And then, there is the environment that has been fostered in Mars Hill.
PH knows many (mostly former) members who were leveled for respectfully, but vigorously expressing either doubt or dissent with the way that the firing of two beloved pastors was handled. These members were betrayed by the leadership that they had previously chosen to trust. Many of these members were previously not even on MH radar, as their many years of membership history had demonstrated them to be what would be considered “model members.” The members that reaped the devastation during these times were not “immature Christians” as the Elders of MH have tried to portray. Many were, in fact, mature Christians with proven track records in ministry leadership that surpass Mark Driscoll in time and quality. (Despite their never having fostered a “mega-church.) PH would think that an outcry from this demographic would be taken very seriously by leadership within a church body.
Are the men who perpetrated or ignored such betrayal qualified to be Elders?
February 29, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
well,as the attorney referenced in the “Kool Aid” clip, I can only say to reallysad1:”nice editing.” Actually…not so great,in that my heart hurt once again upon seeing it.
PH did a nice job of characterizing the members whose trust was betrayed by MH leadership, though I do not consider myself to be among the cream of that crop. (My husband is, however,so maybe we can apply a little covenant theology to boost me a little.
)
Regardless of elder opinion, or the resulting consequences to us,I believe now as much as I did then that we made our posts under the guidance and direction of our Lord. If I am mistaken, may He show me my error.
The betrayal that I felt when the Pastor that I had chosen to trust, (and had gone to bat DEFENDING even in some of his less brilliant moments) trashed me publically has been no small thing. The pastors who know me know that I love Mark, and would never have made such a post without some significant thought and prayer.
March 1, 2008 at 12:54 am |
Had not heard of this before. Sorry you had to experience this. It was petty, in-your-face, reprehensible, and certainly worthy of a rebuke. Once one feels he can get away with things, without checks, it will grow. In a rightly-functioning plurality of elders, he would simply have been called on it the first time he tried it; and thus been helped to keep his sinful tendencies out of the pulpit… to his great benefit and to all who hear him.
March 1, 2008 at 1:27 am |
Is not first time, by a long shot. Have since heard of many examples. Obviously, unless God shows him how harmful it is, it will continue. You see, he does it in such a way that it comes of cute…even funny. In our culture, we have come to idolize speakers that entertain. Mark is a very entertaining speaker – how can his methods be wrong?
If you want to hear more…check out the “Humility” sermon that was preached on November 4, 2007, I believe. Many folks were trashed that day…humbly of course. I know of about 6 that chose not to receive communion that night because they knew that they needed to get their attitudes in line first.
Note the self-effacing comments at the beginning, thus setting the stage with his humility. Of course the lessons on humility following such a humbling of himself would be sanctified and humble, right?
March 1, 2008 at 11:15 am |
Oh…looks like I got the Humility sermon date wrong…is in November somewhere.
February 16, 2009 at 11:33 pm |
Thanks for writing about this.
March 5, 2009 at 11:08 pm |
I find it ironic that a movement (Calvinism) that began by rejecting authority and denying the validity of any central authority in the Church also set up its elected elders as absolutely unquestionable once they are in place. This dates back to Calvin’s earliest days.