The dangers of insomnia...
(Tim: This post by our dear sister, Kamilla Ludwig.)
So, here I am at something past 5 am with insomnia for the third night running. I never know what to do, but it seems the best solution is to get out of bed and out of my bedroom for a while. I usually come downstairs to surf the internet. It's amazing the number of people who are voluntarily up at this hour on a regular basis! So, tonight (this morning, rather), with all the news and gossip about the Vatican's offer to disaffected Anglicans, I checked on an AMiA-related blog I hadn't read in a while to see what was going there.
AAAAARRRGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They aren't discussing married Anglican priests becoming RC priests and how this is the end for clerical celibacy -- nooooo sirreee Bobby. They're discussing Mark Driscoll and Doug Wilson (now isn't that an interesting pairing?) and how evil complementarians are for encouraging -- or, alternatively -- ignoring wife abuse. The blogmaster is making a valiant effort to keep them honest (God bless him!), but it seems to be the lie which simply will not die...
[Now, this is interesting! When I tried to google who said, "If you tell a big enough lie often enough . . ." one of the first links to come up was a blog about false memory syndrome. Just hold that thought for a moment and the connection will make sense.]
And then, there she was. A woman I have encountered before who tells the story of an horrifically controlling husband before they both discovered the wonders of Egalitarianism. She makes it sound as if Complementarianism made him do it. Now, please, please, please don't go misconstruing me, again (you know who you are). The first time I heard this woman's story, I did have quite a bit of sympathy for her. But now, I've run across her telling it so many times in so many different places, I have to wonder if it has become her schtick, her calling card, her bid for another sympathy fix.
And that's when the danger really started. That's when I started thinking about how often this really happens. OK, so I get it. I know Egalitarians think Complementarianism is a set up for abuse, that pastors know this and they refuse to do anything about it for fear of losing their precious places of honor. Don't you deny it, we've all seen those claims too often to believe your denials. Now here's the thing. Have you ever wondered where these Egalitarians find all these horrible pastors and husbands? Scratch the surface of an Egal and you'll find a woman who has experienced abuse at the hands of a male authority figure (father, brother, husband, pastor). And sometimes the abuse is genuine. My point is not to deny that.
Now here comes the other side of the equation, so to speak. Is there something inside Egalitarians which makes them seek out these abusers? Is that how they justify turning their backs on what the Church has always taught? And then, do some Egalitarians seeing this abuse industry spring up around them begin to believe their father who might have been a bit too harsh for their tastes was actually abusive? Or maybe it was their pastor who (they say) knew abuse was going on in their marriage but refused to deal with it?
I don't know, but the tales of past abuse coming out of the Egalitarian camp begin to look suspicious for their frequency. Ask an Egalitarian and I'll bet you'll find a tale of some sort of past abuse. Go ahead, try it. Hang around with any half dozen of them long enough and seven of them will tell you how mean their father was or how controlling their husband was or how their pastor ignored their cries for help. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
Clearnote Churches
Clearnote Fellowship
Christ the Word
Monthly archive
- May 2013 (18)
- April 2013 (33)
- March 2013 (43)
- February 2013 (28)
- January 2013 (41)
- December 2012 (31)
- November 2012 (37)
- October 2012 (38)
- September 2012 (21)
- August 2012 (28)
- July 2012 (46)
- June 2012 (50)
Popular Posts
Tags
Recent Comments
- K. Bartholomew on The difference between pro-life and anti-antiabortion...
- Kamilla on Inflammatory rhetoric in the abortion debate...
- David Gray on Teach daughters not to be brash and sons not to be effeminate...
- Tamara on Teach daughters not to be brash and sons not to be effeminate...
- Craig French on Inflammatory rhetoric in the abortion debate...
Comments
Some ways to deal with this:
1) Exercise a couple hours before bed time
2) Warm milk (your mother was right, it really works)
3) It is best to get up and change your pattern if you cannot sleep
And we see, God uses insomnia for His Honor and His Glory!
Blessings.
My wife has always noted that her opinion is that most feminists are simply women who have been hurt, and this is the wall they put up to protect themselves. I sure know that my late mother had a wall up after my parents' divorce until my stepfather showed her by example that a man really can love and protect a woman.
Which has a lot to do with me learning how to do the same, and there are 14 grandkids around due in major part to my stepdad's example.
So I don't doubt that in some households where male headship is abused, so are the wives. Their mistake is assuming that their experience is normative.
"Their mistake is assuming that their experience is normative."
I think this describes many platforms described by liberals today. And I mean that in a sorta-complimentary way. Honest ones are trying so hard to reach the poor, hurt, hungry, that they end up throwing a thousand babies out with the bath water when they throw that water on the fire that is threatening just one baby.
What starts as covering the exception can often become the normative culture.
A couple of observations:
1. In 15 years of full-time pastoral ministry, and about as many years doing similar work as a member of the laity, I've seen men who were abusers and men who were . . . what? . . . let's call them abandoners, men who simply abandoned any involvement with their wives and children.
If I had to guess at the ratio of these two types of errant husbands/fathers (I didn't keep records, so this is a guess), I'd put the abandoners way ahead of the abusers, about 90 percent abandoners, probably more.
2. Paul Vitz, a Catholic psychologist, wrote a book -- The Faith of the Fatherless -- that generated tremendous controversy. His thesis (aptly simplified by one Amazon reviewer) is this:
"Paul Vitz is a professor of psychology at New York University and was himself an atheist until his late 30's. The simple but compelling thesis of his new book is that 'the major barriers to belief in God are not rational but can be called, in a general sense, psychological' (p. 5).
"Vitz turns Freud's projection theory of religion (belief in God is an illusion that derives from our childish need for protection and security) on its head, and argues that 'the atheist's disappointment in and resentment of his own earthly father unconsciously justifies his rejection of God' (p. 16)."
Vitz builds his case on the writings of prominent atheists (Friedrich Nietzche, David Hume, Bertrand Russell, John-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and H.G. Wells) who wrote candidly of their hatred for their fathers.
Kamilla's musings amount to a similar thesis, viz. that an egalitarian's embrace of egalitarianism is rooted in their own psychological reaction to an abusive father/husband/pastor.
The evidence for this thesis is abundant from the lips of egalitarians themselves (which Kamilla noted), most of whom are anything but bashful when it comes to linking an abusive male with their own embrace of egalitarianism. In other words, Kamilla is not seeing a mirage here -- it is Very Easy to validate her report.
3. A final observation on the ones who have drunk this egalitarian kool-aid: they are fearless in hurling slanders against those whom they deem to be leaders of the patriarchy they hate so much.
Among those regularly slandered on one egal forum are myself, the Bayly brothers, John Piper, Bruce Ware, Paige Patterson, the MacDonalds, Mark Driscoll.
It's a hoot that Driscoll gets criticized by this group for his preaching against abusive men (!!!) because "The issue of abuse is one of the biggest weapons in the egalitarians' arsenal." So, that sly and wily Driscoll preaches against abusive men because "if they'll just be benevolent rulers, women will stop complaining and accept their subordination quietly."
Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
I really am saddened that it's somehow OK to "call out" someone who has been sharing her personal, life-changing struggle. I am a Christian who honestly doesn't care if I have a complementarian or egalitarian marriage (and I don't think it is important.) But I do care about how we care for others who are hurting and struggling, and I'm saddened by the fact that people think they can snidely criticize someone whom I think most will agree has been wronged. What is her "sin" in this venue? Talking about it? Please reconsider "calling out" someone in this fashion, I think it is not pleasing to God and a very poor witness.
"Is there something inside [them] which makes them seek out these abusers?"
Blame the victim.
It is much easier to point fingers at other women (or their husbands who "misunderstood" teachings in the evangelical culture) that to take a critical look at what is being taught.
Go ahead, make excuses for misuse of authority. It's much easier to do that than it is to take a look at our (sub)culture and what may or may not line up with the Bible and the Gospel.
Elizabeth,
I'm sorry but we'll have to disagree about whether or not the post is "calling out" someone who hasn't even been named. We can be nice to each other all the livelong day, but in the end, sometimes he kindest thing is to expose the lies to the light of day. On the other hand, what saddens me is that you can say you're a Christian but don't care what kind of marriage you have and don't think it's important.
Marriage is the foundational institution of human society and it is used throughout Scripture from beginning to end to illustrate our relationship to our Lord and Saviour. Scripture begins with a marriage, the marriage of a man and woman -- and we see in the creation account that the woman is made from the man, for the man, and brought to the man. Scripture ends with the Wedding Supper of the Lamb. It is this culminating feast to which the New Testament points so clearly in describing Christ as the bridegroom and the church as His Bride. We are also told that human marriage is an icon, a model, a picture of this ultimate marriage.
How in heaven's name is that not of supreme importance?
Kamilla
The labels complementarian and egalitarian aren't BIBLICAL. Why does it sadden you if Elizabeth or anyone else doesn't embrace them? What matters is that in our marriages we strive to follow Biblical principles and reflect Christ and his church. That doesn't require a label.
Honestly, I think that many people who consider their marriages and their theology of marriage "supremely important" find themselves in the middle ground between the two camps, uncomfortable with either label.
> [pca woman:] The labels complementarian and egalitarian aren't BIBLICAL.
The labels may not be, but the interpretations of the passages held by those who use such labels for convenience's sake are either biblical or they are not.
I'm sure you are aware the term "trinity" isn't biblical, either. Same thing here.
> [pca woman:] The labels complementarian and egalitarian aren't BIBLICAL.
"Patriarchal" is more biblical than either of the other two modern terms.
I'm with Elizabeth. I have a great marriage & I don't think we have to put ourselves through the ringer by "labeling" our marriages x,y, or z. Sometimes a person can focus so much on the label that they add an unhealthy stress to their lives trying to "live up" to what they believe "x" label means.
It's not a sad thing to simply live out your life of sanctification in the light of Scripture without obsessing over every single theological label. Christians for generations have lived oblivious to the terms "egalitarian, complementarian, and authoritarian" and have had healthy marriages focused on God's Word.
With that said, I think when a believer is spiritually abused & injured through the twisting of Scripture-our first response should be grace & mercy...love. This is not liberal thinking at all...just common sense that when a sister or brother is hurting, the Law needs no further utilization because they are already intimately aware of what the Law is.
What is needed, is the Gospel...Grace...not the clubbing on the head with the Law.
Sometimes, we Christians feel such a need to be right that in the process of being right, we forget that our pride can literally push hurting believers away from the visible church (and I can say this with certainity as a former WELS member/pastor's wife-a denom that judges all things outside Lutheran teaching as false teaching & those who endorse said beliefs as false teachers).
Why we feel a need to do this is obviously rooted in our sinful natures. Let's look at our own hearts before we judge an individual we do not know.
"her bid for a sympathy fix"-- Come on, now. This is a real person you are writing about. Don't you think that is out of line? Would you say this to her face? Would you have liked living the life she has for the past 8 years?
Maybe the next time you have insomnia, you should just drink a glass of warm milk and stay away from the computer.
Kamilla apparently believes that women choose abusive FATHERS. How on Earth does that happen?
About insonmnia...I find an odd connection between drinking adequate water throughout the day and how well I sleep that night. Another thing to look at is hypertension. Have you had your blood pressure checked lately?
"Kamilla apparently believes that women choose abusive FATHERS."
Fr. Bill most certainly believes that Karen cannot read. Or, he hopes that's the problem. Any other credible possibility would be truly sinister.
"How on Earth does that happen?"
Like I said, as a universal rule, it never happens, for all it takes is one woman not to choose an abusive father to invalidate the rule.
On the other hand, >>some>some<< women choose to have abusive fathers.
But, Kamilla said all that; just with fewer words. Maybe that was Karen's problem?
4. Our
Continuing from a blog-software mangled and lobbed off post . .
On the other hand, **some** women choose to have abusive fathers. Here's how it happens.
1. Suzi is born into a family where the father puts restrictions on what she may do (e.g. "You can't go outside to play until you clean your room"). Suzi dislikes this very much.
2. As she grows older, Suzi's father expands the scope of the restrictions he places on her (e.g. "You can't go to Starbucks with your friends until your homework is finished."). Suzi is majorly torqued.
3. Fast forward to college, where Suzi is finally free to ignore what her father wishes. She gets invited to a CBE meeting, where she hears a divorced woman give a speech that makes three points: (a) her husband was soooooo controlling and restrictive that she was smothered in her self-esteem, (b) until she learned the truths of egalitarian Christianity (which is, after all, the only true version of Christianity); and (c) then she was finally free to divorce the lout for abusing her all those years.
Suzi isn't married, of course, but she remembers her childhood in her father's house. "Sheesh!! He was so abusive of my childhood. No wonder I'm so unhappy. He abused me! Now I can face the old fraud and be free!"
That's how **some** women choose to have abusive fathers.
But, Kamilla said all that; just with fewer words. Maybe that was Karen's problem?
So, as a victim of child sexual abuse, it is good to know that there are people out there that think I *MAY* have chosen that path. Yeah, that was a fun path to take, let me tell ya.
I don't know any of these people (egalitarians, who were abused) personally. However, I do believe that the words of Christ were to "judge not..."
It is NOT our place to decide whether or not she is telling the truth or not. That is God's place. It IS our place, indeed, to extend the love of Christ to anyone. Regardless of their faith, race, denomination, egalitarian/complementarian status, etc.
Your blog post comes across as that of a shallow know it all. Not exactly dripping with the love of Christ. I don't know you and maybe you aren't like that for real. Maybe you are. However, next time you are hit with a case of insomnia at 5 am and the urge to do the Mexican Hat Dance on someone's "supposed" abusive past (via blog post) hits ya (as if you really know that person), go grab a shot of Jack Daniels instead and read The Huffington Post.
The knee-jerk criticism Kamilla's receiving here boggles the mind. And the misuse of Scripture by her detractors is equally dismaying. It's all cant, animus posing as argument.
Are we really to approach a woman's accusation of abuse acritically? Is this the one area in life where the accused has no recourse, where laws of civil society and scripture alike are suspended and the accuser reigns supreme? Those writing in opposition to Kamilla sound like Stalinist apparatchiks in their willingness to believe any accusation. Indeed, according to some, the truth of the matter should be no concern of ours.
But what if the woman has been seeing a counsellor for emotional problems, what if the counsellor specializes in the recovery of lost memories, what if together they dredge up childhood memories of Satanist rituals where she was ritually abused by her father and his friends? What if no one supports her story--not her Christian mother, not her siblings, not her father's Christian friends, no one. We're to believe a sole witness--whose memories of an event arrived 40 years after the fact? We're to acritically love her, despite the fact that her story of abuse is probably a family-destroying, soul-searing lie from the father of lies?
No. Woman would never fall for Satan's whispered accusations against authority. Woman, the great source of purity in the world, the life-giver, would never accept Satan's suggestions that her Father is selfish, egocentric, manipulative, controlling and abusive, would she?
David Bayly
I had a thought about the insomnia.
If you get up at night to look at the computer screen you probably are making your insomnia worse. It has to do with light. The light from the computer screen into your eyes creates triggers signaling to your body that it is daytime and that messes with your night/day cycle and you body begins to release daytime-coping hormones that definitely do not let you settle down to sleep.
Turning on the overhead light to read a book does not have the intensity into your eyes that a computer screen's light creates.
Actually, you should probably turn off your computer more than an hour before your normal bed time. The pre-bedtime computer screen viewing may also be part of the initial insomnia cause.
Of course I'm typing this in Taiwan at 10:58 p.m. so I need to take my own advice.
Good night.
I don't believe *I* said that every woman who said or cried abuse is telling the truth. She may very well not be. If she is or is not is not the point in this matter. The point is, how are we responding to said woman? If it is true, we should be there to hold her and comfort her and pray for her and walk her through this hard time in her life. If it is NOT true (and who are we to know, really?), then we are to respond the same way. We do NOT know a person's heart. We just don't. God does. We carry out His love for her, regardless of whether her situation is true or not, and God will take care of whether she is telling the truth or not. That is something that would have to be dealt with in her own heart.
I would hate to think that I passed a homeless person on the street and didn't give him the $5 in my pocket, just because I was *sure* he was just gonna spend it on getting alcohol or drugs. It is not my place to decide that. It is my place to help him, and not judge him, based on my *own* flawed perceptions. This is the same thing. Saying all these woman are crying wolf, just because they came out of complementarianism is a scary thing. We don't know what really happened in their lives. It doesn't matter. The same is true of the family accused. Love them and pass no judgement. It still is not our place. We are ALL lost without God's saving grace.
FTR, woman is just as fallen as man. The only great source of purity I know of is Jesus. He is the Life-Giver. I know for a fact that I have accepted Satan's lies before. I will continue to struggle with my sinful nature for as long as I live. Praise God that He deals with me and my heart. Also, Praise God that nobody ever told me my own story of abuse was not true. I am sure that would have fast forwarded my downward spiral into depression and self hatred that I already was on. Quite the opposite, I had people take my hand and walk with me through it and help me "reach the other side".
I pray that any woman who reads this, who has been abused, doesn't take to heart what Kamilla wrote.
"It doesn't matter."
This is just foolish. My mother lied about my father abusing her my entire childhood just to get sympathy points with purposely gullible people such as yourself. I wished someone would of confronted her about her lying and slandering of my father. But, she played the abused-by-my-husband card and no one questioned her. Me and my brothers suffered for it. But, hey, its all good. Who are we to judge anyone? Right?
Too Liberal,
I pray the women who have been abused *do* take what I've written to heart. What you've written here sounds quite nice and reasonable, except for the fact that it is pure poison. It bears absolutely no resemblance to the New Testament whatsoever.
The sort of love you propose is basically devoid of real content. It is a cup of hot cocoa and a big hug. Oh, goody. What you deny in your false presentation of "love" is the judgment our elders, pastors and friends are required to give. For without this judgment we can never call anyone to repentance and forgiveness.
I don't deny, and never had, that sometimes the abuse Egalitarians retail is very, very, real. What I do say now, clearly and unapologetically, is that whatever abuse they have suffered or believe they have suffered - Egalitarians are called to forgiveness. We are all called to forgiveness, whether what we have to forgive is years of emotional torture, repeated beatings or simply an imagined slight. The cross of Christ requires it of us.
The answer to abuse is not to embrace the lie of Egalitarianism but to repent and forgive. Repent of the repeated retelling of abuse, repent of the lie blaming Complementarianism for the abuse. Forgive your abuser as well as those who had harsh words for you in your rebellion. Repent and embrace a biblical vision of sexuality in marriage and leadership in the church.
Too Liberal, you were right. You don't know me and you apparently don't know my story. I was deep in the Egalitarian lie and men I had never met had what I thought were unfairly harsh words for me. They stung and angered me, like you can imagine my words here have stung and angered certain women. But they did something else, something I endeavor to do, but at which I fail miserably. They began praying for me.
And through the power of their prayer, I found my way out of that pit. I've forgiven their imagined slights against me and I've repented of the heresy I formerly embraced.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - crawling out of the pit of lies known as Egalitarianism was scary. I didn't know what I'd find, whether I'd lose all my friends and stand alone. What I did find was joy, peace, grace and the blessing of friends who loved me enough not to leave me there, even when I didn't know they loved me.
Kamilla
Dear tlfsatcfo,
Actually, it does matter whether accusations against fathers and husbands are true. It matters very, very much.
Our society has been overwhelmed by pleas for victim status as well as the missional fervor of those to whom God has given a special calling of comforting the afflicted. This is the context for each reaction against what our dear sister, Kamilla, has written.
Really, though, we need to broaden our understanding of victimhood, seeing accurately who needs comfort. Every crime has those who are victims of being falsely accused of that crime. And the false accusation is every bit as serious a crime as the crime the person was falsely accused of.
This is why Scripture requires the false accuser be punished with the same punishment his victim would have been punished with had the accusation been true. Makes sense, doesn't it?
It's hard to think that being falsely accused of rape is anything like being raped, but ask a victim of this false accusation about his suffering and things become clear. Same with child molestation, abuse, and incest. We should be extremely careful to weigh the evidence of the crime before throwing ourselves into comforting the one claiming to be afflicted.
Proverbs has a purpose in telling us we never know the truth until we've heard both sides of a story. Mob psychology exits. Rush to judgment is a real danger and every pastor has been guilty of it.
Brothers and sisters, in our soft and decadent time when men are good looking and women are strong, we simply must examine every charge made to us on the Facebook pages and blogs and phones, and in the living rooms and offices and courts of our churches. Slander is sin and it's our duty to admonish and discipline those who commit this sin just as it's our duty to admonish those who commit the sin of incest.
And believe me, we most certainly do discipline the sin of incest at our churches. Ask anyone. Also, we spend many hours and days and months and years of our lives comforting the victims of physical and sexual abuse. Ask anyone. Also, we take such cases, along with any other felony, to the civil magistrate, and teach other pastors to do the same. Ask anyone--particularly the men and women who were at the Christ Church Ministerial Conference two weeks ago where I gave a talk, "Good and Bad Patriarchy."
So, no false dichotomy allowed, commenting here as if those questioning a man who reports being sexually abused by his brother or pastor or camp counselor are blaming the victim and lacking in compassion.
Truth is, we have so much compassion for boys raped by men that we refuse to overlook those who trivialize such wickedness by claiming to be victims of something that never happened. So, we investigate before we discipline.
After all, how can you comfort the victim of false charges of incest--one of the most wicked actions I deal with each week in the pastorate--if you avoid asking whether the accusations are true?
Please understand me in this. My heart is broken and I am intensely angry over the many, many, many souls who have grown up under the terror and ceaseless suffering of children living under the authority of predators. Our church has any number of them--as does yours. If you don't know it, you're not a faithful elder, pastor, or Titus 2 woman. It's very, very easy to know if you want to.
But many simply don't want to know because it would mess up their lives with sin and blood and secrecy and confrotation and rebuke and discipline and tears and repentance and the civil magistrate and stuff like that. You know, real spiritual work as opposed to debates over whether or not to schedule a child's nursing, to wear a robe or a collar, to allow amplified instruments in worship, to use wine or grape juice in the Lord's Supper--you know, stuff like that.
Well, I'll stop for now.
With much grief and love and faith in our Heavenly Father Who restores the years the locusts have eaten,
>>This is just foolish. My mother lied about my father abusing her my entire childhood just to get sympathy points with purposely gullible people such as yourself. I wished someone would of confronted her about her lying and slandering of my father. But, she played the abused-by-my-husband card and no one questioned her. Me and my brothers suffered for it. But, hey, it's all good. Who are we to judge anyone? Right?
Same story when my mom divorced my dad. Same story she still tells to coworkers and people she meets. The stories are better or worse, depending on how much she thinks she can get away with. My mom has proven countless times that she will say or do nearly anything to get attention. Just ask my wife what the holidays are like.
>>If it is NOT true (and who are we to know, really?), then we are to respond the same way. We do NOT know a person's heart. We just don't. God does. We carry out His love for her, regardless of whether her situation is true or not, and God will take care of whether she is telling the truth or not. That is something that would have to be dealt with in her own heart.
This is insane. And it is the farthest thing from love. My mom called me this summer and tried to sow the beginnings of the same accusations against her current husband that she leveled against my father (see above). How should I have responded?
Would it have been love to pat her on the back and encourage her to divorce him? Or would it have been love for me to wonder if that wasn't exactly what she wanted from me? Perhaps love might have considered how the accused party's life might be affected by the unquestioned acceptance of her accusations?
Perhaps it might have been love to confront her with her past lies and warn her that God is not blind? To warn her against wrecking someone else's life in order to justify breaking her vows (again)? Perhaps it might have been love to dig a little deeper and at least try to confirm whether or not it was even plausible that she was telling the truth instead of accepting her account at face value?
Perhaps it might have been love to ask if another man was involved--as was the case when she divorced my dad?
"Purposely gullible" is the perfect description: You would have me allow my mom to persist in slander, hardened lies, selfishness, murder, adultery, and idolatry? To persist in her own misery? To persist towards everlasting misery? And you would call that love?
Sweet. Sounds a lot easier than what I thought my responsibility.
You can't trump loving discernment because the thought of someone being wrong makes you weepy. To assume everyone is telling the truth is just as destructive as assuming everyone is lying. And there are certain cases in which it's better to have healthy reservations or suspicions--some skepticism.
That's what we're talking about here. Kamilla is teaching us discernment so that we can love people better. And you're jumping up and down, calling us to close our eyes lest we love people too much.
I am really disturbed by the tone of the original post. I think the best response to abuse CAN be found in scripture:
ISAIAH 61
The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,
because the Lord has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor;
he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor,
and the day of vengeance of our God;
to comfort all who mourn;
to grant to those who mourn in Zion—
to give them a beautiful headdress instead of ashes,
the oil of gladness instead of mourning,
the garment of praise instead of a faint spirit;
that they may be called oaks of righteousness,
the planting of the Lord, that he may be glorified.
When we love people, sacrificially, when we bind up the brokenhearted and give them the liberty that God does, when we treat them with dignity and respect, they will grow and mature in Christ. If they are liars (which, in my experience, is NOT the majority) they will repent and turn to Jesus and seek healing for that as well.
Some women lying about abuse is not a reason to doubt all women. Investigation is necessary in the case of church discipline, but it should always been done with pastoral care and respect. If you don't know this woman, you are out of line judging her situation. She used to be a very popular blogger in patriarchal, quiverful-ish circles. She certainly had a much bigger voice then than she does now. The fact that she has told her story more than once doesn't mean that you get a free pass to judge her, especially if you have not written to her personally to seek out the truth of the situation.
"And you're jumping up and down, calling us to close our eyes lest we love people too much."
Absolutely brilliant, Jacob! Sometimes the love is harder to handle than holding on to the anger that has become our security blanket. It hurts when you first begin to step forward into forgiveness and the love offered by those who call us to count the cost of the cross of Christ. It hurts, it really does at first.
I liken it to wound care. It's an interesting side of medicine that many don't have experience with. Occasionally a patient who has had abdominal surgery will develop a complication called a seroma - a pocket of fluid collects near the incision. If the seroma is large enough, the incision may have to be re-opened to drain the fluid. When this happens, the patient is not simply sewn back up again. The wound is packed with moistened gauze and those dressings are changed daily. At first it hurts like blazes - the edges are raw and it feels like the wound is being torn to shreds when the packing is removed. However, as the wound begins to heal, the dressing changes hurt less and less. The process takes weeks, and sometimes even months.
Wound care is a long and tedious process. But the end result is well-healed tissue that is strong. The alternative? To sew the wound back up again just compounds the possibility of the seroma occuring again as well as bringing the danger of infection. Oddly, all that packing and dressing changes with wound care bring less risk of infection.
So, you see, sometimes the loving thing to do is to open things up, tell the truth about them and let them heal, slowly, as God wills.
Kamilla
Gentlemen, I thank you so much for your wise help in this discussion.
For all reading here, I've been corresponding with Dale O'Leary, whose article on feminism and forgiveness has been a help to me for many years. She gave me permission to quote her email to me as I see fit. Here is part of her response to me today:
"The failure to forgive, be it a terrible sexual assault or a simple failure to understand a daughter's need, can create emotional consequences. I have seen women who were really abused recover and those whose fathers were simply insensitive not be able to forgive. The answer is that regardless of the level of the abuse as Christians we must forgive everyone who injured us in any way. We must follow the example of Christ who forgave from the cross. . .You are facing the same thing I faced in my talks. If a woman held resentment to her father, she couldn't hear what I was saying."
Kamilla
I'm not going to criticise you. I'm not even going to mock you.
You people are a dying breed. Sorry, but the idea that both men and women are humans, with the common emotions and impulses of humans, isn't going away.
Kamilla,
... the actions here on this blog are why so many women, when they leave their abusive patriarchal marriages, leave the faith altogether. Who could blame them, with "love" like this? Who needs the accuser-of-the-brethren around when you belong to a "family" like this... [NOTE FROM TIM BAYLY: The rest of this anonymous comment has been removed as explained in my comment, below. This is the meaning of the ellipses.]
...The thing is, I'm not interested in talking to you or the Bayly brothers... [NOTE FROM TIM BAYLY: The rest of this anonymous comment has been removed as explained in my comment, below. This is the meaning of the ellipses.]
>>the idea that both men and women are humans
Not humans, but men. As in the Hebrew, 'adam'--that's what God named us.
>Be a "biblical patriarchy" supporter all you want, but before you write posts discussing the motives (and the truthfulness) of someone who you haven't even bothered to go to privately, take a minute to stop and ask yourself if the urge to vilify them is born of the Spirit's fruits or of the flesh.
And yet people who tell such stories ask us to assume the guilt of the men they impugn.
>>The thing is, I'm not interested in talking to you or the Bayly brothers
As you know, your commenting privileges here were revoked over a year ago due to your constant public expressions of defiance against the Word of God. Commenting under a different name isn't polite.
So, we'll take you at your word quoted above and allow you to talk to others on other forums not under the authority of Scripture.
Sincerely,
I've been thinking about the comp/egal issue a lot lately, but this blog post disturbs me, because it feels like it is calling out a specific person publicly, when, if anything, it should be done privately.
And I think there is a really dangerous element here- false accusations are a terrible thing, but were I a victim reading this, it would feel much worse. I would be afraid to tell the truth, or to seek help - because I would be afraid of not being believed. I would be afraid of not passing whatever the litmus test is -- an abuser may be an elder, or someone else with community clout. Some people only think abuse is real if someone is hit. It isn't hard to understand that many egal's have experienced abuse. Abuse is real enough, in all sorts of relationships. I've seen enough genuine cases. :(
Why is it inappropriate to make comment publicly on someone who is publicly commenting on others?
40below,
First, the "person" was not called out. Kamilla could easily have had over a dozen different agitators within cyber-egalitarianism in mind.
It appears that one of them (maybe, maybe not) recognized herself and displayed for us a validating example of what Kamilla was referring to: a heart hardened in bitterness, bent on revenge against any and all who would dare to question her twisting of Scripture.
Second, the particular egalitarian who has protested too much has also personally libeled me, both Bayly brothers, John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Russell Moore, Randy Stinson, Bruce Ware, Doug Wilson, CBMW, Focus on the Family, Vision Forum -- labeling all as cultic, mentally ill, aiders and abetters and promoters of the abuse of women, and worse. You do not have to google very far to verify all of this for yourself.
Let's grant that every egalitarian complaining of abuse has a valid complaint.
Does this make slander and libel acceptable?
Does this make libel and slander spanning DECADES acceptable?
Does it make express denial of Scripture acceptable?
Does it make the corruption of young, impressionable, and poorly taught Christians acceptable?
No matter what their abuse has been, no matter how "reasonable" it may seem to you, such people as we are speaking of in this thread are vipers, their bite is the purest poison, and I join the psalmist in crying to the LORD that He will stop every one of their lying mouths.
The person telling her story is speaking from direct experience, and telling her own story. This blog post appears to be critical of her, without going to her directly, and without first-hand direct experience of the people involved. That's close to gossip, for me.
It's like me saying "I live in a place where it gets really cold, and sometimes I find it hard to live here" and then someone coming along and saying "Oh, she's probably exaggerating." Of course, weather is less-emotional topic of weather instead of a marital relationship, and weather can be verified more easily than the ins and outs of personal histories.
But, having come this far, I think that the bigger issue is that there is an uncharitable tone towards many people who claim that they've been abused, and some of that abuse is undoubtedly real.
40below,
Though the Minnesota winters never bothered me, I would never accuse someone who found them difficult of exaggerating (grins). It's pretty good, but the problem with your analogy is that the wether is not a brother in Christ against whom you can bear false witness (or true, as the case may be).
Kamilla
"Ask anyone. Also, we spend many hours and days and months and years of our lives comforting the victims. . .
Actually, I'm surprised at that.
I'm surprised that anyone hurting would open up to people who communicate with such critical, harsh, and sarcastic tones. This isn't said to be unkind. Just sad.
I have to agree with pca woman who points us back, to the Scripture and back to true, Gospel-based compassion.
Perhaps 40 below is too commonplace. If I say I've seen 65 below, do you start to doubt me?
You're right, weather isn't a brother in Christ. But neither of us know the brother, and so we can't know what really happened, and she is also a sister in Christ. Unless you know she's lying, insinuating that she might be is potentially very hurtful. To her, individually, and to other abused women as a larger group. Her decision to tell her own personal story is her own, and she may have wonderful reasons for doing so (processing the events that have happened to her, encouraging other women to seek help) - but for us to start nosing around into it without going to her directly is another thing entirely. If you think she is in error, Matthew says you should go to her privately first. And, if I've followed the comment thread correctly (perhaps I haven't), she *can't* respond here.
I don't know anyone with falsely-induced memories. I do know a few exaggerators who twist events to garner sympathy. But, far more common, are the people that I know personally who have experienced grievous hurt, and I've seen it all sorts of marriage and families.
PCA wife, etc,
I am living proof that if happens.
Kamilla
I forgot to say Kamilla - your post to me is a good example of how assumptions can be wrong. I don't live in Minnesota. ;)
>Unless you know she's lying, insinuating that she might be is potentially very hurtful.
That is a remarkably childish understanding. She is a fallen creature. She is not incapable of lying, either to us or herself. She impugns another fallen human being. Assuming she's relating an accurate portrayal is not very discerning.
BTW I do live in northern Minnesota.
>>The person telling her story is speaking from direct experience, and telling her own story. This blog post appears to be critical of her, without going to her directly, and without first-hand direct experience of the people involved. That's close to gossip, for me.
No one's identified this woman Kamilla refers to and nothing Kamilla's written could be used to identify her.
On the other hand, there are names that have actually been named. Sadly, Kamilla reports that both Mark Driscoll and Doug Wilson are being slandered as "evil complementarians" who "are for encouraging -- or, alternatively -- ignoring wife abuse."
But of course, not one of our commenters calling for compassion has uttered a single word mourning these false accusations, this slander. Not a single word.
There are plenty of indicators of compassion for suffering women here, for those with eyes to see. Those who haven't seen them are committed to cultivating blindness.
In Christ,
Oh, I didn't assume you did -- i was merely personalizing to my own experience -;)
Kamilla
Assuming she's lying assuredly impugns her.
Anyone who reads both here and ____ (NOTE FROM TIM BAYLY: I've taken out the name of the blog Mr./Ms/Mrs./Miss Anonymous put in here because it brings information into this discussion that I didn't know and don't think helpful.) could figure out who is being talked about. But as I said earlier - the bigger deal is how these attitudes carry over to people who are in abusive situations. It's difficult to admit there is abuse. It's difficult to tell people about it. If I was abused, and I read these comments, made by my brothers and sisters in Christ, I would feel sorrow and helplessness where there should be hope and love. :(
As far as defending Wilson and Driscoll? Those negative comments weren't made here. I believe people did leap to their defense in the place those comments were made.
"Assuming she's lying assuredly impugns her"
Where? Again it must be asked - where has this assumption been made?
Kamilla
>>Assuming she's lying assuredly impugns her.
Who is "she?" And don't answer that question, please, since I'm only asking it to make the point that we don't know. Even when some commenter showed up here claiming to be "she," that commenter came here anonymously. In other words, that person took steps to avoid being identified.
The most that can be said, here, is that the honesty of a type of person and an anonymous example of that type of person has been called into question.
>>If I was abused, and I read these comments, made by my brothers and sisters in Christ, I would feel sorrow and helplessness where there should be hope and love.
So, it's no comfort to read what I wrote about David's and my work as pastors:
* * *
...believe me, we most certainly do discipline the sin of incest at our churches. Ask anyone. Also, we spend many hours and days and months and years of our lives comforting the victims of physical and sexual abuse. Ask anyone. Also, we take such cases, along with any other felony, to the civil magistrate, and teach other pastors to do the same. Ask anyone--particularly the men and women who were at the Christ Church Ministerial Conference two weeks ago where I gave a talk, "Good and Bad Patriarchy."
...Truth is, we have so much compassion for boys raped by men that we refuse to overlook those who trivialize such wickedness by claiming to be victims of something that never happened. So, we investigate before we discipline.
After all, how can you comfort the victim of false charges of incest--one of the most wicked actions I deal with each week in the pastorate--if you avoid asking whether the accusations are true?
Please understand me in this. My heart is broken and I am intensely angry over the many, many, many souls who have grown up under the terror and ceaseless suffering of children living under the authority of predators. Our church has any number of them--as does yours. If you don't know it, you're not a faithful elder, pastor, or Titus 2 woman. It's very, very easy to know if you want to.
* * *
The evidence of compassion and loving care for men, women, and children who suffer at the hands of those who have been called by God to nurture and protect them is unavoidable on this blog. Unavoidable, that is, except to those who are adamant in their refusal to see it.
Love,
>Assuming she's lying assuredly impugns her.
Not assuming she's telling the truth is not the same as assuming she's lying.
I really don't have much to add. Most of the others who have opposed your viewpoint said what I meant. I never meant that not judging someone means you take what they say at face value all the time. It does, however, mean we still extend the same grace to them that Christ did to us. This is a blog post comment. Not a thesis. I really didn't think I needed to go into that much detail. I guess I was wrong.
As far as the type of love I'm talking about, Kamilla... It is more than just a cup of something warm and a pat on the back. I believe I gave the example of people walking me through my own abusive past. Again, I don't feel details are necessary. It was a very personal experience and I don't feel like it is public information. I'm really not sure where you got that.
Anyways, I have to be done with this. I have children to raise (yes, I have reproduced) and a life to lead. This blog represents such a small portion of the Christian community. It really is nothing more than a giant facebook status that people read and move on. Occasionally, people comment. Mostly it is not even known about by the vast majority of folks.
Pages
Add new comment