This post is gratuitous. We drove home – as is the case at the end of all driving holidays. We listened to some Mark Driscoll. I played with my iPhone. Twittering the trip home. And we stopped in Cardwell to take some sunset pictures…
Tag: mark driscoll
The road home
Dear planters
I have mentioned my feelings on the current wave of church planting enthusiasm before… But in summary – I think church planting is a good and necessary thing – particularly in areas experiencing population growth. I also think attendance patterns at churches (particularly Presbyterian Churches) in Queensland demonstrate the need for culturally relevant (dare I say “missional”) churches…
But, I am constantly frustrated by church planters and would be church planters putting down the old ways and old guys as they scurry up the ministry ladder. So I was greatly encouraged to read this post by Tasmanian church planter Mikey Lynch on why he likes to hear what the old guys have to say. There are a few bits of his list that seem to damn the old guard with faint praise – but the sentiment is praiseworthy.
You can head over there to read my comment. It’s long. And I feel a little bit like the Apostle Paul when I lay down my “credentials” for feeling the way I do… reluctantly foolish.
Also – in order to maintain my fantastic search engine ranking for the phrase “Driscoll fanboys” I should mention that those are the particular people I’m targeting with this rant.
Driscoll made broad generalisations when he visited our shores that have been latched onto like a mantra by a generation of bullish, headstrong, and arrogant young men (much like myself). Who want to make a difference and perhaps are looking for a point of difference. I’m not talking about people engaged in actual church planting currently – but those in pews being fired up and looking to lay blame for the current state of staid conservatism that misses the cultural mark.
That is all.
Video hits
Chris just beat me to the punch on this. Video preaching. Some are for it. Some against. I’m mostly against. I think you’d have to be pretty arrogant to think that your sermons should be broadcast to the thousands in your auditorium – and then to thousands more in multiple auditoriums elsewhere around the city, state, nation or globe.
But wait you say… Mark Driscoll does it – in a “multi-campus” format for his church – Mars Hill – in his city – Seattle… Driscoll also wants 900 men to plant churches in the US – how’s he going to find 900 men world wide if he can’t find 8 suitable men in his own city?
I understand the practicality of embracing the model. There are no doubt thousands of people who’d like to listen to Mark Driscoll in church every Sunday. I’m happy enough for Mars Hill to pursue that model provided it’s in the same city and being driven by humble pragmatism – and not the inability to find the people to do the preaching elsewhere…
There were some interesting points raised by the original article – by an emerging church type (which means he has a bone to pick with Driscoll – even if he doesn’t name him specifically… oh wait, he does)…
“This is the rule: Technology, taken too far, creates the opposite of what it was intended to create.
Still doubt it? Ask yourself- Email was meant to keep you in touch and ease communication, right? But when you are trying to process 100 emails a day, you don’t feel in touch, you feel crushed. You’re not communicating- you are wading through spam, forwards, fyi’s… Your emails get shorter and shorter, more and more terse, and mis-communication happens more often than not. “
“If we’re not more thoughtful about this, soon, every city and town will have the Driscoll franchise… maybe even two or three. And the Andy Stanley, Ed Young Jr franchise as well. Is Joel Osteen too far behind? Hybels, Warren, Groeschel… the market is going to get crowded.”
See, here’s my concern. Nicely articulated. We want not just one preacher for a generation – but a generation of preachers. Bible teaching is enhanced by a diverse platform of voices all spurring one another on. There’s one preacher in that list of luminaries who I’d listen to. Only one. And yet, a world full of churches with just these seven men is technologically (and therefore technically) possible.
This really is the biggest question mark raised over the Mars Hill model for me – and by extension the Acts 29 church planting philosophy. Sure, Driscoll’s a gifted guy. A once in a generation preacher. But that doesn’t mean we should all be listening to him in our churches week in week out.
Jensenisms
While I’m holding out against the young evangelical male norm and not signing up as a Driscoll fanboy – I’m unabashedly a fan of Phillip Jensen. His well balanced article on the abortion debate got a run on the SMH website today (thanks to Findo for pointing it out) – and I assume in the printed version. It’s nice to have a fairly moderate Christian voice in the debate.
I linked to this when he put it up on his site a couple of weeks ago – but if you didn’t read it then, read it now.
Here are three paragraphs to whet your appetite…
“Arguments that it is a woman’s right to control her body do not deal, adequately, with the differences between the mother and the foetus. There are two lives for whom the mother is responsible. The question is whether her responsibility for the life of the foetus extends to making the decision of life and death, or whether her self-interest undermines the legitimacy of this decision. Should the state have some say in protecting this life from her?
There is little purpose in demonising those who oppose abortion by claiming they are imposing their morality on others, for the entire legal system is an imposition of morality on others. Rather than an anarchic jungle of society without law, our society imposes a moral system on individuals.
Our society uses a combination of Christian heritage, rational discussion, political democracy and judicial wisdom to guide its choices. On a range of issues, it has chosen to limit individual freedoms. On others, it has allowed the citizens to make their own choices. It is not unreasonable to make life and death issues involving a defenceless victim a matter of moral discussion, political decision and judicial wisdom.”
Plant rant
There’s a lot of chatter around the Australian evangelical blogosphere (that’s a pretty narrow field really) about a future church planting movement in Australia.
Some people are over in the US with Mark Driscoll and other renowned church planters right now. And they’re blogging up a storm. Most of the posts are buzzing with fanboyism. They’re chock full of quotable quotes, photo ops, video interviews and summaries from talks given at conferences. It’s no doubt very exciting for those caught up in the movement.
Some people are not so excited. I won’t link to the post because I’m not sure how long it’s going to stay up. Simone has a post on the matter here.
Church planting is exciting. Sure. It’s great to be pursuing new avenues to preach the gospel to people. It’s something I’d like to do one day myself. Maybe. But it has to be said that it takes a special character to persevere with someone else’s work and not go off breaking new ground. I’d say it’s more challenging for a minister of a church to take on an established eldership or church governance structure.
These new fangled church planters have some compelling arguments but they’re often built with some sort of naive view of the nature of ministry in mind. Mars Hill, Mark Driscoll’s church is in my mind a case in point. Pull Mark Driscoll out and things change dramatically. There doesn’t seem to be a great succession plan in place if your preaching pastor preaches to multiple locations via a satellite link. The model they propose works so long as ministers don’t parish hop (which they do) and as long as the church can provide for their own staff members from within their numbers (which they can’t always). When there’s a vacancy in an Australian church an outsider has to come in and take over. That’s the way it works – particularly when there are more vacancies than candidates to fill them.
I’m also not sold on the idea that all the good church stuff happens in cities. Which is a key theory behind a lot of Mark Driscoll’s strategies in particular. So I’m reserved in my exuberance when it comes to responding to the news that Australia is going to have a network of church planting being supported by the Acts 29 movement.
The rest of this post is a comment I posted on Simone’s blog where she was less than enthused by the personality cult (my words not hers) surrounding super church planters like Driscoll… you may already have read it. A few of these statements address the particulars of that post.
While I appreciate Mark Driscoll and love him for his passionate teaching and church growth strategies – if you can call them that – I don’t think his is an easily reproducible style.
I would say the church planters who are running these conferences were not only not going to these church planting conferences – but were not even following a church planting recipe.
I don’t set out to be Gordon Ramsay in the kitchen, and I’m not going to set out to be Mark Driscoll in church planting. I think the beauty of being both a celebrity chef and a church planter is that you work with the ingredients you’re given – and in most cases the ministry you forge (or the food you make) works best when it reflects your unique personality and not a cheap imitation of a trailblazer.
These guys all seem to be wanting to be trailblazers by following someone. And that seems contradictory.
It’s Time
Time Magazine has just published a list of the 10 ideas changing the world right now. Number 3. New Calvinism.
There’ll be a bunch of links to some reactions in my link post today. But here’s the actual article.
And here’s a quote:
“Calvinism, cousin to the Reformation’s other pillar, Lutheranism, is a bit less dour than its critics claim: it offers a rock-steady deity who orchestrates absolutely everything, including illness (or home foreclosure!), by a logic we may not understand but don’t have to second-guess. Our satisfaction — and our purpose — is fulfilled simply by “glorifying” him.”
The article names John Piper, Mark Driscoll and Albert Mohler as leaders of this pack.
Driscollisms
I’m about to break an unofficial rule – and post something about Mark Driscoll. If you’ve never heard of him – look him up on wikipedia – or check out his blog at his church’s website.
I’ve mentioned him a couple of times – but I know that he doesn’t really like bloggers. Unless they’re flattering. I also don’t want to appear to be a fan boy. I think he’s good – but not the second coming.
Will Henderson is a pressy guy in the US learning about Church Planting. That pretty much means hanging around as many Mark Driscoll fanboys as possible and learning from them.
He’s just posted a list of quotable quotes from a recent talk Driscoll gave. Here are my favourites:
“If ALL you are into is NEW you will end up a heretic. God call us to contend & Contextualise.”
“Preaching the gospel? There will be critics everywhere online permanent. Turn them into coaches. Never engage on their terms. In your anger do not sin. Avoid email.”
The guru’s guru
I’ve never been one for gurus. Particularly self proclaimed ones who spit out pithy statements at random intervals.
Simone just hailed me as a guru of trivia, which was nice, which got me thinking about the concept of a “guru”.
Gurus tend to annoy me. Today, I’d like to introduce you to the guru of the internet. Seth Godin. I subscribe to Seth’s blog – mostly because he is a marketing guru. And sometimes he says useful things. The rest of it is twaddle. Like this:
“If it acts like a duck (all the time), it’s a duck. Doesn’t matter if the duck thinks it’s a dog, it’s still a duck as far as the rest of us are concerned.”
That’s a quote from a post on “Authenticity“.
Seth is a guru to so many people – but he has gurus too. Kevin Kelly, founder of Wired is one of those gurus. He’s like the grand daddy guru of the internet. He does seem pretty cool.
Kevin Kelly has gurus too. His gurus are people involved in the emerging church movement. He says as much here. Almost. He’s a Christian and he likes relevant stuff.
Being a fan of the emergent church means being a fan of Mark Driscoll. Almost. He was one of the people who started the movement but has since distanced himself from it. In writing. It’s probably not fair to lump him in with them – but it works for the sake of this little soliloquisious (surely the adjectival form of soliloquay) syllogism.
Mark Driscoll is now the guru of a generation of young Christian men who want authentic Christianity.
His guru is Jesus. So following the chain from Seth Godin – everybody’s guru – gets you to Jesus.
I guess my point is: Everybody you may consider a guru will have their own guru – once you get to the top of the pile of gurus that’s the guy worth following. Follow the guy with no gurus.