I'm taking a plunge with this blog. I realize that maybe many or even most of the people who read this (all four? :)) are the choir and I'll be preaching to it. But yesterday, I started digging into the Driscolls (it's about time, eh?) and now I can not keep silent.
Mark Driscoll is the well-known founder and pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. Membership at MHC numbers into the thousands now and both the church and Mark and his family have received a lot of press coverage (for example, check out the article from the NY Times this past January: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/magazine/11punk-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all). Among the evangelical community he is simultaneously applauded and reviled. The MHC website is a masterpiece of graphic design wedded with practical efficiency and links to a handful of outside websites/organizations, including the Acts 29 Network (http://www.acts29network.org/).
Having heard some...provocative statements about Mark and Grace (his wife) Driscoll and their views about women, I started poking around and it was on the Acts29 website that I found Grace Driscoll answering the question: "Is the Biblical view of women applicable in our culture today?" I will copy and paste her opening statements here:
"Does what the Bible say about women really apply to us today in this culture (submission, can't be a pastor, weaker vessel, more easily deceived, etc.)? Doesn't it make us too vulnerable to our husbands? Doesn't it limit our ability to demonstrate our gifts? Doesn't it make us less of a human to just stay at home with the kids or take care of our husband? These are the questions I hear over and over from women. They are wrestling with how a loving, all-knowing God could possibly think that such antiquated ideas would work today.
The answers to these questions are clear in the Word, yet so seemingly unclear when compared to the yearnings of the culture around us." (You can read the rest here: http://www.acts29network.org/article/is-the-biblical-view-of-women-applicable-in-our-culture-today/ )
I'm not gonna lie. I cried through the whole thing. Let me try to explain why.
1). Mrs. Driscoll went on to use Ruth as the paradigmatic example of a godly woman. She used basic Bible study methods to arrive at her conclusions: observation, context of the story, asking questions of the text, etc. Kudos for getting that far! However, she ended up concluding that a) Ruth's submission, b) God's sovereignty and c) Christ's redemption were the focal points of the story. I am not going to get on a soapbox about her conclusions as they were obviously personally meaningful and encouraging to her, but I do want to point out that they were reached with poor understanding of how to approach, understand and explain a Biblical text (i.e. Naomi is more of a focal point than Ruth; Boaz is not a type of Christ--He is never mentioned once in the New Testament in connection with Christ; etc.)
2). The "Biblical" view of women, according to Mrs. Driscoll is this: submission, can't be a pastor, weaker vessel, more easily deceived, etc. This then leads to her faulty understanding of Ruth. She does not explain where the "Biblical" view of women came from; indeed she assumes that no explanation is needed. She further expands a couple of these phrases at the end of her piece when she states: "God created us to submit, not because He hates us, rather because He loves us enough to protect us. Doesn't it make us too vulnerable to our husbands? As daughters of Eve we are more easily deceived, but like Ruth under the security of our husband and our God we are safe." a) The second half of the first sentence sounds more like an Americanism than an actual truth from the Bible. Please correct me if you know where to find this in Scripture. b) Women are then ontologically (i.e. inherently) inferior to men rather than co-strugglers under the Curse if what Driscoll says is true. c) What about women who do not have husbands? How do they define themselves in her schema? Where do they get their protection from? Who do they submit to?
3). Thousands of people listen to, watch and read what is coming out of MHC every day. And many of them, because of the way it is presented ("hellfire and brimstone" is one description, cf. the NY Times article) will not question the validity of what they are taking in. As a student of the Word of God, almost nothing could make me more sad--how many women (and men!) have read that piece since it was put online three years ago? How many of their questions were silenced? Or how many had their presuppositions reinforced? How many walked away from the Church as a result? Or stated in a different way, what if a person, a woman let's say, who did not have a relationship with Jesus, read that piece. Would she walk away thinking, Wow, no matter how many questions, how much sin and failure, how much disbelief I have, Christ took it all on Himself, was punished for me, died in my place and rose again to offer me a new and abundant life as His daughter! I can do nothing but fall on my face in trust and awe.
Probably not. Blanket judgments against culture and its "yearnings" (ironic given Acts 29's statement that they "won't attack the culture in the name of Christianity") and poor scholarship (Mrs. Driscoll blames disintegrating marriages, children and churches on the lack of teaching these biblical "truths" among women) would most likely alienate any thinking woman between the age of 18-40.
God has used and will use that article as He wills, and I thank Him for that! But I think Mrs. Driscoll's piece had a different affect on me than she was intending....
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
So much, So little
Well, I meant to write a post about sensitivity and discernment, but I have several other things I'd rather write about right now so I'll just leave it at this: sensitivity and discernment are both essential parts of wisdom. Wisdom does not just mean knowing and speaking truth; it means knowing truth and being able to respond appropriately (i.e. with sensitivity and discernment). Okay, moving on.
Yesterday was a double whammy: first, Andy Stanley, then Janni.
Installment 1: Yesterday was Tuesday, and because it was Tuesday I exercised in the afternoon after Greek class, chapel and Greek homework, but before Hebrew class. Normally, I use this time to walk and talk with my dear friend, Jennifer, but yesterday she was swamped with homework so I rode the exercise bike by myself instead. I took the opportunity to listen to Andy Stanley's podcast "Be Rich: Do More. Give More." The passage of Scripture he used was Luke 6:27-36 and he unpacked the teaching of Jesus in a way I'd never heard before.
Jesus basically begins this part of His sermon with a series of extreme statements to totally deconstruct the attitudes and knowledge of His hearers: "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back." Think about it--this is crazy talk! These commands, coming from Jesus' lips, are completely contrary to normal patterns of human behavior, attitudes and belief. Immediately when we read or hear His words, our response is excuse (e.g. "I don't really have any enemies," or "Surely He didn't mean everyone who begs...") and our behavior is largely unchanged. This, Andy says, is because we are focused entirely on the people we are supposed to be serving/loving/giving to. Of course, if we measure them based on our own standards for how much mercy they deserve, we won't give them very much.
Then Jesus takes it up a notch: "And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount." Jesus has just begun to move our focus from those we are called to love and serve; in this first reframing thought He moves it to us. Me, you, we, us. If we were the ones who needed a cloak, or who cursed or abused others or needed anything, surely we would want others to give us a cloak, love and forgivness and other needs, trusting us that our need was real. But Jesus does not stop there, even though a refocus on our own (possible) need(s) is helpful. It is not the ultimate foundation for our love or service.
The climax of Jesus' exhortation and reframing deconstruction is this: we do not love or serve others because we have more than them, nor do we give to or serve others because we ought to--we love, give and serve because our heavenly Father has loved, served and given to us. The Most High God has bestowed His mercy on us and so we, in gratitude for that mercy, show it to others. He is the ultimate grounding for love and service and as such removes all our excuses, all our self-centered behavior and all our stingy tendencies. No longer does it matter if people express gratitude to us for our service, no longer does it matter if people's lives are changed (although we still hope and pray for that!); what matters is that God Himself has bestowed and bestows infinite mercy--and as His grateful children we are to thank Him by being like Him.
"He is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful."
Installment 2: Yesterday evening, being Tuesday evening, I spent time with another dear friend, Janni. As we chatted, Janni said something like, "Sometimes I just want to be able to see myself through God's eyes; how He sees all of the mess but somehow over that He sees the beauty, too....God's mercy is such a mystery." Yes, it is.
It is a glorious benevolence that I do not fully understand; but as I pictured myself, a slimy shadow, full of stench and rot yet somehow bright, beautiful and completely delightful in my Father's eyes, mercy became a little bit easier to give away.
Yesterday was a double whammy: first, Andy Stanley, then Janni.
Installment 1: Yesterday was Tuesday, and because it was Tuesday I exercised in the afternoon after Greek class, chapel and Greek homework, but before Hebrew class. Normally, I use this time to walk and talk with my dear friend, Jennifer, but yesterday she was swamped with homework so I rode the exercise bike by myself instead. I took the opportunity to listen to Andy Stanley's podcast "Be Rich: Do More. Give More." The passage of Scripture he used was Luke 6:27-36 and he unpacked the teaching of Jesus in a way I'd never heard before.
Jesus basically begins this part of His sermon with a series of extreme statements to totally deconstruct the attitudes and knowledge of His hearers: "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back." Think about it--this is crazy talk! These commands, coming from Jesus' lips, are completely contrary to normal patterns of human behavior, attitudes and belief. Immediately when we read or hear His words, our response is excuse (e.g. "I don't really have any enemies," or "Surely He didn't mean everyone who begs...") and our behavior is largely unchanged. This, Andy says, is because we are focused entirely on the people we are supposed to be serving/loving/giving to. Of course, if we measure them based on our own standards for how much mercy they deserve, we won't give them very much.
Then Jesus takes it up a notch: "And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount." Jesus has just begun to move our focus from those we are called to love and serve; in this first reframing thought He moves it to us. Me, you, we, us. If we were the ones who needed a cloak, or who cursed or abused others or needed anything, surely we would want others to give us a cloak, love and forgivness and other needs, trusting us that our need was real. But Jesus does not stop there, even though a refocus on our own (possible) need(s) is helpful. It is not the ultimate foundation for our love or service.
The climax of Jesus' exhortation and reframing deconstruction is this: we do not love or serve others because we have more than them, nor do we give to or serve others because we ought to--we love, give and serve because our heavenly Father has loved, served and given to us. The Most High God has bestowed His mercy on us and so we, in gratitude for that mercy, show it to others. He is the ultimate grounding for love and service and as such removes all our excuses, all our self-centered behavior and all our stingy tendencies. No longer does it matter if people express gratitude to us for our service, no longer does it matter if people's lives are changed (although we still hope and pray for that!); what matters is that God Himself has bestowed and bestows infinite mercy--and as His grateful children we are to thank Him by being like Him.
"He is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful."
Installment 2: Yesterday evening, being Tuesday evening, I spent time with another dear friend, Janni. As we chatted, Janni said something like, "Sometimes I just want to be able to see myself through God's eyes; how He sees all of the mess but somehow over that He sees the beauty, too....God's mercy is such a mystery." Yes, it is.
It is a glorious benevolence that I do not fully understand; but as I pictured myself, a slimy shadow, full of stench and rot yet somehow bright, beautiful and completely delightful in my Father's eyes, mercy became a little bit easier to give away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)