The marketing sweet spot for many companies is young men ages eighteen to thirty-four. These guys don’t know what it means to be a man, and so marketers fill the void with products that define manhood by what you consume rather than what you produce.
The tough retrosexual guys consume women, porn, alcohol, drugs, television, music, video games, toys, cars, sports, and fantasy leagues, as if being a man is defined by how much meat you can shove through your colon, how many beers you can pound, how fast you can drive, how stinky you can fart, how hard you can hit, how far you can spit, how loud you can belch, and how big your truck is.
The artsy, techie metrosexual types consume clothes, decaf lattes, shoes, gadgets, cars (not trucks), furniture, hair products, and underwear with the names of very important people on the waistband. For them, manhood means being in touch with one’s feelings, wardrobe, and appearance.
[...]
What happens if you walk into the church and try to find out what a man looks like? First of all, you’re not going to find a lot of guys in most evangelical churches. The least likely person to see in church is a single, twenty-something male. He is as rare at church as a vegan at a steak house.
In the world, boys who can shave are children who are consumers. In the church, boys who can shave are cowards who are complainers.
[...]
Here’s the cold hard truth: it’s a lot harder to do something than it is to complain about those who are doing something. The notorious sin of Christian guys is complaining about guys who are doing something rather than doing something
So let’s unpack this a little bit. If you’re a blokey-bloke stereotype, Mark Driscoll hates you. If you’re a inner-city yuppie stereotype, Mark Driscoll hates you. If you do go to church and apparently aren’t on the Driscoll bandwagon, Mark Driscoll holds you in utter contempt.
What’s the answer? Be more like Christ! Just kidding. Reclaim the American dream! Wife, kids, and a successful business, with a bit of churchiness thrown in for good measure:
Men, you are to be creators and cultivators. God is a creator and a cultivator and you were made to image him. Create a family and cultivate your wife and children. Create a ministry and cultivate other people. Create a business and cultivate it. Be a giver, not a taker, a producer and not just a consumer. Stop looking for the path of least resistance and start running down the path of greatest glory to God and good to others because that’s what Jesus, the real man, did.
Wait—Jesus had a wife, kids, and a business?
As for Driscoll, what’s the term for a self-hating man? Or is it just everyone else he hates, having checked the boxes of the American dream, US evangelical style?
He did some of that routine when he came out to Australia. Maybe he’s reacting to some ‘extreme’ Y-Gen stuff he’s read? I’ve met some of the blokes that Driscoll seems to have trouble with. We’ve (sadly) seen the results of one of them marrying someone dear to us, and seeing them split up just 6 weeks later! After dating for over a decade! The Commitment (with a Capital C) was just too much for him.
So I say, “Driscoll, clarify what you’re talking about and who you’re talking too, and stop writing-off a whole generation.” He unhelpfully TOLD Australian young men what they should do when he visited Sydney, and completely missed his target audience. The ratio of income to cost-of-housing in Sydney is completely different to Seattle. Driscoll needs to grow up himself a bit, and stop being such an attention seeking hack.
Driscoll has heaps of tough charisma, but he will never really get in contact with the real world. According to him he married quite young after a little bit of trouble. Reading between the lines, his mother fixed a women for him. A mummies boy lives in a certain confined world imo.
Reading between the lines, his mother fixed a women for him.
Wow… where do you get that opinion? I have quite some time for some of his arguments. But I do get a bit annoyed by arrogant American’s coming out of their context and telling all us Aussie boys how to live like the Brady Bunch in the name of “Christian living”. I see it as a cultural matter. He so values living ‘out of home’ and away from parents could be seen as a cultural luxury imposed on the rest of the world by rich American’s that can afford to do so!
Talk about American imperialism… do we have to all adopt fragile nuclear families? What about the place of extended families? What about the few North Epping kids I know who NEVER left home, and as they moved into their house with their wives their parents moved out into the granny flat? Sydney real estate is a whole different creature Driscoll! What about baseball and hot dogs — do we have to adopt them too? Am I even allowed to eat Thai curry… my wife was a missionary kid in Thailand, is that a big enough excuse for me not to eat hot-dogs Driscoll?
I know that’s getting pedantic, but his assumptions of “Christian” family are just a bit too “Stars and Stripes” and 1950’s for me. I’d love to know what percentage of first century Christian young married couples didn’t have parents or parents-in-law also living with them.
I am. If I’m going to disagree with a Christian leader in a public place like this, it is because of the verifiable things he/she has said and done. I hope I will not resort to ‘reading between the lines’. That’s just an attempt to Bulverise, and I’ve had too much of that myself to inflict it on others.
Lewis wrote about this in a 1941 essay of the same name, later included in the anthology God in the Dock. He explains the origin of this term:
You must show that a man is wrong before you start explaining why he is wrong. The modern method is to assume without discussion that he is wrong and then distract his attention from this (the only real issue) by busily explaining how he became so silly. In the course of the last fifteen years I have found this vice so common that I have had to invent a name for it. I call it “Bulverism”. Some day I am going to write the biography of its imaginary inventor, Ezekiel Bulver, whose destiny was determined at the age of five when he heard his mother say to his father — who had been maintaining that two sides of a triangle were together greater than a third — “Oh you say that because you are a man.” “At that moment”, E. Bulver assures us, “there flashed across my opening mind the great truth that refutation is no necessary part of argument. Assume that your opponent is wrong, and the world will be at your feet. Attempt to prove that he is wrong or (worse still) try to find out whether he is wrong or right, and the national dynamism of our age will thrust you to the wall.” That is how Bulver became one of the makers of the Twentieth Century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulverism
If you hear a sound like a tree crashing during the night, and the next day you see that a tree has fallen in the woods next to your house, then you have to asssume that the tree fell during the night. Anyway, there is nothing to critisize about a mother chosing a wife. I just find it distressing that all preachers have to be so “perfect”.
For all his flaws, Mark has been very successful in rebuking and encouraging young Christian men to take the hard steps that are needed to live for God.
The artsy, techie metrosexual types consume clothes, decaf lattes, shoes, gadgets, cars (not trucks), furniture, hair products, and underwear with the names of very important people on the waistband. For them, manhood means being in touch with one’s feelings, wardrobe, and appearance.
...is ‘foaming at the mouth’ language that has nothing to do with imparting a biblical understanding of manhood! It seems to have more to do with Mark’s own personal likes and dislikes. He’s projecting issues of godliness onto personal taste. Mark likes to ‘consume’ grunge rock clothes. Imagine him being condemned for trying to be ‘too trendy’ and not getting a proper white business shirt! I’m sure it’s happened. And I’d have a go at the Pastor or Minister that said that on the same grounds!
It’s an area of freedom, and a matter of personal taste (and maybe even personal health!) if I happen to have a ‘decaf latte’ when I’m catching up with someone rather than being a “REAL MAN!” and having a caffeine overdose. I might lose a night’s sleep and feel like slapping my kids around the next day, but hey, at least I didn’t offend Mark Driscoll by not being a “REAL MAN!” Will someone please tell the guy to go and get some counselling about metro-sexual fashion and just get over it?
I’ve been listening to Mark a fair bit lately, and respect the work he’s put into spreading the gospel. But lately he’s just a little bit to taken with his own stand-up comedy routines and not thinking enough about being sensitive and GENTLE as he handles the word of truth.
I haven’t listened to Mark Driscoll lately, but this seems like he’s putting more of the American/personal view into his gospel messages than before. It appeals to those who resemble him but it can’t possibly appeal to everyone - after all not everyone is the ‘macho’ type.
Although with people who are currently fathers, this could genuinely prove instructive from a mate of his. Source is my pastor’s 2 to 3-times weekly emails:
Here’s an article by Pastor Scott Thomas of the Acts29 Church Planting Network.
Fathers pursuing Christ:
1. See their children as a blessing from God
2. Understand that their children are born with a bent toward evil
3. Believe the gospel is the good news for children
4. Train their children to honor and obey
5. Practice and demonstrate submission
6. Love their wives
But isn’t he saying that macho is just as wrong a view of manhood as metrosexual is?
Men, you are to be creators and cultivators. God is a creator and a cultivator and you were made to image him. Create a family and cultivate your wife and children. Create a ministry and cultivate other people. Create a business and cultivate it. Be a giver, not a taker, a producer and not just a consumer. Stop looking for the path of least resistance and start running down the path of greatest glory to God and good to others because that’s what Jesus, the real man, did.
That’s good stuff, despite what Dave said. He doesn’t mean that Jesus did all those things but that he took the hard path to bring the greatest glory to his father. The rest are just examples which we might do. I don’t think he means we should do it all… it would be hard to really cultivate both a ministry and a business.
What I’m saying is it is about degrees. EG: Vanity… preachers might warn young people against spending all day trying to cultivate ‘the look’ just to impress the girls, etc…. but Driscoll fully singled out a whole ‘style’ of bloke and ranted against metro’s, just as he ranted against beer sculling pigs. These ‘illustrations’ are so long and personally targeted that the point gets lost as all the young blokes in the audience wonder if it’s wrong to drink decaf or wash their hair. Driscoll is being potentially offensive without being clear. One moment he is attacking the sin of viewing porn and being crude and inappropriate, and the next he’s attacking a sub-cultural dress sense. What gives? The second is confused and vague and angry without really having cause to be.
The Peasant Princess
Part 11: Greatest Hits Q&A
Over the 10 week series, The Peasant Princess, Pastor Mark Driscoll and his wife Grace took questions from the audience. This is a compilation of the best questions and answers during that time.
I agree with Mark that the bible does not support sloth and laziness and living off our neighbours, as that is against the whole spirit of loving God and our fellow human being. We need to earn our keep, and this goes back to BEFORE the fall. Genesis shows that we were to work the ground. I’ll say that again: Genesis shows that WE, both male and female, were to work the ground! Both Adam and Eve are to rule the earth! It is part of our being human.
27 So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
And again in Chapter 2
15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will certainly die.”
18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”
The man is there working, but it is incomplete. The passage is not really about job functions but our being built for relationship, and how male and female complement each other. But she is to be our ‘helpmeet’, our companion, and our helper.
The women often worked…
Genesis 29:99 While he was still talking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was their shepherd.
Fighting wolves and caring for the sheep was a woman’s work? Well, according to this passage, yeah!
Exodus 2:1616 Now a priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came to draw water and fill the troughs to water their father’s flock.
They kept their own vineyards (when not bullied by their brothers into doing all their brother’s work).
Song of Solomon 1:6 6 Do not stare at me because I am dark, because I am darkened by the sun. My mother’s sons were angry with me and made me take care of the vineyards; my own vineyard I had to neglect.
The wise woman of Proverbs 31 seems to provide stuff for her husband! She runs a business, earns stacks of dough and then uses it to invest in real estate. See verse 11 especially…
11 Her husband has full confidence in her and lacks nothing of value.
12 She brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life.
13 She selects wool and flax and works with eager hands.
14 She is like the merchant ships, bringing her food from afar.
15 She gets up while it is still night; she provides food for her family and portions for her women servants.
16 She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She sets about her work vigorously; her arms are strong for her tasks.
18 She sees that her trading is profitable, and her lamp does not go out at night.
So I agree that human beings are to work, but for Mark to lay down the LAW that ‘house-dads’ are to be DISCIPLINED by the church seems to me to be going way beyond scripture. It is about the intention and motivation of each situation. My wife has a gift at design. I have not found my ‘gift’ yet. I trained in welfare, but now my training is not enough for my old career — which I burnt out in anyway… Child Protection work. I applied to DOCS recently. Couldn’t get an interview. I don’t have a Bachelor in Social Sciences, just my lousy Advanced Diploma (which I topped).
To make Mark Driscoll happy, I’d have to go out to work. My wife would then have to do all the kid’s stuff, kids errands, running of the house, etc etc etc blah blah blah, and the end result would be we’d TRIPLE OUR STRESS AND HALVE OUR INCOME! We are close to our extended family, aunts and uncles and grandparents. We have our kids settled in a great local public school and have access to great high schools. This is my old stomping ground, my childhood suburb. Joy and I feel ‘safe’ here. It is home. Baby-sitting and family support and cousins and grandparents are a stone’s throw away. Our church is walking distance.
Mark would have me throw all of that away! On my income, our family would have to sell up, move to the country, and rent/ buy maybe half a day’s drive from all our family support networks. Good one Mark! Hmmmm, sorry Mark but you ARE dominated by a 1950’s Brady Bunch understanding of the work / family balance.
“Work” in bible times often meant being *at home* near the family. Sure many men went out to work as shepherds in the fields, or out to build a road for the Romans, or off to war. But they were also often working at home. They were also butchers, weavers, carpenters, metal smith’s, and many other trades all from home. They were hands-on parents often training their kids the family trade. There was no school to send the kids off too!
Industrialisation changed how these jobs are conducted, and removed the man from the home. Industrialisation and recent history have also added the myth that dads are removed, aloof, and not good parents. Blargh! Talk about letting your culture shape your bible reading Mark!
So all humans need to work *if possible* but what is ‘work’ but our mastery over creation? There are flexible definitions within that, and each family must make up their own mind and not necessarily be pushed by the Driscolls of the world into feeling guilt if their situation happens to be different. My ‘work’ at the moment is raising kids, doing the paper-work for Joy’s graphic design (which is only a part-time job at best), and studying for my next career… whatever that ends up being. (Certificate 4 in Business and another in Communications).
The way Mark Driscoll and his wife pay out on HIS ability to help parent his kids is shameful. He’s basically just said dads are idiots, and only mums can parent. What rubbish! He needs to revisit both how Joseph would have raised Jesus, and what the latest cutting edge science into ‘super-dads’ is saying.
Mark Driscolls essential point, that boys are failing to grow into men, is right (even if he doesn’t say it best). I am one of those guys who has had an arrested development in my manhood, where I lived as a boy for much of my adolesence and young-adulthood and now that I am married, I struggle to be responsible. And I am not the only one - many guys around my age and younger live in La-La Land too.
We, the Christian community, need to more to raise our boys to be real men, who have a sense of responsibility and willingness to take charge of their lives that they may serve those around them, especially the women in our lives.
Having seen some really appalling Y-Gen examples, I’m inclined to agree with that essential point.
But he was way too legalistic in his definitions and stereotypes just then. It did not seem very compassionate to those whose industry has changed (such as my former line of work with DOCS now being inaccessible to me), or circumstances have changed (I was working in lower-paid fields, and then our children arrived creating an enormous ‘opportunity cost’ on our family if my wife stopped working just so I could go an earn a measly $45 to $50 grand a year as a live-in supervisor in a youth group home. It’s not that I don’t want to work, but that I am more prepared to acknowledge the ‘seasons of life’ as a family unit than he is.
It’s the way he commanded and stereotyped that turned me off. For example, another area I have trouble with is missionaries sending their kids off to boarding school. I read the descriptions of Pastors / Deacons in the bible as being men of one wife, and raising their kids to respect them. How can they respect them if they don’t even know them? Now imagine if I turned around and said, “REPENT all you missionaries with your kids in boarding school! There will be CHURCH DISCIPLINE if you don’t get your kids into your house now, and home school them! If you have to, LEAVE the mission field right now because you HAVE to BE parents to your kids, and not wiggle out of that responsibility!”
If missionaries can find ‘wiggle room’ in the family priorities of ministry and delegate out their parenting to someone else, then I think there has got to be some grounds for ‘wiggle room’ in arranging a family’s finances. I’m NOT arguing for laziness, but for broadening the definition of ‘work’ to encompass the more biblical domain of ordering creation, managing our lives, and providing for our families — however that works, and remaining open to a variety of other family and ministry opportunities. For example, if I had one of my preferred careers, I wouldn’t have been teaching Scripture the last 4 years would I?
It’s amazing what varieties of things can be accomplished when we are ‘free’ to think - and act - outside the ‘square’ of other people’s expectations - and don’t some of them like to share their views with others ( not gossiping of course, just “did you hear..” or “did you know…” ).
Well done Dave for having the passion and willingness to teach Scripture for these past 4 years. There’s a vacuum of Scripture Teachers in many other places - so it’s encouraging to hear that ‘youngsters’ are having a go too ;)
I’m not going to go into bat for Mark Driscoll too hard because I’ve only read one of his books and that little article that Luke linked. I haven’t heard anything else by him.
[null]Romney hopes to win two more US statesSydney Morning Herald[{}]AP Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, looking to extend his winning streak in the race for the US presidential nomination, has focused on abortion, religious freedom and gay marriage in an intensified effort to win over social conservatives as ...
[null]Romney hopes to win two more US statesSydney Morning Herald[{}]AP Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, looking to extend his winning streak in the race for the US presidential nomination, has focused on abortion, religious freedom and gay marriage in an intensified effort to win over social conservatives as ...
[null]Political Geography: MinnesotaNew York Times (blog)[{}]The area, dotted with megachurches, is predominately exurban and has a significant evangelical community. It is probably the most reliably Republican of all Minnesota's congressional districts. The Second Congressional District, is comprised of seven ...
[null]Political Geography: ColoradoNew York Times (blog)[{}]This is the heartland of Colorado's evangelical community. Focus on the Family is based here. In 2008, among the state's most heavily populated counties, Mike Huckabee did best in El Paso County and, to the south, Pueblo County.and more»
Political Geography: Colorado New York Times (blog) This is the heartland of Colorado's evangelical community. Focus on the Family is based here. In 2008, among the state's most heavily populated counties, Mike Huckabee did best in El Paso County and, to the south, Pueblo County.
[null]How Bob Crow became the voice of reasonTelegraph.co.uk (blog)[{}]Or the similarly "independent" inquiry into euthanasia that was funded by two of its leading advocates (Bernard Lewis and Sir Terry Pratchett) and chaired by a third (Lord Falconer), yet generally reported as an unbiased study.
How Bob Crow became the voice of reason Telegraph.co.uk (blog) Or the similarly "independent" inquiry into euthanasia that was funded by two of its leading advocates (Bernard Lewis and Sir Terry Pratchett) and chaired by a third (Lord Falconer), yet generally reported as an unbiased study.
[null]Heavy lies the head with Kevin in townThe Australian[{}]Her rallying call set off a fleeting vibe of bipartisanship at St Paul's Anglican Church in Manuka yesterday, but the spirit did not last beyond the return ComCar journey to The Hill. "Make my day," Dirty Tony told his colleagues in their partyroom ...
[null]Hating bankers a global sportThe Australian[{}]Such rare political consensus on who to blame was sanctified by Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who in his Christmas Day sermon denounced "financial speculation" for the disintegration of British society. Along with a formidable cast of ...
RSS Feed