Driscoll, British Preachers and all that

Christianity magazine has reignited the fires of an old Mark Driscoll controversy (I'll call him Mark from here on in, not because I'm pretending he's my best mate but because calling people by their surnames feels a bit unfriendly to me). If you're not up to speed on this one here's a quick summary:

• Christianity implies Mark said our preachers are basically all a bit rubbish and that he was having a go.
• Mark says that he has been misunderstood and that he asked the question who aren't British preachers better known in the context of a challenge to our boldness and a loving tone.
• Several people, including widely read blogger Krish Kandish have waded in.

The original event to which this controversy seems to refer is an Acts 29 event in Birmingham back in the summer. I was there are joined a smaller group for  dinner with Mark Driscoll afterwards so feel vaguely qualified to make the following observations:


1 Mark did basically imply that British preachers aren't particularly good or very bold. That was what people there at the time understood him to be saying. It is absolutely right to say that the context was one of challenging us to be bold - which is a fair challenge. It is also fair to say that, at the time, a lot of people present were quite irritated by what he said which suggests that we misunderstood him. If so that is mostly our fault not his.

2 Mark is not only a great warrior for the gospel being mightily used by the Lord but also a delightful, kind and considerate man. It was a privilege to share a meal with him and I feel like I learned a lot in that couple of hours. That doesn't, of course, mean I know him! But it is the case that lots of the things we find difficult about other people are a result of our not having any relationship with them - people should definitely not make a judgment about Mark Driscoll (or anyone else!) as a person based on what he said once on a platform in Birmingham.

3 Part of the reason for this controversy is that Mark's stage "persona" and style when he preaches is very different to what he is like in smaller groups. I am not sure who has advised/encouraged him to maintain a very combative style of preaching but I am not at all convinced they are doing him a service.

4. Mark is right to point out that magazines have their own agendas; both theologically and in terms of sales, so we should take what they say with a pinch of salt.

4 I think Krish Kandiah and others who are lighting the blue touch paper on this one are in danger of damaging a good man's reputation based on something frankly fairly innocuous simply because it's the sort of criticism which get's our hackles up (even though it shouldn't). On the other hand I think it's also unfortunate that Driscoll's response doesn't actually recognise that it might not have been a very helpful thing to say.

Much more important, however, is the substantive issue: why aren't British preachers used extensively at our own major events and known all over the place? 

I have several reflections:

a) It's not entirely true - Liam Golligher, Alistair Begg, Rico Tice, Vaughan Roberts and others have extensive global ministries. Two of those people have, in fact, been "pinched" by US churches! UK conferences are, I think, getting better at using home grown speakers (FIEC conference is a model of good practice in this regard).

b) It's partly true - a lot of reformed preaching in the UK is entirely sound but really quite boring and it doesn't surprise me that people outside our local churches (who listen because they know us and know we love them) don't want to hear us. We need to raise our game (well I do and I suspect some others need to as well). 

c) It's partly because of a (perhaps wrong) British tendency not to talk about what we think we're good at. This can be either appropriate humility or a false reticence about the Lord's gifts! Either way it's a reason for the lack of (self)publicity around preachers that Mark referred to.

d) Partly because our churches are much smaller than many American churches (for all sorts of reasons that I think are nothing to do with our preaching - because churches in Britain led by Americans are usually small too!) pastors don't have nearly as much opportunity to go speak at conferences and events as they don't have large staff teams to cover for them.

e) At the risk of a sweeping generalisation I think British people (in fact nearly all people in the world) are perhaps a bit more open to learning to people from other countries than Americans are; so we invite Keller, Driscoll, Carson etc to our conferences. Americans (like Brits in the C19th) have an undercurrent of global empire syndrome - when you rule the world it's hard to see that you can learn from other people and places.

f) Yes British conference organisers (PT, Word Alive, Keswick) could and should change this by asking more great UK speakers. Some of our most brilliant Bible teachers (Hugh Palmer, Rupert Bentley-Taylor) are not as well known as they ought to be. So too could our American brothers - if more Brits were invited to speak at the Gospel Coalition Conference or T4G they would inevitably also become more widely known here too.

g) I'm available! That's not an entirely flippant comment - any of us who believe that God in his grace has gifted us to teach the Scriptures and miraculously moved us to be passionate about doing that ought to say so and be willing, within the constraints of the responsibilities we have in our local churches, to go and do that in places where people want us to.