Mark Driscoll, in a statement for Christianity Magazine, recently said:
Let’s just say this: right now, name for me the one young, good Bible teacher that is known across Great Britain. You don’t have one – that’s the problem. There are a bunch of cowards who aren’t telling the truth.
Andrew Finden responded appropriately, wondering if Driscoll has an unhealthy bias toward famous, multi-site, mega-church pastors:
Putting aside the (frankly, wearisome) hyperbole, am I wrong in seeing Driscoll want to apply a kind of one-size-fits-all approach (e.g. famous & young) to churches in the UK? Just because there’s no household name, beamed into multi-site churches across the country each week, it doesn’t mean that there aren’t faithful leaders, young and old, teaching the bible, preaching the gospel, stirring their communities on to love and good works, and holding them accountable. In fact, if Driscoll had even visited some of the churches in the UK he’d know that, even in the CofE, it is a egregious stereotype to paint them as “guys in dresses preaching to grandmas”. We shouldn’t assume that unless someone is doing everything the way we would do it, that the important things are not getting done! . . .
It really is a shame to see the good things overshadowed by the stupid things, and I’m actually glad that there is not an all-american smack-down celebrity pastor or culture in the UK. I’m very glad for the faithful and challenging bible teaching I sat under when I was there.
I am absolutely flabbergasted at this comment by Mark Driscoll. It reflects NOT ONE SERIOUS inquiry of the church in the UK and I apologize for the loud rude Yankee jerk. I’m sorry – he is unfair.
Having been associated with MANY UK churches – I am proud of how so many are doing such great things to engage and reach people in the UK and the missiological wisdom you all have there.
We’re ashamed he did this – just know that he does it here and his shallow trite comments don’t go down with most of us well either.
Thanks for sharing Mike–I couldn’t agree more.
http://pastormark.tv/2012/01/12/a-blog-for-the-brits
I know it’s fun to snipe at pastors from the cheap seats, but take some media things with a grain of salt. We do it with articles on politics, how much more for articles on our pastors.
Haven’t read the article you linked yet David, but isn’t that exactly the problem–that we shouldn’t have to take what our pastors say with a grain of salt? Shouldn’t our pastors be models of good communication, not slamming others etc. etc.? Shouldn’t we expect our pastors to say things we can get behind and respect?
I am not by any means saying that we should expect perfection or anything close to it in terms of the way our pastors communicate but we have to have some expectation of them or else we will constantly settle for these sorts of damaging statements that have to be back tracked from.
You also have to consider, that in the UK, this is the state of things:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/Bsa-religion-question.svg
That is a much more uphill battle in terms of garnering attention, and in the way you engage people.
But yeah, that is a rude hateful/bigoted thing for Driscoll to say.
Way to start the year condemning your brothers in Christ in the UK with no actual evidence or data to support your snap judgement, Pastor Driscoll. This is very disappointing. Not to mention graceless and unproductive…..because what was the point of his saying that? To pit UK pastors against US pastors in some kind of intercontinental UFC cage match? Gimme a break.
I read Pastor Driscoll’s blog post and here are my questions – Those were his words, correct? Calling UK pastors “cowards”? So if those were Driscoll’s words – then why isn’t it OK to ask him to be accountable for them?
In the blog post, Driscoll introduces circumstances during & after the interview that needs to be confirmed by the people interviewing him. He made a number of allegations – that the interviewer was “a personally offended critic had finally gotten his chance to exercise some authority over me.” As well as “…..the reporter is a very liberal Christian, and on these issues I am not.” And Driscoll also claims that he was “selectively edited and presented in a way that is not entirely accurate.” But he doesn’t disavow saying that UK pastors were cowards, he modifies it slightly with “In particular, the quote about cowardice may not fit all British men, but for men who misuse their authority to advance their agenda, it seems applicable.” This has become a he said she said issue. Or rather, he said he said. I’d be interested to see the response from Christianity Today to Driscoll’s blog post.
In his blog post, Driscoll comes across as sanctimonious and self righteous – appointing himself judge over the British church and challenging them to find “courageous young Christians” as if he is absolutely sure there are none, having scoured the English countryside personally. It’s exactly this kind of over the top rhetoric that gets Driscoll into hot water constantly. His tongue is very much untamed.