature, and exempts no one from Civil trial or punishment by the authorities,
so also besides Civil punishment there is need of Ecclesiastical censures to
reconcile the sinner with the church and his neighbour and to remove the
offense out of the church of Christ.
This article
compares and contrasts the difference that Christian discipline has from Civil
trial. This is an important distinction. It is one that I want to highlight
today. Article 71 very definitely stresses the fact that ecclesiastical
discipline is of a spiritual nature, and exempts no one from Civil trial or
punishment. The article clearly distinguishes between the two; between the
domain of the church and the domain of the state. When a church member commits
a crime punishable by the law he is not exempted from that simply by confessing
his sin to the church. This is an important, if not central, point. When
allegations of criminal activity are made against members of Christ’s church,
by those within the church, it is not the duty of the office bearers to shield
the accused from possible prosecution by the crown. In fact, all of you in your
work, as office bearers should know the law in this matter when it concerns
children.
The Alberta Child
Welfare Act reads in the pertinent sections as follows.
P39-909 Sec. 3. Reporting a child in need – (1) any person
who has reasonable and probable grounds to believe and believes that a child is
in need of protective services shall forthwith report the matter to a director.
This means that
if you, in your work (or otherwise) believe that a child is in danger of being
assaulted you MUST report it. You need not have proof, just reasonable and
probable grounds that a child is in danger. This is a very broad definition. I
have sought legal counsel on this matter. In a specific case my lawyer asked me
what I believed to be true. I said that I believed the allegations of a woman
who reported to me that the alleged molester had on-going opportunity to molest
a child. The Lawyer told me that that was reasonable grounds and therefore I
was under legal obligation to report.
P39-910 [Confidential Information] – Subsection (1) applies
notwithstanding that the information on which the belief is founded is
confidential and its disclosure is prohibited under any other Act.
The
“confessional” is not sacred when it comes to child molesters. If in the course
of your work you learn of a perpetrator who could be a danger to other children
you must report. You cannot say, “well I learned of this when someone confessed
sin to me.” The law is clear. The only
privileged information is that which is given to a lawyer in a client solicitor
relationship.
P39-912 [Limitation
of Liability] – No action lies against a person reporting pursuant to this
section unless the reporting is done maliciously or without reasonable and
probable grounds for the belief.
There is
protection for you in the Act, that if you report on reasonable grounds, and
with out malice, no one may sue you for slander or libel.
P39-913 [Duty of director] Notwithstanding and in addition to any other
penalty provided by this Act, if a director has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a person has not
complied with subsection (1) and that person is registered under an Act
regulating a profession or occupation prescribed in the regulations, the
director shall advise the appropriate governing body of that profession or
occupation of the failure to comply.
If you do not
report, the authorities shall advise the governing body. This would first of
all include medical doctors and counselors. But my lawyer suggested that since
ministers are registered with the government in order to perform marriages, the
director of child welfare could be obligated to report the matter to Council or
Classis. They would have to do this, not upon conviction but upon reasonable
and probable grounds that the person in question was likely not complying with
the law.
P39-914 [Offence]
– Any person who fails to comply with subsection (1) is guilty of an offence
and liable to a fine of not more that $2000.00 and in default to imprisonment
for a term of not more than 6 months. Not complying with this law is a
punishable offence: a crime.
This is not a bad
law. It does not demand of any of us to do anything against God’s law. In fact,
it urges us to do exactly what the law of God requires compassion for the
weakest, safety for those in danger. We would do well to heed this law better
than the church has in the past. Many times in the past, consistories have
attempted to deal with child abuse as an in house matter. This no longer may be
done. It is a crime that must be reported, no less than if you learned that
someone had committed murder. Then too, the church upon discovery, or even upon
suspicion would be obligated to report.
I present to you
a case study: This is a true story of a respectable Canadian Reformed family,
with some facts altered and names changed. A 14 year old girl has a big blow up
with dad at the breakfast table and shouts some things that cause mother to be
absolutely shocked. The girl yells that she will no allow her father to fondle
her nor will she satisfy him and she storms out of the house. Peter jumps into
his car and rushes off to work. Mother Jane goes to school that afternoon and
picks up Susan. Jane asks her daughter what is going on. Susan tells her mother
that father has been engaging in sexual relations with her for about 4 years
now as well as with her younger sister, 12 year old Tonya. Peter is a respected
man in the church and community. He is in his second term as elder. Jane does
not know what to do. She calls the minister. Hearing the distraught Jane, Rev.
Vander Smith comes over right away. It is about 4:00 PM. The minister hears
Jane’s story and then goes to speak to Susan and Tonya. They confirm what had
been told to Jane, earlier. Peter comes home.
Now, what should
Rev. Vander Smith do? Should he mount an investigation? Should he doubt the
girls? Should he try to reconcile the girls to their father, warning Peter that
if it should happen again he might get in trouble? Should he call the other
elders for advice?
Rev. Vander Smith
confronted Peter with the allegations. In this case, Peter confessed his sins.
Rev. Vander Smith took him to the police, where the girls gave statements.
Peter was charged and pleaded guilty, was convicted and sent to prison.
The church
council met in special session and with the co-operation of the neighbouring
church deposed Peter from his office of elder the day after the allegations
were made and Peter was arrested. They did not wait for the trial.
I believe that
this is the way that these matters must be dealt with. Just because Peter was
found out and he confessed his sin, did not exempt him from civil punishment.
Nor did it exempt him from the discipline of the church. Both the crown and the
church have authority delegated by God; both the crown and the church had to
act. But each in their own sphere.
Van Dellen and
Monsma in their CO commentary give the following scenario:
If some church
member should commit murder he would naturally be disciplined. In case he
should manifest sincere repentance the church would lift the censure and the
sinner in question would be restored eventually to all the privileges of full
membership. But the reconciliation of this criminal with the Church would in
wise exempt hi from trial and punishment by the law. The State would be
compelled to sentence and punish such a criminal even to the extent of capital
punishment, if necessary. As murderer he may have to die in the electric chair
though the church has readmitted him to the Lord’s Supper as one whose sins are
forgiven for Christ’s sake
This principle is
an important one. In the case of Peter and his daughters, because the church
was not involved in the investigation, nor in the criminal matter, the office
bearers were able to function in their God ordained offices. They brought
spiritual discipline to bear upon Peter. The state punishes; the church
disciplines. It has to be clear that it is not up to the church to investigate
the criminal matter. Often there will be discrepancies between what the child,
or woman, says and what the perpetrator confesses to. He says: she says. The church, however, does not have the skills,
tools or the God given authority, to investigate and judge in criminal matters.
This authority has been given by God to the state. Let the church remain in its
own realm and let the courts and the officers of the court do their work.
Having some
definitions from Scripture and understanding the church’s role with respect to
the weaker members, and having discovered a crime, what is the church to? It
needs to give direction, spiritual direction to both the perpetrator and the
victim. The office-bearers will be able to do this if they stay out of the
legal realm and remain where they are ordained to do their work, in the
spiritual realm.
Office bearers
need to be faithful in their work. They need to know the families in their
charge. A once a year home visit doesn’t cut it. There has to be contact, real
world contact with the members in your wards (I assume you have a ward system
in your churches.) Elders must deal
with the everyday issues that affect the sheep and then be ready to deal with
the tough cases.
Churches should
be ready with safe houses where wives or children can go when they report that
they are in danger. They should not have to run off to the child protection
agencies, or to the feminist women’s shelters. The church must be prepared to
care for their own. If they don’t, we should not be surprised when government
agencies step into our family lives. Nor should we complain. Dr. N.
Kloosterman, in his excellent videos (if you’ve not seen them yet, do so soon)
recommends that elders especially have a close working relationship with their
wards. We live in a post-modern age. One in which not just a teaching church
has credibility. Not just an authoritarian church has credibility, but a church
that fosters relationships. If you want credibility with your ward members,
especially the younger set, you need to build relationships of trust.
Elders must be
prepared to visit in prison and to exhort, admonish and restore the sinner.
They must also be ready work to reconciliation between perpetrators and
victims. A little more on that later.
Elders must live
with the sheep to care for and direct them. They need to function in a special
way in the office of all believers. They must be prophets who proclaim God’s
Word about redemption. They need to do that first of all from the pulpit, in
the class room, in house visits, in seminars for the congregation. God’s will
for family life must be taught boldly. Let’s say the 5th, the 6th
and the 7th commandment need to be taught clearly and often.
The elders should
persist in priestly pleading with God for patience with his people. The deacons
especially have a role here. They function as the compassion priests. This
involves prayer, counseling, discipleship, and peacemaking both between God and
man and between man and man. They too must bring sheep to repentance; biblical
counseling is a must.
Office bearers
should also provide kingly protection. We must not try to be Rambo. We are
shepherds, not cowboys; kings under Christ, who rule and protect. But we must
protect. Elders must trust God and use the process set forth in Matthew 18.
Especially in the tough, violent cases, we must be willing to employ the keys
of the kingdom and not withhold this blessing. The sword of the Spirit applied
in loving discipline is much more powerful than the state’s literal sword.
Consistories and councils must understand the issues involved in domestic
violence and how to apply them pastorally to all who are involved. In certain
extreme instances, they need to render judgments as to the application of 1
Corinthians 7 to individual cases as possible grounds for divorce. They act as
judges of God’s people. This is serious indeed, but necessary.
Along with the
elders, the deacons must see to the practical, physical concerns of the family
members involved. If the church offers safe houses correctly, the provinces
foster-care system for the children may be avoided. The perpetrator may need a
place to stay while reconciliation is being sought. In rare circumstances,
there may be medical problems that contribute to the violence or result from
it. The deacons may help to insure proper medical care. If the deacons can help
financially, the family can be protected economically and in some cases
legally. Also, temporary protection may create a need for transportation, as
well as a need for shelter.
The office
bearers should understand the legal system. Just because charges are laid
concerning confessed sin, the accused may be advised to plead not guilty by his
lawyer. This should not necessarily be seen as a sin against the ninth
commandment. If we understand that sometimes the facts of the case do not
warrant the charges then someone may plead not guilty, but plead guilty to a
lesser charge.
Too often in the
past, elders, ministers, church communities have urged the victims of incest,
or family violence to forgive almost immediately. When the perpetrator
confesses his sin, then there is a sense that the victims must simply forgive
and move on. I believe that this is a wrong model. I call it the “forgiveness
model.” The crime is discovered—Often
it is discovered after years, decades even, of abuse—The father is confronted
with his sin and he acknowledges that he has done wrong. We demand then that
(in most cases of sexual abuse) the daughter forgive father and get on with her
life in the family. But this minimizes the reality of what has happened. The
victim often cannot readily forgive and so begins to feel guilt for harboring a
grudge against father. The church often is ready to forgive the sinner long
before the victim is. This is held against the victim. And the victim is
victimized again. I suggest that we move from that “forgiveness model” to a
“reconciliation model.” A reconciliation
model has forgiveness as the end goal not as the first step toward restoration.
This allows the victim to work through a lot of emotional and psychological
garbage that has been suppressed, sometimes for years and decades.
Some years ago I
suggested on the pages of RP that Psalm 109 could be used as a song for victims
of abuse.
Women, also, who
are beaten by their husbands are cowed into submission and into a world from
which there is no escape. They too need to know that the congregation and the office
bearers will stand by them if they speak out. My experience has been that if
the congregation knows that the minister and elders will take seriously
allegations of family violence, then those who are at risk will speak out. When
they do, then elders can go into the family and attempt to restore Christian
norms and behaviours between husbands and wives.
Let each of us
realize that family violence and child abuse, sexual and otherwise is a cancer
in our communities that must be removed. It is a hereditary disease that is
passed on from generation to generation. Abused girls and boys grow up to be
abusers. Boys who see their mother beat up, grow up to beat their girl friends
and later on their wives. Girls who see their mothers beat up often marry
abusers, finding security in the hands of violent men. Each of us has a
responsibility as God’s under shepherds to make it stop.
If office bearers
are willing to address these issues by defining domestic violence and child
abuse in scriptural terms, and if church as congregation can accept these terms
this will lead to much less of this sin in our congregations. And there has
been too much of it, hidden by a culture of silence. If in discovery the office
bearers allow the police, crown prosecutors and courts to do their work, the
elders, ministers and deacons will be able to go about their work in giving
spiritual counsel and discipline to perpetrators and victims. If the office
bearers are willing to give godly direction, boldly speaking out against family
violence and incest the Lord will bless that work greatly. If not, we will be
vomited out of the covenant inheritance.