exile

[creimann]

When the Church was teaching true, and when Catholics were Catholic, i.e. when Catholic culture was alive and healthy, what would have been the correct response to deal with an abusive family member, especially if they refuse to acknowledge their obvious guilt? Any ideas? Is it fair to declare that a person is permanently exiled from the family context? Or exiled indefinitely? Or must we regard their abuse as 'bearing the Cross' and just take their abuse as they give it out?

[Kephapaulos]

I think in those times, the party that is the victim should move out or the abuser should do so. For a time, there must be a separation depending on the severity of the abuse. Really, though, the separation may last indefinitely most likely. I do not know really that much on what to do in those cases, except that the victim should not have to take abuse if it is especially injurious to souls and loved ones.

[Jarrod_D]

When the Church was teaching true, and when Catholics were Catholic, i.e. when Catholic culture was alive and healthy, what would have been the correct response to deal with an abusive family member, especially if they refuse to acknowledge their obvious guilt? Any ideas? Is it fair to declare that a person is permanently exiled from the family context? Or exiled indefinitely? Or must we regard their abuse as 'bearing the Cross' and just take their abuse as they give it out?

 

Spiritually you need to offer it up as a "bearing the cross," kind of thing, but this doesn't mean you have to like it ... nor do you have to put yourself in a situation where you have to feel pain over and over again.

 

On this side of it though ... to exile one out of the family is a major thing and should probably only be done for major things.

 

Jarrod

[CatholicLady]

On  this side of it though ... to exile one out of the family is a major  thing and should probably only be done for major things.

Jarrod

 
  You don't consider abuse...of any kind..sexual, physical or emotional...to be a
  "big thing"?....No one is ever obliged to live under abusive  conditions....ever. My advice is to get out.....or make the abuser get  out.....

[username]

As for the "cutting off" of a family member, it is indeed allowable.  If it has become necessary in order to maintain the welfare of the other members, it is more of an obligation than something merely permitted.

 

It all depends upon the circumstances: what has taken place, what position the person occupies in the family (father, mother, son, brother), etc.

 

My apologies, I thought I stuck this in earlier, but I see that I did not. Edited for Sedevacantist comments that properly belong in the "sede" forum

[creimann]

Thanks guys and gals! Does anyone know how a Catholic family 100 or 150 years ago would have handled such a circumstance? Maybe from reading, fiction or history?

[creimann]

As for the "cutting off" of a family member, it is indeed allowable.  If it has become necessary in order to maintain the welfare of the other members, it is more of an obligation than something merely permitted.

You see now I strongly agree with this. My reason is first, that at times, to fail to be angry is itself a sin. Second, Hell is a 'cutting off', and if someone is headed for perdition, it seems not unreasonable to give them a foretaste of it. I wouldn't say, of course, that anyone living a life of sin should be 'cut off' from ourselves in this life, because they may need our example and so on, but, if they are causing injury, then cutting them 'off' does offer the side benefit of giving them an analogy of permanent loss. Unfortunately I haven't researched this to the point of being able to cite chapter and verse. Cutting people off is not my typical thing to do. But, duty may call!

[miss_fluffy]

It certainly depends on the severity and type of abuse.  But yes,  I think cutting off is a good thing.  And the best thing for  everybody, including the abuser.
 
  I once had a close friend who became verbally abusive, and a wreckless  person, backstabbing etc.  I completely cut her off.  After a  few years she sought me out and was very sorry.  She had  completely changed her life when she came back, and she thanked me for  being so tough on her.
 
 

[Marybonita]

Does anyone know how a Catholic family 100 or 150 years ago would have handled such a circumstance? Maybe from reading, fiction or history?

 

The trouble with trying to find this kind of information Creiman is that Catholics were discouraged from writing fiction.  That's an indulgence of the present age so we have very little information about Catholic life from the last centuries.

 

The parish priest was appealed to for intervention if necessary as far as I remember. Of course that's not always possible now but we have had our own traditional priest intervene with certain family members. They do work miracles. No wonder the devil removed them. 

 

My own memories of my Catholic family from (ahem) many years ago was that they tolerated a lot and prayed a lot. I can never remember an example of anyone being shunned or "kicked out".

 

A line was drawn for certain sins. For example we had an uncle whose marriage was not considered regular. His "wife" was excluded from family gatherings. This was never talked about in the open it was just a given. This exclusion was mitigated by the fact that get-togethers were not held that often. You just had the impression that she was excluded. Visits to their house were not regular although their children were entirely welcome in every instance. The sin was against the parents.

 

There are many examples of Saints who endured physical and emotional abuse. St. Elizabeth of Hungary, St. Rita of Cascia, St. Monica. St. Ignatius Loyola was beaten and robbed by a man to whom he had been good. He forgave him and prayed for his salvation. St. Jean Vianney had a young man appointed over him who treated him like he was an idiot. People complained but the Saint responded that he received a lot of grace from the abuse.

 

Yet these same Saints would shun heretics. It seems overall that physical abuse was not considered as grievous a sin as spiritual abuse in the Catholic Church.

 

And of course there are degrees of abuse. Abuse of children should not be tolerated because they are so vulnerable and can be damaged for life. It seems to me that when that happened a wife was encouraged to leave her husband and return to her parents' house.

 

Sometimes the situation resolves itself when the person leaves on his/her own.

 

Of course my personal solution to every problem now is prayer.

 

I hope that helps.

 

In JMJ 

[creimann]

The trouble with trying to find this kind of information Creiman is that Catholics were discouraged from writing fiction.

Hi MB, thanks! Yes I've read this, from Paula Haigh, or at least the web site containing her works, which does also have a few articles from other people. It reminds me of St Augustine who had some choice words for works of literature and stage performances.

 

My own memories of my Catholic family from (ahem) many years ago was that they tolerated a lot and prayed a lot. I can never remember an example of anyone being shunned or "kicked out".

I can't reveal the actual difficulty but you may have trouble remembering it, too, because it probably never happened! It's singularly modern.

 

There are many examples of Saints who endured physical and emotional abuse.

Yes, indeed. Alas I am not concerned for myself. Rather, I have to plan interventions to prevent problems from becoming worse for others, who may not wish to endure such things, or be able to.

 

Yet these same Saints would shun heretics. It seems overall that physical abuse was not considered as grievous a sin as spiritual abuse in the Catholic Church.

I'll leave this uncommented, just highlighted.

 

I think MB has pretty much summed it up, with others. There are limits, there is virtue in tolerating abuse, some abuse sources are not tolerated, and prayer is key.