Mark Driscoll and Peter Jones: Unfinished Business in the Plagiarism Controversy

The controversy over Mark Driscoll’s use of material written by others started with Janet Mefferd’s accusation that Driscoll plagiarized Peter Jones concepts and descriptions of one-ism and two-ism. According to Jones in his book One or two: Seeing a world of difference (see how easy that is!), one-ism is the view that everything is of one essence. As Jones says in the book, “everything is a piece of the divine.” Two-ism recognizes a distinction between the uncreated (God) and created (everything else).  The self-contained, uncreated God determines the course of the creation.
Jones claims responsibility for coining these terms. On page one of One or Two, Jones claims:

I briefly examined this issue last month by asking plagiarism expert Neil Holdway to comment on Driscoll’s use of Jones material in Driscoll’s book, A Call to Resurgence. Holdway opined that Driscoll’s brief note citing Jones was insufficient given Driscoll’s extensive use of Jones’ material. Furthermore, Driscoll’s use of Jones’ work is not limited to A Call to Resurgence. Without citation of Jones’ books, Driscoll refers to one-ism and two-ism on the Mars Hill and Resurgence websites. He also covers the same material in his 2011 book with Gerry Breshears, Doctrine. While he refers to conversations and audio of Jones in Doctrine, for some reason, Driscoll fails to cite sources which would make clear that Jones’ coined the terms and developed the concepts.
First, on The Resurgence website, Driscoll is credited with authorship of a post which appears to be the basis for a similar section in his Doctrine book.

The truth is what we will call two-ism. Two-ism is the biblical doctrine that the Creator and creation are separate and that creation is subject to the Creator. Visually, you can think of this in terms of two circles with one being God the creator and the other containing all of his creation…
The lie is what we will call one-ism. One-ism is the pagan and idolatrous doctrine that there is no distinction between Creator and creation, and/or a denial that there is a Creator…
To learn more about one-ism and two-ism and see how it plays out in all kinds of ways in our church and culture, come to the Exchange conference. Mark Driscoll, Peter Jones, Francis Chan, Kevin DeYoung, and others will teach you how to distinguish the Truth from the Lie in all of life.

The only reference to Jones is in the commercial for the Exchange conference. If one didn’t know better, one would think that Driscoll (“we will call…”) and/or the others were co-creators of the concepts.
Another reference to Jones’ work can be found on the Mars Hill website (May, 2010).

Pastor Mark has been examining the idea of One-ism vs. Two-ism recently over on The Resurgence. Make sure you check out his previous post, in which we saw how the Truth and the Lie of Romans 1:25 can be understood as a simple contrast between one-ism and two-ism. As a worldview, one-ism is antithetical to Christian two-ism because it seeks to place everything in the one circle.

Driscoll then reproduces a long section from his book Doctrine, where he lists many of the same concepts that Jones does in his books. At the end of this excerpt from Doctrine, Driscoll sources his book but not Jones:

From Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe, pp. 344–346. To learn more about one-ism and two-ism and see how it plays out in all kinds of ways in our church and culture, come to the Exchange conference. Mark Driscoll, Peter Jones, Francis Chan, Kevin DeYoung, and others will teach you how to distinguish the Truth from the Lie in all of life. Exchange is June 17 & 18 in San Diego, California. Find out more.

Then in the book Doctrine on pages 342-346, Driscoll and Breshears use the material from The Resurgence website. This same material, paraphrased lightly, can also be found in A Call to Resurgence.

The truth is what we will call two-ism. Two-ism is the biblical doc-trine that the Creator and creation are separate and that creation is subjectto the Creator. Visually, you can think of this in terms of two circles with one being God the creator and the other containing all of his creation (seeChart 11.1).
The lie is what we will call one-ism. One-ism is the pagan and idola-trous doctrine that there is no distinction between Creator and creation,and/or a denial that there is a Creator.

In Doctrine with footnote 10, Driscoll and Breshears do give some credit to Jones:

10 Peter Jones has spent a great deal of his time explaining this issue to me (Mark). Jones is one of the leading experts in the world on paganism, and much of what ensues in this section has been gleaned from time with him, for which I am very thankful. His thoughts on one-ism can be found at http://www.theresurgence.com/peter_jones_2008-01-08_audio_walking_in_the_land_of_blur and http://www.theresurgence.com/ peter_jones_2008-01-08_video_ walking_in_the_land_of_blur

Driscoll and Breshears published their book in 2011. Jones’ book One or Two was published in 2010. How hard would it have been to cite One or Two? Instead, Driscoll sends the reader to Mars Hill’s Resurgence website. Currently, the first link works but doesn’t mention one-ism or two-ism. The second link has been scrubbed. What is missing in all of this is a clear statement that the terms were coined by Jones with citations to Jones’ books properly crediting him.
As I noted in my first post on this subject, Driscoll does not ignore Jones. In fact, the conference referred to above featured Jones and Driscoll directs people to The Resurgence website where Jones’ audio and video can be found. A persistent reader might eventually figure out that the material credited to Driscoll in his website posts and books directly come from Jones. However, it is hard to see how one could come to this conclusion easily. In fact, it is unnecessarily difficult.
 

New Study of Gay Brothers Renews Interest in Genetic Factors in Homosexuality

Papers in Australia and the UK published stories late yesterday about a study recently described at the 2013 International Association for Sex Research by Alan Sanders and then yesterday by Michael Bailey at the American Association for the Advancement of Science on genetics and homosexuality. According to an abstract of a 2012 presentation of the study, the researchers conducted a genome-wide linkage study involving over 400 pairs of gay brothers. The team identified two regions of interest: the pericentromeric region of chromosome 8 and Xq28, the region previously reported by Dean Hamer in 1993. According to the 2012 abstract, the findings “suggest that genetic variation in each of these regions contributes to development of the important psychological trait of male sexual orientation.”
The study has not been published but will surely renew interest in genetic factors involved in homosexuality. According to Bailey, as reported in the Guardian, sexual orientation is not a choice. However, this does not mean that sexual orientation is completely determined by genes. It appears that the regions identified in this study contribute in some manner to variation in the trait of sexual orientation. The linkages identified in the study do not eliminate the role of other factors in sexual orientation, including the balance of hormones during fetal development.
The new study is consistent with our statement in the recent letter to Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni:

From a scientific perspective, the causes of homosexuality are only partially understood. While it is unlikely that there is one simple biological or genetic cause for homosexuality in all people, there are neural, cognitive and personality differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals which appear to have at least some basis in biology.

Truth Wins Out has an interview with Alan Sanders about the study and related issues in interpreting the role of genetics in homosexuality.
 
 
 

Over 200 Scientists and Mental Health Professionals Respond to President Museveni Regarding Uganda’s Anti-Gay Bill

In a February 3 letter to Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni, over 200 researchers and mental health professionals from around the world joined together to provide a statement of scientific consensus regarding sexual orientation. The letter was in response to Museveni’s call for evidence regarding choice of sexual orientation as he deliberates about his response to the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

The letter was distributed for comment and signature among various professional and academic listservs during a 3 day window of time. Many more wanted to sign the letter but because we wanted to get the letter to President Museveni in time for his political party retreat, we were unable to add all that asked to sign on.  However, those wanting to add their support may do so in the comments section or via email (see the letter).

Click the link to read the letter.

John Catanzaro to Appeal License Suspension

On his website yesterday, John Catanzaro, Mark Driscoll’s naturopathpartially addressed the growing controversy surrounding his license suspension.

To our valued patients and friends of Health and Wellness Institute of Integrative Medicine:

From: Dr. John Catanzaro

As many of you know, the Washington Department of Health (WA DOH) has raised concerns about our use of experimental autologous peptide vaccine in research. We disagree with the WA DOH and are appealing. We are working diligently with our legal team on our appeal.

We continue to provide personalized wellness and cancer care and all of our physicians, nurse team and admin team are here to serve you. There will be no interruption in our ability to provide you excellent quality care.

We want to sincerely thank you for your support and understanding during this difficult time. Our admin team can assist you in identifying ways you can support us during this process.

Warm Regards,
Dr. John

The Washington Department of Health did more than raise “concerns.” The naturopath board suspended his license to practice. In contrast to the message of “no interruption,” he is not supposed to practice while it is suspended. According to the Washington board, he has until Monday, February 17 to appeal.

Catanzaro only partially addressed issues which have been raised. Prior to the state board’s action, Catanzaro claimed to have a collaborative relationship with Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Ken Anderson an oncologist at DFCI, and the University of Washington for the purpose of developing cancer vaccines. In recent days, DFCI, Ken Anderson and UW have denied collaboration with Catanzaro or his clinic. If I was considering alternative care, this would be a huge red flag for me.

Another question is how naturopaths in this group are able to treat cancer at all. Naturopaths must work collaboratively with a MD or DO in order to treat malignancies in the state of Washington.* None of the medical staff listed on the website are credentialed as a MD or DO.

*WAC 246-836-210 (4) Naturopathic physicians may not treat malignancies except in collaboration with a practitioner licensed under chapter 18.57 or 18.71 RCW.

Click the link to read the State of Washington complaint.

Reference to Dana Farber Cancer Institute Removed from John Catanzaro's Clinic Website; U of WA Says There is No Connection

Since John Catanzaro’s license to practice as a naturopath was suspended in January, many websites have been scrubbed. Immediately, Mars Hill Church removed all 18 of John Catanzaro’s articles from The Resurgence website (you can see the posts here). Then, after being warned by Harvard’s Dana Farber Cancer Institute, references to the alleged collaboration between Catanzaro’s Health and Wellness Institute for Integrative Medicine and Cancer Treatment and DFCI have been removed. The current link doesn’t mention DFCI, but last week it did:

The other reference to DFCI was on Catanzaro’s Linked In page, and now that is missing as well.

Unless Catanzaro can offer proof of a collaboration with DFCI (I have asked for such evidence), it appears that he never did have a connection. He also claimed to be collaborating with the University of Washington “in the development of personalized cancer defense vaccines.” About that claim, UW spokeswoman Bobbi Nodell told me, “We cannot find a connection to UW.”*
More Scrubbing
In May, 2013, Mark Driscoll promoted Catanzaro’s ebook on marijuana on Facebook and Twitter, but those links are now broken. (Google cache tells the tale. Click the links to see the posts – Facebook; Twitter)
Mark Driscoll’s foreward to Catanzaro’s book was once on the HWIFC website, but isn’t now.

Once Catanzaro promoted Driscoll’s ebook, Puff or Pass? as a free gift for subscribing to the HWIFC newsletter. Now it is missing.
One page that hasn’t disappeared (but I suspect will soon after this post goes up) is this reference by Catanzaro to Mark Driscoll as his pastor and his article titled, “A Christian Doctor’s Opinion on Pot.”
Here is another page still up on Facebook where Catanzaro is referred to as a “licensed physician.” However, if you click the link in this Facebook post you come to an empty page on The Resurgence website.
To see all posts on this topic, click this link.
*UPDATE: This comment was added after this article was posted.