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
If sharing your story involves another party who does not want their story told and they are a public figure, they sometimes choose to sue for libel or slander. Lawsuits are not the only avenue. Cease and dissist letters are common avenues.
In other news, this blog thread has allowed me to reconnect with some good folk I’ve not talked to in a long time. When I left that world I left it all. It was too difficult to sift the wheat from the chaff. I tried. I was also in a really unhealthy space in my own life and had to draw firm boundaries from toxic communities that fed my unhealthy coping skills until I learned to stand on my own.
I am not going to blame all religion. Some pockets of religion are very easy spaces for unhealthy people to not only exist without treatment, but they can lead. The dangers for fostered codependency and harm to others that may result from that are being showcased in this thread. It ain’t just emergent though. This is a disease that affects all denoms, theologies and mindsets.
Anyway, gotta take kid to school, meet a friend for breakfast and go back to bed.
I have said anything useful I have to say. I’ll be following and clicking thumbs up to stuff.
Thank you again David and Julie and all the brave victims who kicked ass here.
Julie, I met you once when I visited SP in April 2007 while I was in M’polis for a Northumbria Community weekend. I went to 4 San Diego Zondervan Pastors’ Conferences 2006-2009. The EV authors were putting on paper what I had been thinking about for at least the previous 10 years, and I wanted to connect with them personally because I was (pretty desperately) looking for a group of Protestant Christians with whom I could seek God, hoping to find anything like what they were advocating and describing near where I live in the Coastal Range of northern California – the pickin’s were and are really slim. What can I say – I’m somewhat of an idealist… I regularly read many Emergent blogs back in the day, hoping….
Interestingly, the wind began to go out of the Emergent sails for me at that very visit to SP, in the way that communion was served. I suppose what ended up being for me a rather free-for-all melee, instead of a real experience of communion with like-minded and ostensibly like-hearted folks, is sort of an object lesson that ended up characterizing most of the rest of my journey in Emerging church circles. Doug made time for me – a nobody overweight, middle-aged housewife (and helped me process my “allergy” to one M. Driscoll, who was speaking in the next room that year). Tony and other big authors actually conversed with me. I met some really interesting and, in my experience, very kind people – Phyllis actually was the kindest. However, I was on primarily a theological journey, and ultimately, even though the people treated me well in those venues, Emergent (and for me all of Western) theology just developed a lot of holes. I couldn’t patch all the leaks, and there was nothing left for me but to abandon that ship.
Julie, I believe you. I’m so glad you are standing firm in the truth, taking such huge positive steps, and finding support in your worship community of the moment :) It’s not that I expect people I admire to be perfect, but bringing this to light has certainly erased my admiration of some and deeply tarnished that of others; I value honesty a lot more than bare theological concepts. Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us… I wish those people I admired – one in particular – would peer into the depths of their hearts and find the humility, love and courage to do the right thing by you.
I actually ended up in EO – was received in June 2009. That year’s San Diego conf. was the last time I took communion as a Protestant; it was my farewell. The next Sunday I was made an Orthodox catechumen, and felt like I was finally home. We EOs certainly have our share of problems, but (so far) there’s not a Publishing/Speaking engine “stoking [any] star-maker machinery…”
I once shook your hand, while thinking that you were one of the most strikingly beautiful women I had ever met. After having read this thread, I still believe that to be true in more ways than one, and send you a big virtual hug.
Dana
artistglover,
In one sense, the precise civil case doesn’t matter. Any legal matter can tie you up in the courts for years, and cost plenty of money to defend. Regardless of the merits of the case, or the spuriousness of the accusations.
That’s one reason that some public figures may have been hesitant to engage with this thread – any apology, or even private information disclosure, could potentially ruin their careers. (I am not suggesting Julie would do this – I imagine she’s quite sick of the court system!)
I will, however, repeat the concerns raised by some in this thread: libel, slander – which are essentially civil damages due to loss of income or reputation; and/or becoming involved in ongoing litigation around Tony Jones and Julie McMahon – either as a witness or a party.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
A General Electric ad (of all things) reminds me of this conversation.
http://youtu.be/sfmQvc6tB1o
“We all know the lawyers are coming, right?”
For what?? Can you explain to someone with no legal knowledge how sharing your story on a blog could have any legal ramifications? And real ramifications or just threats?