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
matybigfro, I agree that there is much about the SGM/MH/EV stories that is reminiscent of the charismatic flavor of shepherding abuse. Interesting parallel about where the authority lies, “Touch not the Lord’s PhDs!”
@Mike,
Thanks for chiming in – very helpful in fact. From what Alex had said, I thought that the source was someone much closer to the epicenter, but given your explanation, I would likely not have assumed the communication was especially private at the time either. I’m curious though, what you remember from 4-5 years ago about the rumors surrounding the Jones’ divorce… had you heard the story alleging Julie’s mental illness? Just wondering what you and Julie (Clawson) recall from that time that might help shed light on what was happening.
@Alex,
It helps your cause that Mike has commented now… I’m less concerned about your last name especially after having him appear and verify (or at least imply) that you’re not an “unseen hand” masquerading as something else here. Can I ask something though? It sounds like you were part of the Emerging/ent movement 5 years ago but perhaps aren’t now. You said that you hadn’t been hurt by anyone there, but why did you leave? Was it theological or something else?
@FuturistBrad,
“…making the bible our bitch.” I love that phrase.
@Matybigfro @FuturistBrad @Linda et al
Appreciate the connection to Shepherding Movement in praxis here. It was 10 yeas ago this month I bailed on my CLB (“Church I Left Behind”) after my “pastor” followed me home from church with his wife and kids in the van so he could blow a gasket it in my driveway yelling at me until my wife (doing shiftwork) woke up. This in a church that was heavily influenced by the Shepherding Movement despite the fact that Robbymac quotes Barney Coombs (their itinerant apostle) as saying his churches were unaffected by it. The movement had crashed before I started at that church, but I should have taken closer note when despite Bob Mumford saying “we were wrong”, they kept saying things like, “There was a lot of good stuff there, they just took it too far.” Which I should have noticed was just another way of saying “We like the theology despite what people keep doing with it.” I think I’ve got most of the dust off my feet now.
(Disclosure: Robbymac is a good personal friend, and I was privileged to help him edit and discuss ideas that became his first book, Post-Charismatic.) Anyone interested in the history of theological error and abuse in the charismatic church should pick up his new/revised edition of Post-Charismatic. Reading through it, you can quickly see that each error began with a reaction to another one an attempt to correct something that probably did need correcting… but each new thing kept going off the rails in a different spot.
This is what makes what was said above about deconstruction so important. You have to know ahead of time what you need to keep in place, and at some point you need to start reconstructing. Otherwise you’ll eventually be sitting all alone on a pile of dung. (Congratulations on your deconstruction.)
@BillyMadison,
If you had read all the comments, you would have known that the question of evidence has already been addressed. It has been confirmed outside of this thread, and some who are here (including yours truly) looked into it in a more evidentiary way back in ‘08-9, and have been satisfied. Every new bit of information in this thread supports Julie’s story, and where clarifications have indicated that someone has been tarred with the wrong brush, she has been very quick to apologize and move on. The picture is pretty clear to those that have actually been reading. And that’s really more than enough said about it.
ps. - Personally, as an introvert, I find clowns somewhat disturbing. Why are they always pretending to be so happy? Why do they always pull out random people from crowds and make fun of them?
Hey!
Been watching the last couple of days. Someone mentioned the person who came after me and I just needed to stay away as to not say something I would better be silent about.
It is important for those, like Alex, to know that those of us that have been manipulated and broken by leaders in this ring use a lot of tactics that do ringers on you. You find that something that seems innocent was actually a way to corner you and twist things. It is hard for people who have not encountered this behavior to understand. I know I have become less trusting. As you can see, here I do not use my name. I did not realize my personal pic was going to show up. Had I known I would have done something to make that go away. I do not trust like I used to. I have had people call my family to inform them of some wrong doing. Use things to make me look crazy.
The ability to see someone’s intintions as sincere is not so clear to us (those have been abused). In think it is important to keep that in mind.
Julie, I don’t think you need to apologize. Alex’s questions were intrusive and inappropriate.
Don’t discount your intuition.
Alex, I am sorry you feel that way. I apologize for being defensive but I have been on edge for years, and I have PTSD because of my experience with abuse. That was unfair of me to jump on you. I think you are genuinely interested in details, and like I said, just message me and I will answer them all.