This made me think of 1 Timothy 4:12, but what I appreciated most is that the piece doesn’t stop at the verse. It opens up the deeper question of how age, authority, formation, and faith actually shape us over time. It feels less like a citation and more like an invitation to take growth seriously, wherever we are placed.
Sacha, thank you for your careful engagement with my essay. You get to the real heart of it and don’t make any uncharitable strawmen or anything of the like.
I think critiquing the tone is a fair point, it is a pretty angry essay. I will object to the style and/or substance being compared alongside the likes of Mark Driscoll, however. If anything, it’s the Mark Driscoll types that the essay means to rebuke. You know, the ones who love edgy stuff just because it’s edgy. The ones who play with racist theology because it’s exciting to hold an idea so repugnant to everyone around you. That was Mark Driscoll’s thing. Shock value and “hardness.”
The major difference between Driscoll and the figures in my essay is the internet and online communities. I mean to critique the replacement of online community for real mentorship and the obvious host of bad ideas that come along with that kind of behavior.
So I do feel it’s worth mentioning that I do not mean to criticize this demographic for being socially awkward or not masculine enough. Nor necessarily even for being young, although I do lean on that a lot. I more so mean to say that historically the Church has realized young men often have disproportionately inflamed passions and affections, and if those aren’t carefully monitored, things can go bad very quick. the Nick Fuentes crowd is an example of things going bad very quick. My primary criticism is that there is a legitimate evil associated with this movement, and it ought to be ridiculed so nobody finds it to be appealing anymore. And as such, the young men swept up by it ought to be loved and shown the better way forward.
I’ll cap my thoughts there while reiterating that I think you make some great points here. Thanks again for your engagement with my work and especially for plugging the new journal!
If we’re ever in the same area, would love to grab a drink and chat. Blessings and Merry Christmas.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Harrison! I think you are certainly justified in establishing a clear difference between yourself and Driscoll.
His vehement opposition to the excesses of the cultural Left have become a hallmark of his rhetoric and I find that the lane for vehement opposition to the excesses of the cultural Right (from an orthodox perspective, no less) tends to be emptier than would be ideal. So thank you for doing your part.
In any case, I am glad you found my post insightful and I will definitely shoot you a DM if I ever find myself in North Carolina! Merry Christmas to you and your family 🙏🏾
This made me think of 1 Timothy 4:12, but what I appreciated most is that the piece doesn’t stop at the verse. It opens up the deeper question of how age, authority, formation, and faith actually shape us over time. It feels less like a citation and more like an invitation to take growth seriously, wherever we are placed.
That is a beautiful insight—thank you for sharing!
And how wonderful it is that Christ meets us each where we are at on this growth/deification/sanctification/whatever-you-want-to-call-it journey
Sacha, thank you for your careful engagement with my essay. You get to the real heart of it and don’t make any uncharitable strawmen or anything of the like.
I think critiquing the tone is a fair point, it is a pretty angry essay. I will object to the style and/or substance being compared alongside the likes of Mark Driscoll, however. If anything, it’s the Mark Driscoll types that the essay means to rebuke. You know, the ones who love edgy stuff just because it’s edgy. The ones who play with racist theology because it’s exciting to hold an idea so repugnant to everyone around you. That was Mark Driscoll’s thing. Shock value and “hardness.”
The major difference between Driscoll and the figures in my essay is the internet and online communities. I mean to critique the replacement of online community for real mentorship and the obvious host of bad ideas that come along with that kind of behavior.
So I do feel it’s worth mentioning that I do not mean to criticize this demographic for being socially awkward or not masculine enough. Nor necessarily even for being young, although I do lean on that a lot. I more so mean to say that historically the Church has realized young men often have disproportionately inflamed passions and affections, and if those aren’t carefully monitored, things can go bad very quick. the Nick Fuentes crowd is an example of things going bad very quick. My primary criticism is that there is a legitimate evil associated with this movement, and it ought to be ridiculed so nobody finds it to be appealing anymore. And as such, the young men swept up by it ought to be loved and shown the better way forward.
I’ll cap my thoughts there while reiterating that I think you make some great points here. Thanks again for your engagement with my work and especially for plugging the new journal!
If we’re ever in the same area, would love to grab a drink and chat. Blessings and Merry Christmas.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Harrison! I think you are certainly justified in establishing a clear difference between yourself and Driscoll.
His vehement opposition to the excesses of the cultural Left have become a hallmark of his rhetoric and I find that the lane for vehement opposition to the excesses of the cultural Right (from an orthodox perspective, no less) tends to be emptier than would be ideal. So thank you for doing your part.
In any case, I am glad you found my post insightful and I will definitely shoot you a DM if I ever find myself in North Carolina! Merry Christmas to you and your family 🙏🏾