"The unexamined opinion is hardly worth holding".
So since I read Terry's announcement, I have spent some time listening to Mark Driscoll's sermons in order to examine him and what he teaches and how he does it so that my opinion is not merely a reaction but one worthy of holding. I must admit from the start I am somewhat disturbed. For the last two years Brighton was blessed by the visit of Rob Rufus as a guest speaker and we looked forward to his ministry which was devoted to the Presence of God. But this time it seems that Mark Driscoll has a different contribution to make (by the way I wanted to post this as a comment on Mark's website but he has disabled comments on that particular blog post at present);
"I listen to most of his weekly sermons, but it will be great to get a chance to hear him live and in person, and doubtless he will stir up some controversy for us to blog about!"
“This is particularly important for young men. The least likely person to go to church in the United States of America is a young man in his twenties. These are guys who have made a wreck of everything. They are banging their girlfriends – these are men who have blown all their money, staying up all night playing World-war craft and finding free porn on the internet, trying to find out how to get bigger subwoofers into their retarded car. Those are the guys who must first be gathered, they must have a swift boot in the rear, they need a good run through boot camp, they need to be told that Jesus Christ is not a gay hippie in a dress …
60% of all Christians are women. I am glad that the ladies love Jesus but if you want to win a war you have got to get the men and once you get the men you must know what to do with them. They want to know how to get married. They want to know how to have sex with their wives at least once a day, how to have children, how to father their sons ..
His first priority is to gather men and by God’s grace force them to become the kind of men needed for God’s kingdom. The mission is to get the men because if you get the men then you win the war".
Anyone cannot deny surely that it is good for Driscoll to have a heart for seeing young men return to the Church and to the Father heart of God. But return to what? What vision of manhood does Driscoll really want these men returning to?
Fortunately he doesn't leave us wondering;
"You get around Paul when he was a young guy or John the Baptist or Elijah. I mean these guys seemed pretty rough to me. They don't look like church boys wearing sweater vests walking around singing love songs to Jesus.
Guys like David are well known for their ability to slaughter other men. I think these guys were dudes you know. Heterosexual, win-a-fight, punch-you-in-the-nose dudes and the problem in the church today is that it's just a bunch of nice, soft, tender, womified church boys. 60% of Christians are chicks and 40% are dudes that are just chicks. It's just sad".
It seems to me that Mark Driscoll is seeking after raising a generation of what he would call "real" men. I really don't seen ANY Biblical backing for despising the kind of men who sing "love songs to Jesus" and I certainly don't see ANY Biblical backing for setting a role model of manhood as; "heterosexual, win-a-fight, punch-you-in-the-nose dudes". Ah but are these isolated video clips taken out of context?
Well I discovered a blog in these last few weeks entitled; "
The Rise and Fall of Mark Driscoll (Mars Hill Church)" and it is set up by some ex-members who have been quite greviously hurt by the authoritarian structures of the church and how it is run. They had some interesting quotes from a Seattle newspaper detailing the public sacking of two of the elders who didn't agree with Driscoll on some matters. The newspaper wrote this;
"Things got even uglier in a September 30 sermon, when Driscoll—who’s been the face of the church since it was first established in 1996—stated, sternly referencing the two dissidents, that “There are a few guys right now, if I wasn’t going to end up on CNN, I would go Old Testament on ’em. There’s no, like, attorneys and blogging, just like I punched you in the mouth, now shut up. That’s clean; it’s simple.”
Driscoll's view on manhood seems to be quite far ranging across many different cultural issues. For example, he responded to and reacted to the Ted Haggard moral issue by writing on his blog;
Let me first make it clear that Mark Driscoll protested he was NOT suggesting that it was Mrs Haggards fault in "letting herself go" that led to Ted Haggard falling morally. Rather;
I admit freely I am struggling to keep a tight reign on expressing what I really think about Mark Driscoll's views (because it's not very polite) but I am sure it won't take much imagination to guess. Rather than wasting hour after hour marching through
Mark Driscoll's blog trying to find out why he is as he is - I am more interested as to why he is such a contemporary hit at present.
Maybe it is because he makes himself available to his public? After all almost 350, 000 have voted in his "
Ask Anything" campaign for his series in January at Mars Hill. What do Mark Driscoll's public want to know from him I wonder? Some of the questions are quite orthodox and standard but others are more ... different;
"Why do you make jokes about mormon missionaries, homosexuals, trenchcoats wearers, single men, vegans, emo kids and then expect these groups to come to know God in the same sermon?".
Ah humour. Could that be the reason as to why Mark Driscoll is a modern hit at present - similar to his informal "father" - C J Mahaney? Can it really be as shallow as all that? We like him because he makes us laugh? We like his preaching because he uses risque words in his sermons to shake us out of our apathy? Humour? Or maybe it is Mark Driscoll's apparant numerical success? He himself stated; "
As the pastor of a church of nearly 5000 in one of America’s least churched cities ...". Yes the numbers game.
There's nothing wrong with humour per se or a big church to be sure. Like anyone - I enjoy a good laugh (or as Terry Virgo put it; "
Tis the Season to Be Jolly"). Even more so, I listened to Rob Rufus teaching about the need to be "child-like". That includes laughing
AND crying! But can I suggest something;
Humour has become the modern-day "doves dung" now that the anointing of the Holy Spirit is in such scarce supply in certain places, churches, nations and people. Let me state again - some of my favourite preachers and teachers of all time have been absolutely side-splitting in some of their messages. Ern Baxter was one of the funniest men ever heard in the United Kingdom in the 1970's as was Bob Mumford. But they combined their humour with the anointing of God. They knew when it was right to be humerous and they knew when it was right to preach with the unveiled and ungloved manifest Presence of God. But they also knew when it was right to be silent in the Presence and glory of God and stop speaking.
"The numbers thing is an ego thing for pastors. When numbers are down we feel all insecure, when they are up we feel all flattered in our ego. They don’t care if people are walking with God or not – if there are bums on seats we feel happy! The purpose for church is not to have as many bums on seats as possible, but the purpose for church is to have people equipped with God, full of God, know the realms of the glory, know the Voice of God and do the works of God in supernatural signs and wonders! Otherwise people are just there to flatter the pastor".
In short;
So again I am neither against humour (although Mark Driscoll's border-line risque humour doesn't really make me laugh much) or against large churches - I still feel that these are poor substitutes for the Presence and power and glory of God. We are settling for poor relatives simply because our experience is so shallow in seeing God Himself come down.
“You know the George Barnea Research went to thousands of non-Christians in America and said, “What would make you go to church?”. They said, “If we could experience God!”. Then they said to pastors that this is the number one thing people are asking for. The pastors got all indignant and said, “We talk about God every Sunday!”. But we are not talking about academic information about God but God Himself coming!".
I am not trying to set Rob Rufus against Mark Driscoll - for both are servants of God, both with a passion to see the Gospel spread across the world and both (I hope) with a desire to see the glory of God cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. This is more questioning whether Rob Rufus has to be balanced by Mark Driscoll. Terry himself wrote;
But I didn't come away from Together on a Mission feeling that Rob Rufus was talking about "partnership". Partnership seems to imply "equality". Rob on the other hand was preaching in his three main sessions about an ultimate desire - an ultimate end - an ultimate goal! The glory-cloud! The manifest Presence of God come down amongst His people! I wrote that I have never before felt such a weighty Presence of the Spirit of God in that conference than ever before.
In the video release just after the conference, Terry himself seemed to reflect that feeling. He said;
"What a great and memorable week. It has really been one of the most glorious weeks we have ever had ... feeling His Presence in such an intense way ...".
Word AND/OR Spirit?
I have sat under so-called "Word teachers" for most of my church life. My first senior pastor was a doctor of theology and knew the Word of God inside out and back to front. My second church in Bristol emphasised that they taught and believed in the Word of God first and foremost. Yet I have learnt more truths and revelations from the Word of God under sermons from men like Rob Rufus, Ern Baxter and others than ever before (
take this Q and A session with Rob Rufus as an example). And these are so-called "Spirit men"! - I guess by that definition!
Surely the whole emphasis of "Word and Spirit" is not that one year we pay attention to "Spirit" and the next "Word" like some glorified scale, but that we aim to unite both aspects - both gifts of God - in our teaching, our preaching, our churches, our conferences, our lives.
I am not suggesting that we have nothing to learn from purely men of Reformed traditions, cessationists and other men. God is so awesomely gracious and has so much to bestow and give lavishly to His glorious Bride. I would be scared to miss out on any revelation, any truth by stating I will not receive teaching from a man of God. But the "Glory and Grace" truth - the fact that the grace of God was designed before time began to lead us into His Presence, His MANIFEST Presence - isn't a truth that can sit on the shelf and wait for a year.
So ... Brighton?
I know the immediate question will be; "So you aren't going to Brighton then?". Well I didn't say that and I am not going to say that ... yet. Maybe in past years I would have declared that this would have meant that I wouldn't waste my money. But I have trusted Terry Virgo for some years now and I am intrigued to see what other speakers he will invite to Brighton and what themes, what Training Tracks will be planned. It may be (and I desperately hope it will) that these vital themes of the glory and Presence of God, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, signs of the Kingdom such as healing and signs and wonders and miracles will be taught on at Brighton.
If that's the case then that's encouraging.
But one thing is for sure - Mark Driscoll's presence at Brighton won't guarantee I will be there. I am sure he is very humerous and I am sure he is very macho heterosexual, punch-you-in-the-mouth. But I don't need to sit in a conference for a week in Brighton having booked time off work and money to pay for it to meet someone like that. You can meet people like that down the pub.
