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
“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.
A follow up post to Andrew Jones Emergent Dust Storm post.
http://tallskinnykiwi.com/2014/06/emergent-dust-storm/
JULIE – Submitted on 2014/06/25 at 10:51 am
Thank you, Andrew. I forgive you wholeheartedly, and feel your stand with me now all these years later.
My children and I were delivered from the Emergent church. It was not a blessing for me and my family, but bore only rotten fruit.
From my view it was money, male ego, greed, and sin.
I truly was a victim of key Emergent Village leaders and betrayed by my own pastor at the Emergent church where I worshiped in Minneapolis.
My children forever changed. Scarred.
I’m still waiting for their public apology. They know exactly who they are, and what they did. It was wrong. It was sin.
It was about silencing the ugly truth to preserve book deals and speaking gigs. An expensive bus tour with a large sponsor from a publishing house.
The “discernment letter” written by the six of them that night in Dallas, Texas will go down as one of the most ungodly acts against a woman done by men who claim to be of God, progressive, pro-feminist, Christianity 21. Plus, discernment 101 requires that I would be part of it, and not just the husband FYI. I did not even know these men. (plus, Danielle Shroyer)
All this “discernment” in an attempt to cover up an affair.
My own pastor at the time covering up my husbands adulterous affair in order to save his own career. Especially heinous!
Sadly, the Emergent “conversation” went silent when I attempted to talk about this sin, and sought healing and redemption from those involved. No one cared to “discern” the irrefutable evidence I offered to show them even saying, “Please don’t send it to me. I don’t want to know.”
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 was years ago now. Those were crazy times. A $140,000 book advance for a bus tour from Zondervon (I think Jossey Bass in San Fran?) publishing. An affair would have been quite messy, quite untimely.
To this day, it is all neatly denied and the “Julie is crazy campaign” rocks on to rationalize bad behavior, but why else would six men (plus Danielle Shroyer) try so vehemently to have me silenced…even flying one of them “at great expense” to Minneapolis with the sole mission to get Julie locked up…flew the red eye to get that done…all that work to try and have a sane woman committed to rationalize an affair, and a rapid divorce? Sick, sick stuff.
When their plan failed due to my sanity (much to their dismay) my pastor said, “I bet I can find you a hospital to admit you.” Speechless.
I was instructed the only way my husband would stay married to me is if I committed myself…I found out later he had already retained a divorce lawyer and was in full swing with his now wife.
The intake nurse said, “Honey, you don’t need to be admitted here, but you do need a good lawyer.”
Those words turned out to be prophetic. Despite my attempts they never spoke to me again, but the heinous rumors came back to me. Very hurtful. Betrayal. Lies.
I believe it is time for forgiveness and healing. Which one of you will be brave enough to start that “conversation?”
J
I’m not sure the baby and bath water analogy even works in this case. I’m going to have to mull this over, because I’d love to be able to put my finger on what was happening there theologically.
As for the “spiritual wife,” all I can say is that it all strikes me as a repeat of the very thing the movement was trying distance itself from. It’s as if the whole movement has seen too many who don’t practice what they preach, so they just change the preaching so it fits. If preaching against adultery would indict you, well, just declare it not to be a sin and then you’re safe. Can’t be a sinner if adultery is not sin, right? Voila! It’s far more abusive than anything they were trying to pushback against. After all, even Jimmy Swaggert worked within a moral system that could indict him. If you just eliminate the moral system (at least the individual element of it), you can do whatever. You might be a bad person for not speaking out against genocide in Darfur, but you’ll never have to worry about infidelity in marriage. As I said, self-referentially incoherent.
PS Isn’t it sad that Jimmy Swaggert’s moral code was superior by comparison?
Ah, I see. Maybe they threw the baby Jesus out with the bathwater?
The photographer was very “busy” back then. Mr. Hamilton her husband….then other peoples husbands, and flitting between churches. How exhausting! And then there is all the picture taking of her subject. The Greek mythology of Narcissus reenacted in a modern day twist. Again, Freud really would have a field day with this one.
Julie, I was not at Journey church, so I think Tony’s “spiritual wife” must have spent time in between two (or more?) churches. Whether he met her at our church or elsewhere is beyond me (as I said, we were preoccupied by other issues at the time).
I can’t really comment on sketchiness at Journey, but many of the issues that were at the core of our particular pathologies were based in many congregants’ past spiritual abuse at the hands of arch-conservative pastors, and how that played out in a sort of rejection of anything resembling traditional (orthodox) Christianity. It was (perhaps still is) a very complex situation of people being being unable to abandon the label of “Christian” even as they railed against anything that resembled traditional Christianity. Perhaps that is less a testament to their own pathologies more to that of a previous generation (mostly Texas Southern Baptist).