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
Rob from my personal experience as the “fame” money and notoriety grew, so did the abuse. They believe they are untouchable. I think that is also what happened at Mars Hill. But these circling enablers perpetuate the dysfunctional system. They have chosen to look the other way. “Don’t send that to me….I don’t want to know.”
@Tim,
Thanks for your thoughts.
I wonder whether most (or at least many) people have a latent capacity for narcissism to some degree (some more than others), and whether being placed into a position of great influence can actuate this capacity and then cause it to swell to damaging proportions.
Julie – I’m so sorry to hear this!. Don’t be afraid, don’t give up. Remember all those who have heard your voice here and will lift you up! Becoming involved with the Sanctuary Movement I’m seeing parallels with your story. God be with you!
The reason these personality disordered individuals are allowed to continue abusing is because they are common school yard bullies at their core. Many people wrote me and said I believe you and I’m sorry but I can’t get involved because of the legal ramifications. Fear and intimidation. Abuse of power. Wouldn’t it be so much easier if they could simply cough up an I’m sorry. I am in talks about a Defamation of Character lawsuit and would use testimony here from Individuaks that heard through the Emergent circles that about me. If you heard that or were told that please share that with me. That was wrong and an abuse of power and position to discredit an individual, rationalize a divorce and cover up an affair. Thank you. Post here or private message me through FB.
Oh, Julie, I am so, so sorry… however… predictable this was.
And surely the police, and the courts, have better things to do – ones that would bring more justice to the world, perhaps?
For an apparently tech- and legally-savvy blogger, Tony Jones seems unable to Google phrases like “limited public figure”, or even, perhaps, “first amendment”. Or even realise the irony of attempting to limit speech here, when he’s spoken both guardedly on his blog, and (apparently) freely to many others… judging by the number of people dropping by on his behalf.
Fortunately, many of us (including David) are in non-US jurisdictions. So that makes pursuing us a little more difficult.
I realise, however, that none of these factors matter at all. I am beginning to see the severity of the lack of perspective (or is it a delusion? – I don’t know the right terms).
It’s so unfortunate that you are a preferred and nearby target.
Best hopes and prayers for resolving this latest mess. I’m sad to see your six months of legal peace end.
May the police, and, althought I hope not, the courts, listen, see clearly, and treat you fairly.