Mark Driscoll to step down while Mars Hill reviews charges

"Mark Driscoll will step down for at least six weeks while church leaders review formal charges lodged by a group of pastors that he abused his power."

Driscoll: “I want to say to my Mars Hill family, past and present, I’m very sorry. I genuinely mean it ... I’m very sorry for the times I’ve been angry, short or insensitive. I’m very sorry for anything I’ve done to distract from our mission by inviting criticism, controversy or negative media attention.”

2155 reads

There are 11 Comments

josh p's picture

I am praying that God will be honored by this. Is he above reproach at this point? Could he come back if he wanted to?

mmartin's picture

With Driscoll consolidated his power by "purging" the board that is supposed to be his boss and shunning those that don't fall in line with him, who is left at MHC that has an independent voice to hold him and the rest of his minions truly accountable?  Otherwise it might as well be Driscoll holding himself accountable and what he did yesterday was just a PR sham.

BTW, don't know about you, but I find his different layers of boards and elders confusing and weird.  I think it spreads out and limits the voice of the people (congregation) making it easier for him to be him without real accountability.

His behavior has gone on for so long with multiple "apologies."  How seriously should anyone now take this latest episode?

Jim's picture

I live in Plymouth MN in the State of Minnesota. The Federal government is not responsive to me. My 2 Senators could care less. As for my congressman, don't know him. At the state level, my state representative (a Republican) doesn't know or care about me. My state senator (a democrat) has communicated back and forth with me. My wife and I even met with her and her husband for coffee.

But the local government is responsive. After we moved in our front yard subsided a bit leaving the water turn-off valve high to my mower. I called them and they sent out a team the next day to cut it back and adjust. I had an issue with the drainage easement in my back yard and they sent an engineer out to check it out and meet with me. Once there was tall grass at an intersection. I presumed it was Plymouth but it was actually on the border with the town just East of us. Plymouth got a crew out there to trim back the high grass.

Some large churches have no real accountability to the congregation. Votes mean nothing. The congregation is in the dark. In my view Driscoll's empire is the epitome of the mega/unaccountable church.

dcbii's picture

EditorModerator

Jim wrote:

Some large churches have no real accountability to the congregation. Votes mean nothing. The congregation is in the dark. In my view Driscoll's empire is the epitome of the mega/unaccountable church.

This is a not a problem unique to Driscoll.  There are plenty of fundamental churches with the strong dictator model where there is no real accountability either, and they don't have to be large to have that problem.

Dave Barnhart

Jay's picture

mmartin wrote:
With Driscoll consolidated his power by "purging" the board that is supposed to be his boss and shunning those that don't fall in line with him, who is left at MHC that has an independent voice to hold him and the rest of his minions truly accountable?  Otherwise it might as well be Driscoll holding himself accountable and what he did yesterday was just a PR sham.

BTW, don't know about you, but I find his different layers of boards and elders confusing and weird.  I think it spreads out and limits the voice of the people (congregation) making it easier for him to be him without real accountability.

From what I understand of Warren Throckmorton's reporting, the 'elders' at MH will be responsible for the investigation of Mark, but all real power at MH is vested in Driscoll and the two Executive Elders.  So color me highly, highly, highly dubious that this investigation will result in anything more substantial than another apology from Driscoll and perhaps a round of MH reorganization with the same cronies in all the key spots.

In short - talk is cheap.  Let's see what happens, but I remain very skeptical.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Sean Fericks's picture

Great opportunity for repentance and reconciliation!  That's the headline God desires.  Let's pray for truth and love to win.

 

ChristyM's picture

It made the front page of both local fish wrappers this week.  Couple it with the intricacies surrounding the former Northwest Baptist Seminary property and you have the beginnings of a made for TV movie (are those even a thing anymore??). 

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024380355_marshillxml.html

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2014/08/25/3346354_mars-hill-megachurch-pa...

 

Predictably, my friends who attend MHC have about the same reaction folks at FBC Hammond had when various news leaks over Jack Hyles erupted (and no, I'm not categorizing 35+ years of skirt chasing in the same level as hand in the church cookie jar - just sayin').  Yes,  Driscoll appears to admit he has a problem.  I hope he is sincere about mending his ways.  I am not going to be lining up to attend any of his churches.

mmartin's picture

Many good points in this blog post.  The author is calling out those that "sold tickets" to Driscoll saying they bear some responsibility in the Driscoll drama because they promoted him even though there were signs of bad behavior a long time ago.  Driscoll had various behavior patterns from early on that did not line up with Biblical standards for a pastor and yet many still invited him to speak at their conferences, etc.

http://thecripplegate.com/

 

Bert Perry's picture

My question, having seen a LOT of mega-church pastors come and go, is simply whether out culture's love for bigness often encourages the most ruthless among us to attain these positions.  If you view the church as service to the flock, then you limit yourself to serving those whom you can, and you rejoice when someone else comes to help the sheep.  On the flip side, if you view the church as a striving for bigness, then the person who comes to minister to the sheep is not a co-laborer, but a rival.  Hence Driscoll's apology.

A parallel note there is that whether the church is large or small, the pastor who views himself as the CEO is going to send an unmistakable message to the men he claims to be ministering to;

You will always be in a subordinate position.  I will only let you rise to the point where I start to see you as a threat to my power, and at that point, I will take steps to drive you out.

And then the same leaders who take this position will complain that there aren't any men in the church who will take initiative.  The leaders may not even know it, but they've taught these men well.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.