Who's hot and who's not

I have a theory about Mark Driscoll, but I don't know enough about his ministry to say if this is correct.

First of all, there's the common narrative of men who fail by succeeding. They never expected to be that successful. Success is unpredictable. Who could anticipate that The Purpose-Driven Church, Left Behind, or The Late Great Planet Earth would be blockbusters? It's often a matter of lucky timing. A window in time when there's an appetite for that. A neglected marketing niche to fill. 

In Driscoll's case, it may be that he started an empire which rapidly outgrew his limited talents. Perhaps he's a lightweight who could only stretch his material so far. Once he ran out of material, he had to resort to more sensational antics as filler. Like a pop vocalist who only has one big hit, one unforgettable song. 

Driscoll has squandered his opportunities, but maybe he never had the reserves of staying power. He just ran out of things to say, because he never had that much to say, and began padding with gimmicks and shock tactics. 

It's like the Peter Principle, where ambitious employees steadily rise to their level of incompetence–at which point they plateau in steadfast mediocrity. In effect, he was promoted one time too many. The job got too big for his modest abilities. 

I think of Gregory Peck in Moby-Dick. Peck was a perfect actor for certain roles, but he had a very narrow acting range. Capt. Ahab is a flamboyant part which was way beyond him. Patrick Stewart could pull it off, but not Gregory Peck. 

Success is a very trying criterion. Some men, like Spurgeon and Whitfield, were wildly successful as young men, but had the ballast not to capsize. Yet for every example like that, you probably have half a dozen counterexamples. 

In fairness, none of us is indispensable. In this life, we all have walk-on parts. Some build taller sandcastles than others, but all of us are building our sandcastles at low tide. Every earthly achievement will be swept away.