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
So the same complaints keep coming back that this blog is an inappropriate venue to talk about something as personal as a divorce.
It gets very frustrating after a while when those who claim to be silenced are also not heard when they do speak.
Brad, you say, “I still am not convinced that an online thread is an appropriate venue to discuss such a painful family matter.”
But the aggrieved keep saying it’s not about the divorce but the way it was managed by certain people.
Silent cries falling on deaf ears.
Julie – I accept your apology.
Please understand – I don’t want to be involved in this matter any longer. I’m sorry for your painful experiences in this matter and our past friendship, but I’m no longer willing to be involved.
As anticipated, more criticism and labels have been presented – so some points of clarifications are needed:
• Our involvement in this matter came from Julie’s request. I suspect Julie had requested intervention from others and they declined to get involved. We HEARD Julie – so we intervened.
• Intervention is a risk – All pastors/professionals know this. You can become involved in matters hoping to help out, but yourself can get thrown into the mess. I think this happened in this case. I know the people libeled in this thread – I don’t know all the details of personal behavior, but I know the “Discernment Group” did nothing “evil” in this matter.
• “The Discernment Group” was only given this name so that Julie would know that we took her request seriously, with prayer and a sense of urgency. There was no ongoing discussion of the matter of their marriage only discussion on how we could resolve Julie’s immediate request to end the tour and get Tony home. Julie keeps mentioning the “discernment letter” she mentions it as “ungodly”. She’s offered to post the letter – I think she should do so!!! The letter will demonstrate that we HEARD Julie, we INTERVENED on her behalf, and we recommend specific LOCAL CARE, because we knew we could not be involved long-term. I remain unapologetic for what we did! We got involved because we cared for Julie and Tony. I’m actually SHOCKED that our action has been spun into a cover-up narrative.
• No follow-up was given by the group because we resolved the matter the intervention was requested for and nothing further was requested. In other words – we did exactly what Julie asked that we do!
• I still am not convinced that an online thread is an appropriate venue to discuss such a painful family matter. Very few people commenting in this thread bear responsibility to the people in this thread or for the comments they make. This is the issue I have with the “virtual community” – people add their commentary, but have no responsibility for them or for the people they affect.
• There is much misinformation on this thread:
o The emergent movement is not a cult
o emergent started as a conversation among people of various theological/philosophical understandings and remains that way
o The emergent conversation hasn’t faded away at all – in fact – it’s now integrated in practically every Christian expression
o Mars Hill and emergent have very little in common
o Mark Driscoll and Tony Jones have very little in common
o I don’t know of the personal behavior of everyone involved in the conversation, but because people have been involved – I’m sure there has to be bad behavior from some. I just don’t know of all this overt evil people on this thread decry and claim a cover-up is involved – I remain unconvinced of any such thing. I still view this as a very ugly private family matter…and now with all this commentary.
o I haven’t posted on my blog for years, but I am going to answer many of these claims on my blog in the near future. I will post a link when I do.
Jim Hebert (October 1, 2014 at 11:20 am) said: [[“Because God is bigger I still wait in hope for those men to step forward and say, “I’m sorry, Julie. That was wrong.” I will warmly forgive them.” That’s the thing, you should have forgiven them already. For your own sake, for their sake and exactly because of the point you made at the beginning of this statement: God is bigger.]]
I think I see your point, Jim – and from what follows, correct me if I’m wrong – and I partially agree with you. Forgiveness is crucial for healing and for turning things over to God. And I also believe there is more. The same Jesus who in the Gospels mandates we forgive our enemies and pray for those who persecute us (Matthew 5:44, NIV), is the same Word who in the Epistles mandates that the Church hold leaders accountable. Forgive leaders who sin, yes. Trust and restore to leadership roles again … depends.
And, at least as I see it, Julie has sought to do both in this thread – work toward forgiveness and hold leaders accountable. Also, in the ongoing process here, she may have changed her view some on the paradox of forgiveness plus calling to account as a part of seeking justice. The comment you quoted from was originally posted on TallSkinnyKiwi’s blog on June 25, 2014. She’s the only one who can speak to that and how she’s grown in the meantime.
As far as this calling to account issue, I recently wrote about creating a list of “must haves and can’t haves” from key New Testament scriptures about what is required of those who would be leaders in the church. Below are a lot of the “can’t haves” on the list. They show us what level of Christlike character and life-skill development are necessary for elders, overseers, deacons. (All verses from the New International Version via biblegateway.com.)
1 Timothy 3:1-13 – “Not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money … not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain … if there is nothing against them, let them serve.” 1 Timothy 5:17-25 – “Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, and do not share in the sins of others.” Titus 1:5-9 – “Not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient … not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.” 1 Peter 5:1-4 – “Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must … not pursuing dishonest gain … not lording it over those entrusted to you.”I’d make the argument that just as elders-overseers-deacons are public figures because they are leaders in the churches, so also those who present themselves as leaders in the decentralized Church, such as through publishing, blogging, speaking, and event hosting, are subject to those same “must have/can’t have” mandates. They’re not off the hook for accountability simply because what they do isn’t within the confines of a local church. And they’re not necessarily off the hook if those who have been harmed forgive them.
Anyway, we in the West live with the philosophical and theological tradition of analyzing and then polarizing things that cultures with more holistic paradigms would keep in paradox. There are good things within how we typically process information in the West, but this problem of splitting is not one of them.
So instead of disconnecting the two, I see these two as a both/and rather than an either/or – BOTH forgive AND hold accountable. As a spiritual abuse survivor, it’s been my observation that splitting these two now inevitably leads to trouble later.
A “forgive only” approach when those in leadership sin usually leaves in positions of power those who may not be at all repentant and will continue to harm others. It also leaves the forgiver in an accomplice role of some complicity if there is damage done to others in the future for failure to call out leaders’ patterns of toxic behavior now. A “hold accountable only” approach toward leaders who sin usually hardens the non-forgiver in a revenge mode, and frequently sparks further hardness of heart in leaders with patterns of sin.Neither of those is healthy. As individuals and as church bodies, we need the both/and of forgiveness with holding accountable.
Pastor Ken Silva was a good guy. We emailed just two weeks ago. I am sorry to hear he died. His Christianity was much more conservative than mine, but he would regularly email me and check in on me and the kids and tell me he was praying for us. He called this whole Emergent cover up story out publicly years ago. And was SILENCED.
“That’s why I am asking all of you to never click on a link posted by Ken Silva, or Christian Research Net, or Lighthouse Trails Research, or Apprising Ministries. Never use their names in a post or on a website (as I just did). And if you’ve got any old posts that link to their site, delete the links.
I’m not asking you to do this because I’m afraid of criticism. If you’ve followed me at all in the past few years, you know that I’m not. I’m asking you to do these things because these critics are dishonest. (Online source, bold his)."
Tony Jones
http://apprising.org/2010/01/07/emergent-pain-and-discord-in-the-emerging-church/
Ken Silva
Sep 12
to me
Hi Julie,
It’s nice to hear from you. I hope you and your children are well.
Hmm, Tony calls out Driscoll; the pot calls the kettle black.
jmac
Sep 12
to Ken
Hi to you! Yes, we are doing great. The irony is too rich. Peace!
Ken Silva
Sep 12
to me
Glad to hear ya’ll are doing great. Yes, the irony is deep indeed.
Ken Silva
Sep 18 (13 days ago)
to me
Hi Julie,
Here’s pdf files of the comments section at Naked Pastor so they won’t be lost.
Thought you might want a record of what was said.
Ken
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/mars-hill-emergent-movement-emergent-meltdown/