Cussin’ Christians and Unclean Lips
May 22, 2006 by cavman
Mark Driscoll’s in trouble again. Some people have found some of the language in his book Confessions of a Reformissionary Rev to be offensive. I have not read the book, but intend to. I did read the section in the link above (and found it funny, but I’m weird). The GospelDriven Life has some great points on those who are pointing to the splinter in Mark’s eye.
There is nothing like a cuss word or crude reference to a body part/sexual act to upset a fundamentalist. Let me start by saying I grew up across the street from some of the most foul mouthed people around. It was like living Good Will Hunting. Now, I know this is hard for some of you to believe- but many people actually speak like that.
Joe Carter in the Evangelical Outpost has a great post on the subject of vulgarity. A few things-
1. The language Mark used is PG compared to a number of places in Scripture where God is literally exposing the sins of Israel. Try reading Whoredom: God’s Unfaithful Wife in Biblical Theology Ray Ortlund, Jr. God is not nearly as embarassed by earthy language as we are. Ever read Luther’s Tabletalk? Lots of stories and words to upset the dainty-eared.
2. In Isaiah 6 we see that Isaiah repented of being a man of unclean lips from a people of unclean lips (check out my sermon on it). Did he need to have his mouth washed out with soap like I did as a youngster? In our culture we’d lean toward cussin’ & swearing. But Isaiah was most likely confessing that he and his people had spoken the names of false gods to deliver them. They were probably criticizing God because things weren’t going well. They had forsaken the true and living God. The use of slang terms is not the issue here.
3. In my training as a counselor, we had to practice using the medical terms for body parts and functions. Even this was utterly embarassing for some. But, really, are we commanded by God to use medical terminology? I hope not since the KJV does not use ‘urination’, but rather ‘piss’ in various places (try the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance). Our Bible translations have been cleaned up immensely.
4. In the comments on Evangelical Outpost, I am there espousing the idea of ‘cursing this fallen world’. Bono was right, “what a f%##ed up world this is.” There are things for which no ordinary word will do to express our hatred at evil, sin and misery. Unlike the FCC, God does not provide a list of words thou shalt not use. Those are social conventions. As such, we should not condemn someone for social conventions. For instance, I’ve got a friend studying in England right now. The Brits think nothing of pointing with their middle finger. Each Sunday, the pastor of the church he attends uses his middle finger to point to things in his Bible. But the index finger used in such a way is considered quite vulgar! Social convention (just like the non-words we create so we don’t cuss).
So…… since the language we consider offensive is social convention… Mark is violating your social convention. This is regretable, but not sinful. Mark is following the social convention of much of his intended audience.
I don’t want to be known as the cussin’ pastor (there was a guy at the homeless shelter where I used to work that ‘got ordained’ but still cussed a blue streak). Although, I did find that part of Donald Miller’s book downright funny (he called Driscoll Mark the Cussin’ Pastor). I do, upon occasion, use words others will undoubtably find offensive. But, deep down, I think God is more concerned with the idols I cling to than what slang term I use to describe the body He made, or express my existential rage at sin & misery. I suspect we are straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel.
Update: Mars Hill Church has sermons on Taming the Tongue available. Mark did not preach at any of the services that day. But the summaries indicate they advocate the view I have put forth here. Under Downloads go to sermons, then Practical Topics to find them.
Update: Purgatorio hath struck!
Throwing Mark Driscoll Under the Bus…
This past Friday Tim Challies reviewed Mark Driscoll’s new book Confessions of a Reformission Rev. Knowing what I know of Tim and what I know of Mark Driscoll I know that Mark is not the kind of guy that Tim…
[...] Caveman says it so well. Here is what he wrote: [...]
To paraphrase the cry of Agent 86’s enemy The Claw “not the Caveman, the Cavman” whenever Maxwell Smart mispronounced his name.
Yah know, I don’t see what the fuss is about the salty language. After all, aren’t we to be “the salt of the earth?”
*grinduck* Ok, ok, so maaaybe it wasn’t meant quite that way…
Mostly, I don’t have a problem with swearing. But there are people who are offended or even hurt by it, and I think Jesus wouldn’t want us to be hurtful to others, unless it somehow glorifies God or promotes the gospel. (Heck, some people are offended if you give thanks to God in public… but that’s ONE offense I’m not gonna give up!) Anyway, it comes down to where your heart is, I think.
As a cultural thing, we should respect the culture we happen to be relating to at the time. You’ll want to watch your language around people for whom certain words are a big deal (the whole weaker brother thing). And if you happen to be with a bunch of military people or Brits… you don’t have to worry, as long as you are not verbally abusing another (THAT would be a sin!).
Ran across this during my quiet time:
With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we
curse men, who have been made in Gods likeness. Out of the same
mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers this should not be.
James 3:9,10
Bilbo,
My comment addressed that- verbal abuse. The cursing James mentioned has a covenantal background (blessing & cursing) to it, like “go to hell” and places like Eph. 4 rule out “rotten speech”, so you shouldn’t call people “an SOB”. We should be leery of imposing our usage of a word on the biblical use of a word.
So this passage wouldn’t prohibit a ‘curse’ word, as people commonly use them.
Another thing we tend to overlook however is taking the Lord’s name in vain. That is far more important than whether or not someone uses and F-bomb.
Bilbo & Cavman,
I surprised no one has brought up this passage in James before now. (If they have, I missed it.) James is not talking about using “foul language.” He is talking about using “abusive language.” Some of the very people who are criticizing Mark for using foul language are guilty of using abusive language against people “who have been made in God’s likeness.”
I can’t read God’s mind. But I’m sure that he is much more grieved by those who speak ill of other believers than by those who use inappropriate language.
Rod
Cavman,
I can’t believe the comments I’m reading that seek to justify foul language in the mouths of Christians. Sure, “many people actually speak like that,” but that hardly makes it right. Correctly you identified such folks (your neighbors growing up) as being “foul mouthed.” Such words are surely more than mere social convention; they mean things, and apparently you recognized that, even as a child.
I wonder if we’re becoming a generation desensitized to the profane, crude, and vulgar by the prominent use of such language in the media, and by its common acceptance in a culture that is, arguably, increasingly barbarian. Music, movies, and even television have slowly (maybe not so slowly) pushed the envelope of edginess for years now, and the consequences are evident.
Post #5 seeks to make this a matter of “the weaker brother thing.” The post, however, fails to precisely identify the issue of the weaker brother, at least as it is conveyed in Scripture. “Certain words are a big deal” is not the issue of I Corinthians 8, where causing a weaker brother to stumble is addressed. The issue in the Corinthians passage involves a matter that is morally or spiritually indifferent, a matter in which a Christian has liberty. The restraint of the exercise of liberty in indifferent matters is to avoid emboldening another believer to act in a manner that is in violation of his or her conscience.
One final observation: in the original post and in some of the comments, reference is made to some specific vulgar language, but it is euphemized by such things as abbreviated spelling (see post #7), and Bono’s creative use of keyboard characters instead of letters to use a vulgar word. Of course, the word he wants the reader to supply is evident, even though he apparently feels constrained not to write it. If these words are harmless and not unwholesome or unholy, why not spell them out fully and accurately in the posts? And why not freely talk like your neighbors across the street?
Bob,
Thanks for stopping by, and interacting.
Well, Bono used the word, but I chose not to print it, out of love for those who may be offended by seeing it in print.
I disagree with you in that I think this is an issue of whether or not certain words are spiritually significant or immoral. To use them may cause another to violate their conscience.
My question, to get to my point, is this: who decides what words are ‘off limits’? Who decides which word is an appopriate term for sexual intercourse, or defecation etc? Why is one considered vulgar (which originally just meant common, such as putting the Bible in the vulgar, or common, language), and another perfectly acceptable?
In discussing this, I’ve used common conventions for language. That’s because I don’t know who is going to be reading it. I don’t want to turn them off without at least listening to the argument.
Why don’t I speak like my neighbors across the street? There are plenty of reasons- mostly pragmatic. I want people to respect what I say, not losing the message in the medium. The use of ‘vulgarity’ is often thoughtless. It should be just the opposite- to express utter disgust. For instance, adulters don’t “make love”. That term would be appropriate for marital relationships- not the mere bestiality of adultery. One might chose the F-word to convey that that sexual relationship is on a completely different level than that between a husband and wife.
Driscoll is an honest man and tells it like it is. If he swears, it’s a shame on him but I refuse to judge him based on this. Even Paul uses language “offensive” to the people in his time when he says that the religious freaks should cut their penis’s off. Hmmmmm. Haven’t heard Driscoll say anything like that yet.