Mark Driscoll is stirring up another hot-button church debate - and this time, he is telling Christians exactly where he thinks they should draw the line when the wedding invitation arrives.
The outspoken pastor and author recently declared that Christians should not attend gay weddings, arguing that showing up for a ceremony God does not approve of amounts to approving something Christians themselves should reject.
"Christians should not attend gay weddings, if God does not approve of it, we do not approve of it," Driscoll wrote.
And he didn't stop there.
"Marriage is a sacred covenant between one man and one woman, established by God and governed by His Word," Driscoll continued. "The church is called to stand firmly on that truth, regardless of how culture changes."
His concluding line was equally uncompromising: "We cannot redefine what belongs to God."
The statement puts Driscoll squarely back into a debate that has divided Christians for years: Can a believer attend a same-sex wedding without affirming the marriage itself?
For Driscoll, the answer appears to be a firm no.
The former Mars Hill Church pastor has never exactly been known for tiptoeing around controversial subjects, and this isn't the first time he has weighed in on the question. In 2023, Driscoll similarly argued that Bible-believing Christians should not attend same-sex weddings, maintaining that attendance communicates approval of the union.
His latest comments therefore aren't a theological U-turn. If anything, they show Driscoll doubling down on a position he has publicly championed before - at a time when questions surrounding sexuality, marriage and LGBTQ inclusion continue to create difficult conversations within churches and Christian families.
But the issue becomes considerably more complicated when it moves from theology to the family dinner table.
What happens when the person getting married is a son or daughter? A sibling? A lifelong friend? Does attending necessarily communicate affirmation, or can a Christian be physically present as an expression of love while still disagreeing with the marriage on theological grounds?
Christians who hold a traditional understanding of marriage do not necessarily agree on the answer. Some argue, like Driscoll, that a wedding guest is participating in and witnessing a covenant celebration and therefore cannot separate attendance from affirmation. Others contend that maintaining a relationship with a gay family member or friend can sometimes mean being present even while one's theological convictions remain unchanged.
Driscoll, however, isn't leaving much room for that distinction.
His latest message frames the question around divine authority rather than changing cultural expectations: if marriage belongs to God, Christians don't have the authority to redefine it - or, according to his argument, celebrate a definition contrary to Scripture.
Whether Christians agree with his conclusion or think the issue requires considerably more pastoral nuance, Driscoll has once again put one of evangelical Christianity's most sensitive questions right in the spotlight.
And judging by the bluntness of his message, he isn't interested in softening the answer.
