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.
1080 comments
Hey Jen. Thanks my friend! You can “like” it on that floating facebook like button on the left. If you dare yahahaha ;)
David, we need to figure out how to add a like button. :-) Well spoken response.
As has been well documented, this abuse goes well beyond to one emergent leader demonstrating what they like to term “Driscoll-like behavior” – what Julie describes is how those who critiqued Emergent Village, Outlaw Preachers, Wild Goose (though it seems to now be dominated by the Sojourners crew), Pathroes Progressive blogger portal and other incantations of this group. There are a host of other victims out there, who for the most part remain silent because they’ve seen what happens to those of us who speak out both professionally and personally.
Don’t forget, EVERY author/agent/publisher who markets via the US emergent brand is responsible for this culture of abuse – those who did not participate in it, stood by silently as it happened. This includes – but is not limited to – those Julie listed who owe her an apology. IMO the only way to end this is to refuse to buy into the brand – EVEN if someone is your “personal” friend, do not buy any more product from abusers, pay to watch them play, etc.
Having recently gone through a divorce myself, I can unequivocally assert that what exists in the public record provides only a glimmer of the full truth and often serves to obfuscate it. Tony’s claim that the full reality is available through public court documents is simply disingenuous. And, his “think of the children” defense is patently absurd. It is not the job of parents to protect children from the truth, especially when they are caught in the middle of messy and painful circumstances in which one party has so clearly attempted to wrest control of the narrative to salvage his own reputation.
It’s clear that Julie has been subjected to abominable treatment by men in positions of power, and that her attempts to expose the truth have been thwarted by those very same people. I’m glad this forum exists as a vehicle for her story. The truth can only be properly adjudicated if all voices are heard. And, from my perspective, the truth falls 100% on Julie’s side.
I feel the personal need to make a comment giving my take on what’s happening and why I think it is important. Basically, I’m copying and pasting a letter that I’ve sent to those who are contacting me privately, outside of this forum, calling what is happening here into question. There are subtle and not so subtle attempts to silence what is happening here.
So here it is, in gist:
I want to make clear up front that I have not, up to now, held anything personally against Tony. Or Doug. My original post was simply intended to raise the question of what came first, the theology or the abusive tendencies of a person, Driscoll particularly. I think that is a valid and important question for the church and its leaders. This is what the post is about.
There was no intention on my part for the post to turn into what it became… a forum for those who feel they’ve been silenced to freely express themselves. Although that is the ethos of nakedpastor.
As I told Doug and Tony and others, I am not in the habit of censoring the comments of my readers. Read any online platforms for news, etc., and all kinds of comments are being made by all kinds of people. They are never intended to express the views of the writer of the original article. Everyone knows the comments are the diverse responses from the readers.
What are you suggesting I do? Delete that post? Disable comments? Block certain commenters? Censor comments? Lay ground rules for how to be angry and express the injustices perpetrated against them?
I’m not about to begin censoring comments now, even as disturbing as some of them may be.
Although divorce is painful for all those involved, the primary issue is not the divorce. Everyone knows divorces are messy. I don’t think the intention is to gravitate people to one side or another concerning the divorce in and of itself. And of course I don’t want to moderate another divorce proceeding. But I want to be clear: that’s not what this is about. It seems to me the issue is the apparent silencing of people who were speaking out against what seems to be cover-ups, concealment of evidence, and the protection of leaders by their peers. It seems that some information and people were marginalized, ghettoized, and silenced for the sake of the progress of the Emergent machine and its heroes.
This may or not be true, although it’s increasingly suspicious that it was. Nevertheless, people have the right to raise this concern. Do they not? Why they have chosen to do so on nakedpastor is beyond my understanding. But this is where it is happening. So be it!
In conclusion, I do find it interesting that those who are raising concerns about all that happened and is happening are doing so unafraid in the public forum of my post with a lot of emotion and intelligence, while those who are trying to silence the discussion or at least control it are contacting me privately outside of the public forum with words that attempt to direct, intimidate or shame me. This is a pretty strong indicator to me and others that some are more worried about the apparent aggressors than they are the apparent aggrieved.
Nakedpastor is in the habit of exposing abuse, elevating the dignity of the abused, and providing a safe space for this to occur.
I don’t see this ending anytime soon.