Pick your poison

The slow drip saga surrounding Driscoll continues. The recent twist in the story, exemplified by Piper’s entrance into the fray, is how the focus has apparently shifted from plagiarism to ghostwriting.

Piper, undoubtedly emboldened after reading my previous post, may himself encourage other pastors to at least make some kind of principled statement on pastoral integrity and/or scholarly virtue.

In the meantime I thought this post at Pajama Pages did a good job demonstrating the broader ramifications of ghostwriting in the pastorate.

No rap treatment for plagiarism?

Exhibit A: a group of obscure pastors(?) participating in a panel discussion disparage Christian rap. A flurry of blog posts appear from the leading lights of the evangelical world (E-world) criticizing the panelists & defending (reformed) rap.

Exhibit B: a prominent pastor is credibly charged with plagiarism. A dearth of blog posts emerge as the story (even now) continues to unfold. In fact, the leading lights of E-world are all but silent on the matter.

Granting that the circumstances surrounding exhibits A & B correspond as much as apples to oranges, I can’t help thinking that perspective is lost in all of this. Shouldn’t we care far less that a pastor would be guilty of shallow thinking on rap than that a pastor would be guilty of theft and deceit?

This isn’t to suggest that what we know from the blogosphere is everything there is to know. Maybe mitigating facts will come to light that exonerate the pastor. Conversely, the plagiarism charge may be addressed behind closed doors with public repentance, restitution, & reconciliation to follow.

Judging between the two I’d say a single, discredited pastor poses a greater threat to the church and her gospel than a panel of pastors who denigrate a style of music.