<body><iframe src="http://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID=26598723&amp;blogName=PernellGoodyear.com&amp;publishMode=PUBLISH_MODE_FTP&amp;navbarType=BLUE&amp;layoutType=CLASSIC&amp;homepageUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pernellgoodyear.com%2F&amp;searchRoot=http%3A%2F%2Fblogsearch.google.com%2F" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="30px" width="100%" id="navbar-iframe" title="Blogger Navigation and Search"></iframe> <div id="space-for-ie"></div>

Collective Ignorance?

Friday, July 28, 2006

"Preaching for all, by all."

I like that. It's one of the "essentials" (values?) of a church I deeply respect in my own tribe, The Salvation Army. The church is called Corps 614 (based on Isaiah 61:4). It started in the Regent Park neighbourhood in Toronto and, evidently, the idea has spread like crazy. There is actually a whole network of 614 churches now - not just in Canada either - but in several countries.

I love what they do. I love their incarnational ministry with the poor and over-looked. I love their energy and creativity. I love their commitment to Jesus and his Kingdom. They rock.

The thing I like about their tagline about preaching is that it represents a Biblical idea I believe strongly in: the priesthood of all believers. See, I believe that God speaks into community through community. I believe that each of us has the responsibility to teach and encourage one another. I believe God uses the "foolish" to shame the "wise". I believe the Kingdom has leveled the playing field for all of us. In fact, that's one of the reasons I do not hold to a complimentarian view, or a "one preacher" view, or a "personal" salvation view (yes, I believe that individuals come to faith in Christ, but that Jesus came for the whole world - and we play a part in the proclamation and incarnation of the Good News).

This is what Mark Driscoll says in his book "Confessions":

"We continued to meet on Sunday nights until Christmas, when some of the arty types started complaining that there was a preaching monologue instead of an open dialogue, as would become popular with some emerging pastors a few years later. This forced me to think through my theology of preaching, spiritual authority, and the authority of Scripture. I did an intense study of the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament commands regarding preaching and teaching. In the end, I decided not to back off from a preaching monologue but instead work hard at becoming a solid long-winded, old-school Bible preacher that focused on Jesus. My people needed to hear from God's Word and not from each other in collective ignorance like some dumb chat room."

Via

According to Driscoll (or at least, if I read this quote correctly) it's either "long-winded, old-school Bible preach[ing]" or "artsy collective ignorance." I think that's just a dumb thing to say.

Labels: , , ,

  1. Anonymous Gossett said:

    Pernell - I think if you dug a little deeper into Marshill and Driscoll's philosophy of ministry, you'd find that there is a lot of room for dialogue - just not during a sermon. For members, there is a web site with a number of forums where honest questions are asked, often answered by Mark himself. The priesthood of all believers is seen in their community groups (I think they have almost 100 around Seattle) where there are a number of opportunities to teach and study. There are a ton of other ministry opportunities including children's ministries, financial counseling, neighborhood clean ups etc..., let alone the constant admonition of the believers in that church to be a representative of Christ in their spheres of influence. I think that's what it means to be a priest.

    From what I understand, Mark sees a sermon or class as an opportunity to declare in an authorative voice, the well studied, prayed over Word of God. But this doesn't preclude an opportunity to dialogue or minister to one another. In fact, I think it better enables each "priest" to fulfill that responsibility.

  1. Blogger Mike Todd said:

    I'll take the other side of that argument.

    Well said, Pernell. And a good plug for the work being done in Regent Park.

  1. Blogger HCJoel said:

    Sorry, Gossett, I appreciate your heart and points but I still think Driscoll's statement is arrogant. If 'Mark sees a sermon or class as an opportunity to declare in an authoritative voice, the well studied, prayed over Word of God,' the problem is that he believes it can only come from him on Sunday morning. That still sets up Pastor Mark as the authority (the Head, if you will) and the rest of the folks (the Body) can discuss it later but without the benefit of the whole Body being in on the discussion. Of course, there needs to be order but that can be done with relative ease.

  1. Blogger McDLT said:

    Coming from my Anabaptist leanings, I see Driscoll as setting himself (and other preachers) as the authorative figure in the churh, whereas Anabpatists focus more on "priesthood of all believers".

    I also love what 614 is doing, especially 614 St. Jamestown (an Salvation Army/Mennonite Brethren plant). :wink:

  1. Anonymous Steve said:

    Is that what the priesthood of all believers is about? and, Is that where Driscoll is coming from (sidestepping this definition of the priesthood of all believers as equal authorities on Scripture by saying he's the man)? Where does that leave those with the gift of prophecy & teaching? Do we even need preachers & pastors? Do we continue to worked a flawed model because everyone seems to be doing it and it's too big of a ship to turn?

  1. Anonymous Jamie Arpin-Ricci said:

    I stil believe there is a place for the sermon of one within the worship and spiritual formation context, but also agree that it must find its place alongside this more dialogical approach.

    Admitting the lack of larger context, regardless of which side of the argument you weigh in on, Driscoll's comment is clear. He did not qualify the "collective ignorance" and "dumb chat room" statements as a result of participating in the sermon, but as a general statement about the quality of their perspectives. This is completely arrogant and inappropriate.

    Peace,
    Jamie

  1. Anonymous Dave said:

    I hear: "I can't carry on an interesting or coherent conversation with the people that look to me for guidance so I'll hide behind the gracious allotment of seven days that I get to present myself as having it all together. Oh my, if I ever lost those seven days..."

    It's not THAT bad, I'm sure, but to lump all dialogue into a truthless and mindless "chat room" of adolescence is #1. less than encouraging of those who are listening to him. #2. Quite the scarey apparition of how little our understanding of Jesus has come. #3. Proof that the one-way communication of the pulpit is an addiction. #4. a reason I'm glad I'm not one of the 12 billion (or whatever) members of Driscoll's "church".

  1. Blogger 614network.com said:

    It's so funny...in the context of the early church you've got about 20 people in a room sharing a meal, fellowship and teaching...not a well crafted sermon, but a word from the Lord for the body...It certainly didn't take a Bible scholar to bring it, and when Paul was pushed to boast in the gathering he boasts in weakness and nothingness outside of being "in Christ"...It's funny, too, how we put so much stock in 20 minutes out of a week...Give me the priesthood let loose on a community...placing people in the way of God's grace...
    Peace,
    Rick

  1. Blogger Pernell said:

    Thanks for all your comments, everybody.

    Gossett - I don't doubt that people have some opportunities to dialogue at Marshill. Big deal. I guess I am just leary of "the authoritative voice" of any one person (except God himself). Like Rick said, even Paul only boasted in his weakness, not in his authority.

    Joel & Jamie - you both mention that the quote is very arrogant. I couldn't agree more... it is at the very least completely arrogant (and not unlike many, many pastors think unfortunately).

    Steve - teaching and prophesy and any other gift is to be used in community. Is there a place for teaching gifts? Absolutely. But not necessarily in a "sit down and shut up" kind of way.

    Rick - right on. Thanks for dropping by.

    Mike, Dave, McDLT - thanks for your comments.

  1. Blogger hello . . . . . . . . . i'm dwight said:

    people,

    are you saying that he (mark driscoll) is wrong and you are right? be very careful whan you walk that tight a rope!!

    peace . . . really

  1. Anonymous Anonymous said:

    i've added my 2cents worth on my blog: www.emergentkiwi.org.nz

    peace... really ... to all
    steve

  1. Blogger Sivin Kit said:

    my hope and prayer is this kind of attitude (or arrogant tone)- won't be exported to us here in Asia.

  1. Blogger Makeesha said:

    I know I'm late on this but I just had to say that I think Pernell's thoughts and the comments that Driscoll's quote is arrogant are spot on.

    I'm surprised that someone so seemingly intelligent would make a comments so rife with inconsistencies, gross exaggerations and just plain stupidity. I'd chalk it up to a bad day but unfortunately, I hear this kind of attitude coming from Driscoll and others like him quite regularly.

    In our service, we do subscribe to a priesthood of all believers and strive to include the BODY in the work of the Kingdom in and outside the walls of the church building.

    Fight the good fight Pernell :)

Leave A Comment