It can be perilously easy to forget that, as popular
as Driscoll was with evangelicals, he had plenty of criticism. Driscoll was one to steadily present himself
as always the sensible centrist. Anyone
to his theological “left” was a godless liberal and anyone who was to the “right”
of him was a fundamentalist legalist type.
So long as nobody dug into the issue of whether he was competently
exegeting biblical texts or coherently defending his position these rhetorical
plays could work very well.
But even among conservative American Christians
there were serious doubts about the validity and viability of Driscoll’s
approach to manhood. Heath Lambert’s review of Real Marriage expressed direct worry that the Driscoll book would
simply introduce Christians to pornography. John MacArthur made a case that
Mark Driscoll’s interpretive approach to Song of Songs essentially is
pornographic back in 2008.
There was yet another critique, however, and the
critique held that Mark Driscoll’s Testosterone Gospel was one that elevated
Mark Driscoll by way of belittling everyone else. A blogger who goes by Dalrock published “The
only real man in the room.” Dalrock
wrote “For the strongest-man-in-the-room model to work, the
pastor has to always sustain this position.” While much of the rest of the post
does not indicate familiarity on Dalrock’s part with the actual cultural
history or dynamics of Mars Hill it’s a good observation that Driscoll’s
rhetoric and image-molding presented him as “the only real man in the room”.
That men would say after a Driscoll sermon “Mark really kicked my ass today”
suggests as much.
The mystique of Driscoll as Alpha Male
began to collapse with the publication of
Real Marriage. We were given a narrative in which it turned out Driscoll
wasn’t happy all the time circa 2000-2005 like he told us he was; nope, he was
bitter and resentful toward Grace because she didn’t give him as much sex as he
needed to fight off his mood swings and depression, it turned out. Then there
was that plagiarism controversy which raised other questions about the accuracy
of the public narrative. That the first
print edition of the 2012 book did not give Dan Allender so much as one mention
was problem enough since Grace Driscoll’s public deacon profile had listed
Allender as a favorite author twelve years prior. The alpha male element of Mark Driscoll’s
image began to crumble. Driscoll was probably not shifting to the gentler
father figure image only to find that old grudges were resurfacing; it seems
more likely that as Team Driscoll discovered that the old battles had not been
so definitively won after all, image revision could potentially lessen the
sting. It’s hardly likely that anyone
within Mars Hill in 2012 expected Paul Petry to publish Joyful Exiles, is it?
For those who heard the “how dare you!?” sermon,
consider the difference between the Driscollian taxonomy of “jerks” and “cowards”. The “jerks” needed to repent while the “cowards”
were worthless. It was in sermons like
that that the strictly alpha aspect of Driscoll’s appeal to men became easiest
to see but it was sitting in plain sight for anyone who could do the math on
what “shoot your dogs” could potentially include.
No comments:
Post a Comment