Mars Hill Church Board of Elders: Mark Driscoll Resigned Instead of Entering a Restoration Plan

This morning in all Mars Hill Church locations, a statement from the Board of Elders was read to the congregation by the lead pastors. The BoE was given the task to investigate the charges against Mark Driscoll which were lodged by 21 former elders and a group of private witnesses. The BoE’s report was referenced by the BoAA in their statement accepting Mark Driscoll’s resignation. Driscoll submitted his letter of resignation on Tuesday, Oct. 14 and the BoAA issued a statement on Oct. 15. It turns out that the BoAA statement did not completely represent the process or outcome of the BoE’s work. As I reported yesterday, the BoAA’s statement may not even have accurately represented the BoAA’s initial response to Mark Driscoll.

According to this statement made at Sammamish location, the BoE concluded their investigation and wanted to provide a restoration plan for Driscoll. However, instead Driscoll resigned.

The investigation of formal charges against Mark Driscoll has revealed patterns of persistent sin in the three areas disclosed in the previous letter by the Board of Overseers. In I Tim 5:20, it requires that an elder be rebuked for persistent sin. Our intention was to do this while providing a plan for his eventual restoration to leadership. The Board of Elders in agreement with the Board of Overseers are grieved, deeply grieved, that any process like that was lost to us when Mark Driscoll resigned in position and left the church. Now is the time to move on and consider what God is calling us to next as a church as we participate in Jesus’ mission to make disciples in His name. Today begins a new chapter in the history of our church which has proceeded in one direction under one leadership for many years now, but I want you to understand this, God is our Father. That does not change. Jesus is the chief shepherd of the church and that has not changed.

The elders of Mars Hill Church acknowledge as we’ve gone through all of this investigation, and heard all of these stories, we acknowledge that we have personally led in some of the same ways that demonstrate some of the same ways that Pastor Mark had. And those things require repentance and forgiveness and restoration. We realize that there are ways that we have led as elders in ways that have been domineering, sometimes arrogant and sometimes boastful and at least for my part, I want to say I deeply regret those sins and I ask for your forgiveness.  We want to lead you into the future in a way that displays more grace, more love as we speak the truth to each of you. If there are people that I have offended in ways I have pastored this church, I would welcome that you come to me and speak with me to allow me the opportunity to reconcile with you.

At this time Mars Hill Church is going to move ahead under the Board of Overseers established plan for transition.Pastor Dave Bruskas will serve as the teaching and preaching pastor during an interim period of time until we establish a direction we are going as a church. The Board of Advisors are going to be working in the weeks to come on a plan for moving forward and for how that will unfold, what the next steps are, there are a lot of things to consider. As we discover what those things are, what the spirit shows us, then we want to communicate clearly to you and transparently to you what’s happening, the directions and the changes that will be taking place.

This statement does not address the reasons Driscoll was asked to step away from the pulpit. Did the BoE report disqualify him or not? Having a restoration plan certainly sounds like disqualification. From what would Driscoll need to be restored, if not disqualification?  Since the congregation is footing the bill for the severance, shouldn’t they find out what is happening? If Mars Hill is going to move forward transparently, shouldn’t the congregation see at least an executive summary of the report?

Also, this statement ignores the promise of Mark DeMoss speaking on behalf of the church that the allegations against the BoAA would also be investigated. There are credible claims that the BoAA did not accurately represent Acts 29 Network and Paul Tripp in their public communications. And yet, nothing is said about that here and the BoAA is in charge with apparently no accountability.

If the BoE is going to move forward with transparency, this statement does not appear to be the beginning of moving forward. This looks like more of the end of the previous chapter.

 

Mark Driscoll's Resignation: What is the Real Story?

On Wednesday, Mars Hill Church let the world know that Mark Driscoll submitted a letter of resignation the day before. According to Driscoll, he stepped down because he was being divisive. Specifically, he said:

Other issues, such as aspects of my personality and leadership style, have proven to be divisive within the Mars Hill context, and I do not want to be the source of anything that might detract from our church’s mission to lead people to a personal and growing relationship with Jesus Christ.

That is why, after seeking the face and will of God, and seeking godly counsel from men and women across the country, we have concluded it would be best for the health of our family, and for the Mars Hill family, that we step aside from further ministry at the church we helped launch in 1996.

Driscoll also implied that controversies have taken a toll.

Recent months have proven unhealthy for our family—even physically unsafe at times—and we believe the time has now come for the elders to choose new pastoral leadership for Mars Hill.

For their part, the Board of Advisors and Accountability said Driscoll had not disqualified himself but was at times arrogant and domineering. About his resignation, they concluded:

Finally, Mark Driscoll was not asked to resign; indeed, we were surprised to receive his resignation letter. 

There may be more to this story.
After the letters from Driscoll and the BoAA, Driscoll’s sister Melanie Thompson commented on her public Facebook page (under the name Erma Gauthier). Her narrative adds a new wrinkle. According to Thompson, “they” (I presume the BoAA) would not let Driscoll preach. Yesterday, she posted Driscoll’s resignation letter and followed it with comments about the BoAA (image of the thread).

Erma Gauthier They would not let him preach
Yesterday at 10:14am
Erma Gauthier Yeah. I think they really did a number on him. Not biblical or keeping with The Word or process.
Yesterday at 10:16am

Reading between the lines, it sounds like Driscoll’s sister is suggesting that the BoAA was not going to allow Driscoll to preach. She could have been referring to the Board of Elders report, but the simplest explanation is a decision by the BoAA. More about the BoE later. In any case, Thompson is not impressed with the work of those who decided what to do about Driscoll. To reinforce her opinion, she points out that the church has the Ballard campus for sale which to her implies that the leadership would keep Driscoll from preaching again.

Erma Gauthier If they were going to let him come back …ever…then why would they sell mars hill Ballard behind his back.
Yesterday at 10:23am

Erma Gauthier Yeah. The people would have to bring him back. The Pastors have blocked him without disqualification.

Erma Gauthier I want Ballard back. We are the body. We want our church and pastor
Read the entire page to get all of the narrative. Despite the fact that the BoAA determined that Driscoll was not disqualified, Driscoll’s sister implied that that the BoAA, and perhaps the BoE, blocked Driscoll from preaching even though they did not disqualify him. According to Thompson, there is more here than has been disclosed by either Driscoll or the BoAA or the BoE. If so, then the BoAA softened their statement and perhaps didn’t accurately reflect the investigation.
There may be even more.
The BoE may have more to say about the BoAA’s statement. A number of sources indicate that the investigation found something more than the BoAA reported.

Peroutka Should Not Be Surprised by White Separatism in the League of the South

Michael Peroutka told the Baltimore Sun that he quit the League of the South when he found online some views of interracial marriage held by League members that were “contrary to his beliefs.” I find this to be extremely doubtful. Peroutka has been going to League of the South meetings since at least 20o4 when he was endorsed by the League in his Constitution Party quest for president. While I realize he may not have attended this session, League of the South president Michael Hill presented his opposition to interracial marriage at the same 2o12 League of the South conference where Peroutka led the crowd in singing “I Wish I Was in Dixie” (at 50:34 into the video) and called it the “national anthem.”
At 45:30 minutes into this speech, Hill describes his hope that his children marry in his race.
[youtube]http://youtu.be/ovLGfoEo0Sc?t=44m[/youtube]
He proceeds to extol white pride and the superior accomplishments of Western Civilization.
Again, it is possible that Peroutka missed this session but it seems unlikely to me that he never heard these views spoken at a League meeting.
 
 
 

ECFA Guidance: a Year's Severance Pay is "Highly Unusual"

I reported yesterday that the terms of Mark Driscoll’s arrangement with the church upon termination that I have seen involve the provision of base salary and benefits for a year. If indeed these are the arrangements in force, then the Evangelical Council on Financial Accountability may have yet another reason to review Mars Hill Church’s practices. According to an article on church employees and severance pay on the ECFA website, a year’s severance is “highly unusual.”

How Much Severance Pay Should be Paid?
No bright line rule exists for determining what how much severance pay to provide. The main concern should always be proper stewardship of the church’s financial assets in furtherance of the church’s religious purposes. If a long-term employee is leaving the church, it may be a very appropriate quid pro quo payment to provide generous severance. If a contentious pastor leaves, the church leaders may feel forced to provide extensive severance as a risk management decision. Generally, provision of a few weeks to a few months of severance pay should deemed reasonable under many circumstances. In contrast, a year’s worth of severance pay would be viewed as highly unusual and therefore would warrant extensive due diligence and substantiation to justify such a large severance package.

I realize that “no bright line rule exists” but since the ECFA guidance is there, I suspect it will be of interest to Mars Hill stakeholders.