Can religion be enlisted as an ally in the prevention of domestic violence? – ABC Religion & Ethics

Both researching and discussing domestic violence in religious contexts has been difficult for a range of reasons — some of which include the diversity of religions themselves, fear of offending on the part of researchers, and the inherently personal nature of spirituality. In fact, very little research about domestic violence within religious contexts exists in the Australian context.

Nevertheless, we have learned that some faith leaders may minimise and ignore abuse; others report they do not know how to respond to abuse, or else focus on relationship counselling, prayer, and worship as ways of addressing the problem. We have also begun to understand and recognise spiritual abuse as a tactic of domestic violence through the stories of women victims.

In other words, despite limitations, research has established that identification with a religion plays a significant role both in defining women’s experiences of domestic violence and in shaping the way religious organisations attempt to respond to that abuse.

Why theology needs to be “in bounds”

What hasn’t been directly asked by researchers, however, is how religious identification influences men’s perpetration of domestic violence? Julia Baird writes:

The fundamental problem remains, though: the fact that blokes, in the main, run religious institutions. This means while leaders might say domestic abuse is abhorrent, they have not treated it with particular urgency, or preached about it often, if at all.

We agree with her here. She is making a structural feminist argument that points to the gender inequality that is present in leadership hierarchies and norms within religions — as well as, we would argue, in many other institutions in our society.

In our research we have found that most religious leaders, communities, families, and congregations tend to express concern, worry, and opposition to violence against women. Being opposed to domestic violence — or calling it “abhorrent”, as Baird puts it — is a sentiment most of us share and we found it was often articulated in interviews we conducted. So why is it not being addressed overtly in religious contexts? We think theology has something to do with it.

Theological beliefs and their accompanying practices cannot be “out of bounds” for public discussion or relegated to the private sphere. We cannot recoil from such beliefs and practices if we want to address domestic violence within religious contexts because they shape the socio-cultural gendered relationships within those contexts. Hence there needs to be a sustained exploration of the interface between faith, family, institutions, and domestic violence to advance our understanding of and solutions available within religious contexts.

Faith leaders have significant influence through their role as spiritual advisers — an influence that has the potential of challenging and shifting oppressive and misogynist attitudes that both contribute to and sustain domestic violence. It is this potential we want to explore.

We have drawn this insight through partnering with the Lutheran Church of Australia (LCA) and the Anglican Diocese of Adelaide. We contend that it is possible to explore gendering practices to explain domestic violence in religious contexts, and it is possible to delve into theological beliefs and religious practices to ascertain how men use violence — and that doing so offers possibilities to see clergy and church communities as allies in the effort to achieve societal change.

“So heavily invested in male power and privilege”

Through our research we have learned that many religious leaders, families, and communities understand domestic violence as physical abuse — which is the kind of abuse usually described as “abhorrent”. We also learned that the complexity and insidious nature of psychological, social, financial, and spiritual abuse was much more difficult to identify and discuss within religious contexts (participants did not mention sexual abuse, which requires a thorough analysis and interpretation in its own right). We would argue that this has something to do with theological beliefs.

Theological teachings enable men who perpetrate domestic violence to understand and justify their behaviour through interpretations of divinely sanctioned inequality between men and women. These constructions of a hierarchy of genders influence intimate partner relations and households, and therefore keep domestic violence an unspoken, unrecognised, or even justified phenomenon.

Many Lutheran pastors spoke to us about the theological narratives that shape gender expectations. They described these expectations as having a long history and forming constructions of identity for men, women, and family life. Pastors used phrases such as gender expectations being “deep”, “strong”, and “powerful”. They associated men and masculinity with “privilege” and being “not emotional”, and women and femininity with “service” and being “relational” and “emotional”.

Some Lutheran pastors explained that when alternatives to such constructions are proposed, such as gender equality, they are received as threats to theological teachings (mostly by men). Pastors spoke about how men with a Lutheran upbringing are struggling to understand alternative narratives because they potentially disrupt their own sense of self. Questioning male power and privilege is difficult because the theological and identity investment is constructed as “truth” that cannot be changed or cannot be wrong — it is divinely ordained:

People are so heavily invested in male power and privilege it’s just so much to give up … So it’s asking a lot for people to consider another way of being … When you are talking about mutuality and equality of women, some men get really anxious about the language of equality, why is he positioned differently now, he believes theologically his needs come first, but he loves her and provides for her but she has to be submissive to him because the scriptures tell him to do that. Now if we introduce some narrative that says that how he understands his wife is not adequate, he has now hurt her by not letting her be equal … he can’t bring himself to admit that he did that … Therefore, you’ll find people motivated by things that you’ll never understand … He is being taken to a place he doesn’t want to go, cannot comprehend.

Lutheran pastors explained that when the gender hierarchy is questioned, fear emerges for religious men. They often justify belief in gender inequality and their acts of domestic violence because they are afraid of their relationship with God and afraid of losing their identity within their communities. Sin brings shame before God and in front of congregational peers.

Therefore, if interpersonal gendered exchanges within the family, which subscribe to gendered expectations of relationships that they have been taught and known throughout their lives, are called “abusive”, pastors explained this can be overwhelming for couples — not least because the men perceive that their relationship with God stands to be compromised. Hence, it is men’s understanding of what they believe God is like and how they believe God wants them to behave that needs challenging. And this task is inescapably theological.

Gender, theology, and the interpretation of the Bible

Gender performances and gendered hierarchies featured heavily in the stories of clergy that we heard when they offered their explanations and concerns about domestic violence. If we are going to make inroads into addressing and stopping domestic violence, particularly in religious contexts, this requires engagement with theological gender constructions that are maintained through male interests in family life, and how specific conceptions of gender are reinforced by religion and endorsed by their understanding of God’s will.

The pastors we interviewed could identify and explain theological references and biblical teachings that men who commit domestic violence use to justify their behaviour. These pastors could also challenge these teachings that purport to justify male privilege. They could also offer alternative biblical interpretations that challenge gender inequality — for example, by explaining the history of a particular translation of a biblical text, or the meaning of the original languages, or how these texts reflected prevailing cultures of day, or through reflection on hermeneutical injustice and the silencing of women.

All of which suggests that the justification for domestic violence in religious contexts can be taken away by theologically addressing belief in divinely sanctioned gender inequality.

Domestic violence and the role of pastoral care

Needless to say, this requires theological leadership in those religious communities. Providing such leadership can, of course, be difficult, and many pastors we interviewed have faced resistance and backlash with religious institutions. Nevertheless, the centrality of theological teachings in people’s lives cannot be underestimated — this is why it is important to explore theologically informed and clergy-centred interventions as a way of addressing domestic violence and associated gendered ideas.

For example, we spoke to a Christian man who was perpetrating domestic violence and was struggling with the possibility of divorce. He talked about the ways in which he sought help to keep his marriage intact — such as reading the Bible, counselling, and reaching out to pastors. It was only when his pastor explained to him “Now you’re putting God’s law, ‘Thou shalt not divorce’, above God’s grace” that he found he could finally accept the divorce.

In our interview, some clergy also provided us with examples of how they engaged theologically with men who were committing domestic violence, providing us some insight into the influence and power of religious beliefs and practices in the lives of men who use violence. For example, a Lutheran pastor shared a time when he debated Ephesians 5:21 with a man who tried to use that biblical verse to justify his violence:

I have drawn attention to Ephesians 5:21 and explained submission is mutual and voluntary and this passage is not a good Christian wife as an obedient follower of her husband. I gently tried to show that Christian marriage (and relationships generally) involve mutual respect, trust, service and honouring. Submission as described in the Bible is mutual and voluntary and cannot be mandated.

In our most recent work with clergy and church workers in the Anglican Diocese of Adelaide, many participants explained pastoral care — that is, the provision of spiritual support in a way informed by theological teachings — as having healing potential for those experiencing domestic violence and potentially enabling attitudinal and behaviour change in the perpetrators. The was large consensus across the interviews that responding to domestic violence required specialist assistance and hence support from human service organisations beyond the church. However, what the church members believed they could offer was pastoral care. As one person told us:

We are not trained in counselling at high levels, but we are there as someone who is able to listen and support and be present. And I think that’s the gift of church pastoral care, is that we’re able to be at that lower level, just present with people, which then means we’ve got to know the skill set, which is not solving problems. It’s not giving advice. It’s not trying to do therapy because that’s not what we’re there for, but we are there for being, a listening ear, present. And being able to offer off a prayer and ritual.

The importance of religious adherence and ritual in bringing people comfort when they were experiencing domestic violence, participants explained, provided a response that was about community, being close to God, and sharing learnings that come from Jesus Christ and the reading of the Bible. These insights from pastors and congregation members provide insight into the role that religious communities can play in responding to domestic violence.

The importance of theological leadership

We recognise that extensive research has shown that many clergy are simply not equipped to harness the beliefs and practices of their religious traditions to safely help an abuser, and clergy often feel caught between the demands of their religious traditions to discourage divorce or advocate for the “natural” gender order. Clergy and church workers need to be equipped to uphold the safety of others, as well as their own safety in responding.

It would be naïve and unsafe not to think about religious leadership critically because forms of gendered discourse enable men individually and collectively to determine what does and does not count as violence — as Julia Baird succinctly put it, “blokes run religious institutions”. We agree that to address domestic violence also requires significant structural and cultural change, as well as a broader conversation about the exclusion of women from public ministry and religious leadership. The practices of gender-based exclusion cannot be disassociated from efforts to prevent and respond to domestic violence.

But we are also pointing to the need to theologically engage with those forms of biblical interpretation that repress gender equality. It is theological leadership that can facilitate such engagement. If we are going to make inroads into stopping domestic violence and addressing broader gender inequality, we need to include theological beliefs and religious practices in our analysis of the conditions which allow domestic violence to take place. Foremost among the beliefs that need to be challenged is the notion that the exercise of male power and privilege is not abusive — after all, coercive control becomes harder to identify, and the safety of women is severely compromised, when gender-based power relations are ignored or given divine sanction.

If you need to get in touch with a domestic violence support service, you can contact the 1800 RESPECT national helpline: 1800 737 732.

Sarah Wendt is Professor of Social Work in the ARC Centre for Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women at the University of Melbourne.

Josephine Clarke is a Research Fellow in the Department of Social Work and with the ARC Centre for Excellence for the Elimination of Violence Against Women at the University of Melbourne.