In a message to the Mars Hill Church congregation via the Mars Hill social media website, Mark Driscoll expressed regret over using ResultSource to move his book Real Marriage to #1 on the NYTs best seller list. He says he has asked his publisher no longer to use the designation of New York Times best selling author. He pledged to stay off social media for the remainder of the year and plans to cut back on travel in order to concentrate more on Mars Hill and his family.
Driscoll says he has had meetings with those who have been harmed by Mars Hill and wants to have more. He lauds the Board of Advisors and Accountability* but admits that the transition from the elder led church to the current regime was not always handled well. He claims that in the early days of Mars Hill, he was an angry young prophet and said he was sorry and now wants to be more of a spiritual father.
The statement was conciliatory in tone but did not address the plagiarism controversy, the pastors who were fired in 2007 or charges which were addressed to Mars Hill governing board in 2013. The social media pledge seems a bit hollow since Driscoll has a team that tweets for him anyway.
My reaction to the ResultSource disclosure is mixed. On one hand, I think it is commendable that Driscoll will cease referring to the NYT best seller list. However, on the other hand, it is hard to believe that he didn’t know what he was getting into when the church signed on with ResultSource. This is the third reaction from Driscoll/Mars Hill to the ResultSource scheme. First, Justin Dean told World Magazine that the RSI-Mars Hill relationship was an “investment” and an “opportunity.” Then the Board of Advisors and Accountability said the scheme was “unwise.” Now Driscoll says he first saw it as a way to maximize book sales, but now sees it as manipulative and “wrong.” The vacillation about whether gaming the system is a good opportunity, unwise or wrong is confusing and won’t do much to convince people that Mars Hill and Driscoll can be candid.
In 2007, Driscoll preached a sermon with similar themes.
Read the entire letter here or here.
*the governing body of Mars Hill made up of four outside pastors/advisors, and the three executive elders (Driscoll, Sutton Turner, and Dave Bruskas).
Month: March 2014
Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability: Buying Place on Best Seller Lists Violates Standards
On Wednesday, Ruth Graham, writing in The Atlantic, quoted the president of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability Dan Busby as saying that schemes such as the one which resulted in Mark Driscoll’s book Real Marriage showing up on various best seller lists are “unethical and deceptive.” Since the whole thing took place before Mars Hill became a member of ECFA, there will be no consequences of the scandal with that group (even though MHC and Driscoll benefited from the contract after the church became an ECFA member).
I contacted Busby for elaboration on his assessment and he added some detail to his comments regarding the relationship between churches and products created by organization leaders. Busby told me in an email:
It is unethical and deceptive for ECFA-accredited churches (and other organizations) to:
a. make efforts to mask the method of procuring products authored or developed by an organization’s leader in order to improve product ratings, and/or
b. procure products authored or developed by an organization’s leader at a higher price than otherwise available for the sake of improving product ratings, even if there is a valid ministry purpose for paying the higher price.
Busby pointed to a ECFA Advisory Opinion on the subject which is as follows:
Product Procurement
Overview. The leaders of many ECFA members author or develop various intellectual properties, including books. Royalties received by these leaders for intellectual properties owned by the ECFA member should be considered as one of the elements of compensation when the organization’s governing body determines compensation for the leaders.
Additionally, the organization’s governing body should ensure that the organization is not involved in unethical and deceptive practices relating to the procurement of products authored or developed by its leaders. The appropriate avenues with which to procure products should be reviewed against the backdrop of ECFA’s Standards 1, 4, and 6.
Standard 1 – Biblical truths and practices. “Every member shall subscribe to a written statement of faith clearly affirming a commitment to the evangelical Christian faith, or shall otherwise demonstrate such commitment and shall operate in accordance with biblical truths and practices.”
In several of his letters, the Apostle Paul stresses the importance of being beyond reproach and behaving in such a way as to avoid even the appearance of wrong-doing. He tells us that we need to be circumspect to those outside the Church. The reason Paul most often gives is that we must not give Satan any opportunity to destroy the reputation of Christ. Arguably, and in an eternal sense, it may be true that the business of ministries and churches is of concern to God and not to others judging from the outside. However, Scripture is also very clear about our need to be open, honest, and above reproach as we wrestle with the issues of life before Christ’s return. As the Apostle Paul said, “For we are taking pains to do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men” (2 Corinthians 8:21).
Standard 4 – Use of Resources. “Every member shall exercise the appropriate management and controls necessary to provide reasonable assurance that all of the member’s operations are carried out and resources are used in a responsible manner and in conformity with applicable laws and regulations, such conformity taking into account biblical mandates.”
The use of resources in a responsible manner includes managing resources in a God-honoring way. An organization that has expended assets in an unwise manner may diminish its own Christian witness.
Standard 6 – Compensation-Setting and Related-party transactions. “Every organization shall set compensation of its top leader and address related-party transactions in a manner that demonstrates integrity and propriety in conformity with ECFA’s Policy for Excellence in Compensation-Setting and Related-Party Transactions.”
Analysis. In reviewing these Standards and their related commentaries against certain methods in which products may be procured, the ECFA Board, Standards Committee, and Staff found the following:
A potential conflict of interest arises when an organization’s leader decides the organization will promote or purchase books authored by the leader, with the leader receiving royalties on the books. This risk of a conflict-of-interest is heightened when, in relation to products authored or developed by leaders of ECFA members, (a) products are purchased at a higher price than is required and/or (2) there is an effort to mask the method of procuring products in order to improve product rating.
ECFA members must avoid an actual conflict-of-interest by utilizing the related-party transaction process outlined in ECFA’s Policy for Excellence in Related-Party Transactions when purchasing products authored by an organization’s leader.
If an organization pays a higher price than required for procuring products authored or developed by leaders of an ECFA member, there must be a valid ministry purpose for paying the higher price. Otherwise, the excess expenditure of funds is for a non-ministry purpose.
Where an organization attempts to mask the method of procurement from organizations that determine product ratings, ECFA believes such practices are not in accord with biblical truths and practices.
ECFA’s Positions. It is unethical and deceptive for a member organization to:
- make efforts to mask the method of procuring products authored or developed by an organization’s leader in order to improve product ratings, and/or
- procure products authored or developed by an organization’s leader at a higher price than otherwise available for the sake of improving product ratings, even if there is a valid ministry purpose for paying the higher price.
This opinion clearly applies to the RSI-Mars Hill partnership. The method of moving the books was masked in order to fool those who make up the best seller lists and books were purchased at retail price in order for them to count for purposes of the “improving product ratings.” I appreciate the ECFA guidance on this matter and hope that it informs practice in the evangelical community.
Initially Mars Hill Church called the scheme an “investment” and “opportunity” but then changed direction a bit calling the contract “unwise.” I wonder if the church or maybe even Driscoll himself will ever step up and agree with the ECFA.
To see all posts on Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church, click here.
Publisher Corrects Citation Problems in Mark Driscoll's Book Who Do You Think You Are
In December 2013, I documented the presence of copied material from an InterVarsity Press reference book in Mark Driscoll’s book, Who Do You Think You Are? The material from a Dictionary of Paul and His Letters was copied without citation from a Docent Research Group report on Ephesians. See that post for more details.
Now the publisher has addressed the plagiarized material by adding footnotes to the book with the proper reference to Clinton Arnold’s article in the Dictionary. The changes haven’t shown up in the Google or Kindle version, but can be seen via the “Look Inside” feature on Amazon. Here is the before and after image:
Footnotes have been added to properly source the material that was unsourced previously.
Harper Collins Christian publisher stated in January that the problems in Real Marriage would be addressed. They addressed at least two problems. Now they have addressed the problems in another book.
I wonder how expensive it is to make all of these corrections.
For an interactive chart with all of the plagiarism and other citation problems to date, click here.
To see all posts on Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church, click here.
The Atlantic Asks Can Megachurches Handle Mega Money? Puts Focus on Mark Driscoll Controversy
Ruth Graham, writing for The Atlantic, follows the money in the Mark Driscoll controversy over his Real Marriage book. She does a really fine job of bringing together many details to put the spotlight on pastors with all the trappings of celebrity status.
Graham raises important questions about transparency in financial and other matters which are at the heart of much of the strife at Mars Hill currently. As I noted in my post on the by-laws, the decision making authority, including regarding the elders’ compensation is concentrated in seven people, three of whom are staff. The potential for conflicts of interest seems great.
I encourage you to read and tweet the article.
Ugandans Challenge Anti-Homosexuality Act in Court
Nine individuals and a human right organization in Uganda have petitioned Uganda’s Constitutional Court regarding the Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014. The petitioners want the court to declare the Act to be unconstitutional.
Here is the petition.
Notice that the petitions have comprehensively examined the law and offer numerous violations of Uganda’s Constitution. They also point out that a quorum was not in place on the day the bill was passed.
The petitions request that the court:
(a) Permanently staying the operationalisation of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014.
(b) Permanently staying the gazetting of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014.
(c) Permanently prohibiting any person, organisation, Company and/or entity to write, publish, or mount a campaign against adult persons who profess and engage in consensual same sex/gender sexual activity among themselves as adults.
(d) Permanent injunction and/or gagging order against persons, organisations, or companies restraining them from publishing, or writing in the print and electronic media including the internet; articles, letters, against adult persons who profess and engage in consensual same sex/gender sexual activity among themselves as adults which articles may bring such persons into public ridicule, odium and hatred.
(e) Any other reliefs that this Honourable Court may deem fit.
Essentially, they want their rights as citizens of Uganda guaranteed by the court.
See all posts of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.