I’ve been splitting my mental energy between March Madness and sorting through the reading I’ve been doing on the church. If you are a newer reader you might not be totally aware of my love of college basketball. It is the only sport I follow. I follow MSU football, but I don’t follow college football. I follow the Detroit Tigers, but I don’t follow MLB. I follow college basketball quite closely for a middle aged woman who never played any sports. LOL! I did quite well on my brackets to this point. All of my Final Four teams are still alive (MSU, OSU, UNC and UK) and seven of my Elite Eight teams are still alive (missed on Missouri).
Anyway, on to more important matters like the body of Christ, trends in Christianity, and more drivel from Mark Driscoll.
Some of you are probably wondering why I continue to bring up all this negative stuff about the church. My purpose isn’t to be negative. It is to drag the yuck being spoken in Christian circles out into the light and exposing the destructive teachings that they are. I believe anyone who reads this little blog is deeply interested in knowing truth while they follow Christ. And so I’m sharing some of the things I find. I share what I find to make people aware and see how God will lead them. I only wish I could spend a few hours each day writing here because, frankly, the amount of info I’m trying to process is unbelievable. I had a two and a half hour phone conversation with an online friend the other day and I continue to be amazed at how there are so many people finally starting to put two and two together in many of these areas. It’s as though we’ve reached a proverbial tipping point with some of these issues and God is now starting to reveal some of what has been going on.
Anyway, here is another video of Mark Driscoll decrying the chick-i-fied version of the church. But the clincher is at the end. Watch the brief video and then read on below the embedded video.
Video no longer available
Did you get that? The comment at the end? If you don’t get the young men, you don’t get anything. What was he referring to? Young men get married, make money, make babies, build companies, buy real estate, etc. They are going to make the culture. And if you don’t get that, you don’t get anything. Hey! Widows, unmarried folks, single moms, retirees, etc. You are nothing! If you aren’t connected to a young man and what he is going to accomplish in his life, you frankly don’t mean much to Mark Driscoll.
Those were his words, not mine. Building up the church is about grabbing control of the culture through the young men, not bringing the lost to Christ. Getting to those men (not women) with power and connections is apparently what matters, not freeing someone from the bondage and despair of sin. If you are a married woman, Driscoll sees the way to get to you and your children is through your husband. That’s what he said. You are simply the extra prize, not the real goal. And notice it is men who build culture, not women.
And that’s not even touching on the rest of the video where being a godly man means you apparently punch people in the face, own a truck, and shoot a gun. And that sixty percent of the church is “chicks.” Sorry, Driscoll the Dude, I’m not a “chick” and I don’t think most women in the church would appreciate being referred to in that manner. You say your views on masculinity and women are supposed to be great for the church and great for women, but I don’t see how viewing your sisters in Christ as “chicks” and saying it in such a derogatory manner does anything to advance the cause of Christ.
There is a huge shift going on among the most vocal complementarians. It is profound. I don’t think this has trickled down yet into most of the mainstream complementarians which is what I would consider most of the comps with whom I interact.
But the leadership in this area is changing the debate, changing the parameters, and redefining the terms. I really do believe we are heading toward the point where your views on men and women’s roles will be used by many Christians to determine if you are actually a true Christian. Confessing your faith in Christ will not be enough for them. Think I’m exaggerating? I’m not.
More on that in the days ahead.
Follow up post: The future of the church courtesy of Acts 29 Network and Mark Driscoll
I’ll try to forgive you for taking UNC to the final four.
My kids & hubby think it’s hilarious whenever I see MSU on TV and say out loud – “That’s Sallie’s team!” They’re like, WHO???? 🙂
I’ll try to forgive you for taking UNC to the final four.
My kids & hubby think it’s hilarious whenever I see MSU on TV and say out loud – “That’s Sallie’s team!” They’re like, WHO???? 🙂
Well, it isn’t that I WANT UNC in the Final Four although I would like a rematch of the Carrier Classic. I despise UNC and the way they have had our number. I always do my brackets the way I think they will go. I did two – one on ESPN and one on CBS. I have MSU-UNC in one and MSU-OSU in the other. We’ll see if I’m right. I didn’t pick Duke to go far because they have just been so horribly inconsistent this year. And, honestly, I think they were getting ranked a few spots too high each week mostly because they were Duke. But Coach K looked pretty bummed after you lost.
Well, it isn’t that I WANT UNC in the Final Four although I would like a rematch of the Carrier Classic. I despise UNC and the way they have had our number. I always do my brackets the way I think they will go. I did two – one on ESPN and one on CBS. I have MSU-UNC in one and MSU-OSU in the other. We’ll see if I’m right. I didn’t pick Duke to go far because they have just been so horribly inconsistent this year. And, honestly, I think they were getting ranked a few spots too high each week mostly because they were Duke. But Coach K looked pretty bummed after you lost.
And I can’t even begin to comment on this driscoll stuff — I had seen the men clip before. Still processing. Still…wow.
I get the whole idea that we NEED to get men involved in church. But this elevates it to another level. This glorifies manhood over womanhood. It perpetuates the stereotypes we’ve been fighting for years, except gives it a moral reasoning to spring from. Is this any worse/different/better/etc than making Muslim women cover themselves head to toe? I’m not sure it’s that different.
And…my husband IS the type of guy who drives a truck, shoots a gun and punches things. But that’s just part of his personality. He’s a country boy through and through. This is not synonymous with being a Christian guy.
One last point and ? for you Sallie – do you get sick of the whole “culture” thing in the church? It seems these modern evangelicals like Driscoll and others are always talking about culture this, culture that. It’s as if we’re reinventing the wheel sometimes.
And I can’t even begin to comment on this driscoll stuff — I had seen the men clip before. Still processing. Still…wow.
I get the whole idea that we NEED to get men involved in church. But this elevates it to another level. This glorifies manhood over womanhood. It perpetuates the stereotypes we’ve been fighting for years, except gives it a moral reasoning to spring from. Is this any worse/different/better/etc than making Muslim women cover themselves head to toe? I’m not sure it’s that different.
And…my husband IS the type of guy who drives a truck, shoots a gun and punches things. But that’s just part of his personality. He’s a country boy through and through. This is not synonymous with being a Christian guy.
One last point and ? for you Sallie – do you get sick of the whole “culture” thing in the church? It seems these modern evangelicals like Driscoll and others are always talking about culture this, culture that. It’s as if we’re reinventing the wheel sometimes.
I’m thinking UNC may be done for now that Kendall Marshall has a broken wrist. But we’ll see. And you are right….as much as I love my Duke boys, they were horribly inconsistent this year and overrated. I’ll admit that 🙂
At this point I’m going to pull for FSU & NCSU to go as far as they can. I can never, ever, ever, ever pull for UNC. It’s just against my basketball religion 🙂
I’m thinking UNC may be done for now that Kendall Marshall has a broken wrist. But we’ll see. And you are right….as much as I love my Duke boys, they were horribly inconsistent this year and overrated. I’ll admit that 🙂
At this point I’m going to pull for FSU & NCSU to go as far as they can. I can never, ever, ever, ever pull for UNC. It’s just against my basketball religion 🙂
Asked a trusted pastor friend of mine (he was my pastor when I was in the Quaker church, married us, etc) He said this on twitter after reading this post – which I think is SO TRUE regarding Driscoll:
It’s the Solomon Syndrome..build a big enough empire and you go from wanting a discerning heart 2 wanting fame & noteriety.
Asked a trusted pastor friend of mine (he was my pastor when I was in the Quaker church, married us, etc) He said this on twitter after reading this post – which I think is SO TRUE regarding Driscoll:
It’s the Solomon Syndrome..build a big enough empire and you go from wanting a discerning heart 2 wanting fame & noteriety.
Yes. I’m all for men being involved in church. I love men and want to see them use their gifts and flourish in Christ just as much as women. But what is happening is exactly what you say. The movement is beginning to glorify manhood over womanhood in some disturbing ways.
Yes, I think there is a segment of the church that has an unhealthy obsession with the culture. The culture is driving their church, the culture is driving their ministry, etc. Something wrong in the culture? Adopt the opposing view and swing to the other extreme.
Yes! Here is an example. Mars Hill has I don’t know how many satellite campuses. Ten? Twenty? I’m too lazy to look it up. Instead of having different men preach at each campus, they stream in Driscoll. If Driscoll is really concerned about men having the opportunity to be active in the church, why not have ten or twenty other men preach in person at those churches? Wouldn’t that free up many more men to use their gifts? But they don’t do that because Driscoll is the “big name” and the “big draw.” So in one of the most basic ways he runs his churches, he loses an opportunity to give men the opportunity to serve.
Another example? Mars Hill previously had a large board of elders. In an effort to streamline things, they voted to end that and now have three or four men running everything. So instead of many men using their gifts, only a few men run everything. Driscoll says one thing, but does something different.
I could give more examples, but I’ll have to save them for another day. 🙂
Yes. I’m all for men being involved in church. I love men and want to see them use their gifts and flourish in Christ just as much as women. But what is happening is exactly what you say. The movement is beginning to glorify manhood over womanhood in some disturbing ways.
Yes, I think there is a segment of the church that has an unhealthy obsession with the culture. The culture is driving their church, the culture is driving their ministry, etc. Something wrong in the culture? Adopt the opposing view and swing to the other extreme.
Yes! Here is an example. Mars Hill has I don’t know how many satellite campuses. Ten? Twenty? I’m too lazy to look it up. Instead of having different men preach at each campus, they stream in Driscoll. If Driscoll is really concerned about men having the opportunity to be active in the church, why not have ten or twenty other men preach in person at those churches? Wouldn’t that free up many more men to use their gifts? But they don’t do that because Driscoll is the “big name” and the “big draw.” So in one of the most basic ways he runs his churches, he loses an opportunity to give men the opportunity to serve.
Another example? Mars Hill previously had a large board of elders. In an effort to streamline things, they voted to end that and now have three or four men running everything. So instead of many men using their gifts, only a few men run everything. Driscoll says one thing, but does something different.
I could give more examples, but I’ll have to save them for another day. 🙂
I don’t think I found this as disturbing as you did. I mean, I see what you are saying, about how it could be taken as saying that women and children and old people are nothing and if that is what he is saying, then he is wrong and he is not valuing all the various people of the kingdom. But I think he also says something that is true about the feminization of the church, and I think there are men who have been driven away by the feeling that it isn’t okay to be manly and also Christian (sort of like when I was in college there were intellectuals who had been driven away because the church was so emotional–with the most common MBTI personality type being ESFJ!–that they felt there was no place for a real thinking person).
Don’t get me wrong…Driscoll concerns me.
But I must say I COMPLETELY agree with you on the satellite campuses! This was happening at Mosaic when we lived in Los Angeles, and we left the church because, among other things, it was beginning to feel very personality-driven and we were concerned about the direction. Now, looking back, I’d say very rightly so!
I don’t think I found this as disturbing as you did. I mean, I see what you are saying, about how it could be taken as saying that women and children and old people are nothing and if that is what he is saying, then he is wrong and he is not valuing all the various people of the kingdom. But I think he also says something that is true about the feminization of the church, and I think there are men who have been driven away by the feeling that it isn’t okay to be manly and also Christian (sort of like when I was in college there were intellectuals who had been driven away because the church was so emotional–with the most common MBTI personality type being ESFJ!–that they felt there was no place for a real thinking person).
Don’t get me wrong…Driscoll concerns me.
But I must say I COMPLETELY agree with you on the satellite campuses! This was happening at Mosaic when we lived in Los Angeles, and we left the church because, among other things, it was beginning to feel very personality-driven and we were concerned about the direction. Now, looking back, I’d say very rightly so!
Brandy (or anyone who wants to answer) – What is the “feminization” of the church? And what would the “masculinization” of the church look like? Seriously. What would make a church “look masculine”? Who is out there not wanting men to be manly? And what does it mean to be manly?
I hear this so much and I think it gets said all the time, but I really wonder what people mean when they say this or if they just repeat it because everyone says it is a big problem in the church. How has the church been feminized? Or is the church just simply lost in terms of what it is supposed to be accomplishing and it gets blamed on the women? Do I think the church is soft? Absolutely! But why are “women” blamed for that? Why is the church “feminized”? Why not just say the church is full of a bunch of cowards and intellectual and spiritual weaklings? Isn’t that more what it is? And if the church is full of cowards and weaklings, why is that a “feminine” trait?
Men are the ones running things and have been forever. If the church is soft, who is to blame? And why is it a “women problem” if the men are running things? I just don’t buy the feminization argument any longer (as you can probably tell!) LOL!
Brandy (or anyone who wants to answer) – What is the “feminization” of the church? And what would the “masculinization” of the church look like? Seriously. What would make a church “look masculine”? Who is out there not wanting men to be manly? And what does it mean to be manly?
I hear this so much and I think it gets said all the time, but I really wonder what people mean when they say this or if they just repeat it because everyone says it is a big problem in the church. How has the church been feminized? Or is the church just simply lost in terms of what it is supposed to be accomplishing and it gets blamed on the women? Do I think the church is soft? Absolutely! But why are “women” blamed for that? Why is the church “feminized”? Why not just say the church is full of a bunch of cowards and intellectual and spiritual weaklings? Isn’t that more what it is? And if the church is full of cowards and weaklings, why is that a “feminine” trait?
Men are the ones running things and have been forever. If the church is soft, who is to blame? And why is it a “women problem” if the men are running things? I just don’t buy the feminization argument any longer (as you can probably tell!) LOL!
Maybe part of the reason this disturbs me more is that I watched it in the context of so much other reading, discussing and viewing. It is just a tiny glimpse into the attitudes of a growing number of Christian men. There are a growing number of men who are taking an increasingly distressing view of women. They say that they value women and women are their equals. But their actions and many of their words betray them. Why didn’t Driscoll say he values young adults and not just young men? Young women are going to marry, have babies, and buy real estate. Many of them will make money and grow companies. And if they don’t, then their husband will or they will do it in partnership with their husband. It is because in their view everything filters through the man. Not the woman and not the couple. It is subtle, but it is critical. With the man rests the power and the man is the goal. Everything else is just part of the package deal.
Maybe part of the reason this disturbs me more is that I watched it in the context of so much other reading, discussing and viewing. It is just a tiny glimpse into the attitudes of a growing number of Christian men. There are a growing number of men who are taking an increasingly distressing view of women. They say that they value women and women are their equals. But their actions and many of their words betray them. Why didn’t Driscoll say he values young adults and not just young men? Young women are going to marry, have babies, and buy real estate. Many of them will make money and grow companies. And if they don’t, then their husband will or they will do it in partnership with their husband. It is because in their view everything filters through the man. Not the woman and not the couple. It is subtle, but it is critical. With the man rests the power and the man is the goal. Everything else is just part of the package deal.
Sallie,
The phrase “feminization of the church” is, if I understand correctly, based upon a book by that title written, I think, in the 1990s. It was meant to be understood positively, because the author was a feminist (self-proclaimed) and believed it to be a good thing, a sign of triumph. Unfortunately, I haven’t read the book, so I can’t say that what *she* said in her book was the “feminization of the church” was the same as what the phrase has come to mean in common usage. I personally take it to describe the way in which the old imagery of the conquering Christ and his Christian, victorious soldiers (more masculine) is replaced by an emotional relationship with Christ (more feminine). You know, Onward Christians Soldiers is out, Jesus-is-my-boyfriend songs are in.
I don’t know if it is fair, but the book’s phrasing has definitely caught on.
Sallie,
The phrase “feminization of the church” is, if I understand correctly, based upon a book by that title written, I think, in the 1990s. It was meant to be understood positively, because the author was a feminist (self-proclaimed) and believed it to be a good thing, a sign of triumph. Unfortunately, I haven’t read the book, so I can’t say that what *she* said in her book was the “feminization of the church” was the same as what the phrase has come to mean in common usage. I personally take it to describe the way in which the old imagery of the conquering Christ and his Christian, victorious soldiers (more masculine) is replaced by an emotional relationship with Christ (more feminine). You know, Onward Christians Soldiers is out, Jesus-is-my-boyfriend songs are in.
I don’t know if it is fair, but the book’s phrasing has definitely caught on.
Brandy,
I am familiar with the book, but have not read it so I can’t comment directly on it either.
Part of what frustrates me (and I’m directing this at the issue in general, not you specifically!) is that people talk about the feminization of the church, but I think it means a lot of different things in different circles. Driscoll speaks with obvious disdain about the chick-i-fication of the church and decorating with the wrong colors.
Okay, so we use the wrong colors and songs. What do we do? Decorate the church like a man cave and sing “Onward Christian Soliders”? Sing Psalms to the tunes of popular country music? Have everyone carry a gun and wear fatigues? Everyone laments the feminization of the church, but no one ever offers any real solutions.
Well, that’s not true. They do offer solutions. The solution is to make men everything and view women as an evil threat. No, I’m not being facetious. But even that won’t solve the problem.
The problem is that through much of history men have been everything and that is no longer the case. Have the fringe secular feminists gone too far in the other direction? Yes. But most Christian women I know who lead toward egalitarianism aren’t interested in following in the footsteps of the fringe secular humanists. They want to follow Christ faithfully and hear, “Well done, good and faithful servant.” I don’t think most of them really care if the carpet is mauve and they probably hate the Jesus is my boyfriend songs too.
Again, if the church is full of cowards and intellectual and spiritual wimps, then let’s do something about it. But don’t blame it on the women, especially when there are so many women who clearly see there is a problem and want desperately to fix it. Instead they are told to sit down and shut up.
Bottom line? The church will never be healthy until women and men are both free to use their gifts. Promoting manhood and pushing women to the fringe will only create more problems. Thirty years of promoting the newly termed complementarianism via the Danvers Statement has made nothing better.
Brandy,
I am familiar with the book, but have not read it so I can’t comment directly on it either.
Part of what frustrates me (and I’m directing this at the issue in general, not you specifically!) is that people talk about the feminization of the church, but I think it means a lot of different things in different circles. Driscoll speaks with obvious disdain about the chick-i-fication of the church and decorating with the wrong colors.
Okay, so we use the wrong colors and songs. What do we do? Decorate the church like a man cave and sing “Onward Christian Soliders”? Sing Psalms to the tunes of popular country music? Have everyone carry a gun and wear fatigues? Everyone laments the feminization of the church, but no one ever offers any real solutions.
Well, that’s not true. They do offer solutions. The solution is to make men everything and view women as an evil threat. No, I’m not being facetious. But even that won’t solve the problem.
The problem is that through much of history men have been everything and that is no longer the case. Have the fringe secular feminists gone too far in the other direction? Yes. But most Christian women I know who lead toward egalitarianism aren’t interested in following in the footsteps of the fringe secular humanists. They want to follow Christ faithfully and hear, “Well done, good and faithful servant.” I don’t think most of them really care if the carpet is mauve and they probably hate the Jesus is my boyfriend songs too.
Again, if the church is full of cowards and intellectual and spiritual wimps, then let’s do something about it. But don’t blame it on the women, especially when there are so many women who clearly see there is a problem and want desperately to fix it. Instead they are told to sit down and shut up.
Bottom line? The church will never be healthy until women and men are both free to use their gifts. Promoting manhood and pushing women to the fringe will only create more problems. Thirty years of promoting the newly termed complementarianism via the Danvers Statement has made nothing better.
I actually see a lot of irony in Driscoll pointing out the decorating because most of the “men’s men” I know wouldn’t even NOTICE the decorating! 🙂
But yes I definitely think we should hang deer heads up and see what happens. Maybe all the men will come back. 😉
I actually see a lot of irony in Driscoll pointing out the decorating because most of the “men’s men” I know wouldn’t even NOTICE the decorating! 🙂
But yes I definitely think we should hang deer heads up and see what happens. Maybe all the men will come back. 😉
I’m sucked into this discussion. (Sallie I emailed you something last night, check your spam box if you didn’t get it)
Anyhow, I can’t quit thinking on these things. I’m starting to wonder if home church like the good ole prairie days wouldn’t be best for our family. You know, gather up the neighbors, sing a few songs, have some sharing time, and then head out and go home for a day of rest.
I know this opens up a whole different discussion about assembling with the saints and all – but I can’t help but think redoing church is what it will take for ME to feel good about church ever again. I’ve struggled for the past 4-5 years in this area. Nothing works for me. Nothing 🙁
I’d rather stay home, make a big breakfast for the family, worship outside in my garden and pray as I pull weeds than do status-quo mega church.