Spiritual Self-Defense - Know What God Requires - Commentary One

I graduated from a small Catholic college that required all undergraduate students to take a single "theology" class during their attendance at the college.  I placed theology in quotes because the college was about respecting students' beliefs so there were a wide range of options from traditional theology classes to philosophy classes to comparative religion classes and even work-study classes that did volunteering in communities. 

I appreciated the plethora of options, but I was a Biology major with a Chemistry minor who was earning a Secondary Education teaching certificate which is essentially a second major while working part-time off-campus.   In other words, I wanted the simplest course I could take so I signed up for "Intro to Christian Spirituality"  and figured 12 years of Catholic schooling would carry me through the course without too much extra work.  I was right - but I did manage to learn some new things along the way. 

One day, the professor introduced the topic of theodicy which is a fancy term for theologians who attempt to explain why God allows evil to happen - or a related topic of why God allows bad things to happen to good people.  Bluntly, this is a loaded topic for anyone who has lost a family member so I was pretty checked out - but I'll never forget the professor's words of warning at the start.

He started by saying that theodicy is a great topic for academic arguments between theologians - but never, ever bring up any of those arguments in the real world when doing pastoral care...or just being a human. 

I wish the Botkin Sisters applied that piece of wisdom to the blog post I'm reviewing tonight. 

I am not a theologian - and no amount of training could convert me into one; my brain doesn't work like that.  With that caveat, I think that Anna Sofia and/or Elizabeth Botkin could get away with an academic, deeply researched treatise about ideal responses to sexual aggression in the Bible.  They'd need to bone up on how to support ideas from the Bible and need to show some basic understanding of the literary forms in the Bible, but the real benefit of academic research is that nearly any topic can be delved into without doing harm to other people.  Read the Bible, play "Concordance Chance", learn some ancient Hebrew, reference a few commentaries, figure out which formatting the journal wants and poof!  The Botkin Sisters can act out their fascination with the actions of women facing sexual aggression in the Bible without doing harm to any of their readers.

The second paragraph in this post shows a major flaw in their argument that the Bible has a neatly defined plan of response for women facing attackers:

As we explained in Part 1, 100% of the guilt of the abuser’s crime rests on the abuser, no matter what the victim does or doesn’t do. There is nothing a victim can do to “deserve” abuse, and if she fails to stop a crime being committed against her, it’s never “her fault.” However, while God promises that the sin of our abusers will not go unpunished (Num. 32:23, Isa. 13:11, Prov. 11:21), He has also given us specific instructions for becoming a type of woman and developing a type of strength that can make us devastating to this kind of man. But that first requires knowing how to draw the lines.

Notice that the Bible states unambiguously multiple times that sins will be punished.  The verses in Numbers, Isaiah and Proverbs - along with lots of other ones - make it clear that people may get away with sin on Earth, but God will punish sin eventually.   That's super clear - so where are the clear, clear verses that sum up God's "specific instructions" to women? 

Interesting fact: those verses don't exist.  The Bible has plenty of cases of sexual harassment and assault in it - and there's no single way that people responded.

I'm glad the Botkin Sisters have moved away from direct victim-blaming (yay!).  Notice, though, that there is still an indirect condemnation of women who don't follow the allegedly Biblical way of resisting sexual harassment and assault.  A woman versed in the Botkin Method is "devastating" to abusers.  First, what the hell does that mean?  I've worked hard over the years to be able to be intimidating as hell when I need to be - but I've never managed to devastate someone due to inappropriate behavior.  Second, women who haven't followed the Botkin Method have managed to devastate  some pretty big names in CP/QF land.  Bill Gothard and Doug Phillips both managed to lose their entire ministry thanks to women who discarded all of the Botkin Method steps - and, man, those women managed to prevent them from hurting others while also taking all of the trappings of power and fame from them.  Lastly, what does it mean for women who come away from a sexual abuse situation and feel devastated themselves?  The world has some seriously messed up people who hurt others while being strangely resistant to punishment themselves. 

Branding a family-level defense strategy as Godly is dodgy enough; don't worsen the insult by promising that the attacker will feel bad - or lose everything they value - if women follow three easy steps....

The next paragraph shows how unprepared CP/QF young women are to think.  (I was going to say "think independently" - but a few of these statements make me wonder if the girls are supposed to get rid of their brains at puberty,)

After all, are we sure what this man did was wrong? What if he’s a mature Christian who has studied his Bible and is assuring us that this is OK? What if he was in a position of authority over us – doesn’t God say we’re supposed to submit to authority? And besides, what are we going to do? Slap him? Call the police? Would telling someone else be gossip? If this gets out, how will it reflect on the church? Is that really what Jesus would do?

I discussed this idea in the last post - but people can stop actions for reasons other than morality.  My given name is Melinda.  A common nickname for Melinda is Mindy - and I shut anyone down who calls me Mindy.   There's nothing immoral about a Melinda being called Mindy - and many, many other Melindas like being called Mindy.  But this Melinda abhors being called Mindy and I have every right to expect that people call me Melinda or Mel. 

Here's another example: I am not a hugger.  I hug close family members.  I hug some friends if I haven't seen them in a long time.  I will hug people who are struggling with grief if they want a hug.  Rarely, someone who is not in one of those three categories hugs me before I have a chance to stiff-arm them.   There's nothing morally wrong with hugging someone and there's nothing wrong with me stating my categorical preference to not be hugged by people I don't want to be hugged by.

A far more important question is "Am I comfortable with what happened between me and so-and-so?"   I get it; CP/QF girls have been socialized to ignore every thought, feeling, drive, talent, ambition, whim, wish or desire that starts within them if it doesn't conform to what their father or husband wants.  I get that - but gut feelings are a quick and surprisingly accurate way to determine when someone is behaving in a potentially problematic way.

As for the rest - yikes.

Mature Christian Authorities can lie.  See Bill Gothard and Doug Phillips for details on how they did that.

The Bible is full of admonitions to obey authorities.  It's equally full of  people who defied authorities and lived in God's Blessings.  See Rebecca, Jacob/Israel, Leah, and most of Jacob's sons for details.  Want New Testament examples?  What percentage of the time does Jesus tell the Apostles to stop arguing about personal ranking and get back to work?  How many times does Paul and a companion return separately from missions?   So...I think it's a wash at best......

I don't recommend slapping as a form of defense..  It makes a lot of noise, but will anger an assailant without incapacitating them.  Think of movements that produce a lot of force like punching, stomping, head-butting or elbowing or actions that cause a lot of pain and damage to the face like scratching, eye-gouging or biting.

Call the police if someone is putting your health (including mental) or life at risk.  If you are not sure, you can always call the non-emergency line and discuss with an officer if the interaction is worth filing a police report.  (For people who are worried about "overreacting" - women are still working on getting fair treatment for sexual crimes so you don't need to worry about accidentally ruining someone's life.  The system is still tipped greatly in favor of protecting attackers over accusers - so if an officer tells you that you can make a report, do it.  That means something bad happened to you.)

Jesus.  Gossipping is the exchange of negative information about another person for the sole purpose of amusing other people.   Neither discussing an event that happened that hurt/scared/or confused you nor reporting a crime is gossip.

I'm Catholic - so let me tell you that crimes will out.  Whatever crime is potentially being covered up to "not reflect badly on the Church" will come out eventually - plus the added scandal and crime of covering a crime up.   Handling a crime that occurs within a church community by reporting the crime to the police and assisting in the investigation is much better PR than ignoring victims, moving perpetrators to different churches and creating new victims....

What would Jesus do?  Well, the Jesus in the Gospel of John is essentially the Jesus of the Synoptic Gospels written for John Wayne so I guess he'd get a posse together and ride the offender out of town.    Or shoot them.  Or tip their tables over. 

My last quote for this post makes me wonder about the Botkin Sisters sense of irony or lack thereof:

If our knowledge of the Scriptures primarily consists of some vague or misapplied concepts about forgiving, overlooking offenses, covering sin, obeying authorities, not gossiping, and having a gentle and quiet spirit, we are not ready to fight this battle.

I am drawing a complete and total blank on Scripture verses that recommend covering sin.  Oh, don't get me wrong; people try to cover sin up all_the_time especially in the refreshingly human Old Testament - but it generally ends badly.

As for the rest, well, most of humanity understands the difference between the normal rubs and wrongs of people living together and egregious offenses that threaten health and safety.

Let's look at the differences:

Forgiveness -

• Good idea: your sister "borrows" your new shirt without asking for the third time, returns it unharmed, but is genuinely contrite when she realizes you were planning on wearing it and couldn't.
• Bad idea: Bryan in the first post who responded to your distress at a previous sexual activity by telling you that you can't complain because of the way you dressed.  (Remember, run away from the Bryans of the world.)

Overlooking offenses -

• Good idea: You work with Jack, an attractive single man.  Jack says that he finds you very attractive and asks you out on a date.  You decline because you want to follow the courtship motto.  Jack is disappointed, but goes back to your previous working relationship.
• Bad idea: Same set up, but Jack asks you out the next day.  And the next.  And twice the day after that.  You start dreading coming to work because avoiding Jack is exhausting.

Obeying authorities

• Good idea: Your boss tells you that you need to put together 30 copies of the 500 page year-end report for the company - and you hate photocopying.
• Bad idea:  Your boss tells you that you need to put together 30 copies of the 500 page year-end report for the company - and you hate photocopying - but she'll assign it to someone else if you go on a date with her.

Not gossiping

• Good idea: You recognize the new youth minister.  He went to prom with your best friend 5 years ago and threw up from nerves. 
• Bad idea: You recognize the new youth minister.  He took off from your last church in another state when there were some accusations about inappropriate behavior at a weekend camping trip.  

Meek and gentle spirit

• Good idea: you are goosed at work by a three-year old.  
• Bad idea: you are goosed at work by a coworker, boss or client.

Oddly enough, the title of the Botkin Sisters' second book applies here: It's NOT That Complicated!