My Death in Life

If you have not read anything about the topic at hand you can check out Collin Garabino's article here, another by Carl Trueman here, and a little of the aftermath here and here.  I know it seems like quite a bit of preliminary reading but if you are reading this then you probably have some time on your hands to skim and get caught up.

I hope to not come off damning or to place to much blame on one side or the other but to explain a few thoughts on why this issue especially troubles me.  I think this issue highlights a couple things about our Christian culture than should be brought to attention and discussed in a greater circle as a part of the Church in America.  We are in a peculiar time and place which will require extra patience, humility, and understanding before we can come to a place where we can discuss the topic in an objective and fair manner.  This is what I hope to do; in a way that evaluates an issue more than evaluating a person.  People are fickle and a blog simply does not have enough room to comprehensively evaluate a person.  Please take note of that.

The first issue that concerns me is one that Carl Trueman highlights in his article, an issue of current consequences of our culture: fame in ministry.  It is an interesting thing to ponder.  I wonder if there is any historical comparison that we can make for how we treat celebrities today in America.  We live in a culture that looks to elevate people and watch their star-lit lives moment by moment.  This type of mentality has also pervaded the church.  Now what I am not saying is that people being known is a bad thing.  Assuming positive intent, most people who become known in the church are known because of the good that they have done in their work- whether that be through ministry with people, ministry of great thought, or the ministry of living a faithful life and proclaiming God's word.  What is alarming, though, is what this ends up doing to the culture at large.

In this Driscoll event, there was an evident split.  There was one group of people that supported Ms. Mefford in bringing to light the plagiarism.  There was another group of people that defended Driscoll.  In other circumstances the issue would be brought to light and dealt with accordingly (Garabino and Trueman explain what would happen in their institutions) but because of the platform that Driscoll has found himself the issue becomes so much more.  Because of the fame itself it elevates the two general reactions to the issue- those quick to forgive and those who want justice.  These two reactions are common in every scenario where sin is brought to light.  It is the job of the fellowship of believers to take council from both sides to come with a balanced approach to the situation.  But the question becomes who is the fellowship of believers in this situation?  I have one friend who I respect greatly for their composure on such issues who would take the stance that the direct local church and publishers are those who really have a say on the issue.  This friend would say it does not help for others not directly related to chip in or talk about the issue; at that point the rest of the church is endangering itself with other sins of gossip and slander among other sinful states that is produced when you simply cannot know all the details because you are not directly involved.  This makes sense and I believe there is wisdom in that for all of us but I also believe that because of the status of the person in question there is a void left if something goes unanswered on a public level.  Also I fear what Trueman states in his article, whatever happens will be a strong message to the watching world.

The second thing that troubled me is something I have been pondering more on my own.  It seems that the Christian culture at large does not know how to respond to wrong acts.  The extremes here are either too forgiving or too damning and what we all seek is the golden mean.  To be transparent, I tend to lean on the side that is too damning.  Personally, I resonate with an ideal sense of justice that has been transgressed and I want to see things be made right.  As I have just completed college, it was drilled in my head that plagiarism is a big no-no and has severe consequences for those caught in the act.  So why should that be different for anyone else?  There were others I interacted with that countered with thoughts of forgiveness.  Driscoll screwed up, we all screw up, but now we know and we trust that we will all move on, besides Christ is being preached, good work is being done- why let this slow things down?  I believe this to be a bit dismissive.

I am not on a witch hunt.  I do not want to see Driscoll humiliated for what he has done, for I do not want to be humiliated for all the things that I have done wrong.  But I do expect accountability and a level of seriousness to be taken for my sins.  Plagiarism is wrong and should not be tolerated on any level because it is a form of theft.  Not to be trite, but that is what it is- it is theft.  I believe that by me stating that it does not damn Mark Driscoll because he plagiarized.  Saying he plagiarized is not inaccurate if he did, in fact, plagiarize.  Saying that I lied is not unfair to say if I did not tell the truth.  But this is where we find our golden mean.  Because Mark Driscoll plagiarized and because I lie does not make up our identity or put us in some weird subcategory of Christian.  It makes us humans in need for a perfect savior.

With that being said you can still have the two reactions.  Again assuming positive intent, both sides want the same things.  Both sides want to deal with the issue as it is; neither side wants to make it too big of a deal or underplay the seriousness of the issue.  Both sides want to deal with the issue quickly and seek restoration and unity of the Church on this issue. In an appropriate manner in regards to where you are and how you are connected to the situation, reason that out.  Ultimately it will be in the hands of that closest to Driscoll and his work.  What we should make sure our dialogue is centered around is that we have a perfect Savior that we have joined to die to our sins so that we may live in Him.

As my father says it is better to have dead heroes than living ones.  For the dead heroes cannot change their minds or fail us anew and the only true living hero is Christ.  My dad may have gotten that from his pastor.  I don't know, don't cite me on that.