Pastoral Psychol

DOI 10.1007/s11089-017-0781-1

Evangelical Christian Pastors’ Lived Experience

of Counseling Victims/Survivors of Domestic Violence

Barbara L. Zust 1 & Jaclyn Housley 1 & Anna Klatke 1

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Abstract The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the lived experience of
evangelical Christian pastors’ counseling members of their congregations who were
victims/survivors of domestic violence. Evangelical Christians are the largest growing
religious affiliations in the United States. Evangelical Christian members may have
conservative views on marriage and gender roles that complicate leaving a violent
marriage. The role of pastoral counseling in situations of domestic violence is one of
the most unstudied aspects in the domestic violence literature. Following IRB approval,
seven evangelical Christian pastors from the upper Midwest agreed to participate in
individual interviews about their experiences with victims/survivors of partner violence.
The narrative data were analyzed using van Manen’s interpretative phenomenology
method of analysis. Findings indicated that none of the pastors felt adequately prepared
to counsel victims/survivors of domestic violence. When the couple had children,
pastoral counseling focused on keeping the children safe by calling child protective
services. The evangelical Christian pastors were challenged when victims/survivors
blamed themselves for the violence and chose to stay with a violent partner instead of
leaving. The pastors worked to help the victims/ survivors understand that the violence
was not their fault, and to empower the victims/survivors to remember how valuable they
were to God. Findings from this study lend support to the important role clergy have in
counseling victims/survivors of domestic violence.

Keywords Evangelical Christian clergy . Pastors . Domestic violence . Partner violence .

Counseling . Victim/Survivor

* Barbara L. Zust
bzust@gustavus.edu

1
Gustavus Adolphus College, 800 W. College Avenue, Saint Peter, MN 56082, USA
 Pastoral Psychol

Of all the social problems confronted by the church, domestic violence is surely one of
the most misunderstood and mismanaged by church leaders. . . . Like most clergy, I had
gone into the ministry with a deep and genuine desire to serve and help others, but
because I was clueless regarding the reality and dynamics of domestic violence, I was
unable to minister to abusers and their families. In fact, I made matters worse.

—Tracy 2007, p. 1

Introduction

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2014), one out of four women in
the United States will experience severe physical violence by the hands of an intimate partner.
Leaving the abuser is complex. Some victims/survivors do not leave their violent partner
because of religious beliefs (Jennings 2014). Almost 80% of the population in the United
States is affiliated with a religious organization, and clergy are considered to be the first go-to
source for people experiencing partner violence in their congregations (Alpert et al. 2005;
Zylstra 2015).
Currently, the largest (and growing) religious affiliation in the United States is that of
evangelical Christians, who hold conservative views on male dominance and the sanctity of
marriage (Zylstra 2015). The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experience of
evangelical Christian pastors in counseling victims/survivors of partner violence.

Background

Violence in a relationship is primarily about power and control (Biresch 2011; Cohn 2010).
The need for power and control in a relationship is often grounded in ideas from the past
regarding social norms and religious beliefs about male dominance (Faramarzi et al. 2005).
Unfortunately, this form of thinking is still very present. Wanting to have power and control
over one’s mate is also associated with a compromised sense of self and fear of abandonment
(Babcock et al. 2000).
Every 3 seconds someone is physically battered by an intimate partner in the United States
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2015). Children who witness intimate partner
violence in their homes often become victims of the violence (Hamby et al. 2010; Herrenkohl
et al. 2008). Children who witness domestic violence are at high risk for psychological
problems, including depression, behavioral problems, difficulties in school, self-blame, and
suicide (Skopp et al. 2005).
Getting help requires speaking up about the abuse. This is difficult for victims due to the
negative social stigma about being a victim of abuse (Jennings 2014). Those who experience
violence from their partner fear being judged and shunned by others due to self-blame and
shame (Landenburger 1989; Nason-Clark 2004). When there are children in the home, there is
a fear that in talking about the violence with authorities, Child Protection Services (CPS) may
be contacted. When CPS becomes involved, it is the mother who is held accountable for
providing a safe environment for her children (Barnett 2001; Douglas and Walsh 2010;
Mandel 2010). Women of color are especially fearful of CPS becoming involved because of
Pastoral Psychol

differential treatment (Bent-Goodley 2004). If the mother is not able to stop the violence at
home, she risks CPS taking the children away (Kopels and Sheridan 2002; Tatum 2000).
BWhy doesn’t she leave?^ is a question that has been explored over the last four decades.
The early literature on domestic violence speculated that a woman stayed with a violent partner
because she lacked the self-confidence to leave and was dependent on her abuser (Walker
1979). Landenburger’s (1989) seminal study found that early in a violent relationship, women
who long for a loving relationship are determined to make the relationship better. They
normalize the abuse as simply adjustment to a new relationship. According to
Landenburger’s mid-range theory, when the violence continues, it becomes clear to the woman
that she doesn’t have the ability to end the abuse, and she blames herself for this. Convinced
that she is responsible for not being able to stop the abuse, she becomes isolated and covers up
evidence of the abuse in order to avoid societal blame and shame (Bussert 1986). Eventually,
the battered woman enters the disengagement phase. Marked by anger toward herself and her
partner, she is determined to find a way to leave without being killed (Landenburger 1989).
This is the phase that the more recent literature has focused on. Whereas earlier literature
focused on the weaknesses of the ‘victims,’ recent literature has focused on the strength of
those in violent relationships who are working in their own ways to survive with creative,
resourceful resilience (Nash and Hesterberg 2009).
Leaving a violent partner is complicated. Ironically, a mother may stay in the violent
relationship for the sake of keeping the children safe (Humphreys and Thiara 2003). The mother
may fear not being able to protect the children if the abusive partner has partial custody of the
children or has unsupervised visitation rights. Abusive partners may threaten to abscond with the
children if the partner leaves the relationship. The abusive partner may threaten to kill the
children or other family members, including pets, if the abused partner leaves (Murray 2008).
Statistics indicate that the majority of women who are murdered by their intimate partners were
in the process of leaving the relationship or had already left the relationship (Murray 2008;
Payne and Wermeling 2009). Thus, ‘survivors’ are not necessarily the women who leave their
violent partners, nor does being a survivor mean that the violence in the relationship has stopped.
There is also a valid fear of becoming homeless upon leaving a violent partner. Women and
children leaving a violent relationship make up 50% of the nation’s homeless population
(American Civil Liberties Union 2005; National Center on Family Homelessness 2013). There
are not enough shelters or resources at this time to house the many domestic abuse victims/
survivors in need of shelter (Clough et al. 2014).
In addition to the above barriers that victims/survivors of domestic violence encounter,
women who hold religious beliefs about the sanctity of marriage have an extra layer of
complexity concerning whether or not to leave. For some, breaking one’s marriage vow to
remain together ‘for better or worse’ is like choosing to leave hell on earth for an eternity in
hell (Jennings 2014). The victims/survivors may feel responsible for causing disgrace to their
religious community. For such reasons, some would rather die than divorce (Jennings 2014).
Currently, evangelical Christians make up the largest religious affiliation in the United
States, according to the US Religious Landscape Study (Zylstra 2015). Data from this study
indicated that 25.4% of the U.S. population self-identify as evangelical Christians. Since 2007,
the number of evangelical Christians has grown by 2 million people, whereas mainstream
denominations have lost 5 million people during this same period of time. Evangelical
Christians generally have a conservative perspective on biblical interpretation and tend to
strictly adhere to a literal translation of scripture. Examples of literal translation include the sin
of divorce, the sanctity of marriage, and the submission of a woman to her husband (Nash
 Pastoral Psychol

2006). Specific denominations known as evangelical Christian include Assemblies of God,

Evangelical Free, non-denominational, Pentecostal, Southern Baptist, some Presbyterian
branches, and some conservative Lutherans such as the Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin
Synod. In 2014, approximately 21% of Americans identified as Catholic; less than 15%
identified as Protestant; and 5.9% identified as Jewish, Muslim, or Buddhist (Zylstra 2015).
Shannon-Lewy and Dull (2005) looked at the response of Christian clergy in cases of
domestic violence and found that although clergy generally are well respected in the
community and could be a great resource to people in the community, their religious beliefs
could be detrimental to victims/survivors of violence. These researchers concluded that the
efficacy of clergy who counsel victims/survivors of intimate partner violence varied greatly
among clergy. Homiak and Singletary (2007) conducted an exploratory study that looked at
clergy perceptions of their own efficacy in counseling victims/survivors of domestic violence.
Out of the 100 clergy who participated, 8% felt prepared to effectively counsel victims/
survivors, 32% were comfortable referring the victims to community resources, and 60% felt
they were not prepared to counsel or to refer.
A 2014 Lifeway Research survey found that domestic abuse remained a taboo subject in the
pulpit (Jennings 2014). Two thirds of the Protestant pastors said that partner violence did not
happen within their congregations, and, if it did, they wouldn’t know what to do about it if
someone came to them for help. Houston-Kolnik and Todd (2016) looked at clergy responses
to domestic violence through data from the National Congregation Study (N = 3334). These
researchers found that churches where women served in leadership roles, such as clergy, were
associated with progressive domestic violence programs to support the victims/survivors in
their congregations and communities.
Evangelical Christian churches are split regarding acceptance of women in clergy positions
within the church. In 2000, the Southern Baptist Church voted to allow only men to be pastors,
in keeping with their interpretation of scripture, whereas the Assemblies of God and other
Pentecostal churches allow women to be clergy, also based on their interpretation of scripture
(Wood 2001). According to the work of Nash (2006), abused women in evangelical Christian
churches have avoided speaking to their pastor about their violent home situation for fear
that the pastor would counsel them to either stay with or return to their abuser, in order to
keep the family together at all costs. Nash et al. (2013) found that abused women in
evangelical Christian churches often remain silent about the abuse so as not to be
shunned by their church community.
There is a dearth of research in the literature about the role of faith and clergy as barriers or
sources of support for victims/survivors of partner violence. Clergy’s lived experience in
counseling and supporting victims/survivors of domestic violence is the least explored phe-
nomenon in the literature on intimate partner violence (Rotunda et al. 2004). The purpose of
this exploratory study was to explore evangelical Christian pastors’ lived experience counsel-
ing and supporting victims/survivors of domestic violence.

Method

An interpretive phenomenological approach was used for this study. This qualitative research
approach is based on the understanding that the meaning of human experiences cannot be
embraced by observable, concrete data (van Manen 1990). Instead, the meaning or implicit
truths about human experiences are hidden within the narrative accounts of an experience as
Pastoral Psychol

told by those who have had the experience (van Manen 1990, 2014). Additionally, it is
important to note that the meaning of an experience can never be fully captured because
meaning is always evolving (van Manen 1990, 2014).
Participants’ lived experiences of counseling domestic violence victims/survivors who are
members of the participants’ congregations are laden with meaning. The collective narrative
data from all participants as a whole provide a glance at common meanings. The common
meanings help to shed light on evangelical Christian pastors’ implicit truths about counseling
their members who are in violent relationships.
Guiding principles of interpretive phenomenology described by van Manen (1990, 2014)
were integrated in the design of this study. Examples of these principles include using open-
ended questions, giving the participant reflection time to think about the experiences prior to
having a dialogue about the experiences, and using follow-up questions to clarify or ‘go
deeper’ with participants as needed (van Manen 1990, 2014).
All of the researchers were educated in the underpinnings of domestic violence, including
both the short- and long-term physical, emotional, and spiritual effects of violence by an
intimate partner as well as the effects on children who witness the violence and/or are also
victimized. The researchers all had significant interest in the role of faith for the victims/
survivors of violence as well as in the role of clergy in responding to the victims/survivors. The
principle investigator had several years of experience working with women in violent
relationships.
Following Institutional Review Board approval, evangelical Christian clergy in the urban
Midwest were invited to participate in this study. Participants were asked to participate in an
open-ended interview and were given the following questions in preparation:

& How do you counsel members of your parish who experience intimate partner violence?
& Does it make a difference if there are children in the home?
& What are your greatest challenges in counseling the victims/survivors?
& How do you think this problem could be solved?

The above four questions provided a framework for the dialogue with each participant.
Clarifying questions were added as needed. Participants also provided demographic data
regarding age, gender, denomination, and specific training in domestic violence counseling
they had received.
All interviews were transcribed as narrative data and analyzed using van Manen’s phe-
nomenological approach (van Manen 1990, 2014). Narrative data were combined into one
document that was read as a collective whole. Common themes were identified and evidenced
by selected quotes.

Findings

Demographic results

Seven evangelical Christian pastors agreed to participate in this study—four female pastors
and three male pastors. Ages ranged from 24 years old to 60 years old, with a mean age of
46.3. All of the pastors worked in urban churches and were Caucasian. Three of the female
pastors had no education regarding intimate partner violence counseling. Three male pastors
 Pastoral Psychol

and one female pastor had some education on intimate partner violence that they described as
Bbrief,^ Boccasional 1-day workshop on the topic,^ a Bclass in grad school,^ or Ba class in grad
school, but mostly about teen violence.^

Narrative data findings

The following five themes emerged from the narrative data: I’m not an expert on this; All I can
do is spiritual; Anything to protect the children; It’s not your fault!; and Solutions for a broken
world. The following text will address each theme.

I’m not an expert on this Pastors met once or twice with members of their congregation
who were experiencing intimate partner violence in order to assess the situation. They also
provided spiritual support through prayer. The pastors recognized that they were not experts in
the area of domestic violence and that they needed to refer the congregants to other profes-
sionals, as evidenced in the following quotes:
I meet with them on a one- to two-time basis in order to listen, advise, and pray. Then I
refer them to a professional counseling agency because I am not a trained professional
[in this area] and the church can help pay for the cost.

Typically, I meet with the person one to two times and figure out the situation and to
what extent they are talking about. What is the history? How long has this been
happening? Are there children involved? The reason they got involved [with the abuser]
is important. I make recommendations and refer—especially if it is a serious
situation—to professional counselors and a shelter. I haven’t had specific training, but
I know resources for shelters.
Some pastors asked victims to seek the counsel of a church prayer team or a parishioner
ministry team that focused on violence before they would make a referral to professional
counseling outside the church.
I first have him/her meet with a group in the church and then I point them to a counselor
who deals with that [domestic violence] specifically.

I would pray with them first and then recommend the person to visit with the prayer-
counseling ministry since they are trained in how to help people in domestic
violence.

All I can do is spiritual Although none of the pastors felt they were adequately prepared to
counsel those in violent relationships, they talked about the role their spiritual ministry played
in working with both victims/survivors and perpetrators.

Other than praying and sharing spiritual support, there is nothing else I can do. I can lead
someone to our Savior, Jesus. I can provide emotional support, but that is all that I can
really do.

I don’t do any specific counseling, whether it is domestic abuse, broken marriages, or

eating disorders. I refer them to an expert in that area of counseling. I do pastoral
Pastoral Psychol

counseling [about their spiritual life] which would be an understanding of who God
created them to be, accepting themselves, finding value in themselves, and listening to
God’s voice.

Anything to protect the children When there were children in the family, pastors recog-
nized that the children might not be safe. The children could be caught in the crossfire of
violence and/ or could also be the intended target of violence by the perpetrator. The pastors
also recognized the negative impact domestic violence has on the children who witness it. If
there were children in the family, the pastors would counsel differently.
I would do anything to help get the young children out since as they grow and see
that—it can become their normal. The impact of ongoing abuse whether it’s physical,
emotional, or sexual, the impact on the children is staggering.

My initial priority is to make sure that they are safe and that they have a plan to leave the
situation. It is important to refer them to a local shelter that accepts families to ensure
that the families are safe.

I always try to protect children! So children would make a difference on recommenda-

tions and ways to counsel and what actions I would take. Violence is always wrong. I
would contact the authorities.

If children are involved, I would handle that differently, but I don’t know how that
would be treated differently in counseling. I am not an expert on this issue. I would
suggest first taking it to the authorities.
None of the pastors addressed how having children in the family complicated a victim’s/
survivor’s ability to leave the abuse. Those who contacted the authorities about the children in
the home were doing so to protect the children at all costs. Leaving the violent relationship was
the pastor’s solution for keeping the children and the victim/survivor safe.

It’s not your fault! It was very important to the pastors to help the victims/survivors of
violence understand that they were created by God and loved and valued by God. It was wrong
for someone to treat God’s creation so poorly. The decision to stay or to leave was the victim’s/
survivor’s decision to make. However, the pastors’ greatest challenge was hearing victims/
survivors take the blame for the abuse and make the decision to stay in the relationship.
My greatest challenge as a pastor is watching the victim see an option out, but stay. They
think they deserved it. I feel I continually come up against lies that they deserved to be
treated the way they were; that they could have prevented it by being Bbetter^ instead of
seeing themselves as the victim of someone else’s problem.

This act in a relationship is never okay, and it’s important to speak up. We need to create
a safe environment, and make sure the victim understands that nothing is wrong with
them and it’s not their fault.

The greatest challenge is watching the victim stay with the abuser.. .. If someone devalues
that person long enough, the victim can’t decide on her own or identify herself. So the
 Pastoral Psychol

process is helping the victim understand who she/he is and how God created him/her and
what the truth is from the Biblical standpoint of who they are in God and their value.

Solutions for a broken world Pastors shared their opinions on what was needed to reduce
violence in relationships. They talked about what was needed to help individuals who were
born into violence at various levels.
Pastors commented on the big picture of what leads people to be violent toward their
partners. The pastors felt that in order to prevent domestic violence, societal norms needed to
be changed, as evidenced in the following quotes:

On a societal level and in our society in general, we need to redefine healthy marriages
as two people loving one another, submitting to each other, and a partnership of equals.
The problem with domestic abuse is the issue of power (usually the man, but not always
the man). Therefore, the Christian community needs to redefine marriage around
Christ—both partners truly loving and submitting to each other.

Addressing men about relationship patterns and control issues—breaking the cycle.

I think that in our society today that part of what is affecting this [partner violence] is our
visual view of all the open sexual things in media! And, younger kids are more
entrenched with that, and get in their minds constantly. Suddenly, we don’t realize it,
but sexual violence or even violence in itself is tearing down our values. I am wondering
what more we could do with that so people realize that it’s not right. The hard thing is
that so many people are broken—not grounded in the Lord—that they often react and
we get these issues.

We need to educate males and females [about healthy relationships] and start young with
high school programs.
Pastors felt that if more information were available about domestic violence, people
would recognize it before it went too far. Being aware that violence in a relationship is
never the fault of the recipient of the violence but instead is the fault of the perpetrator of
the violence could lead victims/survivors to speak up earlier so that interventions could
be introduced earlier.

Awareness is the biggest thing that can help—informing the general public about
domestic violence! Because once people are more aware, and realize that this act in
a relationship is never okay, and it’s important to speak up—then we know how to
act on it, making sure the victim understands that nothing is wrong with them and
it’s not their fault. If awareness isn’t there, then they don’t get help and the situation
can get worse.

I feel it is extremely important for the adult and the children to deal with the trauma they
have experienced or witnessed happening. Again, seeking services from a
counselor—play therapy for a small child. With professional help they may break the
cycle of being in abusive relationships and get the tools to know what a healthy
relationship looks like.
Pastoral Psychol

I would like to have more education on it. I am aware that it’s happening; I know that
one in four have experienced violence, and I want to have a better understanding of it
and about my role in counseling.
Pastors felt it was very important for the church to respond in a loving, supportive way. One
of the most important things to do was to help the victim/survivor remove self-blame and
shame and see themselves as a valued child of God.

It takes counseling and support of the church community who loves them to walk them
back to health, help young women or the victims rebuild the perception of themselves,
their value, and contribution to society, and provide financial help—like opening your
home to provide protection for the victim. It also is helping the abuser. Most of the time
the abuser has been abused, so he/she needs help. As a pastor . . . until someone
understands the value that Jesus Christ placed in their life, they won’t be able to teach
someone else how to love them.

We need to give people resources and open communication to help them realize it’s not
their fault. Helping the victim talk through what happened and moving forward. Moving
forward would be the most difficult thing. If you don’t have God as your hope, it’s hard
to move forward to that next level.

Discussion

One of the most interesting findings in this study was that the pastors unanimously
expressed sadness over victims/survivors who chose to stay with their abusive partners
instead of leaving. According to the literature, Christian victims/survivors of domestic
violence often fear that their pastor will not support their leaving the abuser because of
their marriage vows (Jennings 2014; Shannon-Lewy and Dull 2005). Clearly, the evan-
gelical pastors in this study upheld the sacred value of each person over enduring
violence in a marriage. In Morgan’s (2015) study involving Protestant clergy and their
congregations, the researcher noted that lay people were more conservative about not
leaving a marriage when violence was an issue than were their clergy. It is possible that
clergy may not be aware that some of their parishioners may hold fast to an old,
misguided belief about one partner submitting, forgiving, and enduring long suffering
to please God. Nason-Clark (2015) referred to pastors’ silence about domestic violence
from the pulpit as a ‘holy hush.’ Jakobsson et al. (2013) contended that the silence about
domestic violence needs to be removed in order for healing to take place.
In 2014, the Dallas Morning News published findings from a survey that indicated that
intimate partner violence was taboo for pastors to talk about in the pulpit (Jennings 2014). The
same article also quoted an evangelist who said to a group of college students, BWomen are to
be submissive to their husbands even if they are beaten to a bloody pulp. In doing so, they may
win their husbands to Christ^ (Jennings 2014). Although this evangelist’s statement may be
thought of as historical rhetoric, the message is still being proclaimed. If pastors remain silent
about their own perspectives on the role of the church in violent marriages, it cannot be
assumed that the parishioners are in sync with their pastor’s perspective. It is understandable
 Pastoral Psychol

that parishioners may have a needlessly harsh perception of the need to stay in a violent
marriage in order to be a good Christian.
The finding that pastors wanted their members to ‘speak up’ about the violence earlier, and
were dismayed by the victim’s/survivor’s self-blame for the violence may indicate a disso-
nance between what the member may have perceived to be the church’s response to domestic
violence and what the pastors held as the church’s response to violence in a marriage. This
finding adds support to the supposition that congregational members may benefit from
learning about their clergy’s perspective on domestic violence.
Perhaps pastors do not talk about domestic violence because they do not feel they are
experts in this area. The evangelical Christian pastors in this study self-identified as non-
experts in the area of intimate partner violence. It is interesting that a few pastors had touched
on the topic in graduate school, but none of the pastors had been educated on intimate partner
violence in seminary. Most of the pastors indicated that they would like more education on the
topic. Whether or not the pastors pursue more education on the issues of domestic violence, the
fact that the pastors are already the experts in their spiritual understanding of their church’s
response to domestic violence needs to be embraced. The pastors’ expertise in this area is
important to share with their parishioners. More than likely, a victim/survivor of partner
violence would listen to their pastor concerning the spiritual aspect of making a decision to
leave a violent partner over the advice of a secular professional.
Another finding in this study is that the pastors recognized that victims/survivors were
oppressed and crippled by the self-blame and shame that the violent partner inflicted by
insisting that the victim/survivor was responsible for evoking the violence. The pastors
recognized the critical importance of helping the victims recognize that the violence was not
their fault and to help victims recall their ‘God-given’ value and strength. This kind of
empowerment by clergy is profoundly needed by religious victims/survivors of spousal
violence.
Secular professionals and resource referrals cannot adequately address the deeply held
religious beliefs that victims/survivors struggle to understand. Leaving or not leaving a
marriage can be a life-or-death matter. It can also be a spiritual life-or-death matter for the
victim/survivor. Zust (2006) found that in spite of the psychological improvements that
battered women made in terms of depression, loneliness, and hopelessness through a women’s
empowerment group, many women remained with their violent partners because of their
religious views about divorce. What they needed was a trusted clergy member to help them
through their struggles concerning faith. Anecdotal data indicates that many pastors of various
denominations feel unprepared to work with intimate partner violence. They refer their
members to shelters and counseling by professionals, and that is all they do. The fact that
the evangelical Christian pastors in this current study recognized the spiritual role they could
play by dismantling the victim’s/survivor’s self-blame and empowering them as valued by
God so that they could keep their faith without keeping the violent partner, is quite amazing.
Because domestic violence is a major public health issue (Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention 2014), state departments of public health have put together interdisciplinary teams
to address health promotion at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. The pastors interviewed
in this study suggested solutions for reducing and/or preventing domestic violence that are
important from both a secular and a religious perspective, such as changing societal norms,
media influence on violence, etc. There is a growing movement bringing pastors and com-
munity resources together to attend to the safety needs of victims/survivors and reduce
violence (Nason-Clark 2010). Religious beliefs play a significant role in the lives of victims/
Pastoral Psychol

survivors for whom their faith is important. Therefore, interdisciplinary community teams on
domestic violence must include pastors.
Although it would be ideal to have clergy representing a variety of religious beliefs as
members of a community team, adding a clergy member from the largest religious group in the
United States (evangelical Christian) would be beneficial from the perspective of the team in
understanding the complexity of historical and present-day conservative beliefs. Having
pastors of any denomination on an interdisciplinary public health community team would be
beneficial for all clergy to understand that referring victims/survivors to community resources
is important but that, as clergy, they also have an important role with the victims/survivors in
addressing historical religious beliefs that may be misunderstood by their parishioners.

Conclusion

Evangelical Christian pastors are working with abused members of their congregations to find
a way to leave the violence through spiritual counseling and referral to shelters and counseling
experts. Findings of this study add to the body of knowledge regarding the important role of
clergy in responding to victims/survivors of domestic violence.
One limitation of this study is the fact that the evangelical Christian pastors interviewed
were all from urban areas in the upper Midwest region of the United States and were all
Caucasian. Evangelical Christian pastors in rural areas may not have as many experts or
resources to help with their members’ safety and provide professional counseling. Evangelical
Christian pastors with diverse racial backgrounds and/or from various regions of the country
may have different ‘implicit truths’ embedded in their experiences of counseling victims/
survivors of domestic violence.
Findings from this qualitative study provide a glimpse of common themes or implicit truths
held by this study’s group of evangelical Christian pastors who agreed to share their experi-
ences of counseling victims/survivors of domestic violence in their congregations with the
researchers. As is true for all qualitative studies, interpretative phenomenology is not intended
to provide inferential results. Rather, it sheds light on an aspect of a phenomenon that demands
more research. Findings from this study lend support to the important role clergy have in
counseling victims/survivors of domestic violence. Future research is needed in this area to
gain a better understanding of the lived experiences of clergy from diverse backgrounds in
counseling victims/survivors of intimate partner violence. Research is also needed to explore
the victims’/survivors’ lived experiences of being counseled by clergy (or not), as well as their
lived experiences of congregational support (or not).

References

Alpert, E., Miles, A., & Coffey, V. (2005). Responding to domestic violence: An interfaith guide to prevention
and intervention. Chicago: Chicago Metropolitan Battered Women’s Network. https://www.
familyministries.org/files/1.1.1.%20Responding%20to%20Domestic%20Violence%20An%20
Interfaith%20Guide.pdf. Retrieved on 9/14/2016 & 11/4/2016.
American Civil Liberties Union (2005) Domestic violence and homelessness: Women’s Rights Project.
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/dvhomelessness032106.pdf. Accessed 4 Nov 2016.
Babcock, J., Jacobson, N., Gottman, J., & Yerington, T. (2000). Attachment, emotional regulation, and the
function of marital violence: Differences between secure, preoccupied, and dismissing violent and nonvio-
lent husbands. Journal of Family Violence, 15(4), 391–409.
 Pastoral Psychol

Barnett, O. (2001). Why battered women do not leave, part 2. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 2(1), 3–35.
Bent-Goodley, T. (2004). Perceptions of domestic violence: A dialogue with African American women. Health
and Social Work, 29, 307–316.
Biresch, J. (2011). Assessing domestic violence in the healthcare setting: Article one in a five-part series on DV.
Pennsylvania Nurse, 66(2), 6–10.
Bussert, J. (1986). Battered women: From a theology of suffering to an ethic of empowerment. Division for
mission in North America. New York: Kutztown.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2014). National data on intimate partner violence, sexual violence,
and stalking. www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs-fact-sheet-2014.pdf.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2015). NISVS infographic. Injury prevention & control:
Division of Violence Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/infographic.html.
Accessed 8 Nov 2016.
Clough, A., Draughon, J. E., Njie-Carr, V., Rollins, C., & Glass, N. (2014). Bhaving housing made everything
else possible^: Affordable, safe and stable housing for women survivors of violence. Qualitative Social
Work, 13(5), 671–688.
Cohn, P. (Director). (2010). Power and control: Domestic violence in America [motion picture]. United States:
Hillcrest Films.
Douglas, H., & Walsh, T. (2010). Mothers, domestic violence, & child protection. Violence Against Women,
16(5), 489–508. doi:10.1177/1077801210365887.
Faramarzi, M., Esmailzadeh, S., & Mosavi, S. (2005). A comparison of abused and non-abused women’s
definitions of domestic violence and attitudes to acceptance of male dominance. European Journal of
Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology, 122(2), 225–231.
Hamby, S., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., & Ormrod, R. (2010). The overlap of witnessing partner violence with
child maltreatment and other victimizations in a nationally representative survey of youth. Child Abuse and
Neglect, 34, 734–741. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.03.001.
Herrenkohl, T., Sousa, C., Taima, E., Herrenkohl, R., & Moylan, C. (2008). Intersection of child abuse and
children’s exposure to domestic violence. National Center for Bio-Technology Information. doi:10.1177
/1524838008314797.
Homiak, K., & Singletary, J. (2007). Family violence in congregations: An exploratory study of clergy’s needs.
Social Work and Christianity, 34(1), 18–46.
Houston-Kolnik, J., & Todd, N. (2016). Examining the presence of congregational programs focused on violence
against women. American Journal of Community Psychology, 57, 459–472. doi:10.1002/ajep.12055.
Humphreys, C., & Thiara, R. (2003). Neither justice nor protection: Women’s experiences of post-separation
violence. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 25(3), 195–214.
Jakobsson, A., von Borgstede, C., Krantz, G., & Spak, F. (2013). Possibilities and hindrances for
prevention of intimate partner violence: Perceptions among professionals and decision makers in a
Swedish medium-sized town. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 20, 337–343.
doi:10.1007/s12529-012-9238-1.
Jennings, D. (2014). In church, a taboo, topic: Religious leaders try to break silence about domestic violence or
abuse among flock. Dallas Morning News. http://res.dallasnews.com/interactives/2014_
deadlyaffection/part8/. Accessed 31 Aug 2016.
Kopels, S., & Sheridan, M. (2002). Adding legal insult to injury: Battered women, their children, and the failure
to protect. Affilia, 17(1), 9–29.
Landenburger, K. (1989). A process of entrapment in and recovery from an abusive relationship. Issues in Mental
Health Nursing, 10, 209–227.
Mandel, D. (2010). Child welfare and domestic violence: Tackling the themes and thorny questions that stand in
the way of collaboration and improvement of child welfare practice. Violence Against Women, 16(5), 530–
536.
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for action sensitive pedagogy. London:
University of Western Ontario.
van Manen, M. (2014). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and
writing. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
Morgan, T. (2015). One in three Americans say divorce is still a sin in cases of abuse. Christianity Today. www.
christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/august/one-in-three-americans-say-divorce-is-still-sin-in-cases-of.
html. Accessed 31 Aug 2016.
Murray, S. (2008). Why doesn’t she just leave? Belonging, disruption and domestic violence. Women’s Studies
International Forum, 31(1), 65–72.
Nash, S. (2006). The changing of gods: Abused Christian wives and their hermeneutic revision of gender, power,
and spousal conduct. Qualitative Sociology, 29, 195–209. doi:10.1007/s11133-006-9018-9.
Nash, S., & Hesterberg, L. (2009). Biblical framings to spousal violence in the narratives of abused Christian
women. Violence Against Women, 15(3), 340–361. doi:10.1177/1077801208330437.
Pastoral Psychol

Nash, S., Faulkner, C., & Abell, R. (2013). Abused conservative Christian wives: Treatment considerations for
practitioners. Counseling and Values, 58, 205–220. doi:10.1002/j.2161-007X.2013.00034.x.
Nason-Clark, N. (2004). When terror strikes at home: The interface between religion and domestic violence.
Journal of Scientific Study of Religion, 43, 303–310.
Nason-Clark, N. (2010). Clergy referrals in cases of domestic violence. Journal of Family and Community
Ministries, 23(4), 50–60. http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/117270.pdf. Accessed 2
Sept 2016.
Nason-Clark, N. (2015). The ‘holy hush’ that’s plaguing churches right now is domestic violence. National
Deseret News. http://national.deseretnews.com/article/4816/the-holy-hush-thats-plaguing-churches-right-
now-is-domestic-violence.html. Accessed 14 Sept 2016.
National Center on Family Homelessness (2013). Pressing issues facing families who are homeless.
http://fliphtml5.com/xsgw/iqjt/basic. Accessed 8 Nov 2016.
Payne, D., & Wermeling, L. (2009). Domestic violence and the female victim: The real reason women stay!
Journal of Multicultural, Gender and Minority Studies, 3(1), 178–185. http://www.scientificjournals.
org/journals2009/articles/1420.pdf. Accessed 8 Nov 2016.
Rotunda, R., Williamson, G., & Penfold, M. (2004). Clergy response to domestic violence: A preliminary survey
of clergy members, victims, and batterers. Pastoral Psychology, 52(4), 353–365.
Shannon-Lewy, C., & Dull, V. (2005). The response of Christian clergy to domestic violence: Help or hindrance?
Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(6), 647–659.
Skopp, N., Manke, B., McDonald, R., & Jouriles, E. (2005). Siblings in domestically violent families:
Experiences of interparent conflict and adjustment problems. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(2),
324–333.
Tatum, D. (2000). Why the label child abuse puts children who witness domestic violence at risk. Trauma,
Violence, and Abuse, 1, 288–290. doi:10.1177/1524838000001003007.
Tracy, S. (2007). Clergy responses to domestic violence. Priscilla Papers, 21(2), 1–11. http://www.
cbeinternational.org/sites/default/files/pp212_3crtdv.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov 2016.
Walker, L. (1979). The battered woman. New York: Harper & Row.
Wood, G. O. (2001). Exploring why we think the way we do about women in ministry. Enrichment Journal
(General Council of the Assemblies of God). http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200102/008_exploring.cfm.
Accessed 23 Aug 2016.
Zust, B. (2006). Meaning of INSIGHT participation among women who have experienced intimate partner
violence. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 27(7), 775–793. doi:10.1080/01612840600781170.
Zylstra, S. E. (2015). Pew: Evangelicals stay strong as Christianity crumbles in America. Christianity Today.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/may/pew-evangelicals-stay-strong-us-religious-landscape-
study.html. Accessed 2 Sept 2016.