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
Julie – re: an ironclad schedule,
I know of parents who have separated and lost the ability to negotiate with each other (or, more likely, it started when they lost the ability to negotiate!)
I think an ironclad schedule would have improved their circumstances considerably – no need to negotiate with each other, and no attempts to control the situation through their children. Just set dates and times. And the cell phones are convenient, too.
However, I wonder how that level of rigidity works in practice.
I am curious, but I completely understand if you don’t want to indulge my curiosity publicly, or at all:
What if the kids don’t want to go?
What if the non-custodial parent can’t, won’t, or just doesn’t arrive?
Linda/matybigfro,
“Touch not those who can read the scriptures in the original languages” (but are disconnected from the culture by millennia, btw).
Brother Maynard,
I think most of us deconstruct because we can smell the pile of poo, but we just can’t see it that clearly. (Or, alternately, we can see the poo leaking out around the edges of supposedly “good” circumstances. I think I’ll drop the analogy here.)
If there is something really stinky going on, many people try to ignore it, but some would rather pull things to pieces until they are able to see it clearly. Hence, deconstruction.
matybigfro,
The “studied” being unquestioned (particularly on “theological essentials” or taboo topics) is a big thing in many Evangelical and academic/theological Pentecostal/Charismatic churches as well.
Julie, http://krillco.hubpages.com/hub/Understanding-Identifying-and-Coping-With-Narcissistic-Personalities that article on NPDs is so scarily accurate. I’ve experienced the “‘Narcissistic Supply’ (NS)” people both first hand in a church situation and then also when I began to write about your situation in January of 2010.
“They are in constant search for ‘Narcissistic Supply’ (NS) ; people who are willing to be mirrors to them and give them the adulation that they feel they deserve. Or, they ‘seduce’ people with charm, compliments, and intense attention in order to trick a person into being their NS.
Narcissistic Personalities often develop many NS sources, and will have a small, close group of NS individuals around them that not only supply them with adulation, but can also be used as ‘minions’ to sic on those that the narcissist desires to defame or damage."