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
It seems to me that we’re beginning to see a bit more of the full picture emerge. I personally am sympathetic to the plight of pastors/overseers in some of these situations. To some extent, one can only go on the information that is available (especially when these are ad hoc meetings). And as someone mentioned earlier in reference to “official” court records, there is often more to the picture than is immediately available. In the same way, there is often more to the story than an overseeing group is made aware of. And there’s only so far they can go to uncover more. In other words, these operate to some degree on a “good faith” understanding that truth is being spoken. Now, that said, it does seem like not including Julie in those meetings was the biggest oversight. That one step would not only have provided the group with more information (there are always at least two sides to a story), but it would also have prevented Julie from being in the unenviable position of having to wonder all these years what went on there. At this point my larger concern is less with that emergency pastoral group (because it sounds as if, as I would have initially suspected, several of the people involved were not guilty of anything other than trying to do their best in a less than ideal situation) than I am with the follow-up afterwards. Of course, what Julie has had to endure since then (I’m thinking of the alleged arrest in front of her kids over a technicality, and other such matters) is still chilling and disheartening, to say the least.
Jeff Straka in this case yes you would think there would be training but when I went back to the 6 to share the results of the psych evals which exonerated me, but actually revealed a serious personality disorder which someone mentioned is in no way suitable for leadership….they would not respond. I was told by Doug Pagitt, “I don’t want to know….don’t send it to me.” Why wasn’t he discerned to be sent to a hospital? Interesting.
And, Danielle….you just called Phyllis Tickle a liar! She heard it from YOU and she said she respects your opinion highly so it must be gospel! “Assaulted my character for years?” I have NEVER spoken to you except for a brief ONE TIME meeting on Princeton’s campus in 2003. How exactly have I done that? On my blog? I don’t have one. At Christianity21 conferences? I attend nothing of the sort. Isn’t it more likely I had my name and mental health smeared since there is ACTUAL evidence by witnesses of that on this thread. I don’t run in the speaker/author minor celebrity circles and so you need to apologize to me I think because you just falsely accused me of “assaulting your character for years.” Danielle, I read the email with my own eyes….so you need to take that up with Phyllis Tickle if you never said a disparaging word about me or my mental health. Which you DID because it was verified….so you can come down from your pedestal now and admit your role.
@Jeff Straka — Only the Holy Spirit is necessary. End of discussion. ;)
I think Danielle you have righteous anger and for that I apologize if what you say is true. However, given that she was married and you her Pastor…that seems highly unlikely, but you claim it’s not. So, “you hard pressed on me and in me” sex email isn’t inappropriate while married? Help me out here. The picture with you and the two wining and dining entitled “Clouds and Tony Jones”
I do know some things that absolutely do not add up and the one(s) holding the knowledge will not come clean. I find it very difficult to believe, but you are saying it is your truth…so be it.
Then why the stonewalling? Why was there zero follow up? Why would you ever discern WITHOUT the other person present or on conference? Why then when I had the psych evals verifying things, no one wanted to “discern” anymore? A lawyer was already retained when you sat down and asked pointed questions…I have the canceled check, so if you bought the story that everything was being done to save the marriage, then you were fooled and yes used as a pawn. If there was such great concern then why wouldn’t the 6 speak to me….once they were put on a plane, yes things obviously went horribly wrong. There was no “tending to family” whatsoever. It was Doug pressuring me after Mark had left to get to St. Mary’s hospital for a psych eval because he called and they had a bed available. Not one of you followed up with me so I think your great concern….wasn’t so great.