You Can't Please Everyone
by Suzanne Hadley Gosselin on 09/21/2007 at 4:25 PM
First Christianity Today associate editor Collin Hansen brought us "Young, Restless and Reformed," and now he examines a controversial proponent of the movement, Mark Driscoll. Driscoll, 36, is the pastor of the 6,000-member Mars Hill Church in Seattle, Wash. Hansen looks at why conservatives and liberals alike won't accept him.
Driscoll now uses Sunday services to equip church members to be missionaries in Seattle. The approach requires a high degree of cultural assimilation, a trait he shares with other emerging leaders. For instance, Mars Hill has made contact with many Seattle residents through the Paradox, a concert venue owned by the church that hosts bands with no Christian ties. And an early, outdoor Bible study that Driscoll used to grow the church allowed smoking.
In Mars Hill's early days, Driscoll struggled to find the right balance between unchanging orthodox theology and flexible methods of outreach.
"I also did not explain in written form that we were theologically conservative and culturally liberal, which caused great confusion because half of the church was angry that the other half was smoking, while the other half was angry that I taught from the Bible," Driscoll writes in Confessions of a Reformission Rev.
Reading the article, you gain respect for what Driscoll is attempting to do: reach an unchurched city by speaking their language, while at the same time avoiding a compromise on truth. I particularly appreciated his perspective on fundamentalism:
"Fundamentalism is really losing the war, and I think it is in part responsible for the rise of what we know as the more liberal end of the emerging church," Driscoll says. "Because a lot of what is fueling the left end of the emerging church is fatigue with hardcore fundamentalism that throws rocks at culture. But culture is the house that people live in, and it just seems really mean to keep throwing rocks at somebody's house."
I don't know about you, but if someone was throwing rocks at my house, I probably wouldn't open the door. How many of the "vulgar aspects of contemporary society," as Reformed expositor John MacArthur calls them, do we indulge in for the sake of evangelism? I believe it takes extreme wisdom and humility, and Driscoll seems to be seeking both. It's a balancing act that affords few friends.
1. Jonathan from Canada said the following at 6:27 PM on Sep 21:
"...culture is the house that people live in..."
Why do we put up with silly statements like this? Throwing rocks? I hope those "houses" aren't made of glass.
This is cultural relativism to the extreme. Some things need to be criticized because they are wrong. We can't just sink to the lowest denominator for the sake of an ideological egalitarianism.
In fact, even Driscollian style relativism is not neutral--why is he allowed to attack non-relativism? Is the only absolute good relativism?
We don't have to engage in the vulgar aspects of contemporary society if we believe in the Power of the Gospel. God moves who He chooses. It's not like His kingdom would fall apart if we don't engage in the trendiest of evangelical styles.
No, let's not yoke ourselves to crude modern culture, where the only standard is to have no standard. We are not slaves to sin. Emulate slaves we should not.
2. Jacob said the following at 8:09 PM on Sep 21:
I admire Pastor Driscoll for what he has done in Seattle. I think he has a good understanding of the city and its needs. I also appreciate his uncompromising stance on the truth. I've been listening to his sermons from last summer as he preached through 1 Corinthians and have benefited greatly from his contemporary applications of the ancient truths.
I read the Hansen article earlier today and wondered how Driscoll was defining "fundamentalism." Given the rise in interest in traditional theology and liturgy (among catholics and protestants alike), I would have to disagree with Driscoll's assesment IF by fundamentalism, he is refering to those of us who prefer older forms to our worship over innovation. I don't think he's using fundamentalism in this way, but I am far from sure in my guestimation!
3. honestly, Ann is my middle name said the following at 9:24 PM on Sep 21:
I was taught that Christians "tell the world" about Jesus by NOT fitting in to the culture. The non-believer who sincerely wants a better life will listen to a family oriented, Bible-carrying Weirdo. What does the Bible say about cultural assimilation?
We should be working on the following:
1. Knowing God (Jeremiah 9:24).
2. Explaining God (Matthew 28:19-20).
I am not aware of Scripture that promotes knowing the world or trying to blend in effectively.
Those church members could have been concerned about potential temptations he would face at a concert. Maybe they were expressing concern for his safety or accountability. He could have interpreted their concern as excessive criticism, leading to isolation, which would ultimately threaten his ministry. He described evangelism as a war. Bible teachers call on the LORD constantly. They still need solid support from family, friends, and church.
4. Nate said the following at 10:04 PM on Sep 21:
In the world but not of the world, to paraphrase Jn. 17:14-15. It's one thing to speak a language to someone and another to do what that someone else is doing. I'm leery of approaches that seek to downplay the differences between believers and non-believers, or it just gets blurry as to why the latter should believe in the first place.
The comment about throwing rocks strikes a chord with me, though, and I can sympathize. I suppose that's why speaking the truth in love is so important.
"But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander." (1Pe. 3:15-16)
5. Pete Ferro said the following at 1:17 AM on Sep 22:
We easily forget that Jesus was called a glutton and a drunkard and that He mingled with sinners and tax collectors. I only realised recently that these people actually wanted Jesus to spend time with them. They climbed into trees just to see Him and they invited Him into there homes for parties. It must have been great to have Jesus visit you - great conversations, great stories, great fun. The point being: It was a fun/wonderful experience to entertain Jesus for supper at your home.
It is so sad that the church, consisting of the people who have received God's grace, affords so little grace to people.
We are called to feed and clothe the ones in need. We are Jesus' representatives here on earth, called to be in the world, but not of the world. Shouldn't we follow Jesus' example and be likeable? Shouldn't we also be friends of sinners?
6. John said the following at 7:11 AM on Sep 22:
You can't have it both ways. Either you're an outreach trying to pull people into the church or you're a church discipling the faithful to do that.
Pastors should not try to do both. They should pray about what God wants them to do, one or the other.
If you try to do both, you will stunt the spiritual growth of the faithful or confuse the "seekers".
Which brings up the question about whether or not this strategy of being "seeker" friendly is even biblical.
7. Leah said the following at 7:47 AM on Sep 22:
I think it's a balancing act that affords many friends, but your particular way of balancing may not.
And... while smoking is unwise... it's not a sin, as such. I don't know if it's official or not, but I've certainly seen one or two people smoking at our church, althought it's always well away from the building and crowd.
By all means, Driscoll (and we) should be compromising wherever possible- EXCEPT on the 'sin' front. When in Rome... (remember that even Paul advocated that).
I do think that Driscoll gets it wrong by not explaining things to his church. If our minister were to do something the congregation might consider radical, he'd certainly explain it to us, even if he ignored protests to not do it.
8. Mike Theemling said the following at 9:33 AM on Sep 22:
Overall, I agree with the article and from the sounds of it, don't have much of an issue with Mr. Driscoll. His theology seems good and uncompromising, very practical, and his actions are consistent with his message.
For example, I didn't realize he was the one who wrote on his blog about the wife's "letting go" as a stumbling block to sexual purity. Yet, he is overall fairly accurate on his observations (this aplies to men too).
Another thing is smoking. I wouldn't say it's a preferred behavior, but I wouldn't outright call it a sin, at least without qualifications. The logic of "it's ruining your body which is a temple to the Holy Spirit" could also apply to consuming doughnuts which there is little contention about (and in fact served often in church).
Same goes for rock music. True, much of it does contain negative lyrics, but a wholesale condemnation of it is not going to be helpful.
His comments about the Paul's writings are intriguing. I wonder if he really means he would like a clearer interpretation from Paul. Because honestly, a good number of passages in the Bible are hard to accept: God's command for the Israelites to kill all men, women, and children (and animals), predestination, proprierty in worship among women, etc. I'd be curious to find his actual views doctrinally.
9. J said the following at 11:08 AM on Sep 22:
It's interesting to find out about this approach. Certainly, Christians can get caught up in the do's and don'ts -- not that those aren't important, but if we love God we will keep His commandments. It's important that anything we do (or don't do) stem out of our love for God.
It seems that Driscoll is trying to love people where they are at, which is great. However, as Christians we are also supposed to be countercultural and live an uncompromising faith.
Wasn't there an article on Boundless recently that said something about if we Christians are trying to be like the world, we water down our message, and then the world no longer has any reason to be like us at all. (Or was it something I heard at church?) Christians are, according to the Bible, a "peculiar people." There should be something about us that is different. There's definitely a balance between loving people where they are at and walking the fence. Perhaps if Christians were different enough, more people would be attracted to come follow Christ. I'm not talking about being judgemental, but about living holy lives.
When we become Christians, we take on a new citizenship: we are citizens of Heaven. Therefore, to some degree, we all have to learn a new culture.
We don't want to water down our message. We want people to see the cross as it is so they have a clear understanding of what it means to follow Christ.
10. Justice said the following at 11:57 AM on Sep 22:
This guy is so awesome. I read half of one of his books and was amazed at his stories. His sole goal is to win more people to Christ on the Seattle area and he's doin it.
BTW, you guys should invite Chad Thompson to write an article on here!
11. Andy said the following at 12:42 PM on Sep 22:
I've just discovered Driscoll a few weeks ago and have been listening to his sermons since then.
This article really captures him in a nutshell - he'll offend both sides: You've got the fundamentalist pharisaical guys who hate his Christian freedom positions (like with alcohol, sex, smoking, etc.) and on the other side are the liberal Sadducees who hate his Christian orthodoxy positions (atonement, sovereignty, sin). It's great, and I think it's exactly what our generation needs - contextualization without compromise. Unchanging truth that's culturally relevant.
To really hear from his own mouth what he believes about what he calls open-hand, closed-hand theology, check out his sermon entitled "Reformission - Reforming Christian Missions":
http://www.marshillchurch.org/audio/reformission_083103_driscoll.mp3
12. Ashley said the following at 8:05 PM on Sep 22:
I've heard this conversation often, as I live in Seattle. Its interesting to make comparisons to the churches in the area, as so many of them completely ignore reaching out to the city around them. I've visited many churches around the area in the past 4 years, and only a select few (that I've been to and heard about) actually get this part right.
However, I would disagree that Driscoll has "extreme wisdom and humility" as stated here. Perhaps in this particular context he seems to have it right, but when you consider other factors surrounding his leadership style and who he is as a person, the entire perspective shifts - at least it did for me.
There has been a lot of controversy surrounding Mars Hill in past years here in Seattle, some of those issues include Driscoll's stance on Catholicism, women in ministry (specifically: leadership), and gay issues. I've found him to be a very brash man, and I find it hard to believe that so many people follow him so blindly. I don't know what kind of accountability this man has for his position, but it saddens me that he, being such an example to so many people, often acts the way he does.
I will state, that I have been to Mars Hill numerous times and I have not found anything during those times that caused "red flags" theologically speaking. However, I know others who have.
I am the type of person that does research and attempts to understand as much of the situation and context as possible, so for those wondering, reading Driscoll's blog would provide some insight into what I am talking about.
No doubt there will be others who disagree with me and that's fine. I just want to make sure that more of the context is understood in this case than just the take on the church affecting the culture - that making statements about the pastor may be correct regarding one area, but not in others. In my opinion its not correct in others.
I do agree with what's stated above about the church reaching out to the surrounding culture, and in this respect Mars Hill does a pretty good job. I want to add another church that does an excellent job of this is Quest Church here in Seattle (not far from Mars Hill as a matter of fact). I'm sure there are others that I don't know about, but many churches around here seem to be more about just showing up on Sunday and going through a routine, rather than actually living out their faith, and reaching out to the surrounding city.
13. Kathryn said the following at 9:15 PM on Sep 22:
Good on him for bringing the Gospel to those people. I think we often forget that our churches, Christian social life, morality etc aren't the Gospel. They are things that are attached to the Gospel through living it out over time. But they are not the good news that Jesus Christ died on a cross and rose again to save sinners.
We ought to pray that he can hold out this balancing act and not cave into sin himself. After all, if he starts to think himself standing strong, he ought to watch that he doesn't fall. And when his ministry looks like how you're describing it, he needs prayer and support from his brother and sister.
14. Phoebe said the following at 10:14 PM on Sep 22:
I don't think I could do it, but, that said, not everybody is like me and I'm glad they aren't!
I do believe that it is important that non-traditional Christians figure out what it means to live a Godly and decent life, even though it may not look exactly the same as it does for those who have grown up in conservative homes. And sound theology and Bible teaching has to be bedrock. We must not "teach down" to those who we think would have no interest in the complexities of the good, solid truth.
15. Fred said the following at 1:38 AM on Sep 23:
I'm more put off by the hugging than anything else.
But criticisms of Driscoll should only be considered if he is sinning in his work and as long as he sticks with the Bible and his work is for God and not himself then that should be enough.
16. Jo said the following at 2:12 AM on Sep 23:
it's a really interesting question. paul said he became all things to all men in order that he might reach some, or words to that effect. he also encouraged us to follow our conscience on matters of what to accept and what not to, but to ensure that we don't cause others to stumble because we accept things that they don't.
i think it all has to be motivated by love. non-christians aren't going to want to spend time with people who seem to be always judging or criticising their lifestyle. when i'm with non-christian friends and colleagues, i don't tut when people swear, i don't express disapproval when they talk about getting drunk or stoned at the weekend. i've been with people while they're getting drunk and stoned and accepted it. i don't tend to seek out situations where those things are likely to be going on, but if they are, it doesn't bother me too much.
it's important to clarify, i don't engage in any of that stuff myself. i can be around people drinking and smoking and so on without being at all tempted to drink or smoke myself. i don't condemn or criticise them, but i also don't conform to their lifestyle. i think that's a pretty obvious witness in itself - the best compliment i ever received was from a non-christian friend who said she admired me because 'you're who you are and you don't give a s***'.
in the article, it looks like driscoll is doing a similar thing. he's allowing others to smoke, but he's not doing it himself. i do think we need to accept some sin in non-christians and not expect them to change before they enter a church. the change begins when they encounter god. we need to enable them to encounter god without feeling they have to become better people or follow a whole load of rules before that can happen.
last point: some christians would find it very difficult to cope with being around particular sins for various reasons. some would be tempted to take part in that lifestyle themselves. some would simply feel extremely uncomfortable with it going on. i wouldn't suggest that anyone with those problems put themselves in that kind of situation. it's all about knowing yourself and not pushing yourself beyond what you're able to deal with. god doesn't ask us all to do the same things, we have different strengths and weaknesses and sensitivities and we have to take them into account. i might be fine with people drinking, but i know there are other things i would struggle with exposing myself to. we have to be honest with ourselves and follow the holy spirit's guidance.
and we also have to understand that other christians don't necessarily have weaknesses where we do. it might be unthinkable to you to be around people drinking, but it might not be an issue at all for me. therefore it isn't necessarily sinful or unwise for someone to willingly expose themselves to other people's sin. we need to be slower to criticise each other in these things, i think.
17. joshMshep said the following at 10:13 PM on Sep 23:
Good thoughts, Suzanne. It's encouraging to see a church wanting to engage with the culture, and take risks to further the Gospel. Flexibility, wisdom, humility are all vitally important.
18. Abigail said the following at 8:26 AM on Sep 24:
It is very hard to reach a culture that is more distracted by, or sees more of, your stance against drinking and smoking than your love for both people and God. Christ gave us two greatest commandments, and we too often focus on the first, which has a vertical direction, at the expense of the second. How many of us are actually eating with sinners and upsetting the "saints"?
It takes wisdom, and a heart directly plugged into God, to reach out to people in a culture we may not find comfortable. We must have a heart that is receptive towards but not a slave to the counsel of other Christians. May we all try to look more at this man's heart, and the heart of others like him, than we seek to judge. I think Christ would prefer that someone come to Him seeking and smoking than that someone rejecting Him due to a public uproar and the judgment of Christians against that very act.
19. Esther said the following at 10:42 AM on Sep 24:
It is much easier to be accepting of cultural differences on an individual level. It is one thing for me to allow a friend to smoke while at a Bible study at my home, than to have a "smoking allowed" policy at church. I seen unusual methods employed to win "sinners" to Christ, and approve of them, as long as a change in forthcoming. Yes, fundamentalists can be judgemental and self-righteous- in fact, they usually make me uncomfortable. However, I would rather see people who have put their faith at the center of their life and living, than see people who are "saved" yet living in the culture of blasphemy and profanity. Yes, Jesus ate with sinners, but he also told them to "go and sin no more". I don't expect modern Christians to be all excited about potluck suppers or "sword drills" (remember those?), but I think they should care about things like premarital sex, tithing, and honoring God in speech and action.
20. Lynne said the following at 12:55 PM on Sep 24:
I read the current, as well as past Christianity Today articles, then I read the article link to Salon. While I appreciate his twin goals of engaging the culture where they are and not comprimising the gospel, two things disturbed me.
1. The dogmatism of his opinion - "traditional churches are irrelevant" to him perhaps, and even his congregation or city, but not to many other people. (See Gary Thomas Sacred Paths on worship styles). It smacks of the hand telling the foot, it's not needed.
2. His teaching on women's roles is quite extreme. No problem that he has all male elders, etc. But "quit your job," stay at home and repopulate the earth with Christian children. Actually, now that I think about it, this could be subsumed under #1. Dogmatic opinions.
Does anyone know career women at his church?
21. Kathryn said the following at 8:20 PM on Sep 24:
1 Corinthians 9:19-23
Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.
And thank God for Biblegateway.com so that I didn't have to type that all out on my own. =D
22. Becky said the following at 9:22 PM on Sep 24:
This sounds like a church that really gets what it means to BE the Church.
I agree with Pete: "It is so sad that the church, consisting of the people who have received God's grace, affords so little grace to people." We need to stop expecting people who aren't Christians to live up to Christian morals and instead meet them where they are. If we show them the love of Christ right where they are, they'll seek out more of it.
Good blog, Suzanne.
23. bertram said the following at 5:41 AM on Sep 25:
You go, Driscoll! You remind me of our Lord: He wasn’t afraid to associate Himself with the “vulgar aspects of His contemporary culture” - drunkards, gluttons, prostitutes, tax collectors (workers of an evil oppressive regime). He did not do what many of us like to do today - stay distanced in our pulpits and comfortable middle class culture (not bad in and of itself!) and preach down to persons who do not belong to our cultural group and say "if they are really interested they will want to listen." Yet which Christian would charge our Lord for compromising the truth of God’s word and jeopardising his sanctification and credibility. Here’s a hypothetical question: “If Jesus were to live in Seattle, with whom would he mix?” It’s very likely that he would be called a friend of smokers, drinkers, etc…
24. Katie P. said the following at 6:28 AM on Sep 25:
Driscoll's approach seems to be what believers in other countries have been doing for years to reach the people they are living around. I am currently living in a non-western country that is hostile to Christianity. Being in this environment, I have been very humbled to learn how much of my faith is cultural, and what is actually biblical. The leader of my house church was speaking on this issue (specifically, 1 Cor. 9) at our last meeting. Jesus is extremely offensive to those who don't believe. And He should be. However, Christians are hurting themselves and the gospel when they add to this offense by throwing in their own cultural forms and preferences as Truth. I think this is what Driscoll is trying to address in Seattle.
25. Fred said the following at 6:10 PM on Sep 25:
Are we being too loose with the Jesus 'friend of sinners' references? Those closest to Jesus were no longer 'sinners', it would seem that Jesus was more an associate of sinners, than a friend. But then again, perhaps it depends on how we define 'friend'.