Making Movement, Difficult and Slow
This past week I was reminded of the practical importance of encounter and presence in the process of reconciliation. A small group of Seattle-area Christian leaders, (Rose & Rich Swetman, Nancy & Tom Murphy, Sandy Brown, Paul Chapman, and myself) gathered together with pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church and Lief Moi one of the church’s founding elders to inquire of God as we explored the damage caused by the harsh and at times demeaning tone of some comments by Mark, and the public protest that was being organized in response to his comments....[via and]
Although the primary focus of our conversation was the tenor of Mark’s comments in recent years, he wasn’t the alone in making movement during the course of this conversation. Paul, the organizer of the protest, asked Mark’s forgiveness for labeling him, “Mark the Misogynist.” Not only that, the protest was called off. Further, for those in that conversation who had seen Mark as something of an an adversary prior to our meeting there was movement toward being advocates one for the other. I left that meeting with greater hope for a reconciled church in Seattle, and beyond....
We all know that actuating lasting change is difficult and slow as our greatest strengths are often our greatest weaknesses. And so the very things that brought us together for this meeting may bring people together again around future matters; and this is the nature of human experience.
Posts
Odd. A small group of "Christian leaders" got together and no one challenged the instigators of this ill-advised protest for their double-standard. Why were they singling out a Christian brother and not calling for the censoring of the Muslim columnist on the Seattle Times as well?
ReplyDeleteWhat is most troubling is that apparently, none of these "Christian leaders" called the protestors on the carpet to rebuke them for their disgraceful behavior: not following Matthew 18 and dragging a brother before the court of public opinion before even meeting with him in private first.
"Why were they singling out a Christian brother and not calling for the censoring of the Muslim columnist on the Seattle Times as well?"
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be no indication that the protest organizers could not do so when appropriate. Moreover, it is possible that addressing Islamic issues appears simpler to consider than to accomplish well. Driscoll's situation is not only about the Seattle Times either. Yet your challenge also begs the question of whether Christians avoid or minimize their responsibility because people insist someone else is not blameless.
not following Matthew 18 and dragging a brother before the court of public opinion before even meeting with him in private first.
Supposedly some had attempted to secure a private audience with Driscoll first, but were not successful. How does one achieve the Matthew 18 standard if the other is not available? The intent of the Matthew 18 passage is to focus accountability as much as possible instead of trying to avoid external reviews by claiming privacy.
Driscoll is a public figure beyond his local church, and so public scrutiny is bound to occur at times. It seemed to take the imminent threat of public outcry and the protracted frustration of the blogosphere to demonstrate the seriousness and range of the offense here.
Politically Correct Censorship
ReplyDeleteHere is a link to the KIRO News interview of the instigator of the protest against Pastor Driscoll. Judge for yourself:
http://kiro.radiotown.com/audio/dorihour1.mp3
Radioguy:
ReplyDeleteCertainly opposing or ignoring Driscoll have their limitations. What is often forgotten when claiming free speech is that both Pastor Driscoll's defenders and critics can cultivate and reinforce each other's reactions unwittingly. So the deeper questions are: what mechanisms foster positive change in the other? How can we effectively challenge when needed? Freedom of expression should not only have to encourage foolish talk.
Whatever happened to Leif Moi?
ReplyDelete