Dealing with Abusive Behavior in a Past Relationship

Abusive behavior in a past relationship can have lasting effects on the individuals involved. In Deuteronomy 22:13, a man is described as marrying a woman, having relations with her, and then coming to hate her ^[2]. This passage sets the stage for understanding the complexities of relationships that have turned sour.

The Jewish tradition, as represented by Maimonides in the Mishneh Torah, provides insight into the handling of divorce and the consequences of past actions. For instance, a person who divorces their spouse should not live in the same courtyard as them to avoid any potential for promiscuity or further conflict ^[7]. Moreover, Maimonides discusses the importance of a husband divorcing a wife who has engaged in adulterous relations, emphasizing that he is punished by lashes for continuing marital relations with her ^[3].

The Christian tradition also addresses the issue of dealing with past relationships, particularly those marred by abusive or sinful behavior. The Apostle Paul's teachings in Ephesians 4:22 instruct believers to "put away, in relation to your earlier way of life, the old man, which has become evil by love of deceit" ^[1]. This verse underscores the need to move away from past behaviors and attitudes that are harmful.

In the context of divorce and remarriage, the Patristic tradition offers nuanced views. Augustine, for example, discusses the complexities of putting away a wife due to fornication, questioning whether the same standard should apply to the husband ^[6]. Tertullian, on the other hand, emphasizes the permanence of marriage and the implications of divorce, suggesting that a divorced woman is, in a sense, still bound to her former husband ^[10].

The Presbyterian tradition, as seen in the commentary on 1 Timothy by Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, advises younger widows to remarry to avoid temptation and idleness, highlighting the importance of considering the well-being and circumstances of individuals in such situations ^[8].

Nonconformist or Puritan perspectives, represented by Matthew Henry's commentaries, offer practical advice on dealing with past conflicts and relationships. Henry notes that returning to a spouse after a period of separation or conflict, as seen in the story of Samson, requires a genuine attempt at reconciliation ^[9]. He also cautions against abusing or speaking ill of others' servants, emphasizing the importance of treating all individuals with kindness and respect ^[11].

The Catholic tradition, as articulated by Aquinas, touches on the concept of satisfaction for past offenses, suggesting that suffering inflicted by God can become satisfactory if it is accepted by the individual as a form of penance ^[4].

In dealing with abusive behavior in a past relationship, various traditions emphasize the importance of moving forward, whether through divorce, repentance, or reconciliation. Maimonides teaches that individuals who have repented should be humble and modest, rejoicing in the merit that comes from their past sufferings and the shame they endure for their previous deeds ^[5].

Sources

Ephesians “Ephesians 4:22 (BBE) — That you are to put away, in relation to your earlier way of life, the old man, which has become evil by love of deceit;”
Deuteronomy “Deuteronomy 22:13 (BSB) — Suppose a man marries a woman, has relations with her, and comes to hate her,”
Mishneh Torah (Maimonides) (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Mishneh Torah (Maimonides), Mishneh Torah%2C Divorce 11:14: Included in this prohibition is that every woman who engaged in adulterous relations becomes forbidden to her husband. He is punished by lashes [for engaging in marital relations with her], 31 Note the Kessef Mishneh , which cites an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's statements here and those in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 1:22 and Hilchot Sanhedrin , Chapter 19, from which it would appear that a man is not punished by lashes for engaging in relations with his wife in such a situation. as [implied by the inclusion of the phrase] "”
theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Supplement (Supplementum), Of the Means of Making Satisfaction, Art. 2: Article: Whether the scourges of the present life are satisfactory? I answer that, Compensation for a past offense can be enforced either by the offender or by another. When it is enforced by another, such compensation is of a vindictive rather than of a satisfactory nature, whereas when it is made by the offender, it is also satisfactory. Consequently, if the scourges, which are inflicted by God on account of sin, become in some way the act of the sufferer they acquire a satisfactory character. ”
Mishneh Torah (Maimonides) (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Mishneh Torah (Maimonides), Mishneh Torah%2C Repentance 7:8: The manner of Baalei Teshuvah is to be very humble and modest. If fools shame them because of their previous deeds, saying to them: "Yesterday, you would commit such and such [sins]. Yesterday, you would commit these and these [transgressions]," they will pay no attention to them. On the contrary, they will hear [this abuse] and rejoice, knowing that it is a merit for them. Whenever they are embarrassed for the deeds they committed and shamed because of them, their merit increases and their level is raised. It is a utter sin to tell ”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 6: Augustine — Homilies on the Gospels — CHAP. XVI.--43. Here there arises a second question, when the Lord allows a wife to be put away for the cause of fornication, in what latitude of meaning fornication is to be understood in this passag (part 5): his wife because of fornication, if he himself also is convicted of committing fornication. For that passage occurs to one: "For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things." [4] And for this reason, whosoever wishes to put away his wife because of fornication, ought first to be cle”
Mishneh Torah (Maimonides) (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Mishneh Torah (Maimonides), Mishneh Torah%2C Forbidden Intercourse 21:27: Similarly, a person who divorced his wife after they were married 69 If, however, the woman was merely consecrated, the couple will not have shared familiarity and there is less grounds for suspicion, as mentioned at the conclusion of the halachah. should not live in the same courtyard as she, lest this lead to promiscuity. 70 In the Talmudic era, the custom was to build blocks of homes that opened up to a communal courtyard. Several of these courtyards would open up to a single lane. If a man and his divorcee would dwel”
1 Timothy (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Timothy 5:14: younger women--rather, as ellipsis ought to be supplied, "the younger widows," namely younger widows in general, as distinguished from the older widows taken on the roll of presbyteresses (Ti1 5:9). The "therefore" means seeing that young widows are exposed to such temptations, "I will," or "desire," &c. (Ti1 5:11-13). The precept here that they should marry again is not inconsistent with Co1 7:40; for the circumstances of the two cases were distinct (compare Co1 7:26). Here remarriage is recommended as an antidote to sexual passion, idleness, and t”
Judges (Nonconformist/Puritan) “Matthew Henry on Judges 15:1: Here is, I. Samson's return to his wife, whom he had left in displeasure; not hearing perhaps that she was given to another, when time had a little cooled his resentments, he came back to her, visited her with a kid, Jdg 15:1. The value of the present was inconsiderable, but it was intended as a token of reconciliation, and perhaps was then so used, when those that had been at variance were brought together again; he sent this, that he might sup with her in her apartments, and she with him, on his provision, and so they might be friends again. It was generously do”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. X.--ST. PAUL'S TEACHING ON THE SUBJECT. (part 2): true sense divorced him, so far as in her lies; and indeed the more iniquitously--inasmuch as (she did it) as far as was in her power--because she had no power (to do it); and with the more indignity, inasmuch as it is with more indignity if (her reason for doing it is) because he did not deserve it. Or else shall we, pray, cease to be after death, according to (the teaching of) some Epicurus, and not according to (that of) Christ? But if we believe the resurrection of the dead”
Proverbs (Nonconformist/Puritan) “Matthew Henry on Proverbs 30:10: Here is, I. A caution not to abuse other people's servants any more than our own, nor to make mischief between them and their masters, for it is an ill office, invidious, and what will make a man odious, Pro 30:10. Consider, 1. It is an injury to the servant, whose poor condition makes him an object of pity, and therefore it is barbarous to add affliction to him that is afflicted: Hurt not a servant with thy tongue (so the margin reads it); for it argues a sordid disposition to smite any body secretly with the scourge of the tongue, especially a servant, who is”

Ask Your Own Question