Driscoll and McLaren.

As some of you already know, there's a fascinating discussion thread happen in a lot of places over comments that Mark Driscoll has made on Out of Ur, Christianity Today's blog, in regards to comments made by Brian McLaren on the issue of the church and homosexuality. Love to get your thoughts...

Brian McLaren on the Homosexual Question: Finding a Pastoral Response [Read this first.]

Brian McLaren on the Homosexual Question 3: A Prologue and Rant by Mark Driscoll [Read this next, keep in mind that this was edited from the original, which can be found here.]

So here's my question. You may not agree with some of McLaren's comments, but is this the way in which to engage a thoughtful dialogue? I personally find Driscoll's comments and tone quite unfortunate. Healthy dialogue is helpful, but trite sarcasm is quite destructive. Mark may come across witty to some, but to others he has missed the point altogether.

For a few thoughful responses, check out Bob Hyatt, Jason Clark, and Len Hjalmarson.

Love to hear any thoughts you all may have...

Comments

[Brad Clark]

It's attitudes like Driscoll's that came across in the article that make me want to leave ministry and the church... not Jesus but the church. I feel sick.

[Stephen]

Wow! I come away feeling more confused than anything else. I don't really think that Driscoll has made any real statement other than being angry and saying some things he might regret later (or maybe not). He certainly has not made any concrete point. I actualy respect Brian's comment:

"I hesitate in answering "the homosexual question" not because I'm a cowardly flip-flopper who wants to tickle ears, but because I am a pastor, and pastors have learned from Jesus that there is more to answering a question than being right or even honest...."

It's hard to have any answer for sure on this. The only thing I can say is Jesus came in love. It never mattered who you were or where you came from. If anything I think I've lost some respect for Mr. Driscoll because of his attack and unwillingness to understand the statements made by McLaren. I think even before responding to McLaren's post, Driscoll glossed over. At even the mention of the word homosexual he has made up his mind. I do respect his view even though I may not agree with it. I just wish he'd delivered it (and especialy on this issue) with a little more love involved.

[curtis]

Driscoll's handicapped himself, and that's really too bad because I thought McLaren's post, though interesting and certainly loving, erred a bit in that he himself never answered the real issue either. McLaren seems a whole lot more worried about distancing himself from Republicans than attemping to mount either a moral defense for homosexuality or a gentle explanation as to why he believes it is wrong.

[Clint Walker]

I may be wrong here, but I get the impression that there is a little history here that several people are not in on.

I reads like what he said it was...a rant.

I think McLaren should have a more forthright opinion on the issue, but I hear what he is saying. I think. I think what McLaren is trying to say is that by making a public statement of his position on the issue, people will place a number of other assumptions on him about what he believes that may or may not be true. I feel this at times. Especially in a demonination that has been arguing about this issue for the last 20 years with no resolution. You dont want to cave to conservatives that are all about gaining control and power, and you dont want to have an anything goes sexual ethic in churches.

I think Driscoll's point is also important. I think that at some point, as a pastor, it is important to take a stand on things like this. And, there is a sense in which the whole EMERGENT thing has been highjacked by folks who instead of simply being sensitive to emerging culture are defining their "gernative friendship" defined by a PC, "blue state" agenda. But his "male lesbian" and "TONTO" comments were distasteful. Futhermore they obscured his point. I also think, if we are to be open to authenticity, we need to be open to people like Driscoll and the way he states things.

I think if the same rant was stated against the Religious Right instead of Emergent, with the same tone, there would be a lot of people who were angry at Driscoll now that would be smiling.

Anyhow....I agreed with Mark's point completely, empathized with Brian a little, but still wish that individual pastors would not be so enamoured with being in everyone's good graces and stand for clear Biblical truth.

[Clint Walker]

I need to revise my post.

the comment should read "the whole EMERGENT thing FEELS LIKE...."

not wanting to attack or blame just express my feeling in that sentence.

sorry for pressing return without proofing better

[Clint Walker]

also should read tone instead of town in the second to last paragraph.

[smallman]

i really hate to be in the bit of a minority, so to speak, on this blog. and up until very recently i would have agreed with mclaren entirely, but a few conversations have caused me to re-think my position a little.

while i think morality is indeed an overflow of the heart, in a sense, is it not also important to inform others of the consequences? maybe not the traditional "i believe it's sin", but in the same way most any preacher from any particular stream would talk about heterosexual sin, is it entirely wrong to say "i dont think it's okay"?

i think my favorite part is when mclaren talks about being "pastoral" versus "right". i think thats fantastic. and many of us who have had any kind of leadership are probably familar with the distinction, but is it wrong entirely to say "hey, you know what, this is how i feel about it"/"this is how it is"? i'm just afraid it could come out as a bit of a "bait and switch" of sorts if we aren't forthright.

[Derek Frenzel]

At first I wasn't bothered by Driscoll's comments, because we all can be sarcastic at times; however, I definitely understand the reverence that this subject needs to be addressed with, and Driscoll did a poor job of reading the room. The Pharisees spoke of the people Christ hung out with as "sinners." Were they right? Of course, Jesus did hang out with sinners and he even addressed their sin from time to time. However, the Pharisees saw these people as sinners first and then by however else you would classify them. Why? Well, aside from being self-righteous, they probably didn't want to take the time to get to know any of the "sinners." It's much harder to actually take part in someone's life than lob statements at them from a mile away. For some (or at least maybe the more vocal ones in the media), not much has changed. And ironically, it's the exact same thing that the world does with us. The world relegates Christians to t-shirts, protest signs, being judgemental and hypocritical, and what's on TBN. We are viewed as a movement, a voting bloc, boycotters, fundies, and dumb, but definitely not individuals - and we complain how we are so persecuted and God is under attack in our nation, etc., while all the while we do the same to homosexuals. We view them as a block, or even "sinners" but definitely not as individuals. Now, there are definitely reasons for this (with the way gay rights groups are), but it doesn't mean it's right. Individuals have names, they have preferences, favorite music, thoughts, personalities, dreams, families, and character. How many Christians actually know a gay person? Next questions is how many Christians know anything about that person's life? So let me get this straight, we want them to know all about our lives, beliefs, values, and don't care to hear about theirs? THIS is what needs to change with the "Church" today. We know the Truth, it's not going to change in five years. We won't be able to dance around it, or package it up all nice- it will still "anguish" us. What we need to do is reevaluate our sense of Grace on an individual level. And not just simply by being nice to "sinners" and "gay people". We need to take part in their lives as people. Become friends, not just acquaintences. Let them see the good work that we preach, fleshed out in our lives.

[Scott]

Wow, that last poster needs to get a job. Way too long of a post there bud J/K Anyway this sure is an interesting topic, must think some...

[Tony Myles]

When is it acceptable for a Christian to express outrage at the situation the world is in?