Domestic violence within our plain culture?

[jahertz]

Not a topic here that I think often about. But JAH, you’re making me worry for my young daughters getting married someday.

Welcome back btw.

RZehr, thank you for the welcome!

I have one daughter in her early teens, and I think about this a lot too. I really believe this is a key area where better awareness can save homes and souls: Red flags exist early in life for the patterns of entitlement and selfishness that predict abuse, and if parents of daughters are watching for these, they can offer priceless service in helping young women identify and avoid a relationship at high risk for a lifetime of regrets.

Beyond that, I think we can help protect our daughters by noticing the gaps and blind spots which may exist in teaching for women offered within our particular church setting, and taking the initiative to fill them in with Gospel-centered truth, both in the home and, where we have opportunity, in the congregational setting.

Suppose my church, like most Plain churches, is highly successful at nurturing up housewives who can put on a great Sunday dinner, but I have never heard anyone address a wife's responsibility, say, if she deems her husband's disciplinary style with the children cruel or abusive? Given that the souls of children are surely more important than the quality of the food, a father of daughters might spend some quality time pondering this type of scenario with his wife, digging into the scripture, and extracting the Gospel principles that could apply to this situation. The daughters, depending on age, could then be brought into a discussion around the dinner table about what submission and obedience to God's order means for a wife who is privy to the abuse of children in her care.

Sustained over a period of years, this kind of awareness-building can empower young women both to recognize harmful patterns of entitlement in potential mates and to peacefully and effectively resist harmful behavior patterns early in marriage if they do arise. This is not only about protecting young women: a husband whose wife is spiritually alert and capable of confronting ungodliness is far safer spiritually than one whose wife assumes her job is to duck her head and rubber-stamp whatever he does or says.

Failing to prepare young women to hold professing Christian husbands accountable for domestic abuse does much more than ruin the image of Christ and the church and crush the souls of wives: it also paves many a young abuser's path to hell and robs him of key obstacles God designed to arrest his descent into spiritual blindness and collapse.

If this kind of challenging teaching about the wife's role in confronting destructive relationship patterns can be introduced into the corporate setting, so much the better.

[Josh]

As vice-president of LifeRing Ministries, I would be as good a choice to receive such intelligence as anyone. PM me through the Mennonet message system if you like and we can exchange contact info. But please refrain now and in the future from casually smearing Christian ministries in public without evidence. That's unprofessional, irresponsible, and destructive.

Yet you have made multiple claims in this thread casually smearing unnamed Mennonite ministers as turning a blind eye to abuse and accommodating abusers, and I would assert that, yes, also without evidence. And I think that's also unprofessional, irresponsible, and destructive. It seems a bit rich that you demand to be treated fairly (and privately) after basically putting the plain world on trial, making wild assertions about how much abuse goes on in the plain world, and complain that it is not out in the open and taken care of.

Whilst I may not agree with Grace airing what she did so publicly, can you not see how this is very similar to your own conduct in this thread?

[Josh]

I did not intend in my last post to imply anything about you beyond what I understood you yourself to have asserted in this thread: That you knew of only a few cases; that we should treat mental illness as a leading cause of the tiny amount of domestic abuse that does happen in Plain circles, since "half of the examples" you offered up were such cases; and that you could think of no "more effective way" than gossip networks to learn how much domestic abuse is happening in Plain churches. If I wildly misunderstood what you intended to say—and it appears I must have, given the sudden assertion in your last post that you have "a library of absolutely hair-raising tales of domestic abuse within plain circles," I sincerely apologize for that.

I listed things I was aware of first-hand. The library of hair-raising stories digs into second-hand stuff. With that said, however, these are still rare - perhaps 1% or less of plain men who are involved in such hair-raising situations.

As it happens, I can think of a way to find out about Plain abusers that may be significantly more effective than "women who are very good at gathering and compiling various sources of gossip": to wit, advertising oneself and one's associates as a resource of last resort for Plain victims and churches seeking help with DV crises. That's the chair where I've sat for a couple of years now, not as an expert but as a learner, filling the role out of an urgent sense that someone needed to fill it and I thought I might be able to take the flak.

You seem to assert that you can operate a nonprofit organisation that will somehow be a better church than the church itself is; that your organisation can somehow become judge, jury, and executioner for deciding if people are guilty of domestic violence or not; decide to financially support wives who claim they are victims by providing them money and other means so they can seek a separation or divorce from their husband, beyond what their church may or may want to do; and to then portray yourself as having expert knowledge on how common domestic violence is in plain circles, as you have done in this thread. I simply think you are wrong about the relative statistics and prevalence of this, and I don't think quasi-church organisations are the answer, particular ones that adopt flawed methodologies such as the "Duluth wheels".

My perspective, on both scope and solutions, is informed by the unique window into the Plain world offered by this role, plus the direct interaction this role affords me with other Christian organizations doing DV work in conservative churches. I am as candid and constructive as I know how, and I leave it to others to draw their own conclusions on my competence and integrity, and weight my words accordingly.

Your "solution" seems to be that all of us, husbands, ministers, and entire churches submit under your organisation's leadership and power. I think that's a bad position to put yourself in. As a survivor of domestic violence myself, I really am not comfortable with you speaking on behalf of me.

[jahertz]

As vice-president of LifeRing Ministries, I would be as good a choice to receive such intelligence as anyone. PM me through the Mennonet message system if you like and we can exchange contact info. But please refrain now and in the future from casually smearing Christian ministries in public without evidence. That's unprofessional, irresponsible, and destructive.

Yet you have made multiple claims in this thread casually smearing unnamed Mennonite ministers as turning a blind eye to abuse and accommodating abusers, and I would assert that, yes, also without evidence. And I think that's also unprofessional, irresponsible, and destructive. It seems a bit rich that you demand to be treated fairly (and privately) after basically putting the plain world on trial, making wild assertions about how much abuse goes on in the plain world, and complain that it is not out in the open and taken care of.

Whilst I may not agree with Grace airing what she did so publicly, can you not see how this is very similar to your own conduct in this thread?

No, Josh, I do not see that. I have been exceedingly careful to level no accusations that would tend to reflect negatively on specific ministries, churches, or individuals, and if I have failed in that and unjustly accused any organization or church in this discussion, I urge you to bring it to my attention so I may correct it in whatever way I can.

Beyond that, the history of this discussion thus far suggests strongly to me that you and I will accomplish little of value by continuing to engage each other on this topic in this forum. I am genuinely sorry about that, as I've had fruitful conversations with you before; but until I know of a way to change the present dynamic, I must respectfully disengage as far as you are concerned. God bless you.

[Joy]

Jahertz, I'm with you on young women (and young men, too) not being taught how to biblically evaluate a prospective spouse. In conversations with professing Christians of various groups, the church just does not seem to be teaching on the subject, and apparently parents aren't, either. And for that matter, complete, balanced teaching on the home is often missing, which creates vulnerability to making very poor choices in life mates.

I had a ladies' devotional one time for Valentine's Day, on what love means in the context of different relationships: between husband and wife, toward parents, toward our enemies, toward one who calls himself a brother yet is living in open sin, and other relationships. We need to very carefully study the everyday application of Scripture in our lives.

[Josh]

No, Josh, I do not see that. I have been exceedingly careful to level no accusations that would tend to reflect negatively on specific ministries, churches, or individuals, and if I have failed in that and unjustly accused any organization or church in this discussion, I urge you to bring it to my attention so I may correct it in whatever way I can.

You simply broadened your accusation to "the entire Anabaptist community". That reflects negatively on every Mennonite ministry, church, and individual, and I think your accusation is unjust.

Beyond that, the history of this discussion thus far suggests strongly to me that you and I will accomplish little of value by continuing to engage each other on this topic in this forum. I am genuinely sorry about that, as I've had fruitful conversations with you before; but until I know of a way to change the present dynamic, I must respectfully disengage as far as you are concerned. God bless you.

jahertz, it seems that as soon as you were challenged in this area, your response is to "disengage". You decided to bring this up in public, and so I responded in public. You also responded to what Grace said in public, and responded with the biggest problem we run into in the Anabaptist world: organisational self-defence mode. I will respect your right to disengage, but I would ask that you take a serious moment for self-reflection about if you are not simply perpetrating all the same things you have been campaigning against since you and I first spoke about this and I encouraged you and another one of the board members to found LifeRing, and I declined to sit on the board so that my own history of being divorced would not cast any bad aspersions on LifeRing's reputation.

[jahertz]

As vice-president of LifeRing Ministries, about which a number of specific and unfortunately misleading allegations have been made in previous posts, I am more than happy to answer questions about our policies and positions, and how we view our role within the Anabaptist ecosystem. I'll go ahead and summarize the basics here, although I did not enter this discussion with the intent of publishing an infomercial.

We are a new organization, still working on completing non-profit status in a number of states, and most if not all of us are new to the non-profit world, so it's just as well that we haven't exactly been flooded with donations so far as we learn the ropes of building and maintaining a responsibly-run organization worthy of being trusted to steward others' funds for the public good. You can find our three-part mission statement on our website at www.lifering.co, as well as brief profiles of our board members.

We all do this work in our spare time, and my personal stretch goal for our organization is to become fully superfluous. We believe the work of domestic abuse intervention, short of criminal matters, belongs to the local church, not para-church organizations, and our passion is to see every Anabaptist church autonomously cultivating an environment in which domestic abuse is rare and cases that arise are dealt with by competent members of the local church or its affiliates, promptly, safely, and in line with the priorities of Jesus and the hope of the Gospel.

As I have said, I think we presently fall far short of that ideal in the Anabaptist world. As I have perhaps not stated clearly enough, in my experience most Anabaptist leaders sincerely want to do well with broken marriages and destructive relationships. However, often by their own admission, many are inexperienced in dealing with the unique challenges of domestic abuse and uncertain of how to identify such cases and address them in a way that yields the fruit of righteousness.

LifeRing generally does not provide direct financial support to victims, but serves mainly as a hub to connect churches and domestic abuse victims and perpetrators with existing resources such as Christian advocacy, training and consulting, and insights from Biblical counselors with experience in domestic abuse in Christian settings.

The right place for sub-criminal domestic abuse among Christians to be confronted and resolved, as with most human dysfunction, is within the context of a caring and competent local church community. Anabaptists have a history of great communal strength that offers unique potential for creative solutions to DV. My dream is to see that potential unleashed in Plain communities everywhere on behalf of the wounded and voiceless who far too often still fall through the cracks. I hope and believe this is what Jesus wants too.

We are far from the only ones working on this sort of thing from some angle or another in the Plain world, and I assume Steve-in-kville did not intend for this thread to become focused on promotion or critique of a particular organization, so out of respect for the op I suggest that any questions about LifeRing specifically be directed to me by pm rather than posted in the thread. Thanks!

[Neto]

If one can make a general assumption in regards to who the young women of the "plain culture" will marry, then I'd say that it is of paramount importance that the young men be taught how to respect and honor the young women. I say this with tongue in cheek, because I think that our sons ought to be taught this regardless of who they marry. I have told my sons never to ask anything of a young lady to which she ought to say no. I hope this doesn't sound demeaning, because I certainly do not mean it that way, but from my observations, I think that women were created to say yes, not no. So it is a sort of "emotional abuse" to put them in a position in which they need to say no.

I know that I am off topic here, because it seems like this is all about preparing the girls for when they will have to deal with boys who grew up to be beasts. But the best "preventative measure" is to remove the threat before the sisters need to deal with it. This is what I was talking about earlier, when I referred to the marriage vows, in which the young man is directed to respond regarding the "sister by his side".

[jahertz]

If one can make a general assumption in regards to who the young women of the "plain culture" will marry, then I'd say that it is of paramount importance that the young men be taught how to respect and honor the young women. I say this with tongue in cheek, because I think that our sons ought to be taught this regardless of who they marry. I have told my sons never to ask anything of a young lady to which she ought to say no. I hope this doesn't sound demeaning, because I certainly do not mean it that way, but from my observations, I think that women were created to say yes, not no. So it is a sort of "emotional abuse" to put them in a position in which they need to say no.

I know that I am off topic here, because it seems like this is all about preparing the girls for when they will have to deal with boys who grew up to be beasts. But the best "preventative measure" is to remove the threat before the sisters need to deal with it. This is what I was talking about earlier, when I referred to the marriage vows, in which the young man is directed to respond regarding the "sister by his side".

Amen, this is key. I spent more time on young women so far because Rzehr happened to bring it up. But changing the cultural expectations in which growing young men are immersed is paramount. Once again the home is the prime shaper of these expectations: a young man with an entitled, abusive dad is far more likely to become one himself.

[Grace]

Grace, it takes a lot to startle me at this point in my life, but I confess I'm taken aback by your decision to open your participation in a public thread by launching vague abuse smears against unnamed board members of an organization you just learned about, regarding a person you admit to not knowing in the present. I think good taste at the very least dictates that you should retract your unsourced public smear and replace it with something helpful, such as documentation of the historic abuse you allege happened, sent directly to the organization you suspect is being duped by said abuser.

As vice-president of LifeRing Ministries, I would be as good a choice to receive such intelligence as anyone. PM me through the Mennonet message system if you like and we can exchange contact info. But please refrain now and in the future from casually smearing Christian ministries in public without evidence. That's unprofessional, irresponsible, and destructive.

First of all, the information I relayed in my comments were NOT unsourced or without evidence. I am amazed that you accuse me of smearing an unnamed board member and a ministry, when the depiction of a husband in the description on the website, is a really bad smear on a man in a very public manner. I am in NO WAY defending the actions of this husband, or that he should not have been held accountable, but airing that past dirty laundry in such detail, compromises the integrity of your ministry. If we claim to be true followers of Christ, and believe in forgiveness, do we air the past dirty laundry of an Indvidual so publicly? Should I have contacted the ministry privately? Maybe, However the airing of dirty laundry was NOT private on the ministry's website. Using your words, "That's unprofessional, irresponsible, and destructive."

As for the claim that men routinely hit women because they "snap" and can't help themselves and are then unfairly blamed, this is pretty much a recitation of the default cover story of every wife beater who ever got caught, "Christian" or otherwise.

If there's one thing all conservative Anabaptists agree on, it's that men are called to be spiritual leaders in the home. I can think of no circumstance in which the Gospel definition of Christian leadership can be stretched to shift or reduce a man's responsibility for a physical attack on his wife, under any provocation whatsoever.

You put words in my mouth. If you read my post I DID NOT say that man can't help themselves and in no way did I defend abuse. Nor did I say that men are unfairly blamed or their responsibility be reduced. I said sometimes, (not always) the women can be verbally abusing and gaslight their husbands, and the women are deemed as the poor abused woman, when she participated in abuse as well.

Bottom line, I believe in each individual person taking responsibility for their abuse, whether it is the man or the wife. You seem to completely negate the fact that sometimes women can be abusers as well, especially with their words and manipulation.

Christian leaders don't get to bask in all the status of "headship" and then suddenly claim helplessness when we feel so "henpecked" or worn out by our wives that we are simply overwhelmed by the urge to slug them a good one. That's not Christianity, that's old-fashioned unregenerate heathen buck-passing, and we men have proven quite capable of doing it for centuries without additional cheerleading from women, thank you very much.

And neither should verbally abusive, manipulating, gaslighting women be coddled and not be made accountable. "That's not Christianity, that's old-fashioned unregenerate heathen buck-passing, some women have proven quite capable of doing it for centuries without additional cheerleading from men, thank you very much".

BTW, I had no one in mind in my comments, but have been close to some situations where I saw women treat their husbands horribly with their words and manipulation. Yet they are given a pass because they are "women".