Join our Newsletter
If you like The NakedJournal, you'll enjoy my weekly newsletter about deconstruction, freedom, and life in general.
Tony Jones on Mark Driscoll: What came first, the thug or the theology?
This drawing is inspired by the Ouroboros Snake... of the snake eating its own tail.
What came first? The chicken or the egg? What came first? The thug or the theology? I read Tony Jones' thoughts on Mark Driscoll.
Jones has always admired Driscoll, maybe envies him a little, wants the best for him, believes he can be redeemed, and suggests that things can be restored.
What I found most interesting though is that Jones believes the problem with Driscoll is theological.
- He titles his post is "Thoughts about Mark Driscoll"
- He talks about the "heady" days of publishing and speaking.
- He dismisses his disturbing personality traits by his use of the word "sure".
- He says it isn't a moral issue (evil) but that he is passionate.
- He says more than once that Driscoll is "extremely smart" or "brilliant".
- He suggests that he will "see" (as in "think"?) his way out of this.
- He writes that Driscoll has just embraced a toxic version of theology.
- He hopes that Driscoll will turn away from this toxic theology.
- He concludes therefore that Driscoll is not the problem, but his theology.
But my question is‚ What came first? The thug or the theology?
That is, did Driscoll become the focus of concern because of his theology? Or was it because of his behavior?
I'm concerned that Jones' post reflects the refusal of the church to understand spiritual abuse. It neglects the pathology of its abusive leaders. I don't think this is being fair to the victims or the perpetrators of spiritual abuse. People are victims of not just a bad theology, but a pathological cruelty.
I don't think Driscoll's theology made this happen. Driscoll "embraced" his toxic version of theology because it aligned with his moral compass. It fit his personality. It worked for him to achieve his goals. Then it manifested the worst in him. Then he continued to develop his toxic theology in order to make more room for his pathological behavior. Mars Hill Church too.
Jones' sentence, "It could have happened to any of us." is true, because I believe we all participate in this dynamic. Theology is our creation. It is a reflection of our drives and desires.
Then, not satisfied to only be the product of our drives and desires, it also becomes the producer of them. Theology is a vicious cycle of our desperate need to understand and control our universe.
Step into this cycle at any point and you can see that we are both the root and fruit of our theology and pathology.
And yes, it spins out of control by manifesting itself in toxic, controlling, and abusive behavior. Nothing can be done about bad theology because of free thought and speech.
But we can do something when this manifests itself in bad behavior. Cruel theology is a nuisance. Cruel behavior is unacceptable.
When Driscoll thinks bully to his people, we can say please stop. But when he actually bullies people, we can step in and say you will stop now!
I don't think this is a theological issue. I think it is a pathological one. Not just for Driscoll and Jones, but for the entire church.
If we would be healed, our theology would take care of itself.
1079 comments
While we’re on the topic of narcissistic behaviour (or perhaps just wounded pride):
Tony Jones and Rod Dreher agreed on a http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/tag/same-sex-marriage-blogalogue/ Same-Sex Marriage Blogalogue (and yes, the irony of two cisgender straight married men discussing Same Sex Marriage was acknowledged).
Tony put in a lot of effort, writing about 15 posts. Rod wrote less, and finally chose to discuss the issue with Andrew Sullivan.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2009/04/03/breaking-news-rod-will-debate-same-sex-marriage/ Tony’s response demonstrates a tendency towards pride/narcissism and psychological analysis/gaslighting :
The headline and lead:
“Breaking News: Rod Will Debate Same Sex Marriage
It just turns out that he won’t debate it with me.”
…
“We started earnestly but quickly petered out. I wrote, Rod didn’t respond.”
…
“Well, Rod has jumped back into the fray. But not with me. With Andrew Sullivan.
Now, listen, I don’t begrudge Rod his right to blogalogue with Andrew instead of me. All of us in the blogosphere know that an inbound link from Sullivan is, “Gold, Jerry, gold!“
So I’ll just take this opportunity to continue the blogalogue in my little (tiny) corner of the Interwebs by reflecting on their posts."
…
“I think that Rod’s conversion to Orthodoxy plays a bigger role than his interlocuters realize. Rod converted to Catholicism in his 20s, after a hedonistic youth. In other words, it was a pretty radical conversion. Then, after reporting on the pedophilia scandals of the Catholic church, and almost losing his faith over it, he converted to Orthodoxy.
So what? Well, I had a talk with Frederica Mathewes-Green a couple years ago that shed light on this for me. She, too, converted to Orthodoxy after years as a pretty radical feminist. … One had to embrace Orthodoxy in toto, she told me, to really appreciate the Jesus Prayer. To emphasize her point, she said this meant the whole Orthodox enchilada, including a 3rd century hermeneutic and cosmology!
“You mean demons and a flat Earth?” I asked. “Not a flat Earth,” she said.
I don’t want to over-psychologize Rod or Frederica, but I have known a number of people who’ve converted to Orthodoxy, and it does seem to attract a certain type of person who, at some deep level, is looking for an enclosed system of belief — the most-bounded of bounded sets. And systems like these have an answer for virtually every exigency. Further, they often tend to revel in taking positions that cut against the grain of contemporary society and are even doomed to failure (as Rod has said his opposition of SSM is)."
…
“But for my part, this is neither an intellectually nor spiritually compelling move, because it mitigates against the ongoing work and revelation of the Holy Spirit. In fact, methinks, instead of maintaining an openness to the Spirit, it tends to enshrine the opinions of men — particularly dead, white ones.
The Orthodox don’t call their current seminary professors “theologians.” The theologians of the Orthodox church are a bounded set, and they lived in the patristic period.
That tells you something, doesn’t it?"
I am now dying from the irony of Tony et al.’s ongoing attempts to enshrine the opinions of living white men.
Holly? Is it possible Steve Knight is not telling you the truth? Were you there that night when Doug Pagitt contacted him a Saturday in Sept 2008? If Doug is so loving and transcending and wants only goodness to flow as he posted here 450 posts ago, than he should start with clearing of his good buddy Steve Knight’s name because right now the story goes that he scrubbed it at Doug’s directive.
I’m not attempting to shut Julie or anyone else down. It’s not within my power, nor would I feel entitled to do so. I just think it’s interesting that the people who tear down emergent aren’t really around to see what’s happening now. All this critique is old news. There’s lots of new stuff to either lift up or tear down. And if you don’t care enough to show up and see what’s current then why do you care enough to keep trashing the old incarnation? As for funding, Transform isn’t actually funded beyond the partners listed on our website once a year for our gathering. No one gets paid to work on it and it’s not fiscally associated with any of the orgs listed above. We do it b/c we love the community and love the work. And Steve Knight didn’t scrub the Emergent Village website. There was more than one admin back in those days. I’m not defending anyone accused in this thread other than Steve b/c he’s my partner co-conspirator and I hate to see him trashed for something he didn’t do. Plus he’s too humble to defend himself. :)
best quote of the day!
No matter how you try to put the lipstick on the pig, it still stinks and squeals
-Becky Garrison
It’s kinda humorous how these stakeholders with financial ties pop in and then disappear. Then I Google them and they are in bed with the abusers? People! There is this fancy new fangled machine called the internet.
@Julie McMahon, you rock! It’s taken me literally days to wade through this in my free time, and I am so grateful for your boldness, graciousness, and adherence to facts, despite all the temptations to sling mud, innuendo, and worse.
You and the others who have spoken of their abusive spiritual leaders have been in my prayers all day as I went about my business at church. After 25 years in various forms of ministry, both church and para-church, I have seen too much. I have often wondered why God punished Israel so harshly in the Old Testament, and allows the church to carry on in similar ways. Maybe your testimonies are the beginning of the church’s humiliation and hopefully repentance, in our time.