How’s that for a title?! In March of 2006, I gave a talk at our annual men’s retreat titled Chopping Off Heads and Crying On Shoulders: What the Bible Says About Men and Masculinity. I’ve been thinking much about some of the points I made in that talk in light of the (most) recent turmoil surrounding Mark Driscoll.

For those who do not know, Mark Driscoll is the pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. Though considered one of the most unchurched areas of the United States, the church has found tremendous success reaching out and drawing in. What then is the uproar, you ask? I’ll try to summarize, but for a fuller recap of recent events, this piece by Andrew Jones is a great place to start.

In short, Driscoll’s comments in regard to the Ted Haggard situation (this post seems to have started it all) have been incorporated into some of Driscoll’s larger views and have resulted in a planned protest of the church, scheduled for December 3. Some of the more potent comments in his original post include this:

At the risk of being even more widely despised than I currently am, I will lean over the plate and take one for the team on this. It is not uncommon to meet pastors’ wives who really let themselves go; they sometimes feel that because their husband is a pastor, he is therefore trapped into fidelity, which gives them cause for laziness. A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband in the ways that the Song of Songs is so frank about is not responsible for her husband’s sin, but she may not be helping him either.

Though the comments are surely irresponsible, they are part of larger issues. Driscoll has often been cited for irreverance and for speaking too quickly, a charge which surely applies to us all. However, as one’s public profile increases, so does the care they must take before speaking. But what seems to have caused the most controversy is that Driscoll is being charged with sexism, the word misogynist has appeared and all the wile, Driscoll is calling for men to be more “masculine,” which to him, means watching Ultimate Fighting and somehow incorporating sports. As Andrew Jones laments, perhaps Driscoll has “watched Fight Club once too often.”

I appreciate that Driscoll is willing to speak out on gender issues, particularly Christian masculinity, but the more he speaks on the topic, the more I have to wonder whether he is truly reflecting the biblical worldview. My friend Rhett Smith recently posted a quote from a woman who recently attended Driscoll’s church and had this to say:

I liked what I learned of Mark Driscoll as I sat in the 2nd row of this Warehouse Hip church, Mars Hill. I flinched though, wishing he would express a broader definition of masculinity and not create such a narrow space for men to live in.

I find myself reacting in a protection of men who do not like sports, who don’t have an interest in Ultimate Fighting and who may not ever desire to watch an episode of Jack Ass. As a girl raised by a man who is an Eagle Scout, Scuba Diver, Backpacker, ER Technician, Elder in the church, Youth group volunteer, Off pitch hymn singer, Science enthusiast, lover of all things nature…I have a significant understanding that masculinity is not defined as narrowly as some would like.

This, for me, becomes the core issue: Driscoll’s comments, as insensitive as they may have been, are not isolated and are part of a larger definition of masculinity which I find anything but biblical. I agree with his assertions that we must regain a sense of biblical masculinity. The very fact that Leon Podles felt the need to write The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity and the recent 9Marks Ministries features several books on missing men in church signals a great problem. Many have sought to counter this problem with a renewed call for mascunity within the Church.

The problem is that much of this call to masculinity imports its ideas more from the world than from Scripture. I have no interest in organized sports, which, by many modern assessments, decreases my masculinity ratio dramatically. However, that does not mean that I am not masculine and we must not only renew biblical masculinity, we must properly define it.

We’re told on numerous occasions of David weeping (1 Samuel 20:41, 30:4, etc.) and the shortest verse in the Bible reminds us that our Savior Himself wept (John 11:35). We’re told that Jesus had a sincere care for both women and children. Certainly no one would accuse either David or Jesus of not being masculine. What the Bible presents is a willingness to listen and compassion coupled with the bravery to speak out, to protect and to stand firm for God’s kingdom.

Too many of the modern views of masculinity reflect merely on specifics, whether it be sports or beverages or media intake rather than these broad principles. Biblical men must be leaders and we must be willing to protect while leading sacrificially, all the while listening. Crying has nothing to do with masculinity or femininity and we must recapture the biblcial picture of the whole man rather than allowing our culture to define (and lower) the standards.

It’s possible that I’ve not heard the whole of Driscoll’s counsel on these topics, but it seems that I’m not the only one concerned. Again, as a pastor, I truly appreciate that he is willing to speak out on these topics. However, I wonder if his views on biblical masculinity are actually masculine enough? Promoting sports and fighting is actually a cheapening of the man’s call to protect. The biblical calling to men goes well beyond watching movies in which someone takes a stand, it requires that we do it ourselves.

• Visit the Mars Hill Church website
• Read Mark Driscoll: The Skinny by Andrew Jones
• Read Driscoll’s original post
• Read Driscoll’s follow-up
• Read The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity by Leon J. Podles

We’re headed to AZ to celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday with family. It looks like we’ll have interenet acces not only while there but also along the road at the hotels, so posts shouldn’t be interrupted, however, I just wanted let you know just in case. Have a great holiday, and remember Paul’s admonition: thankfulness isn’t just about one day but about a way of life (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18):

So, I was out browsing the internet the other day. You know, just poking around, looking here, looking there. Just minding my own business. Just a curious little guy poking around the world wide blogosphere, trying to learn, trying to stay informed. But sooner or later even the most intrepid explorer gets lonely. Join me, won’t you?

I had planned on having a “Poetry and Music” feature today, but for some reason, the band that I had highlighted has had their site removed, so the music downloads have gone AWOL! So I did get to it this week, but the internet has conspired against me!

Here’s some of what caught my eye. Sit awhile, browse a bit:

Read this article about Saddam’s death penalty.

Read about schools banning the game of tag.

Read Christianity Today’s interview with Bebo Norman.

Celebrate with fans of the Wrens as both Secaucus and Silver have been officially reissued.

Browse Techblog’s collection of reviews for the Microsoft Zune.

Browse Metromix’s short list of Bob Dylan fiascos.

Read about Cat Stevens‘ first album of new material in 30 years.

Follow some of the controversy surrounding Mark Driscoll’s recent comments about pastor’s wives “letting themselves go” in light of the recent Ted Haggard situation.

Try on the “air guitar T-shirt.”

Read Christianity Today’s article about “Jesus Camp” shutting down.

Read this Christianity Today article about whether or not embryos bear the image of God.

Read Pitchfork’s reviews of two of my favorite albums of the year so far: first, their review of Our Worn Shadow by Manyfingers, then they review Jóhann Jóhannsson’s IBM 1401 - A User’s Manual.

Browse this list of the 10 most polluted places on earth.

Read this article as you prepare to read Alice Cooper’s memoirs, which he apparently sold to Random House for $500,000. Anyone interested in the memoirs of a pastor from Glen Rose, TX?

Browse Time’s list of their 100 All-Time albums.

Read Allmusic’s article concerning Myspace’s impact on our music consumption, which argues that we now “discard the inhibitors that previously kept our expenditure in check and become rampant consumers to whom quantity is more important than quality” and laments: “No longer will we be able to recite an entire album; we’ll just sing the hooks.”

Read Yahoo’s article questioning the wisdom of the Boston Red Sox recent move to pay $51 million dollars just to be able to talk to Japanese pitching sensation Daisuke Matsuzaka.

Read Lark News‘ piece: Ushers With Stun Guns Cause Controversy. Or, read this article which claims: “Southern Gospel Music More Popular Than Ever Among Sheltered Christian Kids.” (thanks Shawn!).

Read Yahoo’s piece about “a vaguely religious man” who has a blog where he “plods gamely through scripture, asking down-to-earth or occasionally irreverent questions, and getting thousands of emails in response” (thanks Glenn).

For the music lover who likes to shower, see this fog-free mp3 playing shower mirror.

Read Justin Taylor’s post in which he says: “I don’t often link to “bad theology” articles in order to bash them, but I’m making an exception here.” Who is he talking about, you might wonder? Bart Campolo, giver of the single worst “sermon” I have ever heard in my entire life.

Read the Wall Street Journal’s online article discussing sermon plagiarism (ht: JT).

Browse the latest 9Marks Ministries newsletter which is devoted to Biblical Theology.

Read Yahoo’s report that House Democrats formally made Nancy Pelosi Speaker.

Read this Alliance Defense Fund piece about recent developments involving a student and the Missouri State University.

Browse “Ye Olde Treasure Trove” for all your Reformed novelty needs.

Read this article about Wal Mart selling explicitly pro-homosexual content. This article notes that the book uses derogatory language for God.

Read this article noting that Elton John wants to ban all organized religion.

Read as Cal Thomas asks the political question “Where Do Conservative Christians Go From Here?”

Read Yahoo’s story about the Roman Catholic church reaffirming celibacy for priests and excommunicating an archbishop who ordained four married priests.

As I mentioned last week, with the year winding down, it’s time to turn the spectacles of hindsight over 2006 and examine what it had to offer. Each year I like to ask for your input and feedback as I compile a list of the best and the worst that the year had to offer. Please join me in reviewing the year, what did you like, what did you not like and why? What caught your attention and what lost it? What do you recommend and what would you say to steer clear of.

One of the things that I want to encourage here is thinking about everything in light of the Gospel. This not only applies to our faith but but our faith applies to all of life, including aspects such as our media intake. So the point of this yearly exercise is not just to see what you liked but also to see why you liked it and how you evaluate things in light of the Gospel. We’re trying to cultivate an active Christian approach to popular culture rather than a passive one, so please share some of your insights as to how the Gospel has come to bear on all of your choices.

The guidelines are simple:

• Please follow the guidelines.
• Please submit responses only for the listed categories.
• Please try to include at least a sentence or two on why you made each selection. This makes for a much more interesting read and it’s actually the whole point.
• Please return submissions (by e-mail) no later than: Saturday, December 23.
• Please include a small JPEG photo of yourself if possible, or a link to one if online.
• Please include your name, city and state of residence and a link if you are somewhere online.
• Please e-mail your list to me at kpita@yahoo.com.
• Please pass this on and get as many people as you can to participate!

Please submit responses for as many categories as you’d like, but don’t feel the need to answer for all the categories. For example, if you really don’t watch many movies, then don’t feel pressed to include selections for that category. Again, please try to include a short bit about why you made the selection you did; give us some insight as to why you think this is the year’s best.

The Categories (In no particular order):

Music:

• Album(s) of the Year - Must have been released in 2006, may be from any genre.
• Music “Find(s) of the Year” - Something that you “discovered” during 2006 but it may have been released any time. The key is that you first heard it this year.
• Song of the Year - Again, must have been released during 2006.
• Back Catalogue(s) of the Year - What artist did you discover this year and investigated further?
• Artist/Performer of the Year - What artist has impressed you the most during 2006?
• Misc. music thoughts for 2006.

Movies:

• Movie(s) of the Year - Must have been released in 2006.
• Movie “Find(s) of the Year” - Released any time, but you first saw it in 2006.
• Actor/Actress of the Year - Who has particularly impressed you this year?
• Misc. movie thoughts for 2006.

Reading:

• Book(s) of the Year - Must have been released in 2006 in any genre.
• Book “Find(s) of the Year” - published any time, but you first read it in 2006.
• Author of the Year - What author has made a particular impression on you or just made a huge impact in 2006 and why?
• Misc. reading thoughts for 2006.

Pop Culture:

• Person of the Year - You decide the criteria (most influence, etc.)
• Pop Culture Moment(s) Or Trend of the Year - What will 2006 be remembered for?
• Misc. cultural thoughts for 2006?

Faith:

• What theological Truth(s) has particularly “hit home” for you this past year?
• What have you been meditating on throughout the year?
• In what areas have you grown the most this year and why?
• Has any particular Scripture really impacted you this year?
• Misc. faith thoughts for 2006?

Misc.:

• This is where you can include anything you think I should have, thoughts about the Cardinals winning the World Series, what have you. Notice that I don’t have a “Sports” category, so if you do, it would go here.

Please e-mail submissions to me at kpita@yahoo.com no later than Saturday, December 23, 2006.

I’ll admit upfront that up until this point, I’ve not read anything by Wendell Berry. His is one of those names that I’ve seen tossed around by many authors I respect. I’ve wanted to get around to reading him but for whatever reason, he’s never made it to the top of my “to-read” piles. So I was intrigued to see an interview with him in the newest Christianity Today (November 2006).

My interest in wanting to read Berry was really piqued when reading Rod Dreher’s Crunchy Cons. Dreher’s vision of a truly faith-informed conservative approach to not only politics but all of life has intrigued me since reading his book. Dreher argues that the modern Republican Party’s definition of conservative politics as tax cuts and business breaks is actually anything but conservative. Instead, the word itself certainly connotates conservation and Dreher argues that many of the things that have come to be associated with “liberals” such as organic foods, care for the environment, etc. actually belong in the conservative camp.

Dreher openly acknowledges his debt to Wendell Berry among others. The Christianity Today article begins:

Wendell Berry defies easy description. His book jackets call him everything from social critic to farmer to conservationist, and he is all of these, though they do not contain him. He is a writer-poet, essayist, and novelist. Everyone from The Progressive to National Review has claimed him.

Asserting the relationship that ought to exist between Christianity and conservationism, Berry says: “What Christians offer is an understanding that the world is not ours, that we are not the ones that give things value.” But, Berry says, “The church and all of our institutions have failed to oppose the destruction of the world.” This is a powerful indictment that I have been thinking much on since reading it a few days ago.

Christians ought to be at the forefront of conservation efforts, we (should have) a vested interest in the environment and we should live by the understanding that it is not ours, we are stewards and we will one day be called to give an account. Yet it seems, and I realize that stereotypes fall short, that many professing Christians find themselves politically and pracitcally aligning themselves with the very forces that do the environment the most harm. Many have come to associate Christianity with a free-market economy to the point that we’re willing to let the environment be destroyed as long as no one’s economic rights to expand are questioned.

I witnessed much of this first-hand last year in Tanzania. One of the things that many of the missionaries are trying to instill in the people is a care for the land as part of a larger biblical worldview. Deforestation has literally destroyed much of the land. Rather than care for the soil, many people simply burn the land which will produce fresh vegetation. The problem is that the soil becomes depleted and though there is fresh vegetation for a short time, it is only for a short time, it is unhealthy and it is more difficult to grow the next time.

In Berry’s perspective, the fact that “The church and all of our institutions have failed to oppose the destruction of the world” means that not only are we complicit but that we are also guilty. While we might debate the severity of Berry’s sentiments, what we cannot argue is that, at least in part, he is right that we have not opposed nearly enough. I am personally convicted that my family does not recycle as we ought to, we do not typically buy our produce either locally or organically. While these are small steps, they are steps and Christians must be willing to examine everything we do in light of the Gospel.

The biblical worldview asserts that mankind has been placed on the earth to act as God’s stewards and in a sense, His gardeners. Instead we have depleted natural resources and generated nearly unmanagable waste. Though there is debate about the reality of “global warming,” it is clear that the glaciers surrounding Mt. Kilimanjaro have shrunk, much soil now requires years to replenish, we are losing trees faster than they are growing and we are not caring for the earth as we should.

Christians must begin to think of the Gospel as a message that affects not only the whole person, but the whole creation. Paul says in Romans 8:18-25 that creation itself groans to be freed from the bondage of sin. What are we doing to loose those bonds and break those chains?

• Read Wendell Berry
• Read Crunchy Cons by Rod Dreher
• Read The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience: Why Are Christians Living Like the Rest of the World? by Ron Sider
• Subscribe to Christianity Today

As you may know, my family and I were able to spend last week in the Rocky Mountains at a ministry retreat center. We had just about no media intake the entire time we were there (which was both refreshing and frustrating). However, one of the few times that we did receive any media was during a car ride into a local town. We are able to find the closest NPR station.

The top story that day was the “resignation” of Donald Rumsfeld from the position of Secretary of Defense, which he had held since 2001. Upon first hearing the news I admit that I was a bit shocked but not why you might expect.

I expected Rumsfeld’s resignation sometime soon. Politically it seemed that Bush had reached the point where there was no option. I was shocked, however, that Bush waited until the day after the mid-term elections. I expected the move to take place prior to November 7.

To my surprise, NPR featured two Republican senators (sorry, I cannot recall their names) who expressed the same sentiments. Both couldn’t help but wonder whether the Rumsfeld move might have had an impact on the elections, where many Republican candidates lost some hotly contested races.

I found it interesting that two members of Bush’s own party expressed that they felt that Bush’s move was perceived as one of desperation rather than as a proactive move towards change. By making the move after the election, Bush appeared defeated. Had the move been made prior, these senators felt that it would have been a positive sign from the Bush administration that they were truly listening to the frustrations of the people, even those in their own party.

It was this last sentiment that really got me thinking. Here were members of Bush’s own party complaining that they didn’t feel that he really listened. Indeed, this is the perspective of much of the world. In 2005 I had the opportunity to travel both to Southeast Asia and to Tanzania. Both regions shared the frustration that Bush didn’t seem to listen to anyone whom he had not already deemed to be right. Bush is perceived as not listening, especially to those who might disagree.

Christians, especially those in leadership have much to learn from this. Bush is perceived ultimately as arrogant because he does much talking with little listening. Scripture clearly warns “When words are many, transgression is not lacking,” then the positive side is portrayed: “but whoever restrains his lips is prudent” (Proverbs 10:19). Elsewhere, we are reminded that “a fool’ voice comes with many words” (Ecclesiastes 5:3). One of the most direct admonitions on this topic comes in James 1:19:

Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger

Elsewhere we are told that in many counselors there is both safety (Proverbs 11:14) and victory (Proverbs 24:6). This is difficult for many who have been raised to believe that “Americans,” “don’t need no one else no, never.” We’re the “rugged individuals” and we can pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps. However, Scripture labels this mentality as nothing short of pride and says that we should be more quick to listen than to speak.

Whether or not you might agree, for many, Bush’s timing proved to many that he had not truly been listening and only made a move when he was forced to politically. Believers must take this warning and quiet our own tongues while opening our ears. I know from experience that it is often quite difficult to listen, yet this is exactly what God commands.

• Read God’s Politics: Why The Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It by Jim Wallis
• Read Crunchy Cons by Rod Dreher

By now most of you have probably been made aware of the events surrounding Ted Haggard’s resignation from the leadership of the national Association of Evangelicals and from his pastorate at New Life Church in Colorado Springs. Haggard resigned in the midst of allegations of both drug use and homosexual activity.

By the title of this post, you might reasonably suspect that I want to comment on Haggard’s hypocrisy, proclaiming repentance on the one hand while living in unrepentant sin on the other. While this is certainly true and Haggard serves as a warning to all those in leadership to find and practice accountability, I think that there are other issues here that we might explore.

Again, my family and I were in the CO mountains most of last week, so our media intake was severely limited. However, on the way there, we were able to catch a bit of a Focus on the Family broadcast that featured Al Mohler, Ravi Zacharias and others discussing the Haggard situation. One of the show’s guests remarked about some of the comments that he had heard from the mainstream media, particularly some comments that he had heard from Don Imus.

While I don’t regularly listen to Imus, I can adequately imagine the comments he might have made. It’s interesting that in a culture that claims to value tolerance so much, Christians receive so much intolerance. Much of the media unnaturally salivates over stories of fallen evangelical leaders. Yes, the actions of these men is hypocrisy, but they have openly admitted as much. What has not been admitted is the hypocrisy of tolerance.

Our culture has come to define tolerance as an unwillingness to say that anyone else is wrong. Traditionally, however, “tolerance” has meant recognizing valid differences and committing to work alongside one another despite those differences. This is no longer the case and the fact that Christianity claims to be an absolute with clear views of right and wrong while promoting an exclusive means of salvation is simply more than many “politically corrects” can bear.

Thus, when a man like Haggard falls from prominence, the word “hypocrite” is shouted from the rooftops and one man’s failure is held up as evidence that the entire system he believed in is false. However, we can never judge a belief system by its practitioner’s failures. Haggard has openly admitted that his actions were contrary to his beliefs. If anything, Haggard’s failure reminds us of the very truth of the Gospel, that we cannot do it on our own (John 3:1-8, Ephesians 2:1-8, etc.).

The public comments from the mainstream media surrounding this terrible situation reveals much more than Haggard’s hypocrisy, they reveal the sinfulness of the human heart. The media reactions serves as an indictment of the human heart, a reminder that we are always looking for someone else to fall in hopes that their failure will take the spotlight off of ourselves.

While Haggard serves as a renewed call to personal holiness, his situation also serves as a reminder that “we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12).

• Visit Al Mohler’s official website
• Visit Ravi Zazharias’ official website
• Read CNN’s covereage of Haggard’s apology
• Read The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience: Why Are Christians Living Like the Rest of the World? by Ronald Sider