Saturday, October 18, 2014

Chris Rosebrough discusses Driscoll resignation at Issues Etc and at Fighting for the Faith

Rosebrough discusses Mark Driscoll's resignation at Issues Etc.

The second half of the discussion gets into the uniqueness of Driscoll's public persona.  The term "bad boy" would be apt, and in more secular discussions of sociology and psychology Mark Driscoll would fit the profile of the "badass".  Appealing to cultural norms of masculinity was something that, say, Luther did.  Driscoll's badass posture would not be a rejection of the Bible as such ... Driscoll's posture of the bad boy would be understood by Driscoll himself as taking a stand for a traditional masculine manly type of manhood.  Remember how much Driscoll fretted about boys who can shave? 

Rosebrough's proposal that Mars Hill cannot financially withstand this resignation and that maybe three churches could weather the storm.  This would seem likely given the financial dynamics of the churches as a whole. 

That Mars Hill was a denomination in all but name was a point Wenatchee The Hatchet made about eight years ago. 

and at Fighting for the Faith

Here Rosebrough discusses at some length the problem of real estate and operational debt.  As longtime readers will know Wenatchee The Hatchet privately expressed reservations about the fiscal solvency of Mars Hill's grow-forever approach. 

Wenatchee has a long history of pointing out that constant growth without donor consolidation was going to be a fiscal disaster.  There's also the matter of quoting something from Jamie Munson, years ago, about 4 reasons to expand the church (even when you shouldn't).  So Rosebrough proposing that the seeker-sensitive church model DEPENDS ON LEVERAGING DEBT is not a big surprise to Wenatchee.

Rosebrough correctly notes that Driscoll has not been accused of "immorality" in terms of sexual impropriety with someone who is not Mark Driscoll's wife.  As for the "pornographic visions" stuff, let's revisit that some other time.  Too much has been said about the trees and not the forest.  Some discussion of the spiritual warfare series from 2008 as a rhetorical/political gambit might be in order ... later.

No comments: