02 July 2008

Wrong about Mark Driscoll

I wrote this in response to Rhett Smith's blog-post, titled "Does Mark Driscoll Promote a Mysogynistic and Violent Christianity?". By all of the accounts of our mutual friends, Rhett is a great guy, that did an amazing job running an awesome college ministry at Bel Air Pres, in Los Angeles (my former Church) Rhett's also someone whom I hope to call my friend when he and his wife (finally) move to Dallas, TX! But I passionately disagree with him on this question.

The text of my reply: What do you think?

I feel this is completely unfair and a mischaracterization. What is your basis for the claim that Driscoll supports or perpetuates a Mysogynistic and Violent Christianity?

I've listened to almost every sermon of Driscoll's at Mars Hill over the past two years, and can say with all honesty, I have never heard anything that is remotely akin to such a claim. Having listened to his whole teaching ministry for nearly two years, I can tell you a lot about the guy, his heart, ministry and beliefs…and they’re anything but violent and misogynistic.

Now I have heard Mark make sarcastic, ironic, cutting & jabbing statements that attack & deconstruct the feminized, responsibility-fearing young men (among others) that he hopes to reach & convict. It's certainly fair to take issue with his style or effectiveness, if that's Wess or Haden's belief. But to apply a sort of ‘hermeneutic trajectory’ to his satire and biting statements, leading to misogynistic, or violent is unfair and reckless. All you have to do is listen to the man's sermons and theological series to "get" his heart and theological beliefs.

Now, listening to his teaching you will also learn a lot about his background and upbringing that created the personality that loves UFC, bacon and guns. The guy’s background is one of violence, street-fights and family alcoholism and if your listen fairly and with integrity to his teaching, a listener would ‘get that’. Sorry if this offends, but I count him as a ‘man’s man’. And if you ask those that know my heart (or ask my beautiful wife, five daughters and Mom), you would know that any man I would bestow that title on, I would do so not because of some redneck aggression-prone simplistic stereotype, but because week after week he unabashedly preaches repentance, substitutionary atonement, men taking responsibility, serving love for wife and family, being emotionally available and serving towards your wife, respecting girls, women, marriage, celebrating Biblical sexuality and is unafraid to defend and celebrate masculinity.

Sure, there are plenty of missteps and misquotes that have undoubtedly aided his critics. But I have to honestly submit, Rhett, week-after-week, I laugh at the shots he takes and while, I know it will offend some, I never see the big deal. Along with an intellectually honest search through all of his material and teachings, you will also find there are a multitude of sermons & statements out there in which he humbly apologizes, back-tracks, or even talks about John Piper (a man he counts as a dear friend) holding him to account for using "shock-jock humor".

Without a doubt, if the shoot-first, ask questions later, critics would listen consistently to the messages from Mars Hill, you will hear Mark hit the same drum beat of imploring men to grow-up, keep their pants on, respect and honor women, love their wives, serve their wives, love their kids, provide for their family. Be a leader. Often in story of his own relationship with his wife and children as the "cuddle dad" and "faithful, serving husband" become evident and the example of what his faith looks like at home. I would suggest listening to him preach through the weight of “loving his wife as Christ loves the Church” to have a more intellectually honest basis for understanding where Driscoll comes down on Biblical husbandry.

As far as the larger, underlying detraction in Wess, Haden (and perhaps your) post(s), about a concern or discontent with ministries or pastors that seek to really serve men…I totally and completely “get” where Mark Driscoll is coming from, and who he’s talking to. I fully believe that true, Biblical manhood is scarce in our culture. I feel it’s religiously (pun intended) under attack. And it is as epidemic within our culture. It’s actually going to be the purpose and premise of the book I am setting out to write. I really feely that men need a clear picture, definition, defense and roadmap to Biblical masculinity. Men must be held to account for the miserable state of marriage in our culture. For the rampant, debt-laden, financial messes in our country. For the broken homes, incarceration rates and failing Churches. And for the 65% of men in the Church that are addicted to porn. It’s cataclysmic. It’s a tragedy of Biblical proportions (again, pun intended). And you don’t solve it by everyone talking through their feelings, and packaging the Gospel as a way to ‘feel better’ about everything in your life. (Clearly that’s a whole separate discussion).

I’ve never heard Driscoll try to re-package Jesus or the Gospel to ‘create or reinforce his worldview…or serve the other world in which he lives’. I would challenge anyone to go through his sermons and point out where he’s not faithful to scriptures. I have heard him deliver the gospel for years with a style, tone and approach that is, well, just plain type-A masculine. He’s in your face. He preaches election, repentance and the depravity of man. He illustrates the whole nature of God, to include God’s wrath, by preaching exegetically through scripture. God gets pissed off sometimes, and so does Mark. Jesus does in fact come back with a tattoo in the book of Revelation. But that’s beside the point…I feel that it’s pretty easy to understand that Mark delivers lines like that to illustrate a point. It’s a joking line, meant to get a laugh (and it does every time I’ve heard him deliver it). As a Calvanist, he doesn’t even believe that he had a choice to worship Jesus—limp-wristed hippie, or not. It’s just meant to be funny. I really don’t get the offense that’s taken by the things that he says, at times. (Unless I were Mormon, I’d be pretty pissed to hear him say that my religion was deception of demons and that I was ‘riding my bicycle to hell’). I would also caution taking judgment of him, his ministry and theology by the handful of charged statements, out of context…less we and our lives also be judged by the same. I’m just sayin….

We must insist upon real, Biblical leadership from our men. And while his style and delivery is bound to always piss some people off, Mark Driscoll does nothing less than exhibit a commitment to scripture through exegetical teaching. I truly feel that week after week, he faithfully unpacks a literal interpretation of scripture in ways that are delivered in plain English, through examples that are practical and relevant (if they may hurt feelings) with good old, simple humor, sarcasm and irony.

Comments (4)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Jared:

Thanks for your comments. I think I would take his comments as being out of context except they keep building up. It was just a little over a year and half ago that Driscoll had to come out and apologize for all his comments, due to the firestorm surrounding many of his statements, which led to a planned protest of his church.

The comment I find most offensive is this in regard to Ted Haggard scandal:

“Most pastors I know do not have satisfying, free, sexual conversations and liberties with their wives. At the risk of being even more widely despised than I currently am, I will lean over the plate and take one for the team on this. It is not uncommon to meet pastors’ wives who really let themselves go; they sometimes feel that because their husband is a pastor, he is therefore trapped into fidelity, which gives them cause for laziness. A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband in the ways that the Song of Songs is so frank about is not responsible for her husband’s sin, but she may not be helping him either.” http://www.findingrhythm.com/blog/?p=493

Scot McKnight had a pretty good series as well.

Post by Scot McKnight: http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=1697

To answer my question that I pose as the subject. Misogyny is a strong word…you are right. I have a couple of female friends who have had some personal interaction with him in Seattle (wanting to get involved in ministry, etc.), and they walked away with some pretty strong feelings that he doesn’t really like women.

Obviously, we will disagree. There is definitely a following of Dricollites….and he can do no wrong.

I’m glad you have been learning from him though, and feel like you have been growing, maturing, etc. due to his teaching.

rhett
Thanks Rhett!

While, I really like and appreciate Driscoll, I wouldn't count myself as one that has found anyone that can do no wrong...or at least not in a couple thousand years.

Ministry is tough enough, that as a fellow believer, if I feel someone is really faithful to scripture & has a great heart...they're going to get the benefit of the doubt with me. As for Driscoll particularly, I love him though. I loved Ted Haggard too. Both have been instrumental in being born again, and then my theological growth as a Christian.

Ted's fall really shook me emotionally. Not so much in a faith way, because it just reinforces the scary fact that we are all sinners that must glorify God in all areas of our lives. It shook me emotionally. I had met Gayle as well...and while Mark's comments weren't directed at her, I can see why they would offend greatly. Personally, I just file that in the category of "saying things that a lot of people think, but would never say." And maybe secondarily under the category, "why the F would he say that?"

("I have a couple of female friends who have had some personal interaction with him in Seattle (wanting to get involved in ministry, etc.), and they walked away with some pretty strong feelings that he doesn’t really like women." ) I'm not quite sure what to do with this anecdote. Sorry...

In general, I don't understand why we're so quick to turn on one-another and cast stones within the faith. Not everyone is Billy Graham...nor would Billy Graham be as effective at reaching everyone.

thanks....

jls
I hope this isn’t horribly off-topic but something stuck out to me after I read the blog and comments- I can't figure out why the quote from Mark Driscoll would be offensive?

(This one -“Most pastors I know do not have satisfying, free, sexual conversations and liberties with their wives. At the risk of being even more widely despised than I currently am, I will lean over the plate and take one for the team on this. It is not uncommon to meet pastors’ wives who really let themselves go; they sometimes feel that because their husband is a pastor, he is therefore trapped into fidelity, which gives them cause for laziness. A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband in the ways that the Song of Songs is so frank about is not responsible for her husband’s sin, but she may not be helping him either.”)

As a woman I didn’t find that offensive in the least. On the contrary, I agree with it and I don’t think that it only applies to pastor’s wives- I see it all over the church. I don’t think it excuses any man’s sexual sin (clearly neither does MD) and I don’t think the only men in sexual sin are one who’s wives have let themselves go, but it is a common occurrence as far as I have observed.
Even as I read over a second and third time to make sure I haven’t missed anything I can’t find anything in it that would be cause for offence.
Thanks Mel!

I couldn't agree more. I do see why people would connect that to Gayle--and how insensitive that would be after Ted's fall. But, I think that would be wrong to read that as attacking Gayle.

In fact, I think the only thing about Mark's comment that doesn't ring true of some reality to me, is that it was gender specific. Men do it as well. And Biblically, we need to honor God AND our spouses with our temple. After all, my body is not my own, but also my spouses...and God's the creator and giver of every breath, so obviously it's His.

A whole separate blog post might just ask the question (that I twittered about last week) "Why the hell is everyone so sensitive & why are men especially, always so easily offended?"

Thanks for your comments, Mel! Jill felt the exact same way....

Post a new comment

Comments by