What bothers me here is that, while many of the former leaders of the now-defunct Mars Hill Church have long since apologized, having seen the error of their ways, Mark Driscoll has not shown anything close to that level of contrition, when in fact he (a) fostered the culture that encouraged leaders to engage in controlling and abusive practices, and (b) acted in ways that were domineering, arrogant, and otherwise unbecoming of a Church overseer by any reasonable understanding of the Pauline Corpus.
I totally expect this to end very badly. And when it does, there are going to be more than a few, “See, I told you so”s.
One thing we have to be careful of when discussing this is not to assume we know more than what we actually know. Within the larger reformed community there are a ton of people that haven’t even stepped foot in the state of Washington, let alone have any real connection to Mars Hill Church. We only know – at best – what someone else has said about any given situation within the walls of what used to be Mars Hill.
I get very uncomfortable when talking about the fall of a pastor I’ve never met.
When a pastor falls, it is never without a long list of victims in the aftermath. The victims themselves are sinners. When people who have never stepped foot inside Mars Hill pretend to be experts as to what went on and add fuel to their fire it seems that does more harm than good.
While I was initially empathetic to Driscoll, as it seemed that Chandler and Company were being overly harsh on him, the unfolding of this saga has revealed some major problems on Driscoll’s end, issues that are disqualifying.
While some will rightly point out that Driscoll has been otherwise faithful to his wife, I would also contend that fitness for pastoral leadership is far more than marital fidelity, although that is definitely a biggie.
The first red flag with Driscoll in this is his lack of contrition. His apologies are not really apologies and in fact tend to cast himself as a victim. When people on the left do this, we rightly call them out. I hold Driscoll to the same standard.
And while I would otherwise empathize with the threats against his family that he has pointed out, I would also contend that that is a separate issue.
There are several requirements for pastoral ministry in the New Testament, and Driscoll has bombed on several of them.
His juvenile tactics with John MacArthur?
His plagiarism?
His questionable tactics in marketing his books?
His attacks against his own leaders?
A mother lode of others who have been on the receiving end of the heavy-handed leadership at Mars Hill, a culture that Driscoll fostered?
But he didn’t sleep around on his wife…
At the end of the day, those Biblical requirements are there for a reason.
Some might contend that if we held ministers to that standard, we would disqualify about 90% of them.
Then again, looking at the state of the Church in the United States, perhaps that needs to happen…
The fact that the church has suffered a dearth of masculine leaders. That they will take any faux-masculine macho men as an alternative to the predominant effeminacy of church leaders.
Yep. Driscoll certainly had a wide appeal. To his credit, the Acts 29 framework was/is a good framework.
The problem, however, is that any system is only as good as the leaders are willing to operate within the parameters that they set up.
Driscoll stacked his inner circle with yes-men. They did not hold him accountable. The system of elders was a show at best; Driscoll made pretty much all the decisions, and those who dissented were marginalized.
He had a broad appeal to outsiders; many folks on the outside were oblivious to the crap he pulled at Mars Hill.
Ultimately, however, your character catches up to you. It always does.
Church leadership is full of effeminate men because of a paradigm that has been entrenched in the Church for more than a century.
That paradigm is the emasculated Jesus, also known as “Gentle Jesus Meek and Mild.”
That has been force-fed down the throats of Bible school students and seminarians–even at “conservative” seminaries. Many preachers have drunk the Kool-Aid and passed that on to their parishioners.
This is another front in the war on masculinity. It has given birth to reactionaries like Driscoll.
”This is another front in the war on masculinity. It has given birth to reactionaries like Driscoll.”
And I think subsequently I think people like Driscoll are unconciously influenced by the western culture’s caricature of masculinity which is devoid of the substance or the 1st principles that is real Godly Masculinity as exemplified by men like Joshua,David and Caleb and many other male saints as well at the perfection of masculinity of Christ himself.
There is a confusion of meaness like what thugs imagine as masculinity with toughness which the ancient men of faith exemplified.
The fact that contemporary church culture saps masculinity from men suggests something wrong and satanic about it.
And we often think that evil is all strong and masculine. While in truth evil comes in the form of weakness too.
Powerless(Or having the appearance of weakness, powerlessness or victimhood), weak men can be just as evil and just as destructive in distinctively different ways than we recognize in people like Hitler for example.
The Social Justice Warrior phenomenon is an example by which evil effeminate men claim or use victim or underdog identity to destroy their enemies by proxy. Using social manipulation,changing the perception of reality and even changing the definition of morality itself in order to make good look evil and evil look good.
God forbid further suffering. It seems to be heading that way.
Yeah…This is an impending train wreck.
What bothers me here is that, while many of the former leaders of the now-defunct Mars Hill Church have long since apologized, having seen the error of their ways, Mark Driscoll has not shown anything close to that level of contrition, when in fact he (a) fostered the culture that encouraged leaders to engage in controlling and abusive practices, and (b) acted in ways that were domineering, arrogant, and otherwise unbecoming of a Church overseer by any reasonable understanding of the Pauline Corpus.
I totally expect this to end very badly. And when it does, there are going to be more than a few, “See, I told you so”s.
One thing we have to be careful of when discussing this is not to assume we know more than what we actually know. Within the larger reformed community there are a ton of people that haven’t even stepped foot in the state of Washington, let alone have any real connection to Mars Hill Church. We only know – at best – what someone else has said about any given situation within the walls of what used to be Mars Hill.
I get very uncomfortable when talking about the fall of a pastor I’ve never met.
When a pastor falls, it is never without a long list of victims in the aftermath. The victims themselves are sinners. When people who have never stepped foot inside Mars Hill pretend to be experts as to what went on and add fuel to their fire it seems that does more harm than good.
While I was initially empathetic to Driscoll, as it seemed that Chandler and Company were being overly harsh on him, the unfolding of this saga has revealed some major problems on Driscoll’s end, issues that are disqualifying.
While some will rightly point out that Driscoll has been otherwise faithful to his wife, I would also contend that fitness for pastoral leadership is far more than marital fidelity, although that is definitely a biggie.
The first red flag with Driscoll in this is his lack of contrition. His apologies are not really apologies and in fact tend to cast himself as a victim. When people on the left do this, we rightly call them out. I hold Driscoll to the same standard.
And while I would otherwise empathize with the threats against his family that he has pointed out, I would also contend that that is a separate issue.
There are several requirements for pastoral ministry in the New Testament, and Driscoll has bombed on several of them.
His juvenile tactics with John MacArthur?
His plagiarism?
His questionable tactics in marketing his books?
His attacks against his own leaders?
A mother lode of others who have been on the receiving end of the heavy-handed leadership at Mars Hill, a culture that Driscoll fostered?
But he didn’t sleep around on his wife…
At the end of the day, those Biblical requirements are there for a reason.
Some might contend that if we held ministers to that standard, we would disqualify about 90% of them.
Then again, looking at the state of the Church in the United States, perhaps that needs to happen…
My sacrifice, O God, is[a] a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart
you, God, will not despise.
Psalm 51:7
The fact that the church has suffered a dearth of masculine leaders. That they will take any faux-masculine macho men as an alternative to the predominant effeminacy of church leaders.
Yep. Driscoll certainly had a wide appeal. To his credit, the Acts 29 framework was/is a good framework.
The problem, however, is that any system is only as good as the leaders are willing to operate within the parameters that they set up.
Driscoll stacked his inner circle with yes-men. They did not hold him accountable. The system of elders was a show at best; Driscoll made pretty much all the decisions, and those who dissented were marginalized.
He had a broad appeal to outsiders; many folks on the outside were oblivious to the crap he pulled at Mars Hill.
Ultimately, however, your character catches up to you. It always does.
What’s your thoughts on the matter? Why do you think the church leadership is full of effeminate men?
Like this guy:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CEfZBXyWMAAM3iM.jpg:large
Church leadership is full of effeminate men because of a paradigm that has been entrenched in the Church for more than a century.
That paradigm is the emasculated Jesus, also known as “Gentle Jesus Meek and Mild.”
That has been force-fed down the throats of Bible school students and seminarians–even at “conservative” seminaries. Many preachers have drunk the Kool-Aid and passed that on to their parishioners.
This is another front in the war on masculinity. It has given birth to reactionaries like Driscoll.
”This is another front in the war on masculinity. It has given birth to reactionaries like Driscoll.”
And I think subsequently I think people like Driscoll are unconciously influenced by the western culture’s caricature of masculinity which is devoid of the substance or the 1st principles that is real Godly Masculinity as exemplified by men like Joshua,David and Caleb and many other male saints as well at the perfection of masculinity of Christ himself.
There is a confusion of meaness like what thugs imagine as masculinity with toughness which the ancient men of faith exemplified.
The fact that contemporary church culture saps masculinity from men suggests something wrong and satanic about it.
And we often think that evil is all strong and masculine. While in truth evil comes in the form of weakness too.
Powerless(Or having the appearance of weakness, powerlessness or victimhood), weak men can be just as evil and just as destructive in distinctively different ways than we recognize in people like Hitler for example.
The Social Justice Warrior phenomenon is an example by which evil effeminate men claim or use victim or underdog identity to destroy their enemies by proxy. Using social manipulation,changing the perception of reality and even changing the definition of morality itself in order to make good look evil and evil look good.