No excuse for this
I am hoping for an unequivocal repudiation and condemnation of Bruce Ware’s recent comments on spousal abuse from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, from the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, and other complementarian leaders. But I’m not holding my breath.
This really shouldn't have to be said, but wife-beating is not caused by a wife's "failure" to submit. Spousal abuse is not - is never - provoked except in the mind of the abuser. It is the act of a domineering and angry personality that at best is in need of serious therapy and counseling, and at worst a good long stay in jail. There is no rationale whatsoever, especially not a religious one, for spousal abuse. This is very sad indeed.
ETA in reply to the anonymous comment below,
I did read the article, and I read Ware's comments. I disagree with them. The fact that my opinion about his comments differs from yours does not imply that I failed to read or comprehend them.
I understand that he said abuse was sinful. My objection was not that he denied the sinfulness of abuse, but that he claimed it is or can be a "response" to behavior on the wife's part. Ware's statement implies that in some or all cases a wife may be able to minimize abuse or prevent it altogether by better submitting to her husband's authority. This is unequivocally false. Abuse is not a "response" to anything. There is nothing a woman can do to avoid being abused if she is married to an abuser, other than removing herself and her children, if any, from the home until her husband receives the attention - spiritual, psychological and/or judicial - he needs.
Ware’s argument is all the more dangerous because many battered women stay with their abusers in part because they believe that if they modify their behavior, the abuse will cease. In reality, there is no such thing as a “trigger” or “provocation” of abuse. Abusers use the behavior of those they abuse as a pretext and excuse for their violent behavior, and they can be “set off” by almost any thing. Their behavior is unpredictable because it is not a response - sinful or otherwise - to external factors. No victim of abuse bears any responsibility whatsoever for the behavior of their abuser. To teach otherwise is not only completely unjustifiable from scripture and grossly irresponsible, it is also very dangerous and potentially fatal to women, children, and men who live with abusive partners or family members. You may disagree with this, which is of course your right, but this is not only the consensus of those who work with abused women and study abusive relationships, but more importantly, it is the consistent testimony of women who have managed to survive and escape abusive relationships.
I repeat: Ware's statement is completely wrong and dangerous. It should be roundly condemned by both SBTS and CBMW. But as I said, I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
This really shouldn't have to be said, but wife-beating is not caused by a wife's "failure" to submit. Spousal abuse is not - is never - provoked except in the mind of the abuser. It is the act of a domineering and angry personality that at best is in need of serious therapy and counseling, and at worst a good long stay in jail. There is no rationale whatsoever, especially not a religious one, for spousal abuse. This is very sad indeed.
ETA in reply to the anonymous comment below,
I did read the article, and I read Ware's comments. I disagree with them. The fact that my opinion about his comments differs from yours does not imply that I failed to read or comprehend them.
I understand that he said abuse was sinful. My objection was not that he denied the sinfulness of abuse, but that he claimed it is or can be a "response" to behavior on the wife's part. Ware's statement implies that in some or all cases a wife may be able to minimize abuse or prevent it altogether by better submitting to her husband's authority. This is unequivocally false. Abuse is not a "response" to anything. There is nothing a woman can do to avoid being abused if she is married to an abuser, other than removing herself and her children, if any, from the home until her husband receives the attention - spiritual, psychological and/or judicial - he needs.
Ware’s argument is all the more dangerous because many battered women stay with their abusers in part because they believe that if they modify their behavior, the abuse will cease. In reality, there is no such thing as a “trigger” or “provocation” of abuse. Abusers use the behavior of those they abuse as a pretext and excuse for their violent behavior, and they can be “set off” by almost any thing. Their behavior is unpredictable because it is not a response - sinful or otherwise - to external factors. No victim of abuse bears any responsibility whatsoever for the behavior of their abuser. To teach otherwise is not only completely unjustifiable from scripture and grossly irresponsible, it is also very dangerous and potentially fatal to women, children, and men who live with abusive partners or family members. You may disagree with this, which is of course your right, but this is not only the consensus of those who work with abused women and study abusive relationships, but more importantly, it is the consistent testimony of women who have managed to survive and escape abusive relationships.
I repeat: Ware's statement is completely wrong and dangerous. It should be roundly condemned by both SBTS and CBMW. But as I said, I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.