A few weeks ago I questioned whether it was a good idea to protest against Mark Driscoll regarding some comments he made following the Ted Haggard debacle (read that post here).Well, there's been a promising development. Those who called for the protest actually got the chance to sit down with Driscoll and it sounds like they had a really good conversation. Driscoll apologized for using inflammatory language, and those who called for the protest apologized for using inflammatory language against Driscoll.
Helen at Conversation at the Edge has a brief summary of the meeting, including her own apology to Mark Driscoll. (I found the links below on this site.)
Here are the blog posts of several of those who were in that meeting, including Driscoll himself:
As you can read in the People Against Fundamentalism post, the protest against Mark Driscoll has been called off. I'm really encouraged to hear that a peaceful and conciliatory--not to mention biblical--resolution has been found.
4 comments:
I Smell a Double-Standard
The organization behind the protest, "People Against Fundamentalism" (PAF), according to the Seattle Times article, consists of a whopping six "Christians," one of them named Paul Chapman, the husband of a woman "pastor." Thanks to the internet, that little circle had a huge audience by way of the blogosphere and managed to impugn the integrity of an honest, plain-speaking preacher who has somehow managed to pastor a growing church of 5,000 people in "the least-churched city in America." Rather than attempt to honorably resolve their doctrinal differences with him in a loving Christian manner, as prescribed in Matthew 18, they chose to drag their Christian brother before the court of public opinion first.
What did the "People Against Fundamentalism" accomplish? They managed to have Pastor Driscoll censored from his position as a Faith & Values columnist at The Seattle Times - which means that a consistent voice for the gospel of Jesus Christ at that newspaper is now silenced.
And why? Because they accused him of being a "mysoginist." Hypocrites. They said nothing about the Muslim "Faith & Values" columnist at the Times. Perhaps the People Against Fundamentalism believe that Islam has a higher view of women than traditional Christianity? Or, were they just afraid that unlike Driscoll, the Islamists might not turn the other cheek?
You make a good, anon. I suspect they didn't say anything about the Muslim columnist because he (I'm assuming it's a man) doesn't represent their faith. I think their goal was to correct someone who was a brother in Christ and made them (in their opinion) look bad to non-Christians.
I agree that it wasn't a good idea to start labeling Driscoll as a misogynist. But I'm pleased to see that they apologized to him, recognizing their own wrongs.
Here is a link to the KIRO News interview of the instigator of the protest against Pastor Driscoll. Judge for yourself:
http://kiro.radiotown.com/audio/dorihour1.mp3
Man I am so glad about the standoff being dismanteled...very cool!
Post a Comment