# Missions Case Study: Wife Beating



## Parakaleo

I've seen some of these posted before on PB and thought I would add this one from a missions textbook I was assigned in seminary. I know that trying to come up with a "ruling" in a case study is far from perfect, since information has been interpreted and prepackaged. However, beneficial discussion can come from analyzing the principles at work here. What do you think?



> CASE STUDY: WIFE BEATING William A. Benner (Hiebert and Hiebert 1987, 57–58)
> 
> The Reverend Solomon Begari, chairman of the Pastor’s Disciplinary Committee, looked at the other two members of the committee and said, “We must decide whether Pastor Trombo should be disciplined for beating his wife, and, if so, what that discipline should be. There is no doubt that he beat her, but she disobeys him and embarrasses him in public. The question is, is this something for which we should discipline a husband, particularly a pastor?”
> 
> The missionaries who lived by the church had brought the problem before the committee. One afternoon Pastor James Trombo returned home and found his young daughter playing with rat poison, which was scattered on the floor around her. His wife, Paeyam, was nowhere to be seen. He rushed his child to the hospital to have her stomach pumped, just in case she had eaten some of it. When he returned home, he beat his wife after he found out that she had gone to town to buy a dress. She had left their daughter asleep on the floor, expecting to be gone only a short while. Pastor Trombo had scolded his wife several times before this for leaving the child when she was asleep, but Paeyam had taken to ignoring his rebukes and sometimes publicly embarrassed him out of spite.
> 
> Immediately after her beating, Paeyam went across the street to the home of Carl and Lynne Hansen, the missionaries in the area. Paeyam had worked for them for several months, ever since their arrival in the South Sea Islands. Carl and Lynne both liked Paeyam and were shocked to see her weeping and bruised. Although Carl had found it hard to work with Pastor Trombo, who seemed to him to be arrogant and authoritarian, he and Lynne had to admit that the pastor’s church was flourishing. Beside the many highlanders who attended the church, Pastor Trombo had a real ministry among the coastal people working in the town.
> 
> Carl went immediately to talk to Pastor Trombo, but he would not listen to Carl’s remonstrance. “This is the custom of our people,” he said. The missionaries felt that they could not drop the case, so they reported it to the Pastor’s Disciplinary Committee of the Zion Churches of the South Pacific Islands.
> 
> Rumors of the beating circulated among the church members, causing various reactions. Some of the older people felt that Paeyam had finally gotten what she deserved and now would probably straighten up if the committee affirmed her husband. After all, wife beating was common in the highlands cultures. Many others who had been raised in the church were concerned. They felt that Pastor Trombo had done wrong and might even have committed a sin, although they were not exactly sure what kind of a sin. The new converts from the coastal people were generally confused. They liked Pastor Trombo and found him to be a good pastor, but they were used to treating their wives with more equality than the highlanders. Their wives were not beaten, except by an occasional drunk husband.
> 
> The members of the committee considered all these facts and the possible consequences of various decisions. They realized that if they affirmed Pastor Trombo, many people, including the missionaries and coastal people, would not understand. It would seem to them that the committee was condoning the practice of wife beating. Moreover, it would cause friction between the church leaders and the missionaries.
> 
> On the other hand, if the committee decided to discipline Pastor Trombo, it would cause problems with the older highlanders in the congregation and detract from his ministry. The committee’s decision would affect the future of the church, Pastor Trombo’s ministry, and his relationships in his family. No matter what they did, it seemed as if someone in the church would not understand.
> 
> Pastor Solomon Begari looked at the other committee members and said, “As the disciplinary committee of the Zion churches, we must make a final decision in this case. We have talked to Pastor Trombo, to the missionaries, and to our other pastors, and no agreement seems possible. And we cannot put off the decision without seriously hurting the church and the people involved. What should we do?”
> 
> _Moreau, A. Scott; Corwin, Gary R.; McGee, Gary B. (2004-01-01). Introducing World Missions: A Biblical, Historical, and Practical Survey (Encountering Mission) (Kindle Locations 4497-4511). Baker Book Group - A. Kindle Edition. _


----------



## smhbbag

I'd say he needs to be removed from his office, but not as a matter of discipline on him. It's a matter of an elder having a wife who is so clearly untrustworthy, possibly malicious, etc. She brings disrespect not just upon him, but upon the church. She is a danger not only to her family, but to the church as well.

One can be removed from office without being in sin. If he is not a man with a great temper, did not lose control of his faculties, etc. then I have no Biblical grounds on which to say he was sinning. But, given the situation, he should not be an elder, because his wife is so unstable and problematic.


----------



## Pergamum

That Hiebert book is the absolute greatest to give to new missionary candidates because the scenarios are REAL and often happen in Third World contexts. The scenario above seems to be describing my village!!!

In Melanesia, virtually every woman gets beat sometimes in her life, even by husbands in the church. If he draws blood, he must pay and is forced to give gifts to the family that has given her in marriage. Most fights in my village are over husbands beating their wife/wives. I am waiting for a visa to return, but I have heard that a man in the church just beat his wife to death in the middle of the village because he discovered she was committing adultery. 

What solution did YOU come up with?


----------



## OPC'n

I'm sorry, but if you're so ignorant as to leave your child alone to go shopping, then you're mentally delayed. And if you're mentally delayed then you need someone telling you what to do. If you don't listen to what they tell you to do and keep performing idiotic acts, then you need physical discipline. That child's life has worth and the mother is in need of strong instruction. No, he shouldn't be disciplined and the people at the church need to be told why he isn't being disciplined. People discipline their children all the time for wrong doing.....why can't a husband discipline his wife? Most normal wives don't leave their children alone but if they make that misjudgment then they listen to the counsel of their husbands..... irresponsible wives do not listen to their husbands and the next step is physical discipline.


----------



## earl40

Pergamum said:


> That Hiebert book is the absolute greatest to give to new missionary candidates because the scenarios are REAL and often happen in Third World contexts. The scenario above seems to be describing my village!!!
> 
> In Melanesia, virtually every woman gets beat sometimes in her life, even by husbands in the church. If he draws blood, he must pay and is forced to give gifts to the family that has given her in marriage. Most fights in my village are over husbands beating their wife/wives. I am waiting for a visa to return, but I have heard that a man in the church just beat his wife to death in the middle of the village because he discovered she was committing adultery.
> 
> What solution did YOU come up with?



Maybe work on having a local magistrate put in place?


----------



## Miss Marple

"why can't a husband discipline his wife? "

because Scripture does not sanction it

Physical discipline is reserved for slaves and children, biblically.

I'll add the needful caveat that biblical slavery is not the slavery indulged in by the Confederate States; not defending it.


----------



## Pergamum

earl40 said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> That Hiebert book is the absolute greatest to give to new missionary candidates because the scenarios are REAL and often happen in Third World contexts. The scenario above seems to be describing my village!!!
> 
> In Melanesia, virtually every woman gets beat sometimes in her life, even by husbands in the church. If he draws blood, he must pay and is forced to give gifts to the family that has given her in marriage. Most fights in my village are over husbands beating their wife/wives. I am waiting for a visa to return, but I have heard that a man in the church just beat his wife to death in the middle of the village because he discovered she was committing adultery.
> 
> What solution did YOU come up with?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe work on having a local magistrate put in place?
Click to expand...


In some Third World regions, calling for governmental intervention is like calling in a hyena to take care of a rat problem.


----------



## ZackF

Miss Marple said:


> "why can't a husband discipline his wife? "
> 
> because Scripture does not sanction it
> 
> Physical discipline is reserved for slaves and children, biblically.
> 
> I'll add the needful caveat that biblical slavery is not the slavery indulged in by the Confederate States; not defending it.



There is no sanctioning for physical discipline of a wife though I nearly struck someone else wife in a Target about 20 years ago for abusing her child. She was pushing her crying toddler's head straight back by his mouth with both hands. His neck looked 90 degrees bent. I literally tightened my fist and glared at her. I was 6'2" about 220 and muscular back then. I threatened if she did that again I'd knock her jaw off. She whimpered, as such wretches often do when challenged, and said she'd stop. The sad part was that I was afraid I'd be caught on camera and left the store immediately instead of following through. Other than scrapping with my step-sister a few times, that was the only time I was close to hitting a woman. Other than in cases of self-defense it shouldn't' be done.


----------



## Parakaleo

Miss Marple said:


> because Scripture does not sanction it



This may well be the belief of a great majority of Christians. It is beside the point in the case study. The council has to decide if the man has sinned. They have to issue a ruling that does not unrighteously bind the consciences of believers where the Word of God does not bind them.


----------



## Parakaleo

On 1 Tim. 3, when a man physically corrects his children, he is violent? If he has to use force to subdue a dangerous person, is he a brawler? By your measure, no police officer could be an elder in the church.

On Eph. 5, in quoting this you have restated the question I posed above. Does this Word from the Lord bind the conscience of all believing husbands against physically correcting their wives? Under any circumstance? The Lord nourishes the Church as His own Body, yet He corrects. His rod comforts us.

Look, I think this is one of the most difficult questions of Christian living to address for a number of reasons. I think we have become so shocked at the thought of a man correcting his wife _in any way at all_ that physical correction seems off the charts.


----------



## Parakaleo

You know, maybe the best passage to address this is 1 Peter 3:7, "_Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered._"

This, to me, makes the strongest case against physical correction of a wife. Is it strong enough to call what Pastor Trombo (from the Case Study) did sinful? Physical correction of a wife (along with slavery) is something most Christians really, really wish was soundly condemned in the Scriptures.

From where does that desire arise? That is the crux.


----------



## Pergamum

> She had left their daughter asleep on the floor, expecting to be gone only a short while. Pastor Trombo had scolded his wife several times before this for leaving the child when she was asleep, but Paeyam had taken to ignoring his rebukes and sometimes publicly embarrassed him out of spite.
> 
> Immediately after her beating, Paeyam went across the street to the home of Carl and Lynne Hansen, the missionaries in the area.



The wife also seems to have serious problems and these also need to be addressed. 

It'd be a shame if a western family got suckered into incautiously taking sides with such a negligent woman without any reservations or caveats that she was also wrong.


----------



## Miss Marple

I agree that she is in need of correction; guilty of child neglect, obviously. I just don't see a sanction for physical discipline of a wife (self defense or defense of another, yes, that is not in question here).

I don't think we need to see a positive prohibition of wife beating in Scripture "Thou shalt not strike thy wife" to know it is forbidden. It is understood that it is a sin to strike anyone unless it is specifically ordered or allowed.

Thus we know I can not strike my neighbor, my boss can not strike me, my elders can not strike my Grandma, the clerk can not strike his customer, you know, we don't wonder whether this would be ok or not. It's not like Scripture specifically by name forbids each instance. 

The exception clearly being for self defense or defense of another.


----------



## ZackF

Pergamum said:


> She had left their daughter asleep on the floor, expecting to be gone only a short while. Pastor Trombo had scolded his wife several times before this for leaving the child when she was asleep, but Paeyam had taken to ignoring his rebukes and sometimes publicly embarrassed him out of spite.
> 
> Immediately after her beating, Paeyam went across the street to the home of Carl and Lynne Hansen, the missionaries in the area.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wife also seems to have serious problems and these also need to be addressed.
> 
> It'd be a shame if a western family got suckered into incautiously taking sides with such a negligent woman without any reservations or caveats that she was also wrong.
Click to expand...


Exactly. With such heavy sin in both parties, taking a side would be irresponsible. Their marriage sucks. I'm surprised it took a blow up like this to see that. I would think this ends his pastorate. Prayers for both of them to be in counseling and sitting under the word preached. She may need to move out indefinitely.


----------



## ZackF

Miss Marple said:


> I agree that she is in need of correction; guilty of child neglect, obviously. I just don't see a sanction for physical discipline of a wife (self defense or defense of another, yes, that is not in question here).
> 
> I don't think we need to see a positive prohibition of wife beating in Scripture "Thou shalt not strike thy wife" to know it is forbidden. It is understood that it is a sin to strike anyone unless it is specifically ordered or allowed.
> 
> Thus we know I can not strike my neighbor, my boss can not strike me, my elders can not strike my Grandma, the clerk can not strike his customer, you know, we don't wonder whether this would be ok or not. It's not like Scripture specifically by name forbids each instance.
> 
> The exception clearly being for self defense or defense of another.



Right. I'm not aware of the regulative principle of wife beating.


----------



## OPC'n

What kind of correction should they implement on this woman since everyone agrees she's in need of it? Telling her to not leave the child alone certainly isn't working. Maybe a timeout will work or the reward system. Gosh, I certainly wouldn't want to hurt the woman's feelings so our ideas can't be too harsh. But before we deal with her, we need to immediately take action to take away the husband's livelihood.... that should be our first course of action. Him physically correcting his wife after finding their daughter playing with rat poison is a MUCH greater sin than the woman nearly killing her own child indirectly. Palms face.....


----------



## Edward

Nothing from the Puritians? 

Blackstone (looking back from the 1760s) indicates that (contra some of the distinctions above) wives traditionally could be chastised in the same manner as servants or children. See Book 1, Chapter 15. He goes on to say that "But, with us, in the politer reign of Charles the second, this power of correction began to be doubted ". 

One should be careful in accepting current moral, legal, and cultural standards as historically or universally valid.


----------



## Elizabeth

What kind of correction? How about removal of the child from the mother's care? OR another woman overseeing the mother's care while father is working? 

As far as the pastor goes, well, which is worse: to detract from his ministry, or to sanction him acting in a way that is wicked and evil(wife beating). Which shows the kind and gracious love of Jesus? 

Wow...astounding to see such a hard line taken here re:wife 'discipline'. And of a sort that is worse than muslim wife-beating...at least they are told not to 'leave a mark'.


----------



## Pergamum

OPC'n said:


> What kind of correction should they implement on this woman since everyone agrees she's in need of it? Telling her to not leave the child alone certainly isn't working. Maybe a timeout will work or the reward system. Gosh, I certainly wouldn't want to hurt the woman's feelings so our ideas can't be too harsh. But before we deal with her, we need to immediately take action to take away the husband's livelihood.... that should be our first course of action. Him physically correcting his wife after finding their daughter playing with rat poison is a MUCH greater sin than the woman nearly killing her own child indirectly. Palms face.....



I also do not think that physical correction necessarily equals beating. Whether we agree that husbands may "physically discipline" their wives or not; such physical discipline, if administered as we do our children, is not abuse. After all, even in our age, most of society agrees that spanking a child is not child abuse. 

The civil state used to flog petty criminals as punishment or put them in the stocks. If a culture decides that the husband may determine when to spank his own wife...well, that is certainly outside Western norms. And while we have proverbs regarding not sparing the rod for our children, we have no such proverbs for wives. Though, it would seem logically superior for a husband to spank his wife rather than third parties without their best interests at heart to indict and punish her, such as a flogging by the civil state would require. Although, there might be merit in a disinterested Third Party administering such judgment (such as the church, or even the civil state since child endangerment is often illegal in many lands).

I might agree with you that her sin of child neglect might be greater than his sin of giving her an intentional lesson. In the very least, her negligence makes his actions understandable and allows us to mitigate any punishment towards him.


----------



## Pergamum

Some quotes concerning the history behind the legality of wife-beating/wife discipline:



> Puritans became the first Western society to expressly outlaw wife beating. “Every married woman,” stated the Massachusetts Body of Laws and Liberties in 1641, “shall be free from bodily correction or stripes [lashings] by her husband unless it be upon his own defense upon her assault.”






> Three decades later—and still a century before the Declaration of Independence—the pilgrims of Plymouth Plantation went even further. A husband who beat his wife could be prosecuted and subjected to a fine—or even a public whipping, they decreed.



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/07/23/americas_long_slow_about-face_on_domestic_violence__123425.html


The original law Number 80 is here: “Everie marryed woeman shall be free from bodilie correction or stripes by her husband, unlesse it be in his owne defence upon her assalt. If there be any just cause of correction complaint shall be made to Authoritie assembled in some Court, from which onely she shall receive it.”

http://archive.org/stream/coloniallawsofma00mass#page/50/mode/2up




> The Catholic Church's endorsement of "The Rules of Marriage" in the 15th
> century exhorted the husband to stand as judge of his wife. He was to beat her with a
> stick upon her commission of an offense. According to the "Rules," beating showed a
> concern for the wife's soul.
> 
> The common law in England gave a man the right to beat his
> wife in the interest of maintaining family discipline. The phrase "rule of thumb" referred
> Domestic Abuse to the English common law, which allowed a husband to beat his wife as long as he used
> a stick that was no bigger than his thumb. (Violence Against Women 1994). Women
> were not the only ones subject to abuse. In 18th Century France, if it became public that
> his wife had beaten a man, he was forced to wear an outlandish costume and ride
> backwards around the village on a donkey. (www.vix.com/men/battery/commentary).
> In early America, English law greatly affected the decisions of the colonial courts.
> 
> The Puritans openly banned family violence. The laws, however, lacked strict
> enforcement. It was not until the 1870's that the first states banned a man's right to beat
> his family. The laws were moderately enforced until the feminist movement of the
> 1960's started bringing the problems of domestic abuse to the attention of the media. By
> the 1980's most states had adopted legislation regarding domestic violence. (Violence
> Against Women 1994).


http://www.cji.edu/site/assets/files/1921/domestic_abuse_report.pdf


----------



## Miss Marple

I agree that the sin of neglecting her child to that degree is far greater than a beating of some kind that someone might dole out to her. But that is not what I am addressing. I am questioning whether spanking, beating, hitting, striking is a biblical punishment. Whether it has been or is accepted, culturally or historically, is not so much my concern.


----------



## Miss Marple

" How about removal of the child from the mother's care? OR another woman overseeing the mother's care while father is working? "

Exactly, Elisabeth, if this was a deliberate action on her part, she clearly should not be in charge of children. I would not say this if she stupidly or mistakenly neglected her child (God forgive me, I have done so, but with no intent).


----------



## OPC'n

Ok, the wife is taken out of the home. Now who cares for the child? Where does the husband get that extra help? Or the wife is left in the home and an extra woman who has nothing better to do comes in to care for both the child and the wife. Where are you going to get such a woman who doesn't either have her own household to care for (even older woman whose children have flown the coop have homes to care for) or a job to go to? These are great ideas but they just aren't practical. 

You wanted Scriptural backing for a husband to be allowed to physically correct his wife? You're not going to find one that says, "Husbands may physically correct their wives.". What you do have are a few commands....

"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in *everything* to their husbands." AND "25 *Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church* and gave himself up for her, 26 *that he might sanctify her*, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.

Christ does physically discipline his church from time to time because of their sins because he loves us. The most loving thing that husband did for his wife was to physically discipline her. Had the church backed him on this he most likely would have saved the child's life from future certain death thus sparing the woman from a broken heart and being sent to jail. Now what's happened is the church has intervened and is possibly going to fire him from being a their pastor, he'll have to go get a different job, the woman most likely will have not learned a thing because now in her mentally delayed thinking thinks the church backed her and she did nothing wrong. Now what lies in the child's future, what lies in the woman's future, what lies in the husband's future? We aren't talking about a normal wife/mother here.


----------



## johnny

I agree with Sarah, it is a strange situation, this woman seems to have no motherly instincts.
I know they are out there, but I've never met a mother who would treat a child like this.
Does it deserve a beating? In a culture where wives are beaten then I guess it does.

Whenever I think of examples of good husbands I think of Mr Warfield and his wife Annie.

http://bbwarfield.com/biography/ 

Here is a great example of devotion in extrodinary circumstances, and yet with all these limitations placed on him he was still able to leave a remarkable legacy of works behind while also teaching, (incredible really)


----------



## Miss Marple

Sarah, I mean no disrespect to you, but I think you are reading things into the text that are simply not there.

The presupposition is that we can not kill anyone. The law provides for exceptions to that general rule: capital punishment lawfully administer, self defense, the defense of others, even pure accidents are allowed.

The presupposition is that we can not hurt anyone. The law provides for exceptions to that general rule: lawful spanking of kids, lawful slaves (indentured, not the man stealing kind), self defense, defense of others, pure accidents.

The presupposition is that we can't impede anyone else's liberty. The law provides for the exceptions to that general rule: cities of refuge for manslayers, temporary detention before a trial.

The presupposition is that we can't take anyone else's property. The law provides for the exception to that rule: we are to restore 2, 3, 4 fold when we steal, we are to pay taxes, we are to pay lawful debts. . .

the presupposition then is that a man can not strike anyone. His wife, his neighbor, his boss, a stranger, the bus driver, his coworker. . . it makes no difference. The exceptions have been made plain. They do not include wives. No where in Scripture are we told it is ok to strike your wife for disciplinary purposes.

"Now, who cares for the child?" I don't know. The dad? An aunt? a Grandma? Whoever is best when you have such a clearly dangerous "mother." Beating her will not provide good care for the child.


----------



## Miss Marple

Having had all this discussion, I am curious to know what did the Missions Board expect you to respond? What was the right answer in their view?


----------



## OPC'n

No worries, Marple, you have the right to think that your way of thinking is accurate. We're all learning all the time.


----------



## Pergamum

There is no "right answer" given by the book - this is a classic textbook used in missions prep courses that gives about 50 or 60 of these hard cases. It is designed to stimulate class discussion and deeper thought. 

It really is a brilliant book and I have used it myself with interns or visitors. Some of the scenarios are VERY uncanny, as they have happened to me or I have seen them played out almost sentence by sentence on the field. The authors really show their experience of field conditions. The book also excellently demonstrates that many missionary scenarios are not covered in US seminaries and it also shows that sometimes there is no perfect answer. Somewhere I have the whole book as a PDF and can share it with anyone. 

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Studies-Missions-Frances-Hiebert/dp/0801043085/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457315085&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=hiebetrt+case+studies+in+missions


----------

