Marriage, Divorce, and Re-Marriage Among Christians

 Guest post by speaker, minister, and advocate Loes Tam:

THOUGHTS ON THE SUBJECT OF CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, RE-MARRIAGE, AND THE BOOK, WOMAN SUBMIT!.

Jocelyn Anderson has written a very honest and compelling story of her experience as a victim of domestic abuse and how she was rescued out of it.

One of the topics Jocelyn addresses is that Christ as Creator is the One who understands the human condition more than any psychologist. This makes sense, of course, since He as part of the Godhead created the first two human beings as we can read in Genesis 1:26-28

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, in Our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

Jocelyn spends as well some time focusing on Adam and Eve, the first two human beings that were created by God. From Genesis 1:26-28 we know that they were created to rule over creation together as a team on an equal basis. Sadly that perfect situation did not last for an event took place which we call the Fall. At that time both the man and the woman disobeyed God. This caused a change in their relationship as foretold by God in Genesis 3:16 when God warned the woman that she was turning away from Him to the man to have her needs met and that the man would rule over her. That sinful pattern has continued throughout the centuries. However, in Christ this pattern has been reversed so in the Church men and women once again are called to serve alongside each other in accordance with their spiritual gifts as given by the Holy Spirit.

Another subject that is touched upon by Jocelyn is marriage, divorce and re-marriage.

God honors marriage but also, because of peoples’ hardness of hearts, provide a framework in which the ideal cannot be realized.

In Biblical times the woman had no right to divorce. A man could divorce his wife for burning food. God’s Law gave protection to women and limited a man’s right to treat his wife capriciously or with cruelty. In Genesis 2:24 we have the clearest revelation of the original intent of God in marriage. Unfortunately, sin entered God’s world as we know form Genesis 3. Divorce became an issue after the Fall because of sin. One of the verses from the Old Testament that is often quoted is Malachi 2:16. In most translations it reads as if it is God who hates divorce. However that is incorrect. It is, in fact, about a man who hates and subsequently divorces his wife. A better translation would, therefore, be:

“For he (any man) who hates (his wife) (to the point that) he divorces (her),” says the Lord, “covers his garment with violence.”

For a man to “cover his garment with violence” speaks of the act of violence and an abusive inner state, which violates the covenant of marriage.

I would like to point out as well that, in fact, God Himself divorced Israel at some point in Isaiah 50:1.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is a foundational passage to prove that divorce can be sought for serious moral reasons which would have included issues such as adultery, abuse, cruelty, humiliation, persistent refusal to provide food or clothing, willful conjugal or emotional neglect (Exodus 21 -22) Though it is never desirable, divorce is acceptable in these circumstances. And a husband was not allowed to simply send his wife away. He must give her a certificate of divorce, a document that legally established her freedom from the marriage and opened the door for her to re-marry.

No debates about the validity of neglect and abuse as grounds for divorce can be found in Jewish literature because these principles were unanimously agreed on. Jesus’ silence on the subject highlights the fact that He did accept it, like all other Jews at that time. It is, of course, confirmed in His Words in Luke 4:18-19

“The Spirit of the Lord is on Me…. To release the oppressed….”

Paul writes in 1 Timothy 5:8 that a husband who does not provide for his wife and others has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever…. Such a person has clearly broken the marriage covenant. His wife can, therefore, seek a divorce from him on grounds of neglect. She can afterwards re-marry.

As for any young woman who has been forced into having sex with a boyfriend, that is called rape. In the Old Testament times the best way to deal with such a situation may have been for her to marry him. However, today there are better ways to deal with such a situation. This is clearly a criminal situation and God has provided proper authorities who are to protect citizens. In the case of a rape, the victim should, therefore, report the abuser to the police so that proper action against him can be taken.

Needless to say, I highly recommend Jocelyn’s book for anyone who would like to have more understanding on the topic of domestic abuse.

 Loes Tam is a minister of the gospel blessed with ministry opportunities in the Philippines, Malaysia, Myanmar, India, and more.  She is relentless in her advocacy of women's autonomy both at home and in the ministry. She is editor of the  Praying and Prophesying blog and the Ministry to Silenced Women website.  She recently started a Facebook group that  reaches out to women who have experienced spiritual abuse in their churches. 

Subscribe to Jocelyn’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

Saddleback Church, Abuse and Divorce

 

  In an audio teaching posted to Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church website, Tom Holladay, one of their teaching pastors, stressed that the ministry at Saddleback does recommend separation in abuse cases but never divorce. He was emphatic that the Bible does not permit divorce in cases of domestic abuse.

   I disagree. The Bible Does Permit Divorce in Cases of Domestic Abuse, and I refer my readers to Barbara Roberts excellent book, Not Under Bondage: Biblical Divorce for Abuse, Adultery, and Desertion. Roberts presents a strong, articulate, and most of all biblical, argument that God does indeed permit divorce in cases of domestic abuse.

   Saddleback Church is dishing up typical evangelical fare on the subject of domestic abuse and domestic violence. In and of itself that is not surprising. But has it occurred to anyone to ask why a pastor who is on the extremely liberal end of the Southern Baptist spectrum, to the point of being denounced as heretical by many evangelicals, tows the traditional line to the hilt when it comes to domestic abuse and divorce?

   Could the reason be that Saddleback Church also tows the traditional line in regards to the doctrine of male authority and female submission? Male authority which can still be maintained in a controlled separation but is seriously threatened when a woman is given leeway of any kind, for whatever reason, in ceasing to submit to an abusive husband by divorcing him? Is it any wonder then, that Holladay also inserted submission theology into his teaching on the subject of abuse by subtly reminding women of their duty to maintain submissive attitudes towards their husbands, although he tempers the inclusion by acceding that tolerating abuse is not a proper example of displaying an attitude of submission.

   Nancy Leigh DeMoss, author and council member of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), does the same in her book, Lies Women Believe. Her advice to women in abusive marriages is to leave if they have to, but never, under any circumstances, consider divorce. If a separation must take place, counsels DeMoss, then during the separation, an abused wife is to maintain an attitude of reverence towards her abuser's God-given position of authority over her—which, according to DeMoss, is not abrogated by the abuse.

   Thankfully, Holladay did not go as far as Bruce Ware did in his presentation to Denton Bible Church, last year, by suggesting that women often bring abuse upon themselves by not submitting to their husbands.

   No matter who is discussing abuse, either victims or church leadership, it seems the subject of submission always manages to slip into the conversation. We just cannot seem to discuss the one without discussing the other. Many victims know that abuse is the extreme end result of the doctrine of female subordination, and supporters of the doctrine acknowledge the fact that it must be carefully controlled or disaster can, and often does, come of it.

   In the audio entitled, "What do I do if I am miserable in my marriage?" Holladay gives a contradictory message to wives experiencing domestic abuse. While, on the one hand, he claims to believe that women are not required to submit to abuse, on the other he defines abuse as being beaten regularly (He stated that he does not consider a husband shoving his wife once as a good reason to separate). So, by his own definition, he does expect wives to submit to verbal, emotional, economic, and even physical violence. 

   I would ask Mr. Holladay how many beatings would have to take place in order to qualify as regularly?

   Beaten regularly? What a horror of a life! Thank God the Bible and the laws of the land are not in agreement with the callous opinions of Tom Holladay and Saddleback church. God gives his blue print for deliverance from the evil man in Proverbs chapter two (see chapter five of, Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence, for a detailed study of that blueprint). There is no loophole in that chapter excepting abusive husbands or restricting abused wives from that deliverance. 

   And I would call Holladay’s attention to the fact that a woman may not survive even the first beating. If she does survive it, what about the second? Which regular beating would he consider to be the most life-threatening, thereby recommending a separation at that point?

   Tom Holladay is wrong. Shoving a wife is abuse and should not be tolerated. Beating a wife once, is one beating too many and should not be tolerated.

   Saddleback Church recommends couple’s counseling to couples experiencing domestic violence. Couple’s counseling will not prevent further abuse and can prove dangerous for the victim. Couple’s counseling may be helpful in marital situations other than abuse, but in the case of domestic abuse or violence, couples counseling is not recommended. Arrest and prosecution along with counseling for the abuser, geared specifically towards the abuse, has proven to be the most effective tool in deterring future violence—with the counseling part being the least effective, as studies in Florida have shown.

   Holladay made no mention of legal recourse against the criminal behavior of the husband who regularly beats his wife, only the need for “healing.” Well, healing is not going to come without acknowledgment of the sinful, abusive, behavior and genuine, heartfelt, repentance. Punitive consequences, like jail, are scriptural. 

   This is criminal behavior we are talking about, not simply bad manners. In my own case, it was my pastor—not me—who called the police and had my violent abuser, an associate pastor of our church, arrested.

   Women can and do die from domestic violence. With three women dying every single day, over 1000 women dying each year, from the devastating effects of domestic violence, why are our pastors and religious leaders soft soaping this critical issue? Could it be for the same reason they always have, that if they step up to the plate and protect women from domestic abuse and violence, they know they would be putting traditional "male authority” at risk?

   Besides knowing the horrors of being on the receiving end of domestic abuse and violence firsthand, I am in contact with far too many women who are suffering from long term debilitating effects from assaults they received from their abusive husbands to take this issue with anything less than deadly seriousness.

   And the issue of “male authority” is at the very heart of it.

Saddleback Church has since downplayed and removed the controversial audio from their website, but this writer personally listened to it directly from the SB website and attests to the veracity of this article. Fortunately, the late Danni Moss had foresight enough to make and preserve a transcript of the audio.

Woman this is WAR! Gender, Slavery & the Evangelical Caste System: Andersen, Jocelyn: 9780979429323: Amazon.com: Books

Subscribe to Jocelyn’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

Debunking 10 Myths About Domestic Violence and Custody Issues

 

Why expend energy in attempting to prove that women are primary aggressors and men are the real victims of domestic violence, or worse yet, that domestic violence isn't much of a problem at all? Hard to believe, but some expend great effort in trying convince others that domestic violence is nearly non-existent, or at least not as prevalent as it really is. 

They make the fantastic , malicious, claim that millions of women are simply lying about the abuse in order to gain legal advantage in divorce and custody litigation. 

Their propaganda includes denouncing the booklet, 10 MYTHS ABOUT CUSTODY AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND HOW TO COUNTER THEM published by the American Bar Association (ABA). The booklet educates attorneys in how to best serve the interests of clients who are victims of domestic violence. An influential activist group once issued a special report debunking the booklet. Some Christian leaders also debunked the booklet. 

The real facts are that a travesty is taking place in this country as a result of domestic violence and related custody litigation. Too many Christians allow fear of radical feminism and a narrow view of acceptable behavior for women, to color their perception of the issue. The following is a listing of the 10 Myths contained in the booklet. Following that are a few facts correcting each myth. 

Myths:

1.) Domestic violence is rare among custody litigants

 2.) ill effects of domestic violence on children are minimal and short term 

3.) Mothers frequently invent allegations of child sexual abuse in order to win custody 

4.) Domestic Violence has nothing to do with child abuse 

5.) Abusive fathers don't get custody 

6.) Fit mothers don't lose custody 

7.) Parental Alienation Syndrome is a scientifically sound phenomenon 

8.) Children are in less danger from a batterer once the parents separate 

9.) Parents who batter are mentally ill, or parents with no evidence of mental illness cannot be batters. 10.) If a child demonstrates no fear or aversion to a parent, there is no reason not to award custody or unsupervised visitation

Facts:

1.) According to the S. L. Keilitz National Center for State Courts, up to 50% of disputed custody cases involve domestic violence

2.) Even without myriads of studies proving the ill effects of domestic violence on children, common sense dictates that domestic violence would have devastating effects on the healthy development of any child

3.) There will always be those who lie and abuse the legal system in order to gain personal advantage, but some evangelical political activists in tandem with male supremist groups and abuser advocates, propagate the unsubstantiated claim that millions of women lie about domestic violence and child sexual abuse in order to gain advantage in divorce/custody situations. The substantiated facts of the matter are these, that where false allegations are concerned, fathers are far more likely to make intentionally false accusations than mothers. The truth is that false allegations are no more common in divorce or custody disputes than at any other time.

4.) Domestic violence is child abuse! Anger and violence are terrifying to anyone subjected to them. Can anyone argue that it is abusive to create such an environment in a home with children? In addition to common sense, studies have shown a strong correlation between domestic violence and child abuse.

5.) Abusive fathers are far more likely to seek sole custody than non-abusive ones...and according to the American Judges Foundation, they are successful about 70% of the time.

6.) Mothers who are victims of domestic violence are often depressed and suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. As a result, they frequently present poorly at court, to custody evaluators, and best interest attorneys.

7.) The American Psychological Association rejects PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome) as lacking data support. The official position of the APA on PAS is that it is an unscientific concept.

8.) Batterers are often more strongly motivated to control and abuse through the children after separation or divorce due to loss of other methods.

9.) Psychological testing cannot always distinguish between a batter and a non-batterer. The sad truth is that men who are batters, often test normally in psychological testing--a case in point would be Darren Mack who tested normally in psychological evaluations during divorce proceedings between him and his wife, Charlotte. He was administered these tests on advice from abuser advocate DEAN TONG, because during the proceedings his wife claimed to be frightened of him. It turns out Charlotte Mack’s fears were justified. One year later, Darren stabbed her to death. Mack is also charged with shooting the Judge who was handling their case—unless they have been updated, so much for the validity of tests purporting to reveal propensity for domestic in men. In truth, mental illness is found in only a minority of batterers.

10.) Children of batterers or children who are being abused often show no outward fear or aversion to the offending parent. In fact, most of time they demonstrate just the opposite. Traumatic Bonding and Stockholm Syndrome are common but unhealthy survival techniques used by children of batters or child sexual abusers.

Christians should be leading the charge in protecting women and children who are victims of domestic violence and a hostile family court system. Reading this booklet, published in 2006 by the American Bar Association is a good start.

 

The book, Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence, is available free with Kindle Unlimited. Gifting print copies to church libraries, spiritual leaders, police departments, and shelters is a great way to participate in Domestic Violence Awareness month in October. But why wait for October when three women will die today from DV, and another three will die tomorrow, and another three....  

Subscribe to Jocelyn’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

Pat Robertson Advises Husband to Discipline Unsubmissive Wife

  In this video, a letter is read by [the now, late] Pat Robertson from a complementarian husband, named Michael, who is frustrated that his wife will not submit to him as head of their home. The letter says the wife is not only un-submissive but also has a tendency to be physically abusive as well. Following is a transcript of the letter along with Robertson's advice:  

Michael: "My wife has become a real problem. She has no respect for me as the head of the house. She insults me and she even went as far as stretching her hand to beat me. I've lost my self-confidence. Her words hurt so much and she refuses to talk through our problems. Please tell me what to do." --Michael 

Pat Robertson: "You could become a Muslim and just beat her...This man's gotta stand up to her. He can't let her get away with this stuff. I don't think we condone wife beating these days, but something has got to be done to make her...She is just totally ...rebellious... she doesn't want to submit to any authority...That's the problem, she does not understand authority...You can't divorce her, according to the scripture. I say, move to Saudi Arabia!"

Robertson's response was outrageous and irresponsible. The only thing he was concerned about was the fact that this woman would not acknowledge her husband as her authority. And he definitely gave the impression that he wished we still "condoned wife-beating."

Notice the detached language Michael begins his letter with. He starts out by, and continues throughout his missive, blaming his un-submissive wife, entirely, for the problems in their marriage. His words are very telling for anyone familiar with the dynamics of domestic abuse, "My wife has become a real problem.".  

Judging from the order of Michael's complaints, he (along with Robertson) is more concerned about his wife's lack of submission than any alleged physical abuse...which behavior this writer does not condone in either the husband or the wife. 

Both Michael and Robertson saw the wife's lack of submission as being the primary cause of problems in the marriage, with domestic violence being only a secondary issue. Actually, Robertson ignored the domestic violence, seeing the un-submissiveness of the wife as the entire problem. If only wife-beating was condoned "these days." 

The solution? Move to Saudi Arabia, where Michael could legally batter his wife into submission.

None of this is hypothetical. It is all clearly spelled-out in the video. 

Of paramount concern to this writer [and should have been to Michael and Robertson as well], was the alleged physical abuse by Michael's wife. 

If this allegation was true, then the Michael had options. Robertson should have encouraged him make his own safety a priority. Michael should have been supported in a decision as to whether or not to continue living in the same home with a physically abusive spouse [always unadvised]. 

The wife's alleged behavior was not only sinful but criminal as well, and husbands [as well as wives] do have the right to legal recourse and protection. 

Robertson was also wrong about divorce. Abuse is scriptural grounds for divorce.

His advice to husbands to "MAKE HER" submit, was horrific. How many wives have been severely abused or beaten, maybe even killed as a result of Robertson's ignorant, cruel, and utterly irresponsible advice to Michael? How many thousands--maybe millions--of people have watched (and continue to watch reruns) of that video. The producers of the 700 Club should be ashamed of themselves for not recanting and retiring that episode. 

As survivors of abuse usually learn [or should learn], the only autonomous adult we can or should "MAKE" do anything (control)...is ourselves. It is very possible that that the abusive paradigm of complementarianism (male governance and authority over adult females) was largely responsible for the problems in this couple's marriage, however, that does not excuse the wife's alleged physical abuse. 

Christian response to domestic violence: Michael has moral responsibilities and legal options: 1.) Repent of his own sinful desire to dominate his wife through the false assumption that, by being born as a male, he is appointed by God to govern her   2.) Continue to live with her and expose himself to her alleged abuse [not recommended]   3.) Let her know that she may have to pay the personal consequence of losing her marriage over her sin--a safer action for battered husbands than for battered wives. Violent husbands tend to kill wives when they try to leave, or even threaten to leave   4.) Take advantage of his legal right and recourse of arrest and prosecution against his violent wife for her alleged crime of assaulting him.   5) Divorce. Divorce for abuse is not forbidden in scripture.

The late Pat Robertson passed away in June of 2023, but his wide-reaching influence lives on through acolytes, books, and reruns of his Christian television show, the 700 Club. 

His remarks about gender-based abuse and authority were dangerous, unscriptural, and heartless. He showed remarkable unconcern and shortsightedness, indicative of a belief in female subordination so strong that he indicated condoning physical abuse in enforcing it if it had only been legal to do so. 

Pat Robertson was a complementarian so frustrated at the idea of a woman who would not be subjugated that the only solution he could think of was for the couple to move to Saudi Arabia, where wife-beating is legal.

Christian patriarchy and domestic violence are two sides of the same coin. This horrific advice by the late Pat Robertson is complementarianism at its finest. 

Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence: Andersen, Jocelyn: 9780979429309: Amazon.com: Books

Woman this is WAR! Gender, Slavery, and the Evangelical Caste System

“Gentlemen, don’t even think about marriage until you have mastered the art of warfare.”

Pastor John MacArthur

(Quoting World War Two Field Marshall Montgomery) in 

the Introduction to his teaching, “The Fulfilled Family….”

Does the Bible teach such a thing as a woman’s “place?” Are women really cursed because of sin? Are women silly and gullible as some teach? Christian author, Jocelyn Andersen, doesn’t believe so. To gain a comprehensive overview of what God says about women, Woman this isWAR!, is the book to read.

Woman this is WAR!, examines Bible commentary and translation practices which have historically been androcentric (male centered) and even misogynistic (anti-woman). These have adversely effected understanding of the scriptures, relations between women and men, the happiness of men and women, and, in general, has hindered the work of the gospel, by forbidding women to preach, pastor, or serve as elders or deacons.

The book chronicles the early history of the women's rights movements, as well as the role of church leadership in aggressively suppressing both women's rights and the historical record of Christian initiatives within the movements. Through the complementarian movement, many of the same arguments used to support the institution of slavery, are still used today in suppressing the rights of Christian women. This book documents identical arguments used by Christian leaders against both movements and is an unparalleled resource for all who desire an in-depth study of gender equality from a Christian perspective. The history of women’s rights is traced back [much further than usual] to the very first feminists…who were Christians—godly women, who brought the issue of women's rights to the forefront as they struggled to alleviate the suffering of others, and found they were hindered in doing so for no other reason than the fact of their sex. This work provides valuable historical insight into Christian initiatives in the movements for women’s rights, that are rarely included in Christian literature.

 

Subscribe to Jocelyn’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

No Divorce for any reason ?!?

Foreword to "Woman Submit!" Written by Elreta Dodds

 Jocelyn Andersen experienced domestic violence first-hand and has survived to write about it. However, what she writes in these pages is more than just a testimony, it is an appeal. Andersen strongly appeals to any woman who is experiencing domestic violence at the hands of her husband to leave. Her appeal is specifically targeted towards Christian women because Christian women are more apt to stay in a potentially deadly situation due to what they’ve been taught regarding the interpretive meanings of the scripture passages that deal with submissive roles in marriage and limited exceptions for divorce.

It is sobering to realize that many of the clergy in today’s church believe and teach that a woman must, at all costs, not divorce her husband, even if she is constantly living under threat of death in her marital home. 

"Andersen bravely and boldly challenges doctrinal teachings that discourage women from leaving husbands who are abusing them

Andersen writes in conversational tone. So, reading her book is like hearing her voice. She writes in such a way that you can hear her talking to you. You can hear her inflections through the pages. Moreover, it’s a quick read. I read most of it in one setting.

Although Andersen and I don’t completely see eye to eye when it comes to her theological viewpoints regarding Adam and Eve, her book is in no way heretical. Just to clarify, when Andersen says “lives are more important than theology” she’s not talking about the theology of salvation (for those of us who are Christians should be willing to give our lives, if need be, for the sake of the gospel of Jesus Christ), but she is instead talking about the theology of marriage and divorce. And when a woman is faced with making a decision between getting away from an abusive husband or staying in a life-threatening domestic situation, I agree with Andersen; to live is more important. What earthly good are we if we are dead or if things are so bad at home that we wish we were?

 I believe that any abused woman who reads this book will be encouraged to get help. To be quite honest, I believe this book could save lives.

 Praise God for Jocelyn Andersen and the work she has done in her effort to help women through the trials of domestic violence and abuse. 

  

      --Elreta Dodds

Author of, Is God a Chauvinist?

Don't wait for Domestic Violence Awareness month to prepare yourself to respond knowledgeably, compassionately, and biblically to the sin and crime of domestic violence. As of the the posting of this article, 174 women will die from spousal/partner abuse before then.  

Should Abused Wives get Divorced?

The second question I received during my interview on the IMPACT RADIO USA "Family Talk" podcast [about Christian response to domestic violence] had to do with divorce and did I recommend it?

A few of the questions I was asked:

• God hates divorce. How do you advise women [in abusive marriages] concerning divorce?
• What kinds of adverse effect do boys experience who grow up watching fathers abusing their mothers? 
• How do you break the pattern of abuse?

Listen to my answers HERE

Does Scripture Allow Divorce from an Abuser?

The entire tone and theme of scripture is that human lives and compassion are more important than theology, which is often skewed by personal bias. 

Proverbs chapter two says it is God's will that anyone oppressed by the evil man be free from him. That includes oppressed and abused wives. In forbidding abused spouses to divorce, proponents of mainstream marriage and divorce theology have ruined and cost far too many lives.

Subscribe to Jocelyn Andersen’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence: Andersen, Jocelyn: 9780979429309: Amazon.com: Books

Separation and Divorce

 

Excerpt from Chapter 7 of, Woman Submit!. "My Journey from Fear to Peace:"

"...That passage helped me understand that when I became willing to see and do things God’s way instead of my way, I would be cared for by God and would no longer be at the mercy of abusive treatment or threats of abandonment.

    Did that understanding solve the problems within my marriage? No. Did I immediately run out and file for divorce? To my family’s dismay, no, I did not. It took some time for me to grasp the fact that I had to let go of the wheel. I had to give up control. I had to stop trying to figure everything out.

    Is that a surprising statement coming from one who was trying to escape being controlled? It shouldn’t. Everyone has to have some sense that they are in control of some portion of their lives. One of my ways of feeling in control of that chaotic situation was by not admitting defeat. I simply refused to give up. I was constantly trying to figure out ways to fix things. I was even using prayer to try and control the situation. That was wrong.

   It was with great difficulty that I reached the painful conclusion that my efforts to change my beloved abuser might be fruitless. And I finally, reluctantly, became willing to accept the consequence of divorce or permanent separation if that became necessary."

Excerpt from Chapter 7 of, Woman Submit!. "My Journey from Fear to Peace:"

 

 A book that saves lives.

Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence: Andersen, Jocelyn: 9780979429309: Amazon.com: Books

Subscribe to Jocelyn’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

Phyllis Schlafly Criticizes Victims of Domestic Violence

This article was written in 2008. At the time it was written, I reached out to Schlafly and her organization, Eagle Forum. I mailed Schlafly a copy of my book, Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence." Neither she nor anyone from Eagle Forum ever acknowledged my communications. Schlafly passed away in 2016 without ever offering a correction, retraction, or apology for the harm done to battered women and their children through her advocacy of batterers. Eagle Forum continues to stand by her shameful position that batterers are mistreated by family courts and victims often lie about the abuse, using the courts to "gain the upper hand."

If Phyllis Schlafly is not dedicated to an all-out assault against victims of domestic violence and the credibility of abused and battered women, she is making a very good show of it. Despite the fact that she frequently skews facts in her own articles minimizing, or ignoring altogether, violent incidences between spouses. 

Schlafly, attorney, political activist and founder of Eagle Forum, an evangelical watchdog organization, falsely accuses the American Bar Association of using false and misleading statistics in divorce cases where abuse or domestic violence is alleged--which they do not. It is Schlafly, in fact, who misleads her readers by deliberately providing them with false information. 

Schlafly cruelly slanders battered women by depicting them as making false allegations against their abusers. When writing about domestic violence, Schlafly’s articles reek with tabloid sensationalism and deceptive journalism. One would think a veteran journalist who is an attorney as well as a prominent, well respected, spokesperson for Christian evangelicals, could be counted on to present her readers with honest, well researched facts. But the sad truth is that Schlafly has allowed her fear of radical feminists to color her perception of all women who do not fit into her narrow view of what constitutes appropriate feminine behavior, which is topped by an obvious belief that any woman who takes legal steps to protect herself from an abusive spouse or physically violent relationship is merely a liar using the legal system in order to further her own devious, feminist, anti-family agenda. 

Just one example (there are several) of Schlafly’s skewed portrayal of the domestic violence issue can be seen throughout her Town Hall article, "Brave Judge Resists Feminist Agenda," (August 2008). This article is rife with untruths which, considering her status as an attorney with access to much more legal information than the average researcher, can only be construed as deliberate deception and a misrepresentation of easily accessed facts. In paragraph one of "Brave Judge...", Schlafly states, as fact, her opinion that restraining orders are unconstitutional, that abusive and violent husbands are non-criminals, and that most women who allege abuse are devious liars. In paragraph two, she states, as fact, her opinion that jail sentences for restraining order violators are unjust. 

Need I point out that violating a restraining order is breaking the law? And those who violate them are well aware that they will be arrested as a consequence? In paragraph three, she gleefully begins “proving” her points by introducing the Anibal and Vivian Crespo case (Crespo v. Crespo, FV-09-2682-04) in which Superior Court Judge Francis Schultz, ruled that Anibal Crespo’s rights were violated by his ex-wife being granted an unconstitutional restraining order against him. The case is thought to be headed to the Supreme court. 

It is interesting that Schlafly's description of the facts of the case differ slightly, yet (as we shall see) significantly from reports submitted by other sources. In an analysis of the ruling, written by Mary Pat Gallagher, we find the following facts: “The ruling vacated a final restraining order that Vivian Crespo obtained in 2004 against her former husband, Anibal Crespo, based in part on photographs showing injuries he allegedly inflicted in March 2004 when he entrapped her arms in the electric windows of his car when she tried to talk to him about unpaid child support. Anibal was living upstairs from Vivian in a two-family home." WCBSTV relates the following: Anibal and Vivian Crespo divorced in 2001 after about 17 years of marriage but lived in the same two-family home in North Bergen: She was on the first floor with the children; he was on the second floor with his parents. In 2004, Vivian Crespo obtained a final restraining order from a different judge after claiming that her former husband hit her face and pulled her arms when she sought the child support money. Anibal Crespo responded that his ex-wife attacked him while he was in his car and any injury she suffered came when he closed the car window to protect himself. As a result of the restraining order, Anibal Crespo had to move." 

Schlafly describes the facts of the same case as follows: “Anibal and Vivian Crespo were divorced and rearing their children in the same household when they had a fight, and Vivian asked for a restraining order. Anibal was not charged with any crime, but the judge issued the restraining order, which banned Anibal from his own house and thereby separated him from his children.” 

Am I the only one who finds little resemblance between how Schlafly relates the “facts” of the case and the descriptions given by Gallagher and WCBSTV? 

Anibal and Vivian Crespo were divorced and rearing their children in the same household? Schlafly deceptively portrays Anibal and Vivian to her readers as divorced yet still living together. This immediately paints Vivian Crespo in poor light to most of Schafly’s readership which is primarily composed of evangelical Christians. 

Vivian is going to get little sympathy from that camp—and obviously none from Phyllis Schlafly who had to have known the facts of the case before writing her intentionally misleading article. 

It doesn't take an attorney to know the difference between a "two family house," and the "same household." Vivian and Anibal Crespo were not living in the same “household.” These facts are clear in news reports read by the public at large and in documents presented at legal proceedings. 

"They had a fight, and Vivian asked for a restraining order…?" 

It is indeed a sad day when a couple can have a simple argument and a restraining order is granted, no questions asked. However, in the Crespo’s case, the argument was not simple. Vivian claims she was hit in the face by her ex-husband, and Anibal admitted to rolling up the electric window of his vehicle thereby entrapping Vivian’s arms. That was assault, pure and simple--regardless of whether they were arguing or not. 

Vivian’s injuries were photographable by the police. Police photos of her injuries were presented to the judge when she asked for protection from further assault. 

Schlafly's statement, "They had a fight, and Vivian asked for a restraining order…" does not come close to giving readers an honest report. 

Schlafly plays on her readers sympathies by writing, "Anibal was not charged with any crime, but the judge issued the restraining order, which banned Anibal from his own house and thereby separated him from his children…" She is actually advocating for the wife-beater!

As an attorney, Schlafly knows that the granting of restraining orders does not carry an automatic sentence of being separated from one’s children. Parental visitation is mandated in cases where restraining orders are granted just as in divorce decrees. But this refrain of, “fathers being separated from their children by frivolous, undeserved restraining orders,” oft repeated by Schlafly, is a veritable mantra with men’s rights and father supremist organizations (the majority of which do a poor job of masquerading as pro-family advocates). 

Schlafly has written at length concerning her objections to the passage and renewing of VAWA, the VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT, which admittedly has some flaws, especially within the family court arena. Unfortunately, she has allowed her writing on the subject of women’s rights and domestic violence to become biased against families headed by abused (or formerly battered) women and single mothers. 

Schlafly has become the evangelical, feminine voice for groups who pose as pro-family advocates but are in reality, nothing more than men’s activists and father supremists dedicated to the continued suppression and oppression of women. 

If these groups are indeed “pro-family,” why do their media releases, websites, and commentaries reflect the same misinformation and sensationalism seen in Schlafly’s article dealing with Vivian and Anibal Crespo? 

Schlafly levels unproven accusations against women such as, “Too often, the order serves no legitimate purpose, but is just an easy way for one spouse to get revenge or the upper hand in a divorce or child custody dispute.” 

Who says “too often?” Where is the proof of that? 

The facts are that false accusations occur no more frequently in divorce/custody disputes than in any other legal dispute. A report by Bala and Schuman published in the Canadian Law Quarterly in 2000 revealed that when it does happen, it is fathers who are more likely to level intentionally false allegations against mothers. 

Studies have shown that fathers who level intentionally false accusations are usually batters or otherwise controlling and abusive. 

There will always be men and women who abuse the legal system in making false allegations. But they are certainly not the majority, and in no way constitute the “all too often.” 

According to the S. L. Keilitz National Center for State Courts, up to 50% of contested custody cases involve domestic violence. Studies have also shown a high correlation between wife beating and child abuse--even sexual molestation. 

Despite this information, mothers who dare to try and protect their children from abusive fathers are likely to lose custody altogether. 

The percentages are staggering--70%. Yet Phyllis Schlafly along with men’s rights/father supremist groups continue to scream that restraining orders against batters are unjust and destroy families. 

It is domestic violence and abuse that destroy families, not the act of seeking protection from the abuse. 

Phyllis Schlafly is an avowed enemy of battered and abused women (and their children). She has seriously compromised and is well on her way to losing her credibility altogether as a journalist, as a spokesperson for evangelical Christians, and as an advocate for the American family.

This article was written in 2008. At the time it was written, I reached out to Schlafly and her organization, Eagle Forum. I mailed Schlafly a copy of my book, Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence." Neither she nor anyone from Eagle Forum ever acknowledged my communications. Schlafly passed away in 2016 without ever offering a correction, retraction, or apology for the harm done to battered women and their children through her advocacy of batterers. Eagle Forum continues to stand by her shameful position that batterers are mistreated by family courts and victims often lie about the abuse, using the courts to "gain the upper hand."

Subscribe to Jocelyn’s Updates & Newsletters: http://eepurl.com/dgDt6b

What if an abuser is not physically abusive? Should a wife Leave him then?

In 2003, when I experienced the horrific assault described in the first chapter of, Woman Submit!, the Holy Spirit had been dealing with me for some weeks prior, about how very much God hates it when his children are mistreated. And no one disagreed that I needed to leave that violent man. In fact, It was my Pastor who encouraged me to divorce him. And it was my Pastor's wife who assisted me in completing and filing my petition for divorce.

God not only hates it when his daughters are abused, He also hates it, when spiritual leaders and trusted advisors refuse to do everything in their power to get a woman to safety, because, in their theological opinion, it may compromise wifely submission and respect towards an abusive husband.

It is never wrong to ask, "are you safe?" It is never wrong to advise a woman to leave a dangerous spouse. But is it wrong to advise her to leave an abusive husband who is not physically violent?

This brings us to the question, about whether a non-violent husband can be considered a physical threat  to his wife. And if advising a woman to leave a non-violent abuser is the appropriate Christian response to her unhappy situation. What if her husband is verbally and emotionally abusive but does not batter her? Can he be considered a danger, then? Many would say, No. But I disagree. I say, all abusive husbands are--or are potentially--physical threats to their wives.

What about the wife who is advised to stay, pray, and submit, and is ultimately driven to suicide by such callous advice and by her husband's verbal and emotional cruelties? That husband was a not only a physical danger to his wife but ultimately her murderer. Those who guilted her through religious terrorism also become her murders. Her blood is on many hands.

What about the wife who's health is neglected because her non-violent abuser controls the finances and uses economic abuse to manipulate her options? He successfully prevents her from getting the health and dental care she may [desperately] need. Her health deteriorates. She lives a substandard life, perhaps becomes disabled, a terminal disease is allowed to run its course, and she ultimately dies because of the abuse. Who can say that "non-violent" abuser was not physical threat to his wife?

A husband need not batter a wife to place her life and health at risk. The question, "Are you safe," entails much more than the obvious, "Does he hit you?"

Neglect caused by economic, verbal and emotional abuse [and manipulation] is physically dangerous. And God hates it when his children are subjected to this kind of treatment. He really hates when people who profess to know Him, advise His daughters who are in such circumstances, to stay, pray, and imperil their lives for the sake of religion.

A Young Mother's Story

Churches are failing abused women through a combination of bad advice, faulty theology and a Catch-22 where women are told divorce is not an option and yet held in contempt for staying in the situation and tolerating abuse...

That's how Bob Allen, managing editor of Ethics Daily began his very moving and powerful article/review of, Woman Submit! Christians & Domestic Violence, published on July 13, 2007.
He showed himself for the advocate he is on behalf of battered women.

In fact, I have been moved more than once by the sincere compassion demonstrated by evangelical journalists like Bob Allen of Ethics Daily and Ed Thomas of One News Now.

Within the past week or so the story of a young mother was brought to my attention that had me spitting nails and reminded me all over again of why I wrote Woman Submit!

This young woman had escaped an abusive husband and, along with her small children, was attempting to rebuild her life.

She had found a church she really loved and threw herself whole-heartedly into being a part of the worship and fellowship activities there.

According to a fellow church member, with the exception of her children, "The church was all she had" in her life during the short time she been attending services there.

Now this was not a small narrow minded so-called "fundamentalist" church, but rather a very large church of one of the more "progressive" and modern evangelical denominations. In fact, the denomination in question has done several surveys concerning domestic violence and portrays a compassionate public image for women who find themselves in such circumstances.
The church member who shared this young mother's story with me did so out of profound regret concerning a decision the Church leadership made in regards to this young woman and her children.

His regret was such that he ultimately left that church for one he hopes would demonstrate more sincere compassion towards its members.

It is not uncommon for the spouses or former spouses of abused or battered women to not take the divorce or separation quietly. In fact, they rarely do. It may surprise the uninitiated to find out that the workplace is a common place for battered women to be killed or injured by their violent spouses or ex-spouses.

This young woman happened to be at church when her ex-husband showed up. Fortunately he did not harm her or anyone else, but before he left, he had made quite a scene, thoroughly humiliated her and possibly frightened a few other people as well.

I was not told the extent of the incident or whether or not police had to be called. All I was told was that after this happened, the young mother was summoned to the pastor's office and informed that this was not the right church for her. He felt certain she would be happier if she found another place for herself and for her children to worship and fellowship.

This large, rich (they presently have a $5,000,000 building project going on), "progressive" church dropped this young family like a sack of potatoes--like so much garbage.

One young woman and 2 small children were simply too much trouble for all the rest of the members, who had their lives "together," to deal with.

Yes, the churches are failing abused women, in more ways than we can imagine. It is a stench in the nostrils of God.

And what a breath of fresh air, what a shot of encouragment it is for me to cross paths with people like Bob Allen, Ed Thomas, Marvin Sanders, Tim Wildmon,Earl and Rachel Gooden, Arthelene Rippy, Ted Elm and so many others who are joining with me in what often seems like an uphill battle to bring awareness and hopefully help generate some compassion towards battered and formerly battered women who draw strength from something as small as our acceptance of them and maybe a willingness to be inconvenienced, just a little bit, on their behalf as they take the steps they need to in order to free themselves from the hellish minefield of abuse.

Good Mothers Do not Lose Custody of Their Children

   Old ideas about divorce and child custody shattered when I attended the annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference, where I spent a weekend with over 200 non-Custodial Protective Parents (mostly mothers) and Custodial Protective parents (again, mostly mothers) who through their efforts to protect their children, either lost custody of their children or live under the constant threat of losing custody of them to the abuser. 

   Many of the protective mothers I met are members of churches across the nation. I met non-custodial protective mothers who told me they how they long to fit in and just be a normal mom like the other mom's at church, but in addition to the horrific details of their lives, feel they cannot even attend their fellowship's MOPS group for mom's because of the stigma and shame attached to being a mother who lost custody of her children.
   The old stereotype persists that good mothers do not lose custody of their children.

   But this is simply not true. And it is past time for Christians to educate themselves as to what is happening within the United States family court systems.

   As we strive to be light and salt to those within our spheres of influence, as we strive to be obedient to the command to "Bear one another's burdens" let's be aware of the protective mothers in our midst, who may or may not (as yet) have lost custody of their children. And let us begin to lovingly support these parents as they struggle with a horrendous reality that is incomprehensible to most of us. Sometimes that can be costly in terms of emotional investment, time, and even money. To their credit, one church in Central Florida, went so far as to pay the legal fees for one battered mother to regain custody of her children from their abusive father. 

   This church was not complementarian, so had no issues with supporting a mother wife who refused to be "submissive" and divorced an abusive husband. Refusal of male-headship churches to respond when possible victims of domestic abuse are identified is both a contributing and exacerbating factor in abuse and subsequent child custody issues  among church members.
   In cases of divorce, most loving fathers agree that children (especially babies and small children) need their mothers. A child's first primary relationship is usually with its mother. Although a protective parent can be either a mother or a father, it is usually the mother. If a mother is abusive, this writer agrees that a loving father should be granted custody, but the sad fact is, that many (probably the majority) of the fathers who sue for custody, are abusers of both their wives and children. In attempting to protect their child[ren] from abuse or sexual molestation, protective mothers risk being called liars and experiencing retaliation [or the threat of retaliation] by the family court system, in being accused of parental alienation (PAS) and of having their child/children ripped from them [often despite overwhelming evidence substantiating the abuse] and placed in the home of the abuser. 

   Family courts operate outside the criminal justice system. The two systems operate under completely different and unequal standards of investigating reports of abuse. This often results in evidence of criminal acts not ever being report to or being investigated by the police (only investigated by "case-workers" and "guardian ad litem's"). It is common, the family court system, for criminal acts never being brought to prosecution. 

   Additionally, protective mothers who report crimes against their children [by the abusive parent] often find they are ones penalized by having to endure the additional heartache and stigma of being granted only supervised visits with their children, in some cases not even being allowed to touch them during the visits.

   Can you imagine, no hugs allowed? 

   Some mothers lose relationships with their children altogether because of unjust custody rulings and the stiff protocol that comes with many supervised visit rulings. Children are robbed of close loving relationship with a loving parent--often their only loving parent. This is beyond crime. It is pure evil.

   And this is happening. 

   Good mothers do lose custody of their children. And they attend our churches. Visit the links in this post for more information about the family court holocaust that has been devastating American families for decades.

Protective mothers who read this, we ask that you comment to this post with suggestions as to how we can give you the support you need. What is it that you need most from your friends and family in Christ?