The following bullet points are quotes in from page 2 of Pastor Mark Driscoll’s letter in the Elders Response Document:
- This meant that I needed to give up a great deal of power…
- To begin this process I had to go first and divest myself of a great deal of power.
- Having shared power…
The above quotes are disingenuous at best. Pastor Mark Driscoll may have given up responsibility, but certainly not power. Before the new bylaws passed, there were approximately twenty-four voting elders and Pastor Mark had merely one vote. Once the new bylaws passed, there were only five elders voting virtually all matters pertaining to control and direction of church. (Including Pastor Mark’s vote) Let’s do the math…under the old bylaws, Pastor Mark needed to persuade twelve others to go along with him to get a simple majority. Under the new bylaws, he only needs to convince two.
No matter how you slice it, it is far easier to convince two people to go along with you than twelve. Despite Pastor Mark’s very persuasive rhetoric and personal charisma, (as well as the use of verbal abuse and bullying tactics.) it is far easier to convince two people out of four than twelve of twenty-four.
Few people in Mars Hill even care about the bylaws. No surprise there – bylaws are rather boring and sometimes complicated read. Since few really care about how the church is governed, why on earth would Pastor Mark Driscoll and Pastor Jamie Munson attempt to create the illusion that Mark gave up so much power? Perhaps it was to create and support the illusion that Pastor Mark Driscoll was not a “jockeying for and abusing power” as he so cavalierly and falsely had accused others of doing?
Are men who engage in this kind of behavour scripturally qualified to be elders? If so, peace. If not, what would God have you do to call them to account before more damage is done?