LindaV

To those of you who have criticized the Vanderveen’s comments on “Real Marriage”:

1) It’s not a “review.”-  In the Editor’s Note, it explains that David & Sarah were asked to “read Real Marriage together and share their thoughts on the book and the meaning of "real marriage." They shared their thoughts. Professional qualifications are not necessary for that, therefore there is no need to mud-sling at their qualifications or criticize that they didn’t objectively summarize or report on the contents of the book to your satisfaction. Their post was their response and thoughts on Driscolls’ book--- as they were asked to provide.

2) Dave’s challenge to the Driscoll’s claim that “their advice is entirely biblical” and the ensuing questions about polygamy and masturbation. - Regardless of Dave’s view of polygamy, homosexuality and/or masturbation, I believe his point is that Driscolls’ are claiming that these things are directly and explicitly named as sinful “from the table of contents to the appendix and the teaching of Jesus Christ Himself”, when in fact, they are not. Even if, in your honest opinion, God would, or should, favor or oppose a certain behavior--- it is dangerous to put words in God’s mouth and claim Scripture teaches something when it doesn’t specifically address that topic or behavior.

Applying Biblical principles to our modern lives often requires interpreting Scripture, looking at the whole teaching of Scripture, and prayerfully discerning godly and god-honoring guidelines to live by. Driscolls’ may have done that in arriving at their view of marriage and sex, but they must admit, with humility, that this is their best attempt to apply Biblical principles and offer them up as such.

What frightens some about Driscoll is his readiness to confuse his understanding, interpretation and application of Biblical principles with direct and explicit Biblical teachings. (As we are all well aware, deeply sincere, intelligent, godly men and women have, at times, come to different conclusions on a variety of things--- including marriage and sexuality.) Dave is not arguing for or against polygamy, homosexuality and/or masturbation--- this is just an example to demonstrate the “poor Biblical scholarship” he believes found throughout Real Marriage.

3) Christ’s model of teaching/shepherding. - Dave makes a good point that Christ’s method for teaching his disciples was not to impart more rules and regulations, but rather to teach principles and values. Dave writes, “For discipleship to be scalable, duplicatable and sustainable, people needed general principals and broad stories to help them wrestle with their lives and their myriad decisions.”

By asserting their opinion of what’s right and wrong in a marriage, or the bedroom, Driscolls promote the infant-like dependency on rule-following and pharisaical obedience, rather than the development of spiritual mature Christians who prayerfully seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit and discern god-honoring behaviors appropriate for their life and their marriage.

4) And finally, Sarah has apparently hit a nerve by questioning the appropriate role of professional counseling/therapy vs. pastoral counseling and care. I would agree that part of pastoral shepherding care of the flock may include basic counseling, listening, giving Biblical guidance and direction, and prayer--- but this must include wise acknowledgement when professionals should be called in. Pastors must be sensitive to when the issues at hand exceed their training and/or expertise and wisely refer counselees to others. Pastors who think they are the only ones who can help their congregants with personal, marriage and or sexual issues not only risk hurting, rather than helping, but must also question if their egos are preventing them from recognizing their limits.

It’s not that there isn’t a place for pastoral counseling, and Sarah acknowledges talking to one’s pastor is a good place to start, but as Sarah states, “the Driscolls have gotten themselves in over their heads…. I find it absolutely stunning that Driscoll believes that he is not only responsible for directing the nitty-gritty details of couples’ sex lives … but also that he is qualified to do so.”

This is not a question of either/or, but of wisely knowing when someone’s needs are best addressed by a professional with the time, qualifications, gifts and wisdom to best guide them to health and wholeness. Unfortunately, the Driscolls seem to think they have the “right” answer for every couple and every marriage. And that can be dangerous.