Who’s Talking About The Mark Driscoll Plagiarism Controversy?

Three days ago, Relevant Magazine published a brief article with the headline: Basically, Nobody’s Talking About the Mark Driscoll Plagiarism Accusations.

What a difference a couple of days make. Now, lots of people are talking about the controversy swirling around Pastor Driscoll.

Religion News Service, World MagazineChristianity TodayChristian Post, CrosswalkRight Wing Watch, Orlando Sentinel, Opposing Views, First Things, Examiner, Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion, Religion Dispatches, and the Urban Christian News all have new articles up about the matter, some just posted this morning.

One person not talking is Mark Driscoll which is unfortunate because he could quiet the matter with appropriate action and comment. One organization that probably would not like to talk any more about the issue is Tyndale House. According to a statement given to Christianity Today, Driscoll’s publisher, Tyndale House, said his book A Call to Resurgence “conforms to market standards” in the citation of Peter Jones material.

That judgment of Tyndale House might be influenced by a recent publishing deal between the publishing house and Driscoll. Tyndale advertises on the Salem Radio Network which also carries Mefferd’s show.  Certainly seems possible that Tyndale put some pressure on Ms. Mefferd to make a statement of apology. Let me hasten to add that I believe Mefferd was sincere in her statement in that she did not alter her assessment of the evidence regarding citation of sources.

I doubt this story goes away quietly.

I have some additional links below and will add them as I find them. Readers, if you see other articles on this topic, please add them in the comments section.

See also:

On The Allegations Of Plagiarism Against Mark Driscoll (12/2/13)

Zombies, Plagiarism And Mark Driscoll Helped Me Write This Blog Post (12/3/13)

Mark Driscoll And His Church On Plagiarism (12/4/13)

Janet Mefferd Removes Evidence Relating To Charges Of Plagiarism Against Mark Driscoll; Apologizes To Audience (12/4/13)

Ingrid Schlueter Resigns From Janet Mefferd Show Over Mark Driscoll Plagiarism Controversy (12/5/13)

Mark Driscoll Accused Of Plagiarism By Radio Host (Religion News Service)

More Allegations Of Plagiarism Surface Against Mark Driscoll (Religion News Service)

Flunking Mark Driscoll for Plagiarism (11/29 – First Things)

Mark Driscoll and Janet Mefferd: Plagiarism, Tribalism and Paganism (Istoria Ministries)

Ongoing Drama Ensues After Radio Host Accuses Mark Driscoll of Plagiarism (Charisma News – 12/9/13)

  • http://www.covenantcaswell.org/ John Carpenter

    The conclusion of the matter is this:

    1. Ms. Mefferd has retracted her accusations and apologized to Mark Driscoll. So should Warren Throckmorton .

    2. The alleged plagiarism of Dr. Jones is not substantial The publisher of Driscoll’s book reviewed the allegations and concluded that Driscoll’s use of Jones’ ideas and crediting to him was to publishing standards.

    3. The alleged plagiarism of two brief paragraphs from a commentary of 1 Peter is more substantial. However, the publication in which it apparently occurred is little more than an internal study guide. Churches commonly produce material for their Sunday School or small groups and likely, inadvertent failures to proper cite sources is also common. The mistake should be corrected but until evidence is forth-coming that it was intentional plagiarism, to treat this as though it is a great moral failure is absurd.

    4. The real substantial issues here are the worldly scandal-mongering that many Christians relish, including some Christian media organizations, the cynical and reflexively scornful attitudes toward Christian leaders, etc.

  • http://www.ericpazdziora.com/ Eric

    Driscoll is doing himself no favors here. The evidence of plagiarism is so obvious and inarguable that even John Carpenter, who is mildly notorious for trolling comment sections to make personal attacks on anyone who dares say anything negative about Driscoll, admitted in a previous comment thread, and I quote, “I agree that the commentary stuff is probably plagiarism.” Well then, QED.

    Coupled with Driscoll’s own statements about how pastors “borrowing” is “a demonic, satanic issue,” it’s easy to see why people have latched on to this as a blatant example of religious hypocrisy. Yet it would be quite easy for him to make the whole scandal go away if he just said, “This was an oversight, I’m sorry, I regret the error, and it will be corrected in future editions.” Instead he responds by attacking those who pointed out the fact. He has only himself to blame that it’s a scandal at all.

    It is a bit amusing, though: All the controversial and offensive things Driscoll’s said and done in the past, and this is the one that becomes a scandal?