Divorce, Abuse, and the Christ-CommunityGary D. Collier |
||
Introduction Divorce is a horrible, painful, and destructive part of our culture. I believe there is nothing good to be said for it. But there is a related matter that begs for attention: When faced with marital disaster, what stance should the Christian community take, and what role should it play? Despite our theoretical answers, I believe there are some terrible realities here; for historically, more focus has been given to the horrors of divorce than to the failures of Christian communities in responding to divorce. Stated bluntly: In many cases, Christian people have no idea what the real problems are in marital crisis, and they often damage the parties involved. Furthermore, church leaders often abandon their responsibility to pursue avenues of authentic and substantive nuptial support in our larger society and are too willing to turn over that responsibility to state and secular agencies (such as courts and mental health agencies). As a result, at crucial times, the voice of the church either becomes aggressive against the parties involved, or it simply goes dead. This is a long-standing, serious problem. So here, I wish to delineate six specific challenges facing communities of faith. But first, three disclaimers: I am not talking simply about people in so-called "legalistic churches," but Christian people-church leaders especially-from all kinds of churches, even the so-called "open churches" who talk a great deal about grace and who claim to "focus on Jesus." Nor am I offering a blanket condemnation of Christian people or church leaderships. Many people, including church leaders, do understand how to deal with people in crisis and are wonderful blessings from God. Nor am I saying that a Christian community is responsible for other people's failure. No, it is responsible for its own failures. And "it" and the individuals who make "it" up need to face their own culpability and then do something about it. Six Challenges (1) Talk grace, practice grace: Despite the best intentions of the best, grace-talk is sometimes merely rhetorical. At some point, Christians need to come to grips with the implications of real grace. Despite the best intentions of the best, grace-talk is sometimes merely rhetorical. At some point, Christians need to come to grips with the implications of real grace. As Paul says,
We have all seen it: grace that is no longer grace. When grace is merely a word but not a deed, when it holds something over the head of sinners in the name of being a "consequence of sin," it is not grace. Christian school administrators and faculties still conveniently hide behind old "school policies" about hiring or firing divorced employees, as do Christian publishing houses and leaders of "grace-talk" churches large and small. Oh, divorced people can now attend more churches without having to hide in the back, and they can teach and do other things: but honestly, is this the result of understanding the implications of grace, or is it merely "not being legalistic any more?" There is a difference. If there are consequences to sin, let God be the enforcer. But let Christian people turn to grace in truth and learn what it means to forgive as we have been forgiven. (2) Embrace the ministry of reconciliation: When dealing with separation and divorce, faith communities sometimes start thinking like lawyers, setting themselves up as quasi-legal agencies enforcing their own views ("God's laws"). The results are disastrous and many now see the folly in such an approach. However, instead of charting alternative courses, the response is often simply to back gingerly out of such situations and let the legal and mental health agencies handle them. When dealing with separation and divorce, faith communities sometimes start thinking like lawyers, setting themselves up as quasi-legal agencies enforcing their own views ("God's laws"). The results are disastrous and many now see the folly in such an approach. However, instead of charting alternative courses, the response is often simply to back gingerly out of such situations and let the legal and mental health agencies handle them. Certainly, there is a valuable place for our secular agencies. However, when the Christian community begins to view divorce as primarily a legal matter and then abandons its own particular calling in deference to legal concerns, there is a very serious problem at hand. What is the calling of the Christ-community if it is not to be an activist for what Paul called "the ministry of reconciliation"? When it comes to the problems associated with divorce, all Christians-husbands, wives, church leaders, and other members of the faith-community-have moral and ethical obligations to explore every possible avenue of what a "ministry of reconciliation" might mean in this case. We need to understand that neither our legal system nor our mental health system will do this: they are not designed for it and they cannot accomplish it. If the faith-community allows itself to become intimidated by perceived legal or therapeutic barriers and thereby abandons its own calling to be a serious voice for healing and reconciliation, it loses its reason to exist. This does not mean that churches must defy or ignore the legal and mental health systems. It means, rather, that faith-communities have definite callings which must be pursued despite what secular agencies are doing. (3) Don't engage in soul-battering: Anywhere there is a "power-over" relationship, where one individual or institutional party maintains the right of unequal and unequivocal power in effecting change or forcing its point of view, there is a serious potential for abuse. This abuse can come from men, women, groups, and educational and legal institutions-even churches and parachurch organizations. Anywhere there is a "power-over" relationship, where one individual or institutional party maintains the right of unequal and unequivocal power in effecting change or forcing its point of view, there is a serious potential for abuse. This abuse can come from men, women, groups, and educational and legal institutions-even churches and parachurch organizations. In a recent book, Carter Heyward calls attention to the inequities and abuse often fostered in the name of "professional ethics." I do not agree with many things in this book, but the distinctions between two kinds of power are worth repeating: the Dynamic of Domination and the Dynamic of Mutuality. The first results in what Heyward calls "the battering of the soul." The second is a sacred power for healing. Heyward states: . . . those of us who work as healers-therapists, doctors, nurses, priests, pastors, rabbis, educators, midwives-understand how badly abusive we can be by withholding intimacy and authentic emotional connection from those who seek our help. For "abuse" is not simply a matter of touching people wrongly. It is, as basically, a failure to make right-relation, a refusal to touch people rightly. (p. 10) This distinction between "dominant" and "mutual" relationships is fundamentally important in any kind of Christian conflict-resolution. Christ-communities must open their eyes to the many ways they inadvertently batter the souls of already beaten people; they must see how crucial it is to stop refusing to touch people rightly. (4) Break out of denial: We have all seen people caught in denial and it amazes us: an alcoholic who swears he has no problem with alcohol; a pathological liar who believes she always tells the truth; a thief caught red-handed who denies even being at the spot. But it is difficult to see in ourselves. We have all seen people caught in denial and it amazes us: an alcoholic who swears he has no problem with alcohol; a pathological liar who believes she always tells the truth; a thief caught red-handed who denies even being at the spot. But it is difficult to see in ourselves. Many people who have picked up the language of "grace-speak" believe that as long as we speak in the ethereal terms of love, grace, mercy, and the "surpassing worth of Christ" then we have no obligation to say or do more. Our remedies are, at times quite simple: Just focus on Jesus! Be warmed and filled with the gracious love and surpassing mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ who will bind and care for you and fight all your battles for you! We have been blinded by decades of misguided debates on the topic of divorce, or by current notions that divorce is best left to lawyers and counselors. Without intending it, we have sometimes become communities of delusion, resolutely projecting a heart of grace while stubbornly protecting a calloused soul: blind, oblivious, incredulous to any suggestion that we ourselves contribute to marital decay and destruction! Let us step out of denial and recognize our own culpability. (5) Support, but don't "enable": Enabling someone to hide from the reality of sin or from self-destructive behavior is not a Christian virtue; supporting someone who is struggling and seeking help is. Enabling someone to hide from the reality of sin or from self-destructive behavior is not a Christian virtue; supporting someone who is struggling and seeking help is. Sometimes good Christian people trying to support one or both parties in a separation and divorce can actually do a tremendous amount of harm. By all means, "support" is needed. "Enabling," however, under the guise of grace, can both contribute to marital breakup and help to insulate a person from finally coming to grips with deep personal issues which will continue to affect his or her relationships with others. (6) Provide safe places: The Christian community can be a very dangerous place for someone in crisis. The reason is simple: Christians talk about confessing their sins to one another-but sometimes they do not know how to handle someone else's real-life trouble and they often do more harm than good. This is not just a matter of theory, it is a fact: many people in crisis have been severely crushed by fellow Christians who did not know how to help them handle a real problem. The Christian community can be a very dangerous place for someone in crisis. The reason is simple: Christians talk about confessing their sins to one another-but sometimes they do not know how to handle someone else's real-life trouble and they often do more harm than good. This is not just a matter of theory, it is a fact: many people in crisis have been severely crushed by fellow Christians who did not know how to help them handle a real problem. Where confession and catharsis are not possible in safety and confidence, community cannot exist and healing cannot occur. Bonhoeffer was right: Many Christians are unthinkably horrified when a real sinner is suddenly discovered among the righteous. So we remain alone with our sin, living in lies and hypocrisy. People in a faith-community must make confession possible; to bear the burdens and confessions of others we must learn the meaning of keeping confidences, providing safe places for the open expression of fear and anger, building trustworthiness, and being people of integrity. This may not be easy, but not even to try is tragic. The Search for Community What is the faith-community's role in responding to divorce and to people somehow associated with it? I have suggested that Christian people and communities of faith have often abandoned their responsibility to pursue authentic and substantive nuptial support and are too willing to turn over that responsibility to state and secular agencies (such as courts and mental health agencies) who are, in fact, not equipped for dealing with such things. Despite good intentions, Christians often appear to have succumbed to a religious culture which increasingly: (1) talks grace but practices law; (2) avoids any in-depth evaluation of legal, moral, and ethical decisions by secular agencies and refuses to chart and pursue alternative paths of healing and reconciliation in the face of such practices; (3) actually becomes a party to damaging people more than they already are through its long-standing attitudes on power and control issues; (4) is often in denial about its own responsibility to provide genuine and energetic nuptial support in a society which has legally and therapeutically all but abandoned it; (5) sometimes falls into the trap of merely enabling Christian people to engage in irresponsible, immoral, and unethical practices; and (6) has often failed to provide a safe and trusting environment for people associated with divorce to confront and deal with the issues important for them. I have offered six positive suggestions for confronting these issues. And I end with two very serious and sincere questions: When does the community of faith begin acting like a "healing community of grace"? When does "the ministry of reconciliation" become "living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword" for battered people?
|
||
|
Return to |