Associated Baptist Press - 1/9/2009

Associated Baptist Press
January 9, 2009 · (09-4)

David Wilkinson, Executive Director
Robert Marus, Managing Editor/Washington Bureau Chief
Bob Allen, Senior Writer

In this issue
UPDATE & CORRECTION: Warren's church says violence no excuse for divorce (765 words)
Robert Handy, Baptist historian, seminary professor, dies (437 words)
Opinion: Bush response to shoe-thrower a shameless act (677 words)

---

UPDATE & CORRECTION: Warren's church says violence no excuse for divorce
By Bob Allen (765 words)

(Editor's note: This story updates, replaces and corrects one issued Jan. 8, which incorrectly attributed the domestic-violence comments to Warren rather than Holladay. ABP regrets the error.)

LAKE FOREST, Calif. (ABP) -- Comments on the Saddleback Church website that the Bible does not permit a woman to divorce a physically abusive spouse have triggered concerns among advocates for victims of domestic violence.

The pastor of the Southern Baptist megachurch is Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life. Warren has been in the news of late as the surprise pick to deliver the invocation at President-elect Barack Obama's Jan. 20 inauguration.

Audio clips on a "Bible Questions & Answers" section of Saddleback's website feature a speaker who says the Bible condones divorce for only two reasons: adultery and abandonment.

The speaker is not identified on the page, but a spokesperson for Warren said it is Tom Holladay, teaching pastor at the church in Lake Forest, Calif.

"I wish there were a third [reason for divorce] in Scripture, having been involved as a pastor with situations of abuse," Holladay said. "There is something in me that wishes there were a Bible verse that says, 'If they abuse you in this-and-such kind of way, then you have a right to leave them.'"

Holladay said Saddleback's counseling ministry advises separation and counseling instead of divorce in abusive marriages, because it's the only path toward healing. "There's an abusive cycle that's been set up," he said. "Separation combined with counseling has been proven to provide healing in people's lives."

Holladay said there's nothing in the Bible that says a spouse must tolerate abuse. "There's nowhere in the Bible that says it's an attitude of submission to let somebody abuse you," he said. "That is not submission. So we recommend very strongly separation."

He defined what he meant by physical abuse.

"When I say physical abuse, I mean literally somebody is beating you regularly," he said. "I don't mean they grab you once. I mean they've made a habit of beating you regularly. You need to separate in that situation, because that's the only thing that's going to solve that."

Obama's invitation to Warren has been criticized from the left because of his opposition to gay marriage and from the right by Warren's fellow religious conservatives, who fear his prayer will convey approval of Obama's left-leaning social policies.

But Saddleback's published views on domestic violence are what recently caught the attention of Because It Matters, a blog by a lifelong Baptist and abuse survivor who uses the pseudonym Danni Moss to give anonymity to her children, family and former in-laws.

The commentary "expresses a distinct lack of understanding about the nature, heart and spiritual roots of abuse," Moss said.

"I think he believes he is doing right and doesn't realize his ignorance or how much he is hurting people, so this is offered without personal judgment," she added. "But I also believe categorically that it is dangerous."

A women's-rights blog named The New Agenda called the views "alarming," especially in light of recent statistics showing a 42 percent rise in reports of domestic violence from 2005 to 2007.

Attempts to reach Warren for his take on the controversy Jan. 8 were unsuccessful. Kristin Cole, a spokeswoman for Warren who works at A. Larry Ross Communications, confirmed the voice on the website is Holladay's, but said she does not know when it was recorded.

Holladay also fielded a question about whether a Christian spouse should remain in a "miserable" marriage.

"God sees you as one, and the Bible says they become one, and so the answer, the Bible answer, is yes," Holladay said.

"I often say to people when they're facing this decision, really, you're choosing your pain in this moment, because it's going to be painful either way," he said. "If you stay in the marriage there is the opportunity for reconciliation and for the loss of pain, but there is going to be short-term pain on the way there. There's no way to not have pain."

Holladay said there is an "immediate feeling of freedom" after a divorce -- but in the long run "there is lifelong pain in divorce."

"Does God expect me just to live with this pain?" he asked. "No, I think he expects us to ask him for wisdom to do the things that would cause the pain to begin to be solved. He says we're one and as Christians, as believers, the Bible says a husband is to sacrifice for his wife and the wife is to respect her husband."

"So if that's not happening," he said, "I think you have not only the right but also the responsibility to keep pushing for that, to not just settle for the pain."

Bob Allen is senior writer for Associated Baptist Press.

---

Robert Handy, Baptist historian, seminary professor, dies
By Robert Marus (437 words)

NEW YORK (ABP) -- Robert Handy, who studied under legendary Christian scholars like Paul Tillich before becoming a prominent Baptist historian in his own right, died at a retirement community in West Caldwell, N.J., Jan. 8. He was 90.

Handy was a professor of church history at Union Theological Seminary -- the ecumenical Protestant graduate school in New York -- from 1950 until 1986. During that time he taught generations of pastors, missionaries, chaplains and other ministers and published works on church history and American religion that scholars still consider standards in the field.

In a tribute to Handy's scholarship published after he retired, Altered Landscapes: Christianity in America 1935-1985, former students, colleagues and friends lauded the historian's career.

"Every one of them... knows his or her indebtedness to the lifelong scholarly career of Robert Handy," the book's editors wrote, praising "his strict adherence to the technical canons of historical inquiry, his sensitivity to the practical needs of Christian people, his signal labors on behalf of a sophisticated understanding of American church history, and his appreciation for the conceptual ties of history with many other disciplines."

He was particularly known for his work on church-state relations in the United States, and attempts by some U.S. Christians in the 19th century to impose their vision of a "Christian" America.

Handy was born Jan. 30, 1918, in Rockville, Conn. He graduated from Brown University in 1940 with a bachelor's degree in European history and earned a divinity degree from Colgate-Rochester Divinity School in 1943. He was ordained a Baptist minister that year.

While serving as pastor of an Illinois congregation, he began taking history classes at the University of Chicago Divinity School as a way of combining his interests in local-church ministry and history. After a stint as an Army chaplain, he returned to Chicago, where he earned his doctorate in 1949.

Union Seminary appointed him to a three-year contract the next year. He taught classes while assisting Tillich and another renowned Christian scholar, John McNeill, in research for their foundational works on church history.

"Little did I know that the three years would stretch into twelve times that number to the time of retirement," he later wrote.

Handy also authored the official history of Union Seminary in 1987 as part of the school's sesquicentennial celebration.

"We know that as a historian he loves the truth of history," the editors of the tribute to Handy's career wrote. "He loves as well the people who make history. Indeed, among those scholars whom we know, we know of none who better joins the love of truth to the truth of love."

Robert Marus is managing editor and Washington bureau chief for Associated Baptist Press.

---

Opinion: Bush response to shoe-thrower a shameless act
By Miguel De La Torre (677 words)

(ABP) -- By now we have all seen the endless media loops of the Iraqi journalist named Muntadhir al-Zaidi throwing his size 10 shoes at President Bush on Dec. 14. Al-Zaidi called Bush a "dog" and hurled his shoes at the president, who was holding a news conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

Anyone vaguely familiar with Arab culture knows that showing the sole of your shoe to someone is the rudest offense that can be committed, and calling someone a "dog" is probably among the worst insults that can be given.

Since the incident, Al-Zaidi is being held by officials, charged with assault against a foreign head of state, which if convicted, could carry a 15-year prison term.

Many Americans seeing the video were outraged at the display of this shameless act. But what exactly is shameless? Was it the disrespect shown Bush as the representative of the American people, or the nation he symbolizes? Or is it that Muntadhir has such poor aim?

No -- I believe that what was truly shameful occurred minutes after the shoe toss. As we saw in the video, Al-Zaidi was wrestled to the ground by Iraqi security forces, repeatedly kicked, and rushed out of the room. Not surprisingly, he suffered injuries while being taken into custody.

While the president joked about the shoe size, he -- and those in the room -- could hear al-Zaidi screaming outside as he was continuously beaten. While the President shrugged off the incident, he -- and those in the room -- could still see the trail of blood on the carpet where al-Zaidi had been dragged out by security agents.

It is shameless, and deeply disturbing, that the president of the United States said nothing about the screams he could hear or the blood he could see. Could he not have asked for restraint? Could he have not whispered in the ear of the prime minister to please stop the torture?

It is entirely appropriate that the shoe-thrower face the consequences of his act of civil disobedience. After all, that is the purpose of civil disobedience. But for him -- or anyone, regardless of the act committed -- to be beaten and tortured while in custody is inhumane, immoral and uncivilized.

The beatings apparently did not cease at the time of arrest. Allegations have been made that Muntadhir has also been tortured during his detention. According to his older brother, Dargham, he suffered a broken right arm, broken ribs, an eye injury and internal bleeding. The torture has been so severe that his brother reported Muntadhir was willing to sign a blank sheet of paper and let his tormentors fill in whatever charges they wanted him to confess.

While Iraqi authorities dismiss these charges, they have yet to prove them false by producing a healthy Muntadhir. In addition, his family reports receiving many threatening phone calls.

So why couldn't Bush say that Muntadhir should be treated humanely and with full due process? That Americans do not believe in torture and beating those held in custody? That as a nation we stand for human rights and human dignity?

Because the real shameless act of the day is that in the final analysis, the United States has lost its ethical voice.

After Abu Ghraib, secret CIA prisons, Guantanamo Bay imprisonment without due process, waterboarding and torture as acceptable policy, how can we speak to the Arab world (or anyone else in the world, for that matter) with any moral authority?

Eight years of Bush leadership has contributed to a world where the shameless beating of prisoners is normative.

President-elect Obama faces an important policy decision when he takes office. Does he close down the base at Guantanamo Bay and repudiate all forms of torture, or does he maintain the status quo?

How he decides this issue will either signify a new path toward proper world behavior or will maintain and continue the despicable torture policies of the Bush administration.

With anticipation, we wait to see how much "change we can believe in" will occur.

-- Miguel De La Torre is associate professor of social ethics at the Iliff School of Theology in Denver.