Quantcast

Conservative, Evangelical Christianity: Seattle-Style

mark-driscoll.jpg
photo courtesy of poptheology.com
Mars Hill founder Mark Driscoll has announced that the church will be expanding, new "campuses" in Portland, Oregon and Orange County, California will be joining the existing 10 locations, mostly in Western Washington. (Portland sends Seattle Stumptown, we send Mars Hill. You're Welcome.) With this announcement, the fast-growing church cements its reputation as a national player on the evangelical scene. The move to Orange County contains particular significance, as the region has been a hot-spot of conservative, evangelical Protestantism for decades.

If you were raised in the kind of religion that involves an old man chanting in an ancient language, or no religion at all, the idea of a "campus" as a religious building might not be a familiar one. Anyone who attends a Mars Hill church sees Mark Driscoll speak, those in the "main church" see him onstage, live and in person. His sermons are played on video to audiences in the satellite campuses, which also have their own pastors and staff who can provide personalized services to the congregants. Thousands see Driscoll speak every Sunday, even more find his sermons online.

Obviously, this model makes the institution and the man difficult to separate, and Driscoll has proved a magnet for controversy. Mark Driscoll's loose, modern, not-your-grandaddy's-church style has attracted thousands in one of the nation's most irreligious cities, but the group's theological underpinnings are anything but modern, and possibly even less liberal than your grandaddy's church. Mars Hill is firmly on the bandwagon with the entire constellation of right-wing culture war causes, from the laughable, like Harry Potter turning our children into satanists, to the dangerous, like gays choose their orientation, and shouldn't be tolerated by society. Retrograde theology on abortion, marriage, the role of women in society, and sexuality are also frequently on display. Driscoll isn't shy about expressing these kinds of views from the pulpit, and he doesn't have a problem with using his church to try to influence public policy. Of course, none of it is presented without being couched in the non-threatening tone of "hey bro, let's just rap about Jesus," which has been so successful in winning over Seattle's non-believers.

A stereotypical Southern, evangelical preacher wouldn't stand a chance in Seattle. We may like to believe that's because our city's enlightened attitudes on social issues wouldn't tolerate that kind of harsh, judgmental doctrine, but Mars Hill differs only in style from those bigoted, histrionic Dixie baptists. Driscoll's career continues to prove that cultural distance from the mainstream of the American evangelical movement doesn't necessarily make a population immune from evangelical theology, provided its presented in a way they find attractive. If Mars Hill can find converts in secular Seattle, there's every reason to believe the phenomenon can be duplicated in Oregon and California. The new congregants probably won't feel like they're horrifying any of their gay, feminist or secular friends and lining up on the conservative, traditionalist side of the culture wars, alongside Pat Robertson and Michele Bachmann, but if they absorb Driscoll's strident worldview, that's exactly what they'll be doing.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@seattlest.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • Everett-

    Thanks for the synopsis of the Mars Hill Churches. I am very curious about your assessment of what you call "harsh, judgmental doctrine" on the part of Driscoll (in emulating the ideology of southern preachers). Considering the language you use throughout your article to describe Mark Driscoll's ideas and methodology along with those of "evangelical theology," you sound a tad judgmental yourself. For example, "laughable," "dangerous," "retrograde," "bigoted," "histrionic," and "strident" are all adjectives you use to make very strong judgments. Clearly, then you are very judgmental yourself with your estimation of Mars Hill.

    -Curious reader

    (PS: Before I read this article, I never heard of Mark Driscoll and I am not a member of a Southern Baptist church. And I am very suspicious of the modern evangelical movement and its dubious gimmicks used to grow churches.)

  • As to the harshness of Driscoll's theology, he believes that homosexuality (and even "effeminate" behavior by straight men) should be publicly discouraged, that women should be subservient to their spouses, and certain aspects of our culture are "satanic." It would be one thing if he just held these opinions privately, but he seems intent on enforcing his own conservative, Calvinist standard on all of society, the vast majority of whom do not attend services at Mars Hill.

    You're right, I am being judgmental. As a journalist, I take it as part of my job to expose what I see as bad behavior by anyone in a position of power. Driscoll, by contrast, is a very powerful clergyman, and rather than use his position to build up and strengthen the community, he seems content to lash out at some of our weakest and most vulnerable. Behavior of prominent figures like Driscoll is fair play for public discussion, whereas Driscoll used his prominence to criticize the personal lives of millions of female, gay and secular Americans who he's never met, and who don't have a platform like Mars Hill from which to defend themselves. If Driscoll has a problem with my words, he can very easily and publicly defend himself, or just get in touch with me personally. The vast majority of the people he's condemned from the pulpit can't do that.
    I hope that answered some of your questions. Thanks for reading.

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@seattlest.com