I know I shouldn’t but I feel like I need to follow up with a post from couple weeks ago. And next week, I’ll pump out some thoughts about Stay-at-Home-Moms. Couple weeks ago, I wrote a post entitled Stay-at-Home Dads are Safe From Hell in response to Pastor Mark Driscoll’s [Seattle's Mars Hill Church] recent teaching/soundbyte about the ungodly nature of Stay-at-Home Dads. I received a variety of responses from folks including some emails questioning my “public” response to Driscoll and the poor choice/decision/sin of me calling ”out” another pastor. Honestly, I felt I was mild and respectful in my disagreement but it did make me ponder this question:
Should there be a general rule for pastors to not publicly call out or question other pastors?
I pondered long enough to email Pastor Mark to apologize and asked to get together if he had some time. No response but understood since he’s a busy dude.
Why apologize? I feel apologetic for not contacting him directly but I don’t apologize for being in disagreement. I respect that Christians and other leaders can have the freedom to have their views…hopefully with biblical substance and theological integrity. And I want to exercise my freedom and discernment to be in disagreement. In fact, my hope – both as a Christian and a leader – is to have the courage to be in disagreement even if it’s unpopular – but to do so in a respectful and civil manner.
One of my readers named Brian left the thought provoking comment below that gave me much to think about. First of all, Brian, I do not have an active relationship with Mark. I have not spoken with him after our long and intense lunch discussion over the issue of women in ministry at Red Robin about 8 years ago. We both threw down. We quoted Scripture, brought up theologians, authors, and books all while chomping down on our burger and fries. It was an intense meeting but we walked away with our respect for one another intact. At least I felt that way. And while I do strongly disagree with his view on women in leadership and the manner in which he conveys some of his content, I have to be honest and give props to him and the team at Mars Hill. They are doing deep and substantive ministry and I can celebrate in that as a co-laborer in Christ.
I don’t have much more to say in response except to say that while there are many emotions, thoughts, words, and such that I feel, I choose not to publicly convey all of them. I am an emotional person and in the past, I have struggled with my anger and loose tongue. They have hurt others – including my church and my wife – and subsequently, have hurt me. Over the recent years, God has been compelling me to a deeper maturity and to be more responsible with my words and growing presence in public leadership – both to my church and beyond. There are times I fail but more and more, I feel like my voice in the City, Church, and Culture is to be a ‘reconciler’ or ‘peacemaker.’ And so even while I may choose to judge the words and actions of others, I have chosen to refrain from condemning in hopes of movements towards reconciliation.
And to be honest, if I were to share ALL of my thoughts, words, and emotions publicly, every one of you should be calling me out. And that is no joke.
Here’s the thought provoking comment from “Brian.” What do you think?
Eugene,
I find that as you are a pastor of a church, and a community leader, I want to to see certain things from you. I think part of that is unbelievably unfair (I was once a pastor, so this burden is at least somewhat familiar to me). And yet, I have to believe that a leader takes risks.
It’s obviously your choice which risks to take, and you will be second-guessed like a football coach till the cows come home. Given that, I will now second-guess you
I had hoped you would take more of a stand with this issue, you seem to be creatively riding the fence (politician-style), in an attempt to remain “Christ-like” (a worthy goal). But I believe that injustice (in this case the overall gender inequality that Driscoll continually preaches) often causes us to have strong emotions and it can be truly sad and un-Gospel-like to remain silent, even if the risk of such voicing is the sin that our voice bears with it…(at the heart of the Gospel we find that we then have the difficult and humbling task of repenting…)
I would have loved to see you respond with more anger and sadness to Driscoll’s words and overall theology of gender (as oppressive to women and men)…if he had been speaking about race or genocide or poverty (in such bottom-line and depreciating ways), would you have had more emotion and obvious push-back? I’d rather a (my) pastor risk sinning while pursuing justice versus “remaining pure” and keeping silent by riding the fence. I want to love and respect Driscoll, but it’s so fricken hard when he implies that I (as a current part-time SAHD as well as a full-time SAHD this past summer) deserve Church discipline for such behavior (regardless of whether or not I attend his Church…he knows his voice carries beyond the walls of his Church). It takes two for reconciliation, I cannot love and respect him (nor him me) abstractly without relationship.
(and maybe that is where I am being assumptive…because you DO have a relationship with him, and I have no idea what goes on and what gets said in that relationship…and maybe my part in this is to begin a relationship with him so that I have the opportunity for such messy attempts at reconciliation…)
To name Driscoll’s goodness is a beautiful thing to do, I do believe that there are many men (including myself) who need to up the ante on both our work ethic and pursuit of our families…but let’s call a spade a spade: to tell women that they should raise the children and submit to their domineering husbands, while suggesting that men are not cut-out for being a main care-provider for their children is downright asinine.
My entire career has been working with children, my wife works in design, and yet we both offer very uniquely male and female (respectively) care for our kids…my wife is very motherly and I am very fatherly, but not because one (or both) of us works or doesn’t work outside the home. My wife will probably always make more money than me, so me “staying-home-to-provide” for my family is going to make more sense…not necessarily because we want a Lexus or a big house, but because we have school loans and bills and the economy sucks right now.
While Driscoll’s main message was meant to light a fire under the rear-ends of men who need to stand up and take responsibility for their life and relationships, he bull-dozes many people in the process and does not seem to realize it or want any forgiveness for it…that is the problem in my mind, and that is what truly saddens and angers me.
Filed under: church, emerging church, religion, mark driscoll
Eugene, I like the idea of not saying anything about someone if you have nothing good to say about that person. I know it’s a simple rule but it keeps people away from both condemning and judging someone.
Judgement ultimately belongs to God and it is the Holy Spirit that convicts us of things that we are doing, thinking or saying that are wrong in God’s eyes.
It is a really tricky one. And I have been in similar situations with members of the congregation I am a part of (I am not in a leadership role in the church). I believe the enemy often uses disagreements amongst Christians as fertile ground to tear the unity of the body of Christ apart. We have enough to contend with without picking holes on each other, so my advice would be to trust that God knows Mark’s heart as well as yours and that we are all ultimately accountable to God.
You have made your point and now as a Christian you are called to forgive, love and seek reconcilitation. If we fail to do that, we are no different to the rest of the world. Believe me, I have fallen out with fellow Christians enough times, and have had a lot of heartache because of it, but the one thing that I kept realising God was putting in my heart was to leave the judgement to Him and to love unconditionally. That unconditional love is what embodies Jesus’ legacy. It is a tough call and a lot to live up to, but if Christ lives in us we have to trust by faith and by grace that we are able to do this: we are called to edify one another and not to tear down. There are plenty of people out there doing a great job of breaking the Body of Christ. This is the perfect opportunity to display Christ’s love to a world full of pride where everyone has to have the last word.
I will pray that this situation gets resolved and that you and Mark will bring glory to God by the way that you handle yourselves.
Blessings,
ransom33 @ http://www.ransom33.wordpress.com
Driscoll placed his comments into the public sphere. To respond publicly isnot only acceptable but necessary. My opinion is that once a person chooses to exercise influence and assert leadership, their ideas become public domain. It is no longer about the relationship. Driscoll isn’t out there wondering about being criticized. He is a professional critic (not written disparingly).
I’m with Don on the public arena thing and Brian on just about everything else. Pastor Eugene, I really appreciated your first post and your stand for justice and the underdog.
I’m going to say the next thing kind of tongue in cheek – Driscoll style – on behalf of Brian. I was a stay at home dad for 4 years, and this is what I have to say to Pastor Mark.
“You may be able to beat me up in an ally brawl, but I’ve done a few things in my day a lot more manly that pastoring – like the day a guy with a machine gun was trying to chase down a woman down a DC ally and I went after him with my car. I’ve done bison ranching and construction too. (Now I’m a PhD student in biblical studies, so don’t give me the I’ve read the whole Bible crap.)
I don’t think you, Pastor Mark, are man enough to be a stay at home dad. It takes a man with real guts to to stand up and say this is what I believe God wants me to do for my family regardless of what the rest of this chauvinistic culture thinks.”
End of speech. (Lots of other things I could say about “providing” etc, but I think you guys have covered the most important points.)
Thanks Brian; thanks Eugene.
Being a stay at home dad was the hardest and most rewarding thing I’ve done. My wife got a chance to pursue some key career opportunities, and now she is thrilled to be at home with the kids and grateful that I took a turn.
Pastor Eugene, I started reading your blog about the time the original post came out. I loved your response. Sure, I would’ve loved for you to “throw down” a bit more, but that’s just my own sinful anger coming out.
My own comment is that I’m tired of hearing working vs. being a stay at home parent (SAHP) as an all-or-nothing proposition. You are or you aren’t. One is good, the other bad. What about the whole range of flexible family solutions? I work 3 days a week, my husband works 4 days a week, and the kids are with my sister in law 2 days a week. I consider it a great solution. The kids are home with me sometimes, my husband sometimes, and their aunt and cousins sometimes. I know lots of families that have worked out part time/flextime arrangements for one or both parents. Does that mean we’re only partly sinful? {note the sarcasm in that last sentence} Note that I still outearn my husband. Should he feel guilt and shame?
Now, I’m no Biblical scholar, but I’m pretty sure that in Biblical times and most other points in history. the idea of a “stay at home parent” pretty much didn’t exist since everyone in the family was working.
In general I think Mark and others like him use the Bible to further their own personal opinions about gender, marriage, and leadership. I just can’t respect that, and my struggles with these issues have been central to my life since my own marriage 10 years ago. I know I can still follow God’s guidance and not agree with everyone’s interpretation of it.
When, WHEN, are we going to stop alienating and excluding women and families who don’t conform to our modern-era stereotypes?
Hey Eugene!
Love the conversation taking place here. As a fellow Pastor and also soon to be stay at home dad (part time) I am glad to see you respectfully responding to Mark. As for whether a pastor should refrain from calling out another pastor in public? I believe that not only should we but that we have to. The ministry God has called us to is too important to not respond especially when it is about issues that could be deal breakers for some. I like that you are real Eugene, you don’t pretend to know all the answers and are open to conversation. At the same time, you stand firm on the things you should.
Keep up the good work!
I too think the SAHD vs. working person dichotomy is simplistic in today’s culture. Though I am not yet a parent, I do bear much of the “housekeeping” work, as one with an editing job that allows me to be home more often than my wife. Indeed, while I was in SEMINARY, my wife worked full time to pay me through, while half of the week I was at home studying. 2 Thess. is talking about laziness, not style of work.
I also became a reader of yours around the time of your original post on this issue. Sometimes I think Driscoll needs a firm response; othertimes I honestly think it would be better to ignore him altogether, as it is obvious that one of his main goals is to pick a fight and see his name bounced around in cyber-space. (When he spoke at Trinity last year, he made a big deal about how to get “hits” on your church’s website by preaching on certain hot-button issues…) Of course, as with Paul in Philippians, I suppose the main thing is that the gospel is reaching people, despite the mixed motives of the messenger.
Eugene
I really respect the thoughtful and prayerful way that you handled this. Tragically if find that it is not often that a leader takes so seriously the kind of comments that you received to your blog post. It is easy to shrug our shoulders and forget
Many belssings on all you do. Would love to get together some time
Brian,
Thank you for your response! It reminds me that there are men who care about gender equality and who are willing to speak out. I respect the discussion around pastors and public opinion etc., but I am entirely frustrated by our (myself included) hesitancy in standing firm against gender inequality… especially when it means confronting a powerful and influential man who believes he is communicating the Truth.
At the very least, I hope we continue to struggle over our responses to gender issues… publicly and in our private lives as well.
I came across a video relaying Driscoll’s stance on this issue on a blog before reading your posts here. As a SAHD who loves Jesus, needless to say I was incensed. For you to be accused of being divisive is rather ridiculous, as Mark was the one who took it upon himself to elevate this issue to one of Salvation (by saying that SAHD’s are “worse than unbelievers”…) That is no mild statement, and deserves firm, biblical response, since he takes that verse in 1 Tim. completely out of context!
I find myself perplexed by how he himself can feel uncondemned by such a position, since his own family is supported by the donations of others, and not by working himself directly in the ‘marketplace’. Does he refuese financial gifts from working women? How does he reconcile the way God provides for his family, when he is essentially volunteering to care for the Family of God, while rebuking those who selflessly serve for the benefit or their immidiate families?
If Jesus washed the feet of his own disciples, (which was hardly a job done by the man-of-the-house in that day…) and told us to do the same, how contradictory to claim that it’s wrong for a man to serve his wife and children by bending down to do the unglamorous work that is so essential…
Eugene,
I share some of Brian’s frustrations. Not that you HAVE to take a stand but you seem to want to place your foot on both sides of the fence.
To quote Brian: “but let’s call a spade a spade: to tell women that they should raise the children and submit to their domineering husbands, while suggesting that men are not cut-out for being a main care-provider for their children is downright asanine.”
I find it ironic that MD makes a point to call out his critics during his sermons. He sometimes refers to the “nutjob bloggers” out there. I’m not sure if he’s referring to you.
He plays a mean game and then plays victime. WTF!
Last year, a friend of mine passed on a vodcast of one of his sermons. In his sermon and in front of the entire congregation, he put up a Joel Osteen sermon and basically mocked him and the sad thing was to hear the entire congregation laughing along. And no one in his church challenged him. Incredibly sad.
I think you were right to email Mark to make contact with him directly. I thought your first post was very respectful and maybe agree with Brian in that we need to raise our voices to call out injustice. I agree that since Mark is out there in public with his views, that sometimes the other voice or a disagreeing voice needs to be public also. I firmly disagree with Mark and believe that the scripture he used was vastly out of context and misused. That needs to be confronted.
On a larger scale, is this a similar situation to James Dobson and Jim Wallis where Jim Wallis called out James Dobson on his blog on the letter that was sent out from Focus on the Family. Was Jim out of line doing so?
i haven’t heard a whole ton from MD, but some. what i have heard i agree wtih Brian about – he seems to speak his convictions from the Bible, and in this issue, to speak to men who are being lazy, etc, in order to wake them up. Brian also had a good point, that MD doesn’t couch his statements with enough qualifiers. His statements lack framework, so then sound like big generalizations that apply to everyone. In this instance he did not state who exactly he was talking to/about, which would eliminate these *potential* misassumptions. But when he neglects to clarify, he “bulldozes” everyone else. True true. He sees it as a right/wrong issue, without realizing that he forgets the diversity of his audience, and the potential exceptions, when he speask. I have a degree in Rhetoric, and have definitely learned that qualifiers are very important (but dont overuse them!).
Should a pastor call out another? I really support the way you do it, Eugene. Respectfully disagreeing, in public not personal because that is how he did it. BUT I also support that you aren’t making this a newspaper tabloid issue, calling him out for being sinful, etc. That wouldn’t be right because he wasn’t that hugely public about his statement. You’re engaging in conversation, humbling considering whether you are doing it right, etc. But not letting what you see as false doctrine go unchecked.
I would be very scared to lived in a world where pastors were not called out publicly. Why should sermons (or podcasts, or blogs) be any different from a published book or article. Responding and critiquing such things is a necessary part of discourse that keeps people honest, committed to truth in scholarship, and civil. Not engaging in discourse leads to poor scholarship and the very real potential for false doctrine to flourish and cults to form.
I find it very very interesting that it is only the MD crowd that gets upset when he gets challenged publicly. He point blank refuses to engage, calls out and mocks all those he disagrees with, and yet gets upset that he is subject to the same?!!! I don’t get it.
Anyone who is in a public position should expect to be critiqued publicly. One would hope that would be done in a generous and loving manner, but it must be done.
my $.02
if you’re called to be a prophet, speak out publicly against it.
If you’re not, you can present your views without attacking him viciously and/or coddling him.
my $.02
you need to get a life eugene and stop writing about nonsense.
So often in the public sphere it’s the most obnoxious who get the most press, thus besmirching the rest of us by association. It’s a problem with Islam – we’ve heard all about the fascist terrorists, but never hear about the underlying voice of reason and tolerance within Islam (until we talk to Andy, anyway). So it is with the Church. The world hears the Falwells and the Driscolls and the Robertsons and the Hutchersons and assumes that “all Christians” must agree with them. Some of that may be because the press loves a good, inflammatory quote, but some is also because we are reticent to “call out” these Christian leaders when they publicly misrepresent Christ and the Gospel. I know I’d much rather stay focused on doing what I’m called to do and ignore the more divisive voices. . .but at what cost do we let these loud voices speak for the rest of us? And if they refuse to sit and dialogue with us, what recourse do we have but to publicly acknowledge “while we worship the same God, our understanding on this issue is VERY different”?
we can’t agree with everything that people say, even within the christian community. i applaud your efforts in pointing out your disagreements yet still keeping it civilized and appropriate. we ought to feel safe enough to do that. isn’t that part of following Christ? it’s to wrestle through these issues together?
wrestle away i say… it makes us think instead of just swallowing what is given to us!
Wonderful you’ve got folks like ‘Brian’ in your congo, Eugene. You guys are obviously doing something right when you’ve got folks willing to challenge you in such an articulate yet constructive way.
I’m fully with Don on this one. Public leadership is in a different category. I’ve mentored many leaders over the years and always tried to emphasize that when they take strong stands publicly they should expect to receive public criticism. That’s part of the deal and I think it serves a useful ‘governing’ function for leaders–you think harder about what you’re going to say when you know you may be publicly challenged. It reduces the loose cannon factor exponentially.
Some caveats to the rule:
1. None of that absolves those of us doing the criticizing from doing all we can to speak directly and privately to the person first. Very often that level of interaction changes the situation so no public challenge is necessary.
2. I do think it’s critically important for Christians to try hard to maintain as much public unity as possible (for many reasons including the ones ransom33 mentions). So we’ve got to choose the issues we’re willing to do public criticism about carefully. Only the big stuff that we consider to be of ‘prophetic importance.’
3. But sometimes even after private communication with the other person or institution, we’re going to need to go public about one of those big issues.
Seems like that’s how you handled this. Though all types of Christians pastors can get silly with injecting their strong cultural and political biases into things, I think it’s fair to say that especially conservative evangelicals have had a field day over the past few decades in that regard. It’s about time that more balanced evangelicals pushed back. Good for you.
But sometimes you get only stony silence or worse in return. When I was in regional staff leadership with InterVarsity in SoCal many years ago I wrote a long letter to Jerry Falwell and his elders at his church in Virginia expressing my deep concern for his continuous strong statements in support of the apartheid regime in South Africa. My point was that he had taken on the role of a public national pastor who potentially had influence on people I was pastoring, and therefore needed to carefully weigh what he was saying. I also told them that though I didn’t want to do so, I would be forced to publicly question that support for apartheid. I followed the letter up with a call and was told by one of his lieutenants that they had received my letter, and that if I went public with my criticisms I would be denounced, and I quote, ‘on our more than 450 television outlets around the country that carry the Rev. Falwell’s program.’ Ouch! So sometimes even the right approach on the right issue doesn’t pan out.
I went ahead and challenged them publicly anyway, btw :^)
apologizing?
i can just picture mark “can’t-worship-anyone-i-can-beat-up” driscoll’s smug face reading your apology email.
apologizing? Seriously??!!
how wrong of me is it to simply give up here? a part of me wants to engage this conversation and get involved. a bigger part of me says “i know what i think and it’s going to take a lot to change it, regardless of what any pastor says, irrespective of his church’s attendance or giving. so why should i get involved? why should i get angry and make others angry over something i’m done debating?” to be one who is not a “respecter of persons” would tell me that i shouldn’t give Driscoll the attention he draws to himself by making outrageous and contentious statements and yet a spirit of brotherhood and cooperativity tells me to engage. i am at an impasse
Eugene,
I loved your post. I thought it was respectful and an honest criticism. I wish the rest of our public discourse was as thoughtful, gracious and critical as your post was.
As for the “outing another pastor in public” concern: MLK’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” changed my life, my faith and my ministry. Talk about calling out another pastor in public! He called out eight specific ones explicitly, and thousands more implicitly, and the world has never been the same. If pastors can’t call out other pastors the church will have lost one of its greatest tools for self-improvement.
@sue: i wonder if people want to actually see fights between pastors. i felt like i called a spade a spade but perhaps not in a manner that satisfied some. i do wrestle with what brian and others have noted:
am i being “soft” with MD re: women’s issues because i’m a dude. would i be angrier if he was calling our minorities or asians. definitely makes me stop at my tracks.
@julie clawson: wholeheartedly agree. but because there’s such a divide in seattle w/ MD, trying to see what a reconciler can look like in this city.
@greg: you can keep your .02 cents. sorry.
@andy: yes, apologizing why? because i don’t need him to worship me.
@jimmymccarty: thanks bro. i do agree with other commenters that we live in a public world and churches and pastors are intentionally engaging the public arena. i expect folks to push back regarding my blog because i’ve chosen to share it publicly. so, i think most would agree that we should so it’s a matter of HOW.
Eugene-
As a member of your church, I have always appreciated the diplomacy you use when handling sensitive issues. You manage to make your stand without standing on other people’s toes. This is something I wish other pastors and public figures would do more. We all want to respond in anger, throw punches, and show the other person how wrong they are. That’s not the point. Upholding truth, while maintaining Christian unity, is the point.
I disagree with MD & MH on many issues. Reading your response has both affirmed me, and been an example of how to respect each other when we disagree. MD is wrong, but he’s not the devil. We need to remember the difference between our friends and our enemies.
“In so much as it depends on you, live at peace with one another.”
Hi everyone. I too have been guilty of being too emotional and letting my tongue hurt people and ruin things. I ,too, have been a (youth) pastor, and things get hard when they hit home or get personal. But according to Scripture, we are to be like lambs among wolves. And trust GOD!!! Trust him to provide, protect, and to teach and guide us. May GOD bless us all.
I agree with jimmymccarty. I think that MLK’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” is a good example of a pastor calling out other pastors in public. I think that there is a biblical one as well: how Paul responds to Peter in Galatians 2.
I think that passage can show pastors how to handle public conflicts. If a pastor is teaching something publicly that is “contrary to the gospel,” then it needs to be challenged publicly because it leads people astray. But the pastor who challenges needs to check his/her own motives, and ask: “Am I doing this because I like being right, or because I’m jealous of another person’s influence? Or am I doing it because I want people to act consistently with the gospel?”
As for me, I liked the spirit of your first post.