Is Mark Driscoll a bully?

Yes, according to a new website titled “Is Mark Driscoll a bully?”. Mark Driscoll is the senior pastor of Mars Hill church in Seatlle, and the author of the website is clearly not a fan. The site defines the word “Driscoll”:

1. (verb) To employ a self-martyring, pseudo-theological chauvinistic rage to denigrate intelligent women, homosexuals, worship leaders who wear a pink shirts, congregants who disagree with you, a pastor who fails to talk about his wife’s vagina from the pulpit, and any non-Christian who thinks you are a crazy bigot.

The site also includes some pretty crazy examples of things Mark Driscoll has said. My favorite:

One night, as we approached the birth of our first child, … I had a dream in which I saw … in painful detail Grace sinning sexually during a senior trip she took after high school…. I asked her if it was true, fearing the answer. Yes, she confessed, it was. Grace started weeping and trying to apologize for lying to me, but I honestly don’t remember the details of the conversation, as I was shell-shocked. Had I known about this sin, I would not have married her.

So God decided to speak to Mark in a dream about his wife’s sinful past. Hahaha…. love it. And people say God doesn’t have a sense of humor. Kudos God. You deserve a tip of the cap on that one.

I am not sure what the history is behind the site, but the author also uses Pam Hogeweide’s book Unladylike as a resource for victims of Mark Driscoll. So, nice.

Also, consider this an open thread. If you’ve seen anything on the internet you want me to talk about, please feel free to put it in the comments.

27 thoughts on “Is Mark Driscoll a bully?

  1. Interesting vid, I would like to hear MD’s response to everything, I hope he addresses these issues & handles them as I expect he will. I am curious if the situation concerning the guy accused of having sex with his fiance was handled biblically as far as addressing the situation, and what about the fiance? Her reactions arent mentioned or addressed. Its definately worth following to see the outcome.

  2. The passage off Scripture in 1 Cor 5 is similar to this situation, the man went to MD church is a christian that fell into sexual sin & was unrepentive according to them. There is clear instruction in that chapter on how to address someone in that situation. If its an unbeliever who is doing the same thing then its a different situation cuz they arent a christian. Christ did reach out & fellowship with sinners & those who were lost, just as we should also, but the religious hypocrites are the ones He called out cuz they were putting on a front. To make the guy sign a contract & disclose his sexual history is rediculous, I wouldnt do that if I was in his situation. Also the fact that it was done in an email to a select group of people and not publically before the church isn’t biblical either. Galatians 6:1 tells to restore someone who has fallen into sin with gentleness or else we could fall into the same sin.

    My question is was the man repentive of his actions, but didn’t want to conform to the added nonsense by signing a contract & disclosing his sexual history? Which the leadership labelled as rebelious, but it fact its not rebellious cuz its something that was added by men to control the situation.

    • There’s a difference between the situation exposed/shunned by MD and the one described in 1 Cor. 5.

      A guy sleeping with his fiance differs from a man sleeping with his father’s wife in the sense that the former is a ‘victimless’ sin, while the latter is deeply hurtful to the man’s father.

      Also, in the story of 1 Cor. 5, it seems clear the whole church knew about it and why wouldn’t they? The son shows up with his step-mom and dad is no doubt out of the picture … so the church at Corinth was enabling the sin by doing nothing though it was public knowledge.

      As for the couple MD outed, was it public knowledge before, because it is now! What of the scripture that says “love covers over a multitude of sins?” Since it was NOT public knowledge and no one else in the congregation was being harmed, why not ‘cover it over with love’, handle it discretely? No one was really harmed by the couples behavior, but now the entire congregation is inflamed by it, divided, and the name of Christ is sullied in the Puget Sound area by virtue of the news coverage.

      I see a big difference and believe MD was wrong; power tripping at this couples expense.

      Me thinks that church is about to come unzipped …

  3. Good questions. I don’t know.

    If I had to write out my sexual history to my pastor, it would go something like this.

    “Okay, I’ll talk. In third grade I cheated on my history exam. In fourth grade, I stole my uncle Max’s toupee and glued it on my face when I played Moses in my Hebrew school play…”

  4. I just found this article were the man described in the vid talks with the author of a blog. Very different story then what is portrayed. The man seems genuine to me in confessing & jumping thru the hoops before being blindsided with the contract. Its a 2 part deal, here is a link to the first one below:

    http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-needs-new-pr/mark-driscolls-church-discipline-contract-looking-for-true-repentance-at-mars-hill-church-sign-on-the-dotted-line/

    • WOW.. How disgusting is Mars Hill and it’s leadership!!

      Sounds like Mark needs a lawyer to sue the Bible socks off these dudes for slander …

  5. The subject of marriage is an interesting one for folks involved with the house church movement. There you’re likely to find people who are anti-state in terms of licensing ministers, filing not-for-profit status, etc. Some house church married couples have only had a ‘church’ ceremony and no state marriage license. So are they really married? Are they having Biblically legal sex? :shock:

    When my wife and I were married, the minister said in his homily “I don’t marry you, you marry yourselves.” That set my mind to spinning, because 9 months before our June church wedding service, we exchanged vows and pledged our love to one another before the Lord. From that moment on we considered ourselves married, accountable to God, though we waited until after our June wedding ceremony to consummate our marriage. I wonder however, had we not waited, would God have considered us to be in sin had we made love? Would God say to us “you don’t have a state marriage license” or “you didn’t have an official wedding service?”

    So about the couple MD has assailed with that shunning BS, might they have made a personal, private marriage committment before God? Isn’t that the essence of an engagement?

    Might serve MD to reflect on Jewish culture, engagement and marriage, before jumping all over those kids because they don’t have a WA state marriage license. Who can say the condition of their hearts in the matter?

    Seems a shame to blur the lines between casual fornication between people with no committment to God or each other, and the exclusive committment between a man and woman who love one another and God.

  6. Interesting to me was all the blog responses. Just like here a lot of people who’ve stepped away long enough to see the abuse for what it is;

    So basically 5, 6 or 7 bloggers venting their anger with a few giving their own personal trampled-on-in-the-name-of-the-Lord experiences. Then all of a sudden some self-righteous pro-driscoll dude starts quoting King James judgment-against-sin verses, riling up the rest of the bloggers. They go back and forth arguing with him for at least a night or two or three worth of blogging. By now, besides the original 5, 6, or 7, 3 or 4 others have joined in to either vent or tell the guy off. And depending on how far it escallates, it’s drawn in at least 1 or 2 who either aren’t saved at all and never want to be, or who used to be but are so turned off by all the shenanigans they’ve become atheists. And for an added bonus, there might even be 1 or 2 come in taking the side of the guy quoting king james judgment verses.

    Then all of a sudden as if by miracle the guy finally shuts up and leaves, shaking the dust off his feet. It then reverts back to simple voicing shock or disgust, but basically staying calm, until another guy (or girl) comes in to set everybody straight. Then the whole process recycles. It is eerily familiar.

  7. If Driscoll wants to emulate the Lord Jesus, may I suggest he note the verse in John where Jesus is described as “full of grace and truth,” and the verse where Jesus describes Himself as “meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”

    I do not think I would find rest for my soul in that congregation. Yuck.

  8. I watched the video and read the links, MH reminds me of the ultra-fundamentalists FLDS with Warren Jeffs as their leader. It also reminds me of the late 1970’s earlier 1980’s when I was at BT while attending PBC.

  9. PS. Remember at BT around 1980 the Ruben families son who was engaged was intimate with his fiance. He told an elder at BT. An elder made the announcement on Sunday morning about this to the congregation. He and his fiance were under church discipline! I don’t believe they ever recovered from the embarrasement of this. If I recall correctly the family ended up leaving BT. This was so wrong. He went to the elder because he felt remorse and they crushed his spirit instead. So sad!

    • Many a girl had to get up in front of the church in those days and confess her sin… never saw the guy do likewise… I always thought that it was nobody’s business to know who had been fornicating.

      • Sad to make the girls get up and confess like that … why not get a branding iron and give them a ‘scarlet letter’ while they’re at it?

        Do the leaders understand they are creating even more problems for a young girl by making her get up in front of a crowd and confess her sexual sin?

        There’s an old joke that illustrates the point …

        A teenage boy goes to his priest and confesses “Father, forgive me, I have fornicated” … the priest asks “Was it with Sally Smith?” … “No” the boy replies … the priest asks “Was it Jenny Jones?” … “No, not her either” says the boy … “Was it Kathy Kelly?” … the boy says “No father – I’d really rather not say.” So the priest tells the boy “OK then – that’ll be 10 hail Mary’s and 20 bucks in the poor box” … the boy hurries from the confessional and out of the church were several of his friends are waiting and says “I’ve got 3 new leads” …

        • I only ever saw girls having to go up in front of everyone and confess their sexual sin…and even then it was only because they had gotten pregnant. But I didn’t start attending CBC until around 1996 so I probably missed quite a bit.

  10. I noticed that too. I guess some things don’t change.

    The other thing I noticed is that other blogs are talking about specific abuses in church. The are a lot of Christian/Theological blogs out there, but very few of them focus on specific churches. And rarely do they speak out about a specific instance. It’s nice to see it happening.

  11. I don’t know if it was Anna or someone else who recently quoted “love covers a multitude of sins” on another thread. This bullsheester in the name of the Lord is the total opposite.

  12. Anna mentioned “If Driscoll wants to emulate the Lord Jesus, may I suggest he note the verse in John where Jesus is described as “full of grace and truth,” and the verse where Jesus describes Himself as “meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” to which I say a hearty amen.

    But I doubt the problem lies in Mark wanting to emulate Jesus. Could it be that he wants to BE Jesus so thus is emulating Lucifer when he was thrown out of God’s presence for wanting to be God.

  13. I read the account of Mark Driscoll’s bullying tactics in the articles that Monte linked us to. Unbelievable – from discipline contracts to mandetory shunning and the processes of publically humiliating a young person for a sin that is less harmful – if we are measuring sins – than the abuse the likes of pastors like Driscoll who are openly abusing the body of Christ freely as if it his right and calling. The man is deranged. And what is so devestatingly sobering is the number of people attracted to a ‘ministry’ such as his. It validates what alot of us have been harping on the last 5 or so years – the Christian Culture today is celebrity driven and longs to associate itself with the latest charismatic pretty person who has a way with words.

    I am in agreement with what Scrupe mentioned about the public disciplinary action. I may as well copy it here so you don’t have to go find it since it is a month later that I have come to the table: (Random Note to Cat: I miss some of the features of the old format. This way it’s harder to tell it’s quoted text):
    Anyhoo, here is Scrupe’s point worth reiterating:
    “There’s a difference between the situation exposed/shunned by MD and the one described in 1 Cor. 5.

    A guy sleeping with his fiance differs from a man sleeping with his father’s wife in the sense that the former is a ‘victimless’ sin, while the latter is deeply hurtful to the man’s father.

    Also, in the story of 1 Cor. 5, it seems clear the whole church knew about it and why wouldn’t they? The son shows up with his step-mom and dad is no doubt out of the picture … so the church at Corinth was enabling the sin by doing nothing though it was public knowledge.

    As for the couple MD outed, was it public knowledge before, because it is now! What of the scripture that says “love covers over a multitude of sins?” Since it was NOT public knowledge and no one else in the congregation was being harmed, why not ‘cover it over with love’, handle it discretely? No one was really harmed by the couples behavior, but now the entire congregation is inflamed by it, divided, and the name of Christ is sullied in the Puget Sound area by virtue of the news coverage.

    I see a big difference and believe MD was wrong; power tripping at this couples expense. “

  14. P.S. My friend Freeatlast has come across yet another great blog and shared it with me the other day. Check it for more info on how Mark Driscoll treats people closest to him. After reading their compelling stories, we concur that yes, sadly, MD is indeed a bully. http://joyfulexiles.com/

    This is a former elder couple on staff at Mars Hill who was “wrongly fired by Driscoll for attempting to curb Mark’s power by opposing structual changes and new bylaws that were being pushed through by Mark” (Brent Detwiler explains on yet a different blog) – these bylaws, btw, were to give Mark complete access to the money and decision making without dissent. Since Paul is a lawyer he includes extensive documentation and resources (that you can read if you are into that), but Jonna’s story goes into the heart of all they went through there and the 4 years since they left. It’s only now that they’ve felt free to tell their story. If you want to see true colors this is where to find it.

    Seems like it was only a few years ago some folks here on CBC blog were singing the praises of MD. He was the new cool which could have been fine and good. How quickly a ‘ministry’ can spin off into orbit and lose focus of the Lord – I guess it depends on the ambition of the one(s) in charge. Jesus said (Matthew 10:26) “…There is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.” I guess if you wait long enough, the truth of the matter surfaces.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


nine + = 15

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>