Tony Jones on Mark Driscoll: What came first, the thug or the theology?

Ironically, it seems like you’ve created your own culture here where motives are cynically questioned, honest questioning is dismissed and anything that is contrarily spoken against the actions and behavior of the group is mercilessly met with derision.
Congratulations, you’ve become the very thing you rally against.
Truly, hurt people, hurt people.

Hi John Musick:

Thanks for visiting my blog and specifically this post and making a comment.

Rather than take you on point by point, I decided I’d rather address the thrust of your comment.

Is it really mudslinging if the accusations are true? As Anne Lamott has written, “You own everything that happened to you. Tell your stories. If people wanted you to write warmly about them, they should have behaved better.”

We’ve all heard the authorized side. Now we’re hearing the unauthorized side. On the one hand it looks like the silenced are finally finding a safe place to protect their dignity, while on the other hand it appears there are some who are still trying to find a place to protect their reputations.

I understand how messy this is. Uncomfortable. Chaotic. Angry. Conflicting. But I’m convinced through experience and observation that this can be creative.

If you take some time to read through the comments, you will actually read apologies and forgiveness. And it won’t end here. I expect more to come.

Isn’t this the good fruit that rises out of the mud you wish we would conceal?

In my previous comment, I used the term interlocking directory for a professional network involving “Commenders” whose recommendations and actions prop up others who may be spiritually abusive. So, I thought I’d add some more description about the term and what exactly that network is.

Below is part of a comment I put on a post April 2014 about what could be called the “Patriarchy Oligarchy,” a cluster of close relationships that supports the patriarchy movement. At the end of it, I mention the patriarchy movement potentially experiencing a melt-down (which I think we’ve continued to see happening). I hadn’t read this comment in a while, but when i did today, it brought to mind Acts 5, and what the teacher Gamaliel said concerning the earliest Christian movement, "Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.” (Acts 5:38-39, NIV, Biblegateway). Not justifying any potentially bad behavior, but just think that Gamaliel’s sentiment is relevant on this thread. The presence of anger doesn’t mean it’s automatically unjust or unrighteous … and if people go over the line with their anger, they’re responsible for that but it doesn’t mean it’s all irresponsible.

Anyway, here’s the excerpt from that comment.

http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/04/30/the-duggars-promote-bill-gothard-and-the-pearls/#comment-141736

Over 40 years ago, an investigative reporter in my then home town did an amazing piece of work on the power brokers of our little area of the world. She research[ed] and verified how a very small number of families created an “interlocking directory” of relationships through owning major businesses, holding significant or controlling interests in multiple forms of media (both print and broadcast), serving on major philanthropical foundations and/or non-profit boards, and involving themselves in the shaping of local politics. In effect, this group formed an oligarchy — a gridlock of elites who wielded their clout throughout the region.

When the report was released through an independent media source, it created quite the stir. Those named did what they could to minimize the appearance of their influence or the depth of their interconnections, but the documentation said what it said nevertheless. And if you simply sketched out a mind-map showing the various realms of influence and the relationships among the people most intimately involved, the clusters that appeared in this connect-the-dots exercise would be hard to deny.

And all these years later, I’ve not forgotten that tenacious and courageous reporter’s term of “interlock[ing] directory.” I believe that is what we are uncovering as we see the inner workings of this “authoritarian christian industrial complex” of key individuals, families, churches, ministries, agencies, publishers, conferences, seminaries, denominations, movements. The press (including “citizen journalists” and survivor blog writers) have been pulling at the loose threads here and there, and it looks like the entire muffler may unravel as different people and organizations attempt to deny the interconnections, or minimize underlying doctrines that have given shape to their whole gridlock of power. (Such as, “We believe in different gender roles for men and women, but we aren’t that kind of patriarchy!”)

It now seems a rather large bunch of loose threads are sticking out, having primed themselves for counter-authoritarian picking and pulling. Mark Driscoll and his elders. Sovereign Grace Ministries. Bill Gothard and IBLP. Doug Phillips; Vision Forum, Inc.; and Vision Forum Ministries. And with them, out pop those knitted-in key representatives of this interlocking authoritarian directory of patriarchy, quiverfull and homeschool movement, etc.

[…]

Perhaps the “Patriarchy Oligarchy” will experience a much warranted melt-down as it gets more exposed to the light …

if Julie’s sole purpose is to harm Tony’s reputation, is there a blog out there that she’s been hosting for all of these years to continually pump this information out to the general public? If so, I’d like the link. ;)

This is a really long “thought chunk,” but I hope it’s helpful for processing what seems to be happening on this thread, and why.

SOME POINTS OF BACKGROUND/DISCLOSURE: I have been a student of political sociology, dynamics of dissent and social change, and organizational development since the mid-1970s. Since January of 2009, I have been writing a book for non-profits about dealing with leadership and organizational systems where abuse of power is involved. I had already been tracking many potentially relevant situations in the larger evangelical community for a long time prior to that, including goings on around Emergent Village and many other “streams” that came out of the “emerging ministry movement” of the mid-1990s to early 2000s.

On June 8, 2014, I published a blog post entitled, “Thoughts on Redemption in the Wake of Abuse: Agents of Damage versus Agents of Healing.”

http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/thoughts-on-redemption-in-the-wake-of-abuse-agents-of-damage-versus-agents-of-healing/

(The comment below will make more sense if you read the Agents of Damage/Healing post.) There is a section in that post where I introduced an original framework I developed over the past five years on “10 Pairs of Roles in Systems of Damage versus Healing.” This is the same set of 10 roles that I’ve been using to talk about a “Pyramid of Responsibility” and what level of direct culpability or indirect complicity people have in toxic systems.

What follows here is an until-now-unpublished companion piece on “Commenders” that I produced around that same time as I published the Agents of Damage/Healing piece (June 2014). I present it here (and will post it on my own blog shortly) without any editorial changes except that I have removed the Fotolia images that I planned to use. (I note that in part because I used the term “theological thugs.”) I didn’t write about Commenders with this current situation in mind, but because I have generally been seeing an increased level of push-back against them from the spiritual abuse survivor community over the past five years. I suspect we will see much more to come …

Anyway, maybe this material will help readers in expanding their context (or at least in understanding my opinion) on why the calling out of those who may be considered Commenders could help bring light and resolution to questions about Emergent Village system toxicity. Many of these questions were raised in blogs at least in December 2009 through early 2010. Understandably, the series of comments here has brought out a lot of heat along with light. However, for what it’s worth, please consider that because of these questions/comments being deleted, deflected, or otherwise unanswered in 2009-2010, the heat now perhaps could’ve been prevented by open responses then. But instead, apparently both behind-the-scenes and on-the-blogs attempts to resolve issues were blocked. So now, it is what it is.

Okay, and now, here this is. Commenders …

Commenders Who Prop Up and Perpetuate an Authoritarian System:

Focusing in on “Commenders” and “Defenders”

Within the Perpetrator/Perpetuator system is a super group – COMMENDERS. (They are the counterfeit opposite of DEFENDERS in the Survivor/Supporter system.) Commender members in this special category invest their own resources and reputation to promote the Dictators and to demote, defuse, deter any who would challenge the presumed rights and reputation of their Dictator colleagues.

Many Commenders have positions in their own agencies or businesses that are part of an interlocking directory (i.e., professional network) with that of the Dictators. So, they are able to offer opportunities (like speaking engagements, publishing contracts, event participation) with positive payoffs in terms of exposure, publicity, and finances. This means that, in defending the Dictators, they are also banking their own influence as loyalists to elevate the entire network of individual and organizations in this negative support system, and not just the Dictators.

They also shield Dictators from scrutiny, negative publicity, and any other form of challenge. They use every other tactic in the Perpetrator-Perpetuator system to reinforce what the Dictators deem as “right” and extinguish all other thoughts, speech, actions, and identities as “wrong.” They also enable a “false positive” profile of the Dictators’ system by lauding and applauding them/it publicly and avoiding the identification or acknowledgement of anything wrong.

However, they are not pawns in this. Commenders should know better because of their own position of responsibility and authority. But for whatever combination of personal and/or professional reasons, they continue to promote and protect those who perpetrate evil. They twist the truth and act like “theological thugs.”

So, when the truth about the Dictators comes out, shouldn’t their Commenders deserve the same fate as their Dictator friends? After all, they helped perpetuate the Dictators’ reigns. But as the prophet Isaiah states in the Bible:

Doom to those who call evil good and good evil,
who present darkness as light and light as darkness,
who make bitterness sweet and sweetness bitter.
(Isaiah 5:20, Common English Bible)

The Bible also states:

The sins of some are obvious, reaching the place of judgment ahead of them; the sins of others trail behind them. In the same way, good deeds are obvious, and even those that are not obvious cannot remain hidden forever. (1 Timothy 5:24-25, New International Version)

The Dutch philosopher-theologian Erasmus said, “He who allows oppression shares the crime.” So – if/when the Dictators’ deeds become evident that they have engaged in evil and inflicted harm on others – what constitutes appropriate consequences for their special Commenders? What options should be considered, based on the types and degrees of support they gave, and the level of damage that resulted among the victims of their Dictator friends/colleagues?

• Public exposure documenting their participation in corruption, and calls for censure?
• Disqualification from public leadership and removal from their position?
• Calls for a transparent, public process of accountability through apologizing and restitution?
• Dissolution and dissembling of their organization?

Whether these Commenders have supported their Dictator friends through their own blind spots or through blind loyalty, they have given us ample reason to question their critical thinking, discernment, and decision-making skills. They have not proven themselves trustworthy. [“DEFENDERS” SECTION TO BE ADDED]