In a short post I read the other day, entitled How Much God Loves Change, this paragraph caught my eye:
And so God, creative as God is, seems to thrive on change. To change landscapes, oceans, hearts, possibilities, and alternatives. This cannot help but clash with those in power. As the prophets can attest. And so, the creative God is also the liberating God.
For me, those words beautifully articulated my journey out of the institutional church.
I was deeply grieved that despite the clear indications of God's call to change - his invitation to walk into a new reality as his people - there was resistance and ultimately rejection of that way.
Those with power asserted their 'authority'. The prophetic voices were silenced. And business-as-usual was reinstated. 'Church' settled back into what was familiar, predictable, and most importantly, controllable.
Recently, I left this comment on Jory Micah's blog post regarding Mark Driscoll's unhealthy teaching on submission:
"The whole ‘biblical submission’ teaching is absolutely toxic! Despite the fact that it is a residue of the shepherding movement (whose leaders have long since repented of their teaching) men are still peddling versions of this crap because it panders to their egos and means they get to be ‘over’ others. It damages lives and is the antithesis of Jesus’s teachings.
In my own experience, when I complained about the abusive and bullying behaviour of my male co-leader, that behaviour was not even questioned and I was made out to be the problem. I was given the choice to submit to his “godly leadership” or resign! And just like MD, this man now runs his own church, and I fear for those ‘under’ him!"
A short time later an anonymous reader replied with this:
Bad grammar aside, this is exactly the sort of behaviour I was subjected to at my ex-church! Threats and intimidation to keep me in line - to control my behaviour!
Now I seriously question the intent behind using fear as a motivation for anything, let alone to preserve your 'salvation'. Can you imagine a god who says in effect, "Behave acceptably or I'll throw you out of the club!" It's worth based on compliance - on conforming to a set of prescribed behaviours!
That just doesn't sound like the one who was happy to hang out with the social rejects of his day; to openly display how much he valued them. And it sure doesn't sound like the one who spoke out against the self-righteous religious leaders' and their willingness to unnecessarily burden those supposed to be in their care.
The interesting thing I've found is that since leaving the religious institution, I'm no longer driven by fear. I no longer fear making mistakes; I no longer fear getting it 'wrong'; I no longer fear failing to have the 'right' doctrine; I no longer fear not measuring up to the expectations of others.
Instead, I have found a beautiful confidence in the capacity of God. His capacity to love me, to redeem me, to be enough for me. Confidence that I am fully acceptable to him, period!
The other thing I question is the concept of "crusading for truth". It's not about loving others, it's about "crusading". It's about insisting on your truth trumping that of others. Just the use of the word 'crusade' speaks volumes to me about the mindset behind the words. It speaks of a militant and aggressive approach - an 'us' versus 'them' attitude.
Somehow, that doesn't sit well with the life of the one who chose to die rather than use power and might to prove his point.
I don't know about you, but I am completely over the use of fear and crusades to push religion. I'm ready to try the suggestion Jesus made: to simply love God and love others...
It had occurred to me that the Dalek mantra of "obey or be exterminated" was little different from the 'christian' threat of "submit or be excommunicated" Of course, for those institutions that don't subscribe to the theology of excommunication, shunning is a viable alternative which produces the same effect.
(As one who had faced such a demand to submit or resign, I have decided that I'd rather face the Daleks - at least they were always honest about their desire for domination and didn't enslave others under a pretence of 'love'.)
Anyway, it was reading a post by Jory Micah today that reminded of my own earlier offering on the subject of submission, because it appears that Mr Driscoll has been preaching on this topic of late:
"Driscoll literally had boys 18 and under stand to their feet and he made a special emphasis on submission, especially to mothers. He states that submission leads to maturity. He tells them, you are supposed to “submit, honor, and obey” your parents.
Driscoll is psychologically training these boys in submission because he knows that someday, these boys will become men and that they will “need” to teach their wives to “submit, honor, and obey” them. The terrifying thing is that Driscoll uses Jesus’ name and the Bible to brainwash young minds."
Now apart from the fact that the commandment supposedly being referred to is simply "honour your parents", or that the bible calls for mutual submission between adults, the type of submission that is being peddled here does not lead to maturity, but actually has exactly the opposite effect.
It teaches people to become yes-men, to keep the peace at any cost, and to abandon their own God-given instincts. It will teach you to doubt yourself, to question your own thoughts and feelings, to assume your own understanding and perspective must be wrong.
I learned the truth of this the hard way and would love to help others see this toxic teaching for what it really is.
The whole submission and spiritual covering theology came from the shepherding movement of the 1970s. Not only was it eventually discredited, but some of the original leaders publicly repented of this teaching. Despite this, it keeps being regurgitated by other religious leaders - from John Bevere with his fixation on covering and authority, to Bill Gothard's umbrella of protection dogma. The trouble is that it's both manipulative and abusive.
Of course it does make life so much easier for those in power to keep control of those 'under' them, because it keeps those people immature and dependent on the leadership - unable to think or make decisions for themselves. It promises all sorts of favour and protection for those who comply, and it threatens all sorts of dire consequences for rebellion against "god's anointed". So just relax and submit. Remember, your leaders know best!
