Knowing that the shelf life in the blog world is less than that of shellfish in the sun, I decided to keep my leave my foot out of my mouth for a few extra days. I waited and did not post what I had written regarding the controversy over Brian McLaren's Pastoral Response to Homosexuality or Mark Driscoll's ranting response. While this episode proves that *%!holes are not an endangered species, cooler heads are prevailing (what doe sthis teach us about the first person to break a story as opposed to the person who gets it right?)..
Brian responds to Mark's rant right here. His explanation was not needed for those of us that intuitively knew what he was trying to get at (maybe because we know him or simply respect him), but for those that missed the point, please read this (and if you linked to his first posting, have the decency to post to his response).
Although, I offered a few choice words of sarcasm for the justifiers at reformissionary, I mostly kept my comments to myself, waiting. Thanks be to God, Andrew Jones came along and offered up my thoughts in his typical eloquence. They are long thoughts, but please read through them. As someone who has slept in Mark Driscoll's living room (with Andrew- but no brokeback behavior) and shared stogies and beer with both on a beach in Boca Raton, I can do no more than echo these sentiments, along with those of Bob Hyatt, who gets to the heart of the problems with Mark's blog posting.
I am learning that Brian and Mark have a lot of followers and that many people went out of their way to justify anything Mark said, no matter how mean-spirited. I also learned that there are a lot of jerks out there that I hope never apply for a ministerial job in my church. They have gotten a bit of truth and are probably choking their own parishioners on that truth.
As I mentioned, I know Mark. And (this is important), there is only 1 Mark Driscoll (and you and I are not him). He is a great preacher (and shockingly funny) and good pastor with a vast understanding of Biblical truth. My concern is that all of these followers coming out of the woodwork who are trying to "BE LIKE MARK" have only 2 of these gifts (at the most). They will damage congregations by using Mark-like virilence and passion for truth without the communication gifts or pastoral skills (you have to be gifted to grow a church using offensive language and speaking for an hour). From the comments I read, I see many of his defenders lacking an understanding of pastoral counseling or care. This concerns me.
or maybe they just have Brokeback crushes on Mark.
5 comments:
I can't argue with you here, Rick. I too, wanted to quickly dive into the conversation and reject Mark's ridiculous tone and ranting right away. But you're right. Andrew and Bob pretty much said all that needed to be said. Thanks for keeping cool! Although, I've enjoyed some of your rants and would have for sure enjoyed this one!
I agree there are many driscoll wannabees. But, the same can be said for McClaren, Seay and Pagitt. We are a world of wannabees
rick - do you think it's ironic for people to fight in the name of Jesus? when i see people so consumed with defining boundaries on an issue, it seems like they're operating in a mode that is much more akin to human control (wanting to control the boundaries of some organizational concept) than it is to how i read Jesus acting. i can't help but think that our obsession with such issues is antithetical to living a life in constant communion with God. our obsessions in such matters become a large barrier to truly following Jesus.
The irony of fighting in the name of Jesus has, sadly, been around since the early church when the Judiazers and Gentiles argued.
It is interesting to think about fighting over boundaries. I can understand debating our understanding of scripture, but it needs to be done in humility ("maybe I am wrong"), but it is in the male nature to fight for their ground. I think Chriistianity is just another thing that gets caught in the male obsession to dominate, win and rule.
So many times we are obsessed with not being wrong in any area, whether politics, food choices or music. Of course, faith would come into the same area.
I think it is a level of maturity and formation (or sometimes personality) that allows a persont o move past the desire to win, dominate or be right.
don't you think that such a level of maturity is needed if we are to truly "submit" to Christ? how can we claim to really be following, if our own biology (male aggression) is blocking the way? it seems to me that there are many issues like this that are a sort of "elephant in the room" for Christians - stuff we commonly accept, yet completely hinders a Christ-centered life. it's funny, because if you were to write a book on this topic, it probably wouldn't sell. people don't want to hear about giving up the desire to win. and yet, it seems to me that the death of this desire is completely necessary.
Post a Comment