Mars Hill is taking a public hit on the chin for its handling of public discipline toward a member named Andrew:
Then he made a mistake that found him cast out: He cheated on his fiancee with a community college classmate. The fury over Andrew’s experience—and his decision to publicize the church’s internal disciplinary procedures—has led to accusations by other Christians that one of the most powerful evangelical voices in the country, Mars Hill pastor Mark Driscoll, employs a cultlike leadership style. Now, for the first time, Mars Hill is speaking out in response to its former member’s charges.
…
Now, as even fellow evangelical Christians express concern about how Andrew was shunned, the church must confront questions about whether its disciplinary practices are misunderstood and biblical, or disturbingly controlling. Is Mars Hill’s PR drama a lesson in how even the best institutions will have disgruntled critics, or a case of an increasingly powerful organization abusing its members’ trust?
I believe that Andrew needed to be held accountable, and we all must realize that when we hear Andrew’s side, we are only getting one side. Still, I have at least two major concerns as I follow this story that is pertinent to my church, which seeks to practice church discipline in a Biblical way with the aim being restoration.
In the Slate piece, Ruth Graham writes:
As a church grows from a tight-knit community to a group of thousands, discipline becomes more difficult. That’s why churches like Mars Hill encourage participation in small groups, in which members can be accountable to one another in their personal struggles. Moral development, as old-fashioned as that term may sound, can be a beautiful, transformative part of the work of the church.
…
The question that Mars Hill members must confront is whether the atmosphere at their church is one of respect or shame. Dean says that the church would welcome reconciliation with Andrew, but Mars Hill is not backing down from its strict definition of repentance. The unspoken implication seems to be that Mars Hill itself has done nothing it needs to repent from.
First, I have to wonder if a ‘mega-church’ can practice discipline very effectively. The smaller the church, the more personal discipline can be, and the elders can have a better knowledge of the situation. (The elders of Mars Hill admitted as much.)
Secondly, I fear that Driscoll’s bravado has led to the church being perceived as over-bearing in general, which colors this specific case of church discipline as more MMA smack down than gentle restoration of a sinning member.
This case saddens me and at the same time encourages me. It saddens me because it puts out the wrong message about discipline, but it has encouraged me to examine my own church to be certain that every issue of accountability is handled with the wisdom and care the Bible demands.
doing it is always different than talking about. have done both on many occasions in small and high impact situations in our own fellowship. no circumstance is enjoyable in the midst of it. all must be dealt with by those imperfect leaders in place who have rightly been given oversight responsibilities, whether the individuals involved or the public at-large likes it or not.
i’m glad the leadership in our congregation has no regard for ‘popularity contests’ as most of pop culture. what feels good usually doesn’t teach our own children not to steal a piece of gum, let alone an adult not to lust after what they are “sure this is right.”
the condition of a man’s heart may not be able to be read like a book by us, but the Book that is read by us always reveals the condition of a man’s heart. leaders must make the call and take the responsibility attached. authority is borne out of responsibility. it may be a gallant effort to attempt to question others’ decisions in these matters, but there are far too many conditions and complexities for the brush of those outside these situations to paint them with adequate cover.
This all familiar scenario has nothing to do with Driscoll or his style or church….but Andrew’s unwillingness to FULLY confess to ALL of his sins.
Grace was available upon FULL confession instead he chose to be self righteous and seek to turn the table back to Driscoll and make an accusation. Andrew was correctly cast out just like the brother in Corinth to Satan…for what purpose ….full repentance.
When i read some of the 607 replies on the linked article, it appears very few understand and are not prepared to apply scripture. Paul
Frustrating. Troubling. Disconcerting. Sad. Frightening. I will freely admit that I underwent my own church discipline in 2000 at Overlake Christian Church and this story horrifyingly reminds me my own account, with much pain and trembling, even 12 years later. My heart BREAKS for Andrew. My flesh CRAWLS at reading this article. We are to be Jesus with skin on. We are to faithfully administer God’s GRACE in its various forms. Legalistic tarring and feathering of God’s chosen people, His royal priesthood, His holy nation, does NOT result in better community or better growth. It results in an impoverished church, a beleaguered sense of trust in God and the body of Christ, and cultivates a climate of fear-based worship where God’s children are walking on eggshells. I can only imagine what Andrew must feel right now. Andrew, I love you in Jesus’ Name. You are repentant, you have repented, and you are forgiven. I do not know you, I have never met you, but you are LOVED IN JESUS’ NAME. I am deeply proud of you for bringing your sin into the light, and for bringing Mars Hill’s leadership’s sin into the light as well. Knowing church discipline all too well, I can freely also admit that one sin that cost me my position of leadership, my community at the church, my connection to the body of Christ there, etc., also eventually lead to an even greater sin which cost me my freedom and sent me to prison. I do not blame my actions on the church or the leadership, but I will indefatigably say that there is an inexorable tie between the church discipline / excommunication I received from Overlake Christian Church, and my eventual crime. Do I wish I could take back my crime? Yes. But I also wish with all my heart that I could take back the church discipline I received, and replace it with something restorative like a warm hug. Alas, warm hugs are not mentioned in Scripture for those undergoing church discipline. And such a legalistic, grace-lacking approaches only send us further down the drain, with no hope of compassionate restoration. Wash your hands of us if you will, you beloved megachurches, and in the process so subsequently condemn yourselves as unloving, uncompassionate, and unbiblical. Jesus loves me the same that he does me, and that is my Amen, because truthfully I’d rather ALWAYS be the guy beating his chest, saying “God be merciful to me, a sinner” than be you.
People need to read the scriptures regarding church discipline. People who refuse to confess their sin when approached by one, then two witnesses. The punishment is harsh excommunication / handing over to Satan in order for them to repent. Likewise, when they do repent Paul warned the church to soften their attitude. This is the mandate for pastors and elders.
If the pastors and elders ignored their responsibility, this guy would have entered into marriage with his unconfessed sexual sin. The pastors were seeking to obey scripture and not allow this marriage to be built on a lie.
But many pastors or elders do not do this and allow sin to become a normality within their ranks and offer no church discipline in case of offence.
Forget emotions! People just don’t like to be confronted with their sin. This issue here is that SIN was not taken seriously enough and look at the result!
@Paul: there is such a thing as obedience to scripture, and there is such a thing as zealous Phariseeical legalistic Scriptural abuse. The latter is present here. Google Mark Driscoll’s own statement admitting that leaders overstepped their authority: http://marshill.com/2012/02/13/a-response-regarding-church-discipline
This has nothing to do with someone not wanting to be confronted with their sin. Andrew had to draw the line somewhere, and I don’t blame him. The next step would have been tarring and feathering.
There was no zealous legalistic Scriptural abuse. One life group read the private letter to the group. Why? Because everybody was wondering what was going on. Was that a mistake? NO. Because scripture requires that if the sinful Christian, upon being approached twice privately, refuses to repent, it is to be made public.
I would expect that to happen at a life group level as compared to a public Sunday service level due to current legal defamation laws.
The mistake was made by Andrew making it public seeking to cover himself, or others who have no understanding of church discipline.
Church discipline is foreign to many and seen as harsh but it is scripture. Andrew did draw the line and has stayed in sin. Ryan you don’t take sin seriously enough. Paul
@Paul: wrong again. Andrew did not seek to make it public, he was doing what we all would do: looking for love and support since he had been denied it by a Phariseeical church hellbent on persecution rather than restoration. The next time you fall, ask yourself which of these two things you’d prefer, and see what you do in your own manner of response. And I’m laughing hysterically at your insinuation that I don’t take sin seriously enough. Boy, you just made it plain that you’re a proud supporter of Mars Hill and an avid stone-thrower and axe-grinder right there. You’re as divisive and incendiary as they are. I commend you on the plank in your eye.
@Paul: I’m actually also laughing at the fact that you’re a pastor and that you’re writing from Australia. Good luck Australian Christians! Hope there are grace-filled churches out there for you to attend! You don’t need to see Paul’s identification…his is not the church you’re looking for…you can go about your business…move along!
@Paul: Also…hmmm…..yes I’m sure you’re right. Andrew would have entered into marriage with his unconfessed sexual sin. He would never have repented. He would never have confessed. He would never have humbled himself. He would have ended up in hell and taken THRONGS of innocents with him. He would eventually have revealed himself to be the antichrist. Right? Do I understand you correctly? Because that’s all you can see: FORCING someone’s hand and forcing repentance down their throat. You are not God, nor do you have the right to pretend to think you can force His hand. Dish out some grace and see the Lord move. Strong-arm people, as you’re making it quite clear that you’d like to do with Andrew, only results in more seclusion, more desperation, more hopelessness, more despair. I am relieved that you are not MY pastor. I know this, Paul. I know it all too well. People who were Biblically uncompromising but ALSO full of grace reached out to me and THAT is why I’ve been restored. Mars Hill is not full of such people. Google “Mark Driscoll” and you’ll see what kind of leader this church is following. Open your eyes. God has a still, small voice, I’d encourage you to listen to it sometime. Andrew did.
First of all sin must be repented of by all of us without exception. Secondly if anyone in your life is so squishy soft as to ignore the mandate to “expose the deeds of darkness” than they are in league with satan not with the truth of the word of God and they are helping you damn your own soul…should you really be seeking to be hugged when your sin has so greatly offended God who is perfectly Holy and that you have so obviously offended and hurt the one(s) for whom you were forced into a prison sentence over??? It would be like saying…”I can’t follow Christ and His truth because people are being mean to me and asking me to tell the truth about my sin (confess) and further abandon my lies (turn and repent) which I have loved with all my life!” It reminds me of a story that a man who said he was seeking to get out of a homosexual lifestyle and the pastor said “We don’t accept fags at our church!” and so this man leaves and says he couldn’t possibly follow Christ because of this offensive pastor and what he had said to him in his greatest time of need. So I make this argument – Has God’s absolute truth changed in this circumstance? No-He and His truth are “the same yesterday, today and forever.” So then this man who is seeking to “escape the condemnation” of his own sin is not really interested in following Christ as Savior and His complete exposure of this man’s sin but rather have someone console him in his sin rather than call him out of it by the truth of the Word of God….You will indeed perish if you do not acknowledge your sin and repent of it and it will continue to destroy your soul and sear your conscience until you are unable to acknowledge your sin…Repent and be saved…if you don’t think your sin is sin then you don’t need a Savior and you have made Christ into nothing and He won’t be made into nothing even in your eyes…
Perhaps sometimes that still small voice is talking so quietly, we can’t hear it over the keystrokes of our comments…