Disagreeing with Driscoll (uh oh…)

Mark Driscoll wrote a post on the Washington Postย blog about his favourite hobbyhorse – adolescence.

When he spoke in Australia a few years ago he spoke about it, too. If you’re not familiar with his point, he talks about how there used to only be two stages – boy, and man. Now we’ve got adolescence and he calls them boys who can shave – they live at home, they have no job or a dead-end job and they refuse to grow up.

Driscoll is coming on too strong in regards to this topic, I think. Don’t get me wrong – I hated when I lived alone and my friends left their mess around assuming that someone would clean up after them. But if the developmental stage of adolescence is a reality, then if these boys who can shave moved out of home, got a career and a wife, and then children… wouldn’t they be doing something incredibly stupid? All of those things are huge steps, and taking them simply because you’ve turned a certain age would be insane. If someone got married before they were ready to lead a family, the man wouldn’t lose a lot – but the woman would. She would be submitting to someone not grown enough to lead.

Now, those are just my thoughts. They might be completely nonsensical. But what I’m saying is that if this stage has developed, then we do need to let it exist and not squeeze it out. It allows for a lot of good things – lots of memories, better formed friendships, more academic learning. We shouldn’t enable it by cleaning up their mess, paying their bills and essentially, mothering them. But it needs to exist, I think.

Thus, I’m disagreeing with Mark Driscoll.

Your thoughts on the issue?

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Disagreeing with Driscoll (uh oh…)

  1. My thoughts? I think churches tend to do a lot of men bashing (man up, you wusses! take the lead! stop being a princess!) while going very easy on women (you’re a helper, like the holy spirit, and therefore you are awesome). and lots of men are getting sick of being told they act like little boys.

    Like

  2. I think Marks main drive is more men to grow up and be men, not only that but Godly responsible ones at that. I don’t think this is pointed at anyone below 20ish but rather those who are 25, 30, 42 who act like immature teenagers.

    Like

    1. You’re definitely right – it is aimed at making boys grow up and become godly men, but he seems to put specifics around it – like move out, get a job, get a wife, get some kids…
      One thought is, what about those called to be single?

      Like

  3. So yeh adolescence is a real stage of life, and a couple of views- Piaget = learning thinking abstract making decisions. Erikson = struggling with self. But Driscoll is taking about young adult male slackers who’d prefer to sit around all day playing video games rather then man up and leave home. “The problem with adolescence is guys don’t know when they’re ever going to grow up and be men, and no pressure is exerted on them to do so”

    Like

    1. I’d never heard the Erikson definition… it’s interesting…

      When do you think pressure should be asserted? Is there a specific age…?

      Like

  4. Mark Driscoll preaches to a white congregation (probably like 99.99%). His preaching simply reinforces white male bashing and jumps on the popular bandwagon that white males are the cause of all the problems. Mark Driscoll should be ignored.

    Like

    1. That’s a little intense, I think. There is a valid problem, but he stretches it way too far.
      And aren’t 99.99% of evangelical Christians white males, anyways…?

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s