Saturday, April 25, 2015

can't remember which of Mark Driscoll's LLCs in WA has an expiration date at the end of this month?

Real Marriage: the truth about sex, friendship and life together
Mark and Grace Driscoll
Thomas Nelson
copyright (c) 2012 by On Mission, LLC
ISBN 978-1-4041-8352-0

There's the book about which some controversy swirled over not just Result Source but why Mark and Grace Driscoll didn't give a nod to Dan Allender's work (and that of, well, a few other people) in the first print edition of the book.  That editors went back and fixed the various lapses could seem to confirm that the initial problem of the Driscoll's failing to acknowledge Dan Allender's work even once was accurately assessed.

Now, the book is copyrighted to On Mission, LLC, one of a few LLCs associated with Mark Driscoll.  Let's look up the stuff about that again, shall we?
https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=603258287
ON MISSION, LLC.
UBI Number 603258287
Category LLC
Active/Inactive Active
State Of Incorporation CO
WA Filing Date 12/06/2012
Expiration Date 12/31/2015
Inactive Date 
Duration Perpetual

Agent Name CT CORPORATION SYSTEM 
Address
505 UNION AVE SE STE 120
OLYMPIA WA 98501 

Governing Persons
Member
OMCRU INVESTMENTS LLC
23632 HWY 99 STE F441
EDMONDS , WA 98026
 
Member
LASTING LEGACY LLC
23632 HWY 99 STE F441
EDMONDS , WA 98026 

So the members are Lasting Legacy LLC and OMCRU Investments LLC.  It didn't always used to be that way, did it?

http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2013/12/on-mission-llc-entity-that-owns.html

See, back when Wenatchee The Hatchet discussed On Mission on December 2, 2013 the details of the UBI looked more like this:

http://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=603258287

UBI Number603258287
CategoryLLC
Active/InactiveActive
State Of IncorporationCO
WA Filing Date12/06/2012
Expiration Date12/31/2013
Inactive Date
DurationPerpetual

Registered Agent Information
Agent NameC T Corporation System
Address505 Union Ave Se Ste 120
CityOlympia
StateWA
ZIP98501

Governing Persons
TitleNameAddress
ManagerDRISCOLL, MARK1411 NW 50TH ST
SEATTLE, WA 98107
ManagerDRISCOLL, MARK1411 NW 50TH ST
SEATTLE, WA 98107

Then the line-up of members began to look a little more corporate by January 2014
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/01/wheres-on-mission-llc-located-these.html

That there was even a side company at all to manage the royalties and intellectual property of Mark Driscoll flew in the face of his 2009 sermon from the 1 & 2 Peter series where he said he didn't start a side company.

http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/02/mark-driscoll-in-2009-i-didnt-start.html


https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=603199549
LASTING LEGACY LLC
UBI Number 603199549
Category LLC
Active/Inactive Active
State Of Incorporation WA
WA Filing Date 04/17/2012
Expiration Date 04/30/2015
Inactive Date 
Duration Perpetual


Agent Name CT CORPORATION SYSTEM 
Address
505 UNION AVE SE STE120
OLYMPIA WA 98501 


Governing Persons
Member,Manager
DRISCOLL, MARK
23632 HIGHWAY 99 STE F441
EDMONDS, WA 98026 


Member
DRISCOLL, GRACE
23632 HIGHWAY 99 STE F441
EDMONDS, WA 98026-9211


https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=603258278
OMCRU INVESTMENTS, LLC
UBI Number 603258278
Category LLC
Active/Inactive Active
State Of Incorporation CO
WA Filing Date 12/06/2012
Expiration Date 12/31/2015
Inactive Date 
Duration Perpetual

Agent Name CT CORPORATION SYSTEM 
Address
505 UNION AVE SE STE120
OLYMPIA WA 98501 
....
Member
R UNITRUST ON MISSION CHARITAB
23632 HWY 99 STE F441
EDMONDS, WA 98026 
This would appear to be the On Mission Charitable Remainder Unitrust


So, at the end of this month one of the LLCs connected to the ownership of the copyright of Real Marriage expires.

Let's bear in mind that Sutton Turner signed the Result Source contract on behalf of Mars Hill but the invoice was sent to Mark Driscoll as an individual care of Mars Hill. Even though an entire sermon series at Mars Hill was built upon the foundation of Real Marriage and Sutton Turner signed the contract, it was to promote a book that was copyrighted to Mark Driscoll by way of an LLC that stopped featuring Driscoll as a direct member some time after the LLC was created, to be replaced with membership via mediation of membership in other LLCs. 

By the way, according Colorado records On Mission LLC has moved its address but not changed its agent

look for doc#
20141776224
For ID# 20111058965

ON MISSION LLC
5550 TECH CENTER DRIVE STE 303
COLORADO SPRINGS CO 80919

That change was effective 12/23/2014

We've noted some other corporate changes earlier this year
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/01/wheres-on-mission-llc-located-these.html

But since one of the LLCs will be expiring in, oh, just a few days, it's worth revisiting the topic again.


Turner's account of how he signed the Result Source contract despite dissent and how, later, a split emerged in the BoAA as to whether to blame him alone for it and Global

http://investyourgifts.com/resultsource1/
Posted by Sutton Turner on April 20, 2015
...
In July 2011, a new marketing proposal was already in the works at Mars Hill: ResultSource. I learned of the project from the manager who was overseeing it. ResultSource was a marketing practice that purchased books through small individual bookstores that would qualify the book for the New York Times Best Seller List. Then, these books would be shipped to Mars Hill and sold in our nine church bookstores. It was proposed that being listed on the New York Times Best Seller List would increase the awareness of the church, support the upcoming sermon series, and increase church size.


I had a couple of meetings with the manager who was working on this project and at the time he stated his concern with the marketing proposal. I was not invited to any meetings to discuss ResultSource in my role as General Manager overseeing finance. However, I wrote several memos to my supervisor sharing my concern and lack of support for this marketing practice. I was relatively new to the staff and obviously not on the Board of Directors, nor was I asked to be a part of this particular decision. But due to my adamant disagreement and desire to best serve the staff and church, I wrote a memo on August 26, 2011 to my supervisor saying the following:

•The plan was poor stewardship.
•If the plan were to be revealed, it would look poorly on the stewardship of Mars Hill Church.
•If the plan were to be revealed, it would look poorly on Pastor Mark Driscoll.


A week later, I was notified that my advice was not taken and the plan to use ResultSource was approved. I don’t know who approved the plan. I don’t know what process was conducted concerning the decision. I do know that it showed that the process of making big decisions was broken and it needed to be fixed.
...
Shortly after the decision to execute the ResultSource marketing plan was made, my supervisor resigned. After him, I was the highest-ranking employee in administration. The decision had been made but the contract hadn’t yet been signed. On October 13, 2011, I signed the ResultSource contract as General Manager a full month before being installed as an Executive Elder. After signing the contract, I emailed an elder, stating my frustration with having to be the one to sign the contract when I had voiced my disagreement with it. But few in the organization (or in the media since then) knew of my disagreement. When you stay in an organization and you do not agree with a decision, you have to own that decision as your own. Unfortunately, I will always be linked to ResultSource since my name was on the contract even though I thought it was a bad idea. If given the same opportunity again, I would not sign the ResultSource contract, but honestly, my missing signature would not have stopped it. Someone else would have signed it anyway since the decision had already been made.

To date Turner has not explained why he had to be the one to sign the contract.  He would not have been the highest ranking officer ... although in the wake of Munson's resignation he could have been the highest ranking employee in the organization. But under Munson's bylaws (or Driscoll's, we've discussed the ambiguity of whose creation the 2007 bylaws ultimately was over here earlier this week) if Munson resigned as president the vice president was the preaching pastor, Mark Driscoll.

Still, there's a sense in which we should remember that Turner describes himself as willing to comply with policies he disagreed with.  So in a sense while his name will always be attached to the Result Source Contract we should move forward a bit.

http://investyourgifts.com/learning-growing-communicating-under-criticism/
Posted by Sutton Turner on April 24, 2015
...
When the criticism of Mars Hill Global began in the Spring of 2014, I wanted to communicate about what happened with Global, its history, the financials, and my mistakes. Unfortunately, I was not permitted to discuss these things just as I was not permitted to discuss the ResultSource situation in the detail that I felt it deserved. There was actually a division on the Board of Advisors and Accountability (BOAA) as some men wanted to put all the blame for both Global and ResultSource on me, but I am thankful for men who did not allow that. [emphasis added]

Eight difficult, grievous months have passed since I resigned; four sad, yet hopeful months have passed since Mars Hill held its last service. I began to work on each of these topics through blog posts several months ago with the wisdom, counsel, prayer, and blessing of many friends who are former elders and staff members at Mars Hill.

After the first blogs were published, many people asked me, “Are you stabbing Pastor Mark, Pastor Dave, Mars Hill and … in the back?”

Since leaving Mars Hill in September, I have been in frequent contact with Pastor Dave Bruskas, Matt Rogers, and other pastors with whom I directly served, board members with whom I served, and many other top leaders with whom I have served shoulder-to-shoulder while at Mars Hill. Many of these men remained at Mars Hill after my resignation and some still faithfully remain at Mars Hill selling assets and closing the organization. Our ongoing contact has been as friends, not in any managerial or oversight context with regards to Mars Hill—I’m thankful that Jesus has allowed our friendships to extend leaps and bounds beyond that. We are family in Christ.

Conspicuous for the moment by absence is mention of Mark Driscoll. Whether this omission indicates anything is impossible to say but toward the end of giving Turner at least some benefit of a doubt let's observe the following--in a way what matters is not so much that Turner signed the contract (though, of course, that matters), what matters is who was invoiced for that contract?

Courtesy of Warren Throckmorton, we have access to those invoices:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/05/27/who-at-mars-hill-church-authorized-church-funds-to-buy-a-place-for-mark-driscolls-real-marriage-on-the-nyt-best-seller-list/




By Turner's account there was a party or a group within the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability that was willing and supportive of the idea of letting Sutton Turner alone be the fall guy for controversy surrounding Result Source and Mars Hill Global.  Turner also recounts that this split the BoAA and that some objected to this idea.  Well, thanks to the reporting we've had access to in the last two years there's a very simple reason why we can accept this account as at least plausible.  Mars Hill BoAA members would have known that regardless of whether or not Sutton Turner's name was on that contract, the invoices Result Source sent were to Mark Driscoll.

There might be those who would read skeptically everything Turner has published in the last week.  That's understandable but so far, at least, while Turner's account seems to uncritically accept some "history" of MH governance that has been disproven years ago, Wenatchee The Hatchet's current impression is that Turner may have simply repeated the history of Mars Hill governance ("everybody had to all agree for anything to get done) that was told him when he arrived.  In that case he was told a basically false story he was not in a position to have corrected.  And since between the 2007 post-trial statements and Mark Driscoll's "Stepping Up" video we can't be quite sure if Jamie Munson wrote the bylaws or Mark Driscoll wrote the bylaws that were approved in 2007, Sutton Turner's story has at least remained consistent on the essential details. 

What's more, Turner's account also squares with documents leaked from Mars Hill to Warren Throckmorton.  Now if people dispute the accuracy of what Turner has said they should set the record straight.  At the moment it seems as though Turner's recent account of a split in the BoAA in which some part of the group wanted to scapegoat him seems to reinforce the validity of Paul Tripp's statement that the BoAA was incapable of providing the kind of accountability it was designed to do. How would a BoAA split on the issue of whether or not to make the guy who signed a contract on behalf of Mars Hill to rig a #1 spot on the NYT bestseller list for Mark Driscoll a scapegoat be able to hold Mars Hill leadership accountable?  As Paul Tripp stated last year about the BoAA, the most such a board could do was ensure financially restrained decisions, it could not meaningfully provide any other accountability.

Turner's account says "some men", meaning Turner's understanding was there was more than one man on the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability who wanted to basically scapegoat him over Result Source.  That's quite a claim.  We can work out from the invoices of Result Source being sent to Mark Driscoll that those who opposed the scapegoat gambit could have done so on the basis of the fact that while Sutton Turner signed the RSI contract as a Mars Hill employee it was done to promote one of Mark Driscoll's books and Mark Driscoll had become the legal president of the organization.  

As we've discussed at some length earlier this week, when the plagiarism scandal erupted and Janet Mefferd presented evidence that the Trial study guide infringed on a copyright the initial Mars Hill public response was to spread the blame on to a team of research assistants for an introductory essay that only had Mark Driscoll's name on it.  Which is to say, as scapegoating the employed help goes, there seems to be some precedent for this having been done before in the face of controversy.  Turner's story may yet get rebutted from elsewhere but for the moment what Turner has shared seems plausible (if incomplete) and would even fit what has demonstrably happened in the past when Mars Hill has reacted to public controversy. 

If anyone previously or currently associated with the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability wants to clarify or correct any of the statements Sutton Turner has lately made now might be a good time.

Friday, April 24, 2015

Turner explains that he was going to explain the Global thing but former attorneys for MH have asked him not to ... and he's not going to get into concrete numbers

The most notable excerpts are quoted in blue, but you can (and may wish to) read the whole thing.

http://investyourgifts.com/learning-growing-communicating-under-criticism/

Learning, Growing, & Communicating Under Criticism

For the past several weeks, I have been planning to discuss the lessons I have learned from events and mistakes at Mars Hill Church on my website. Earlier this week, I wrote three separate blogs regarding the ResultSource decision in 2011 at Mars Hill. Today, I planned to focus on Mars Hill Global. However, last night I received a call to explain that Mars Hill’s former attorneys did not want me to post any more blogs and also to remove what has already been communicated this week.

Iron Sharpens Iron

In a previous blog, I wrote that if you leave an organization because decisions are made that you do not agree with, then you should not go to social media and blog about it. If Mars Hill was still a church, I would not be discussing these things in a public way, but the church’s epic implosion was historic. In our modern day, a church of its size, influence, and scope has never failed in such a public way nor experienced such unprecedented circumstances. Unless, we study the leadership, events, decisions, victories, and failures—the whole history of Mars Hill Church—it may very well be repeated. My goal in discussing these events is to get a better and more full account of what transpired. Proverbs 27:17 says, “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another,” and I believe that this is just such an opportunity for sharpening other believers. I want to spare another church from facing the challenges Mars Hill faced. I also want to spare another pastor and church family from walking through what we did.

...

As I’ve said, I do believe there are helpful lessons to be shared that might prevent what happened at Mars Hill from ever happening again. Consequently, I will not be able to fully comply with the request of Mars Hill’s former attorneys. However, I will rework the Global blog post content this weekend and remove many of the financial numbers that people are so eager to know.

So apparently we were going to get some numbers but Mars Hill's former attorneys did not want Turner to be posting anything at all about Mars Hill and requested that he removed what has already been published this week.  Former attorney's?  Curious ...

UPDATE
10.23pm

As Throckmorton has noted in a blog post discussing other details of the recent Turner post, there's some striking statements in it.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2015/04/24/sutton-turner-mars-hill-churchs-former-attorneys-want-blog-posts-removed/
...
There are several stunning lines in this post. Here’s one:
There was actually a division on the Board of Advisors and Accountability (BOAA) as some men wanted to put all the blame for both Global and ResultSource on me, but I am thankful for men who did not allow that.
Turner closes with more surprises:
As I’ve said, I do believe there are helpful lessons to be shared that might prevent what happened at Mars Hill from ever happening again. Consequently, I will not be able to fully comply with the request of Mars Hill’s former attorneys. However, I will rework the Global blog post content this weekend and remove many of the financial numbers that people are so eager to know.
What could possibly be the problem with releasing the numbers?  How are Mars Hill Church’s former attorneys (plural?) even players at this point?

That there was internal division within the BoAA as to whether Turner should have been made the solitary scapegoat for whatever the scandal was for both Mars Hill Global and ResultSource is pretty amazing.  Mars Hill had historically presented the idea that the elders were all in agreement.  This could at various times turn out to not even be true but the illusion of unity could be important.Turner seems to have lifted the curtain a bit to show that in the midst of the RSI and Global controversies the BoAA split on the possibility of scapegoating Turner.

Turner has also indicated Mars Hill's former attorneys contacted him to ask that he not post more and take down what he's already posted.  What for is a mystery, and why Mars Hill's former attorneys even have any interest or business in making such an overture is also mysterious.  If they are NO LONGER Mars Hill's attorney's anyway whose attorney's are they that they should even care whether or not Turner would publish the financials associated with Mars Hill Global?  On what basis could the as yet unidentified attorneys even have for discouraging Turner from presenting for public consideration what numbers were involved?

For those who may not remember what Wenatchee The Hatchet has had to say about Global, it seems the simplest way to clear everything up would be to just make the entire ledger of where every penny went available for public consideration.  It's not so much "good people have nothing to hide" because everybody has something they'd at least rather not advertise, it's that doubt about Global was substantial enough that restoring trust would seem to be best served by 100% financial transparency, or so it would seem to Wenatchee The Hatchet.
But it looks like we won't be presented any of the numbers associated with Mars Hill Global/Go, or whatever it's called now.

the changing tune Mars Hill leaders have sung about Paul Tripp (and it turns out Turner's not going to share concrete numbers so much when he discusses Global/Go)


--> http://investyourgifts.com/learning-growing-communicating-under-criticism/

Learning, Growing, & Communicating Under Criticism

For the past several weeks, I have been planning to discuss the lessons I have learned from events and mistakes at Mars Hill Church on my website. Earlier this week, I wrote three separate blogs regarding the ResultSource decision in 2011 at Mars Hill. Today, I planned to focus on Mars Hill Global. However, last night I received a call to explain that Mars Hill’s former attorneys did not want me to post any more blogs and also to remove what has already been communicated this week.

In a previous blog, I wrote that if you leave an organization because decisions are made that you do not agree with, then you should not go to social media and blog about it. If Mars Hill were still a church, I would not be discussing these things in a public way, but the church’s epic implosion was historic. In our modern day, a church of its size, influence, and scope has never failed in such a public way nor experienced such unprecedented circumstances. Unless, we study the leadership, events, decisions, victories, and failures—the whole history of Mars Hill Church—it may very well be repeated. My goal in discussing these events is to get a better and more full account of what transpired. Proverbs 27:17 says, “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another,” and I believe that this is just such an opportunity for sharpening other believers. I want to spare another church from facing the challenges Mars Hill faced. I also want to spare another pastor and church family
from walking through what we did.

...

As I’ve said, I do believe there are helpful lessons to be shared that might prevent what happened at Mars Hill from ever happening again. Consequently, I will not be able to fully comply with the request of Mars Hill’s former attorneys. However, I will rework the Global blog post content this weekend and remove many of the financial numbers that people are so eager to know.

So much for having anything useful to say.  Discussing concrete numbers was the only thing that could have truly cleared the air about what went on with Global. 

Still, there's something to bear in mind about the timing of Turner sharing things.  Technically Mars Hill Church, the corporation, doesn't formally dissolve or expire until the end of this calendar year. 

https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=601677819
MARS HILL CHURCH
WA Filing Date12/22/1995
Expiration Date12/31/2015

https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=603353130
MARS HILL CHURCH INVESTMENT FUND, L.L.C.
WA Filing Date11/26/2013
Expiration Date11/30/2015

https://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=603349072
MARS HILL FOUNDATION FOR PLANTING CHURCHES
WA Filing Date10/30/2013
Expiration Date10/31/2015
PresidentDRISCOLL, MARK1411 NW 50TH ST
SEATTLE, WA 98107
SecretaryBRUSKAS, DAVID1411 NW 50TH ST
SEATTLE, WA 98107

All three of these corporations are ones that don't expire until the last quarter of 2015.  So all this talk online about Mars Hill being no more, it's a bit premature.  Try 2016 for that.  And in case there's any further doubt, Kerry Dodd's signature suggests there's still a legally recognized corporation that can contract to sell real estate.

Wenatchee The Hatchet can certainly endorse the idea that what happened within the history of Mars Hill can and should be discussed and done so in a way that is for the public good.  That's ... kind of what Wenatchee The Hatchet has been doing off and on since about 2008ish. 

And what's been particularly fascinating this week is to note the changing tune Mars Hill leadership has sung about Paul Tripp in the last two calendar years.


http://investyourgifts.com/resultsource3/
Posted by on
During my tenure, many people criticized the culture of Mars Hill and lack of accountability. The most stinging came from Dr. Paul Tripp who actually served on the Board of Advisors and Accountability for eight months when past mistakes and sins began to crater in on Mars Hill. Few people know that Dr. Tripp never physically attended a board meeting during that time. In fact, he had never met all of the board members in person. Furthermore, the points he attempted to make were never made in a board meeting or to all of the board members. Dr. Tripp resigned because he wanted the board to go back to local elders. He wanted local elders to govern each of the fifteen churches across five states. Many of the mistakes, sins, and problems that created the culture occurred under a local elder-led board—including the ResultSource decision. There is a tipping point where a church or organization outgrows its current governance. I’m not certain when it happened, but for Mars Hill, the local elder governance had reached the tipping point well before the summer of 2011.

http://www.i4j.org/2015/i4j-live-march-5-learnings-of-a-mars-hill-pr-guy-with-justin-dean/
Justin Dean ·  Top Commenter · Buford, Georgia
Hi Frank,

 We didn't get everything right but I do think our critics, a few in particular, were responsible for starting a snowball effect of events, all under the guise of doing gods work. These aren't honest people we were dealing with.

 Paul Tripps comments shocked me because he was barely involved at MH, never showed up for any meetings and only talked on the phone with our board a couple times. He has no context to say those things and I believe his words and actions were very self serving. What he described is not at all how it was at Mars Hill, not that he would know. I'd love to hear from Paul how he justifies what he did.

Reply ·  · March 6 at 6:57am
It's strange because Mike Wilkerson mentions Tripp in the acknowledgments section of his book, which was published in January 2011, which was three months before Sutton Turner showed up at Mars Hill and about ten months before Justin Dean showed up.

Redemption" Freed by Jesus from the Idols We Worship and the Wounds We Carry
Copyright (c) 2011 by Mike Wilkerson
Published by Crossway
Trade paperback ISBN: 978-1-4335-2077-8
PDF ISBN: 978-1-4335-2078-5
published January 15, 2011

Page 20, from Acknowledgments in Redemption by Mike Wilkerson
Through many books, lectures, and personal interactions with the faculty of CCEF--Ed Welch, Mike Emlet, Winston Smith, Tim Lane, David Powlison--and Paul Tripp, I have been personally challenged and taught how to think biblically about people and how to help them practically and pastorally.  More than anyone, they have provided the vision and guidance to put gospel counseling into practice in the local church.
Thanks to James and Heather Armstrong, Warren and Melissa Myers, Michael and Mary Van Skaik, Hank and Sharon Matthews, Cedar Springs, and Warm Beach for providing comfortable places for me to write.
In terms of the church's history and its culture Sutton Turner and Justin Dean were the newbies who may have had a less than full understanding of Tripp's understanding of Mars Hill history.
 
When Tripp joined the MH BoAA there was much rejoicing, public, for-the-record rejoicing.
Dr. Tripp joins the current Board members: Michael Van Skaik, Dr. James MacDonald, Dr. Larry Osborne, Mark Driscoll, Dave Bruskas, and Sutton Turner. This Board of Advisors and Accountability was voted upon and installed by an overwhelmingly supportive vote from the entire eldership, with every single elder who voted doing so in approval
 
Even as recently as March 2014 Van Skaik was describing how Tripp was overseeing a Board-approved reconciliation process.
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/03/mhc-boaa-sent-letters-in-2013-inviting.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/03/27/leadership-board-at-mars-hill-church/
Earlier this evening (3/26), a letter went out to Mars Hill Community Group leaders from the Board of Advisors and Accountability (BOAA)* regarding the formal charges filed by Dave Kraft in May of last year. In addition, the BOAA commented on a “reconciliation process” but did not specifically mention the 20 former pastors who asked for a mediator. ...
[from Van Skaik's letter]
... However, we are hungry for reconciliation and are continually grieved that many offenses and hurts are still unresolved. We want to seek out and hear the hurts in a biblical manner. A Board-approved reconciliation process is currently underway and is being overseen by Dr. Paul Tripp who flew to Seattle and recently spent a day with the Executive Elders. [emphasis added] He has also been in conversation with a person who is very capable of facilitating these reconciliations. Additionally, each of the Executive Elders has taken the initiative to reach out to people with whom they may need to reconcile. Our prayer is that as a church we can learn from this experience as we continue to grow in love and grace.
Then ... resignation
http://web.archive.org/web/20141031230838/https://marshill.com/2014/08/04/the-weekly-8-4-14
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/08/02/james-macdonald-resigns-from-mars-hill-board-update-on-paul-tripps-resignation/
http://marshill.com/2014/08/04/the-weekly-8-4-14
Upcoming Changes to the BOAA

Dr. Paul Tripp joined our Board of Advisors and Accountability in November 2013 and has been an immense help to our leaders over the past year. Dr. Tripp has extensive experience in discipleship and biblical counseling. Earlier this month, we made the decision together to open the opportunity for him to work with greater focus on issues directly related to his expertise, namely the continued development of our community and redemption ministries. Because simultaneously being a board member and a consultant does not allow for the required definition of independence, Dr. Tripp graciously submitted his resignation from the BOAA in early June so that he can more extensively serve our church as a consultant. We are excited to continue this work with him, and are thankful for his continued support of Mars Hill Church. [emphasis added]

Similarly, Pastor James MacDonald informed the board at the July meeting of his decision to transition from his current role on the board pending his replacement. Pastor James has been a great help in forming the current board’s direction, and we are very grateful for his time and wisdom over the last several years. He said about this transition, “I have great love and affection for Mars Hill Church and I want to make clear this change is not because I am unhappy with Mark’s response to board accountability. On the contrary, I have found him to be exemplary in his current readiness to live under the BOAA oversight. I am not resigning because I doubt Mark’s sincerity in any way. I believe in Mark Driscoll and his heart to leverage difficult lessons in service to Christ and his church in the years ahead. I am excited to continue to support that trajectory as Mark’s friend, as I focus my efforts on Harvest Bible Fellowship.”

Considering these transitions, Pastor Mark shared, “I am thankful for the service of both Paul and James, two men I admire and respect. Their service on our board has been a blessing to me and Mars Hill Church in countless ways. The amount of hours they have given as volunteers is extraordinary, especially in light of their other ministry demands.” Candidates are currently being interviewed to replace these open board positions. They will be submitted before the Full Council of Elders for their approval as soon as possible
 
The early Mars Hill account was that Tripp was stepping down because simultaneously being a board member and a consultant did not allow for the required definition of independence (the bylaws Turner drafted actually seem potentially ambiguous there, actually).
 
Paul Tripp's public explanation of why he resigned was as follows:
 
Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Mars Hill BoAA Statement

I love the gospel of Jesus Christ. I love the church of Jesus Christ. I love pastors. I love working with churches to help them form a leadership culture that is shaped by the same grace that is at the center of the message that they preach.

It's because of this love that I accepted the position on Mars Hill Church's BoAA. But it became clear to me that a distant, external accountability board can never work well because it isn't a firsthand witness to the ongoing life and ministry of the church.

Such a board at best can provide financial accountability, but it will find it very difficult to provide the kind of hands-on spiritual direction and protection that every Christian pastor needs. Unwittingly what happens is that the external accountability board becomes an inadequate replacement for a biblically functioning internal elder board that is the way God designed his church to be lead and pastors to be guided and protected.

So, since I knew that I could not be the kind of help that I would like to be through the vehicle of the BoAA, I resigned from that position.

I would still love to see the leadership community of Mars Hill Church become itself a culture of grace and I am still willing to help, but not through the means of a board that will never be able  to do what it was designed to do. [emphasis added]
 
After that, well, it seems Sutton Turner and Justin Dean have decided this year was the year to say Tripp was, like, pretty much never there even when he was on the BoAA.  Admitting that raises the question of why Tripp wasn't at the two-a-year meetings?  When were the meetings?  Was Tripp ABLE to make them?  What about that meeting Van Skaik referred to in the March 2014 letter posted by Throckmorton?  Did that count?  Tripp's assessment was that the BoAA was incapable of performing the role for which it was designed.
Whatever assurance Sutton Turner may publish as to how effective the BoAA could have and would have been in some alternate universe, Paul Tripp's public vote of no confidence above and beyond resignation suggests that Turner's appraisal of the board of advisors and accountability is an assertion that for the moment wants for evidence.  So what if the BoAA prevented another result Source.  What about Driscoll crashing Strange Fire? 
 
While Turner has decided to cast some doubt on Tripp's knowledge of Mars Hill history and culture the context for this seems to be Turner's defense of his drafting of a governance structure that he thought would solve the problems he saw at Mars Hill.  If they had done that there might be a Mars Hill in 2016 but the dissolution process continues, it seems.
 
Turner has spent this week attempting to explain how, in spite of the fact that he voluntarily signed the Result Source contract, it wasn't really what he wanted to do but if he didn't sign it someone else would have.  Who else would have? 

Turner seems to believe that what went wrong at Mars Hill was a failure of governance and in some sense there's much to agree on there.  But Turner has not presented us with much detail as to what, for instance, Paul Tripp was insisting on that Turner considered emblematic of the problems Turner thought he was solving.  It's not a given that the solutions Turner proposed even solved the problems he saw.  Bear in mind that the BoAA ended up being populated by men who were around in advisory capacities or even potentially donor capacities for the 2007 re-org.  Tripp was not necessarily wrong to have surveyed the BoAA, concluded it could not possibly actually do what it had been designed to do, and resigned.  if Turner weren't so insistent on defending the viability of his idea on paper he could explain how it failed in practice.

Meanwhile, there seems to be this gap between the praises sung about Tripp by Mars Hill the collective up until Result Source broke and then this 2015 belittling campaign. 

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Turner talks generally about laying off lovingly, skims past the 2011-2012 season of terminations and layoffs--Turner's claim Tripp never present seems contradicted by Michael Van Skaik 3-26-14 letter published by Throckmorton

http://investyourgifts.com/how-do-you-lovingly-lay-off-church-staff/

How Do You Lovingly Lay Off Church Staff?

Every year across the United States, 4,000 churches close their doors. The closing of Mars Hill Church was one of the more public in modern history because it was widely reported across social media, websites, and blogs. When I got to Mars Hill in 2011, layoffs and terminations were not done well. I would love to say that I always laid off staff in a loving way in my role as pastor. I did not. One of the greatest lessons I learned while at Mars Hill was to lead as a pastor and not a professional. Over time, Jesus taught me a lot from and with Pastor Dave Bruskas as he led our staff through the pastoral epistles (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus) each week. By the grace of God, at the end, we had gotten closer to getting it right than what we had in the past.

This looks like another case in which Turner presents Mars Hill as in bad shape and not doing well at the time he arrived.  But here he does not say that how he handled things early on was very good on his side.  That might be putting things mildly.

Let's consider just "How to Leave Well" and some of the golden nuggets of wisdom therein:

6. BE PREPARED TO SACRIFICE
If you resign, do not request or expect to receive severance pay (severance is for layoff situations). Sudden staff loss is painful and expensive for your church. The recruitment process is a costly, time-consuming distraction, and severance essentially doubles that cost. If you’re the one who wants to leave, don’t ask your church to invest in a new hire and keep paying you a salary after you’ve gone.

Turner seemed to establish a precedent that if anyone by chance did leave for sake of conscience at Mars Hill a voluntary resignation would be met with a refusal to pay severance unless the situation was unusual.  One can only wonder whether Turner himself accepted a severance package for being a quitter.  If you did quit working for Mars Hill in the 2011-2012 period out of an objection to something like Result Source (if you even heard of it) it sounds like based on Turner's managerial approach you should have expected to get no severance pay. 

But to get a fuller sense of what may have been going on in the 2011-2012 period let's consider what MH leadership has had to say for itself. 

http://web.archive.org/web/20140311063444/http://marshill.com/2014/03/07/a-note-from-our-board-of-advisors-accountability

By: Board of Advisors & Accountability
Posted: Mar 07, 2014

...
Former Staff
In a 2 year period ending in the fall of 2013, Mars Hill Church endured significant turnover of key staff members that made many wonderful contributions to the development of Mars Hill Church during their tenure. A number of these staff transitions were acrimonious. Pastor Mark and the other executive Elders own their part in any discord that could have been avoided with a better process or a more patient interaction.

During the Spring of 2013 the BOAA mandated that a thorough review be conducted with all former staff from that period, soliciting their feedback so that no needed lessons for a healthier future would be neglected. In the summer of 2013 the BOAA reviewed that report, and needed corrections to policy and detrimental management patterns had been made. A former staff elder, Dave Kraft, whose disagreements with Mars Hill policies have recently been made public, had previously communicated with the BOAA numerous times that he was satisfied with the steps we have taken to address his concerns.

The BOAA supports the policy of requiring staff to commit their signatures to a mutual agreement, such as a separation agreement, that private matters of the church learned during a season of employment not be divulged outside the organization. We have seen this practice as wise for stewarding the resources entrusted to the church while engaging in common human resources practices.
A letter from Michael Van Skaik posted at Warren Throckmorton discussed the following back on March 27, 2014
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/03/mhc-boaa-sent-letters-in-2013-inviting.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/03/27/leadership-board-at-mars-hill-church/
Earlier this evening (3/26), a letter went out to Mars Hill Community Group leaders from the Board of Advisors and Accountability (BOAA)* regarding the formal charges filed by Dave Kraft in May of last year. In addition, the BOAA commented on a “reconciliation process” but did not specifically mention the 20 former pastors who asked for a mediator. ...
text of letter read as follows]

Dear Mars Hill Leaders,
I wanted to take the opportunity to give you, the current leaders of Mars Hill Church, an update as to the status of some of what we’ve been working on as a board over the course of the past year. Thank you for all that you do. We know it is extra difficult right now, but good fruit is coming out of these trials!

On May 10, 2013, a now former elder filed formal charges against Pastor Mark Driscoll and other leaders at Mars Hill. While stating that he had not personally been sinned against by Pastor Mark, he had at least seven unnamed witnesses who would testify to the offenses and hurts he claimed, which if found to be substantiated, could result in disqualification. We requested the names of the witnesses to exercise Matthew 5:23-25, but he refused to disclose them. While the issues cited as evidence from these charges came from anonymous sources, the issues all revolved around the theme of mistreatment of fellow leaders and staff. As the governing body responsible for the accountability of Mars Hill’s senior leaders, the Board took these charges extremely seriously.

In an effort to substantiate the validity of the anonymous charges, we immediately sent out over one hundred letters to former elders and staff at Mars Hill Church from the previous two years, inviting their feedback and perspectives regarding their time on staff at the church, particularly their interactions with Pastor Mark and the Executive Elders. We received eighteen responses. [emphases added] While some were very positive, every response was read and reread, looking for anything that would disqualify Pastor Mark and any other Mars Hill leaders from serving, or that would require further investigation. Additionally, the Board looked for repetitive patterns that may also lead to potential disqualification. After a thorough review, the charges were determined to be non-disqualifying. [emphasis added] However, the Executive Elders were individually and corporately given corrective direction by the Board. Those corrective actions have been followed and have been bearing fruit over the last seven months. We have been very encouraged to see the Executive Elders learn, grow, and repent where needed.

However, we are hungry for reconciliation and are continually grieved that many offenses and hurts are still unresolved. We want to seek out and hear the hurts in a biblical manner. A Board-approved reconciliation process is currently underway and is being overseen by Dr. Paul Tripp who flew to Seattle and recently spent a day with the Executive Elders. [emphasis added] He has also been in conversation with a person who is very capable of facilitating these reconciliations. Additionally, each of the Executive Elders has taken the initiative to reach out to people with whom they may need to reconcile. Our prayer is that as a church we can learn from this experience as we continue to grow in love and grace.

You need to know that I and the other Board members have witnessed the Holy Spirit’s work in Pastors Mark, Dave and Sutton as they’ve grieved deeply over the hurts and sorrows that they’ve been the source of. Their hearts yearn for repentance and reconciliation with those that have been hurt and offended.

By God’s grace, the reconciliation process will continue to move forward one person at a time.
Michael Van Skaik
Chairman,
Board of Advisors and Accountability
Okay, so if according to Michael Van Skaik in a letter dated March 26, 2014 Paul Tripp personally flew in to Seattle and spent a day with the Executive Elders was that not in a meeting that qualified as a meeting of the Board of Advisors & Accountability?  Because just this week Sutton Turner insisted that:

http://investyourgifts.com/resultsource3/
Posted by on

... Few people know that Dr. Tripp never physically attended a board meeting during that time. In fact, he had never met all of the board members in person.

Yet if that's the case what's the deal with Michael Van Skaik, writing on behalf of the BoAA, assuring anyone that Paul Tripp was overseeing a reconciliation process and even flew to Seattle if, by Sutton Turner's account, Paul Tripp was never physically present at a board meeting of the MH BoAA during his time as a formal member of the board?  It seems like there's no way to get Van Skaik's statement in the 3/26/2014 letter to match up with Sutton Turner's assertion about Tripp.  Then again, Van Skaik's account of Turner's role in the history of MH doesn't always seem to gel with Turner's own account, either. 

Note that earlier in the letter Van Skaik described more than a hundred letters being sent out to former staff to assess whether or not Dave Kraft's formal charges had legitimacy.  There was a letter that was sent out in the spring of 2013 but the letter that was made available to Wenatchee The Hatchet by a former staffer from Mars Hill simply didn't mention anything about formal charges.
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/03/mhc-boaa-sent-letters-in-2013-inviting.html

As noted before, there's nothing in the above letter, if that's the letter that was sent out, that indicated the BoAA was attempting to assess the legitimacy of formal charges made against an executive pastor, let along Mark Driscoll.  There's no certainty this letter was "the" letter Van Skaik referred to, but even if it wasn't, it's remarkably telling that "more than one hundred" letters were sent to former staffers who stopped being employed by Mars Hill in the previous two years.  That suggests that from the time Sutton Turner started being General Manager and working with and for Mars Hill more than one hundred people were transitioned off staff by termination, lay-off or resignation.  For an organization the size of Mars Hill that's a staggering turn-over rate. 

http://investyourgifts.com/how-do-you-lovingly-lay-off-church-staff/
... Looking back at the two large layoffs we had at Mars Hill in May and September of 2014, we had a prayer time on Wednesday, September 10th. It was one of the toughest days of my professional life. In fact, I gave my resignation to our board a few days before the prayer time because I could not stomach laying off staff and then continuing at Mars Hill myself (along with a personal reason I will discuss in a later post). In August we had 133 staff members and on September 9th, we had 70 – a 52% reduction in workforce.

Van Skaik may have already generally covered the personal reason last year:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/09/19/sutton-turners-status-at-mars-hill-church-uncertain/

UPDATE FROM THE BOAA
Dear Mars Hill,

Earlier this month Pastor Sutton Turner informed our board of his intention to resign from his current staff and elder position. His personal decision is a sober acknowledgement that it would not be financially feasible for him to stay on staff as the church rightsizes itself, and secondly, not emotionally prudent to subject his family to what has been an ongoing season of personal attacks. We want to be clear: there are no disqualifying factors related to his decision.

Sutton put it this way: “Since 2007, Pastor Mark has impacted my life in a significant way. I am thankful to call him my brother, my pastor, and my friend. When I came to Mars Hill in 2011, my plan was to be here for a year, get theologically trained, and focus on the adoption of my son before entering back into the business world. Three and a half years later, I have been able to serve a church that I love as a staff member, but it is now time that I transition off of staff and return to the business world.”

We believe one of the greatest legacies Sutton has established at Mars Hill is a passion for international church planting. He has lit a powerful fire for this at Mars Hill that will last, for what I hope, will be generations. Sutton’s tireless work in this area will have an eternal impact on hundreds of people who he may never meet, but one day in heaven will get to share the part he played in their story.

We, as a board, are very thankful and grateful for Sutton’s gifting, expertise, and commitment in leading and guiding our church operations in the role of executive pastor and executive elder. We fully support his decision and will as a board be assisting the staff leadership teams in the transition of day-to-day responsibilities with Sutton through September 30th. Please join me in praying for the Turners as they seek direction and the next assignment that God has for them.

Michael Van Skaik
Chairman, Board of Advisors and Accountability

It seems the conclusion was Mars Hill could not afford to keep Turner and he felt it was unfair to his family for them to have to deal with the criticism or personal attacks that were coming his way.  as

Tough though that may well have been, go back and look at that "more than one hundred letters" referring to people transitioned off within Turner's first two years.  He had to have been able to stomach the termination, layoff or resignation of more than 100 staff since he joined Mars Hill in the spring of 2011.  What made the season in later 2014 actually different?  Mars Hill seemed like it was having a catastrophic turnover in staff and eldership from 2011-2012 while Sutton Turner, by his account, was revising governance and leadership.  Turner somewhat famously advised on "How To Leave Well" in a way that suggested that those who were still planning to quit not expect severance pay or to get much by way of encouragement.  If it was tough for Turner in 2014 what about the more than one hundred people who transitioned off between 2011 and 2012? 

And at the moment it seems that Sutton Turner's assertions about Paul Tripp have turned out to be contradicted by at least one statement by Michael Van Skaik, unless either Van Skaik or Turner are able to square the circle here and explain how Paul Tripp flew to Seattle but was nonetheless never at physically at a meeting of the BoAA.

Maybe the circle can get squared here?

Wednesday, April 22, 2015

a Teddy Roosevelt quote about critics and 1910 speech--on the evil of men who seek their own advancement "with brutal indifference to the rights of others"

http://www.theodore-roosevelt.com/trsorbonnespeech.html
... Indeed, it is a sign of marked political weakness in any commonwealth if the people tend to be carried away by mere oratory, if they tend to value words in and for themselves, as divorced from the deeds for which they are supposed to stand. The phrase-maker, the phrase-monger, the ready talker, however great his power, whose speech does not make for courage, sobriety, and right understanding, is simply a noxious element in the body politic, and it speaks ill for the public if he has influence over them. To admire the gift of oratory without regard to the moral quality behind the gift is to do wrong to the republic [emphasis added]

...

  But if a man's efficiency is not guided and regulated by a moral sense, then the more efficient he is the worse he is, the more dangerous to the body politic. Courage, intellect, all the masterful qualities, serve but to make a man more evil if they are merely used for that man's own advancement, with brutal indifference to the rights of others. It speaks ill for the community if the community worships these qualities and treats their possessors as heroes regardless of whether the qualities are used rightly or wrongly. It makes no difference as to the precise way in which this sinister efficiency is shown. [emphases added] It makes no difference whether such a man's force and ability betray themselves in a career of money-maker or politician, soldier or orator, journalist or popular leader. ...

... or pastor?

Perhaps we could extrapolate from Roosevelt's observation that it hardly matters how lofty the ideals a man may say he stands for from a podium or a pulpit, we must see and hear how speaks to and treats those under him behind closed doors to get a fuller estimate of his character.  The phrase-maker, the phrase-monger, the ready talker, whatever powers this sort of person has can be considered vices rather than virtues.  A man can say "It's all about Jesus" all he wants but that should remind us that it is all the more important which Jesus this man claims to stand for.  Or as N. T. Wright has put it, he's had to remind himself that the Jesus presented in the Gospels is not an Anglican bishop. 

There's reason enough to wonder whether or not the Jesus Mark Driscoll has told us it's all about has turned out to be a Jesus as much Mark Driscoll as a Jesus who may be found in the Synoptics and an anonymously authored gospel attributed to John.  In light of what former pastors from Mars Hill have began to share within the last year even Driscoll's most ardent fans must pause a moment to consider whether being the "great man" is enough, because Roosevelt went on in his speech to say that the qualities of greatness unbounded by a moral sense becomes vice, greatness in potential does not preclude what he described as "sinister efficiency" and it should be considered whether testimony from former leaders of Mars Hill haven't been testifying to a culture of "sinister efficiency" within the still dissolving corporation.

And for all of this, let's consider whether the unaided and un-branded Mark Driscoll has been a great man.  A devoted husband and father, sure, let's grant that because unlike Tony Jones Mark Driscoll's still married to Grace.  But being married to the same person for decades is not in itself a qualification for pastoral ministry, is it?

So take away Mark Driscoll's Docent Group research help, take away any ghost writers, take away Barna polls, take away everything but what the man himself can bring to the table and what will we have?  We may be able to find out but for the moment we should not forget that for those who would quote Roosevelt as if the Roosevelt quote were an endorsement of a Mark Driscoll, it seems more likely one could argue that the kind of trumped up and ultimately fraudulent "success" Mark Driscoll had bought for himself via Result Source Inc would be the kind of bought status Roosevelt would say is a sign of the times in a bad way, were Roosevelt alive to comment on it. 

Between the substance of what was brought to light in the plagiarism controversy; and the substance of what was admitted to by Mars Hill leadership with respect to Result Source, it's difficult to shake at least the possibility that Mark Driscoll's ministry, however meteoric its rise, was bedeviled with what might be considered a "false standard of success", whether in making use of ideas that weren't his own without properly crediting them, or whether in having had his leadership crew contract with a company to get him a status he had not otherwise attained.  By these measures alone it would seem hard to equate Mark Driscoll with Roosevelt's "man in the arena", and to go by the growing testimony of former elders who served under Driscoll and the other executive leaders, it can seem like there was a "sinister efficiency" in how decisions were made and for whose benefit those decisions got made.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/2014/december-online-only/painful-lessons-of-mars-hill.html?paging=off
Nevertheless, Clem says, the structure of Mars Hill—which over time consolidated power and financial decisions in the central organization—did play a role. "As the structure became more refined, the driving motive became efficiency and growth, and those two factors began dictating church policy."

Clem went on to explain further:

"Here's an example of what happens, then: When Driscoll quit preaching at my Ballard campus and went to Bellevue, I immediately lost 1,000 people. At $10 per head, that's $10,000 per Sunday that went out the door. And yet my people who stayed continued to give to the same budget; they actually started to give more.

"But because my attendance dropped, Central says my budget needs to drop, and that means that I have to fire a youth pastor.
 
"People don't want to lose the youth pastor and start asking, 'How much more will it take to keep Mitch?' And I'm saying, 'No matter how much more you give, we can't use a penny. It just goes to Central.' And they start going, 'This is communism!'"

And here Sutton Turner was saying this week local leadership was the problem?  Yet Clem's account suggests that at the local level pastors could feel Central Operations was so fixated on growth and efficiency that it began to take on pernicious effects.  Sadly, in his recent posts about Result Source Sutton Turner has never mentioned that the biggest reason to have been against it was that it constituted a false standard of success.

As more former pastors have come forth sharing what they saw and heard there seems to be a case made by those who worked with and for Mark Driscoll that the culture he presided over had slipped into something like Roosevelt's "sinister efficiency".   As Roosevelt put it, "Courage, intellect, all the masterful qualities, serve but to make a man more evil if they are merely used for that man's own advancement, with brutal indifference to the rights of others."  There were voices within Mars Hill before the roll-out of Real Marriage that raised the question of whether what was going to be beneficial for Mark Driscoll's reputation might potentially harm the well-being of the church.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/09/22/realmarriagememo/
http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/files/2014/09/RMGiving1pager.png

Consider the two statements from the memo quoted at Warren Throckmorton's blog

* If this information was ever made public it could be viewed by the IRS or someone muckraking that a large giving campaign was set up for the personal profit of Mark Driscoll.

* As a result of this giving campaign you will make a royalty of everyone of the books that is given away. So in a sense it could be conjectured that you're making money directly off of a Mars Hill fundraiser

It might be tempting for some of Driscoll's supporters to invoke Roosevelt's quote about "the man in the arena" but if we were to consult the full text of the speech this attempt seems utterly dubious.  These words from Roosevelt's speech, however, seem necessary to consider as Mark Driscoll appears to be regrouping for a return to the public scene and a return to public ministry.  In place of "the body politic" you could substitute "the Christian community", if you like.

But if a man's efficiency is not guided and regulated by a moral sense, then the more efficient he is the worse he is, the more dangerous to the body politic. Courage, intellect, all the masterful qualities, serve but to make a man more evil if they are merely used for that man's own advancement, with brutal indifference to the rights of others. It speaks ill for the community if the community worships these qualities and treats their possessors as heroes regardless of whether the qualities are used rightly or wrongly. It makes no difference as to the precise way in which this sinister efficiency is shown.



a Teddy Roosevelt quote about critics and 1910 speech--an interlude "Update from Pastor Mark O'Driscoll"

You probably won't find this link works any longer over at Pastor Mark TV. 

http://markdriscoll.org/2010/11/13/update-from-pastor-mark-odriscoll

But the beauty of the redundant mass-distribution of content that was characteristic of Mars Hill is that the same content was sent out across so many channels it's still fairly easy to dig up stuff that would nominally seem "gone"or winnowed out of the Google search.  One cannot do reliable research on background for news by means of Google alone, after all.

So ... let's revisit this blast from the past, from November 13, 2010.  There's a disconnect between the nobody trying to tell everybody about somebody here, spending time on a post that largely recounts the lineage of the O'Driscoll clan and how at one point they ruled ten castles in the old country.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-driscoll/update-from-pastor-mark-odriscoll/454372815517

http://web.archive.org/web/20120318071055/http://marshill.com/2010/11/13/update-from-pastor-mark-odriscoll


November 13, 2010 at 1:34pm

Dear Mars Hill,

It’s late here in Belfast, Northern Ireland (we are eight hours ahead of Seattle), and before I went to bed I felt compelled to write a quick update.

On Sunday I left with my dad, Joe, to visit Ireland—a place we’ve both always wanted to go. We started out in County Cork in southern Ireland. We traced our family heritage as far back as we could go. The records were destroyed amidst civil unrest in the early 1900s, though, so anything before 1800 is tough to get. But I still learned a ton.


The O’Driscolls ruled for three hundred years with around ten castles in southern Ireland, near the city of Baltimore, which we visited. I actually got to see one of the remaining castles, which was a moving experience. After three hundred years of rule, a new king whom we fought against overtook our land and made us peasants. Apparently we were also sea pirates who were fond of seizing ships filled with wine. We also liked to take castles from the Norse and have a lot of children while drinking stolen wine.


In 1845–1890, a massive famine hit Ireland. The nation had been 8 million people until 1.25 million died, and 1.5 million fled the country. I went to the ship dock where my great-great grandfather, James, at the age of forty-eight, sailed from Ireland with his sixteen-year-old son. His wife died, probably of typhoid or starvation. The walk to the ship took weeks for James, and the sailing took months and many died on the “coffin ships.” They landed at Ellis Island, where the Irish were not welcome. So, likely after dropping the “O” from “O’Driscoll,” he moved to Ontario, where he married a nineteen-year-old at the age of fifty-one and had seven kids while dairy farming. She hated that life, so they moved to the U.S. and settled in Grand Forks, North Dakota. He homesteaded his land and built his own home at the age of seventy-one. My dad was born on that farm. I was born there also.

My dad moved to Seattle when I was about a year old so he could get work in construction—something he continued until he broke his back over twenty years later, feeding me and my four siblings while my mom stayed home to tend to us.

As many of you know, I met Jesus at the age of nineteen after having been a non-Christian Catholic. Some Catholics are Jesus-loving Christians; I was just not one of them. My dad also met Jesus. Last summer I had the honor of baptizing him in the Jordan River along with my son and his grandson, Calvin Martin Driscoll. He and my mom, Debra, are with us at Mars Hill, which is a great blessing. My whole family has been saved and is walking with Jesus.

It’s pretty surreal to see what God has done in my life, and tracing my ancestors’ journey was been a bit emotionally overwhelming since God’s grace is so obvious in my life. From pirate to pastor is a lot of grace.


From County Cork we headed up to Dublin. There we saw the Book of Kells exhibit, learned a lot about the political “troubles,” visited a prison and a few large churches, and had a ton of fun—including a pint and some stew at the Guinness Storehouse. We also visited Cashel Rock, which was a magnificent ancient church and monastery built in the lush rolling hills of Ireland and is where Saint Patrick baptized the king of Munster.

Tonight we are in Belfast of Northern Ireland. Tomorrow I am preaching to a few thousand men at The Mandate conference in downtown Belfast. Your prayers would be appreciated. That God would take the great-great grandson of an Irish peasant who was starving to death from a long line of drunkards and wife beaters to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to a few thousand fellow Irishmen is very emotional for me and an overwhelming grace of God in my life.

On Sunday I will not be at Mars Hill. Instead, I will be preaching at Bloomfield Presbyterian Church in Belfast. Monday and Tuesday I will be training Christian leaders and yelling at young men like I do the guys at Mars Hill. Then we will return home by God’s grace and I’ll be preaching my final sermon of the year at Mars Hill before taking some time off to write a book and enjoy my high school sweetheart and our five blessings.

So, if you think of us, pray that the gospel goes forth by God’s grace. This is one of the most religious cities in the world. It is filled with ancient churches and nearly everyone says they are a Christian—half claiming Catholic and half claiming Protestant commitment. The nation is torn between the north, which is British, and the south, which is independent. There is a great need for real revival—true, deep, heartfelt, passionate, uncompromising mission to see people meet Jesus and not just be moral and religious.

Lastly, I want to thank the elders for granting me the kindness of taking this pilgrimage with my dad. The gospel of Jesus Christ is making more sense and bringing me to tears more often than any other time in my life.

A Nobody Trying to Tell Everybody about Somebody
Pastor Mark O’Driscoll

That may have been the tagline, but the mention of the semi-royal rule of the O'Driscoll clan from Mark Driscoll is an interesting thing to mention.  Driscoll has made it plain enough that he believes young men, and everybody really, should live with a legacy in mind.  If Driscoll was really thinking he was a nobody trying to tell everybody about somebody we could ask a few possibly impertinent questions.  Why capitalize "nobody"?  And why would it be worth sharing with the whole world your ancestors ruled across the range of ten castles for three centuries? 

To the extent that Driscoll publicly invoked a family lineage that included rulers, well, maybe the Roosevelt speech about the conduct and aims becoming a member of the ruling class would be all the more pertinent.  He had a warning about the kind of man he referred to as the "phrase-maker" and the "phrase-monger" and by now it would be difficult for even the most animated Mark Driscoll fan to deny that over the 18 years of ministry Driscoll was almost certainly capable of being that, and to that we'll turn.

a Teddy Roosevelt quote about critics and 1910 speech--"It is a bad thing for a nation to raise and to admire a false standard of success", revisiting Result Source

As we've revisited Teddy Roosevelt's speech that made mention of "the man in the arena" we've considered whether advocates for Mark Driscoll could or should attempt to appropriate that axiom with reference to the man.  That Driscoll's book turned out to be full of ideas that weren't his but that weren't adequately credited in first print editions has been fairly well established here and elsewhere.

Just as it seemed the controversy surrounding the subject of Mark Driscoll and plagiarism was dying down another controversy erupted.
http://www.worldmag.com/2014/03/unreal_sales_for_driscoll_s_real_marriage

There was a relatively quick response from the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability simultaneously admitting the contract was set up, that it was not illegal but that it was unwise and would not be repeated.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140311063444/http://marshill.com/2014/03/07/a-note-from-our-board-of-advisors-accountability

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/march/did-mark-driscoll-real-marriage-earn-nyt-bestseller-status-.html

That thematically leads us, actually, into another part of Roosevelt's 1910 speech: 
http://www.theodore-roosevelt.com/trsorbonnespeech.html

  Nevertheless, while laying all stress on this point, while not merely acknowledging but insisting upon the fact that there must be a basis of material well-being for the individual as for the nation, let us with equal emphasis insist that this material well-being represents nothing but the foundation, and that the foundation, though indispensable, is worthless unless upon it is raised the superstructure of a higher life. That is why I decline to recognize the mere multimillionaire, the man of mere wealth, as an asset of value to any country; and especially as not an asset to my own country. If he has earned or uses his wealth in a way that makes him a real benefit, of real use- and such is often the case- why, then he does become an asset of real worth. But it is the way in which it has been earned or used, and not the mere fact of wealth, that entitles him to the credit.
...
            It is a bad thing for a nation to raise and to admire a false standard of success; and their can be no falser standard than that set by the deification of material well-being in and for itself.  [emphases added]

Roosevelt had a specific false standard of success in mind but we would not range far from his intent in suggesting that any false standard of success would be a bad thing for any people to praise.

Like Result Source rigging your way to a spot on the New York Times bestseller list?  A false standard of success, Roosevelt declared, was a bad thing for a nation to raise and admire.  How much more then, perhaps, could this be said about those Christians who might admire the success and activity a man whose status was bought rather than earned?  And while Mars Hill insisted it never again resorted to Result Source let's not forget the iPad Mini offer. 

Now we'll just skip past the part where Roosevelt's speech touched on the necessity of an active and responsible political class and a responsible press because Wenatchee the Hatchet largely agrees.  It's the part that people quoting Roosevelt might not remember was in the speech because reading Roosevelt advocate for an active and responsible press/journalistic group was probably not why they were reading the speech to begin with.

We'll get back to Teddy, but let's revisit that Result Source was not the only promotional approach Team Driscoll resorted to.  Though not returning to RSI for the next big Driscoll book, Who Do You Think You Are featured another promotional campaign that was noteworthy, featuring the offer of an iPad Mini, pre-loaded with Driscoll books, and all you had to do to enter to win it was do something like, well, Driscoll explained it thusly:

http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2013/01/santa-driscoll-has-toys-for-you-maybe.html
http://pastormark.tv/2013/01/21/monday-giveaway-win-an-ipad-mini
Monday giveaway: Win an iPad mini!
 It’s gonna be a fun week on PastorMark.tv. Every weekday this week, I’m giving away a free prize to celebrate the release of Who Do You Think You Are? We’ve never done anything quite like this before—and who knows if we’ll ever do it again—so enjoy!

To start things off, today’s winner will receive a brand new iPad mini, pre-loaded with some of my books.

To enter, all you have to do to enter the contest is share the following phrase on your favorite social network and/or submit a review on Amazon, then submit the form below. We'll accept entries until 11:59 p.m. tonight (Pacific).

One can now wonder whether those pre-loaded Driscoll books have since had their citation errors fixed.

So as indicators of a status gained by, well, contracts and stunt promotions, it's a little hard to imagine that if Teddy Roosevelt were alive today he would necessarily endorse his quote about critics being applied to a guy like Mark Driscoll.  We can't be sure, of course, but it's a point that might be worth bringing up as we approach the 105th anniversary of the speech. 

But there is, in fact, one more thing to consider from Roosevelt's speech on its anniversary and whether it might be applicable to a man like Mark Driscoll as, no doubt, some of his fans may still hope.

a Teddy Roosevelt quote about critics and 1910 speech, the red-letter quote about "the critic" and "the man in the arena", would that man have done his own research?

We've been working through the historical and conceptual context Theodore Roosevelt was establishing in his 1910 speech prior to the too-quotable bit about the critic vs. the man in the arena.
We established it was a speech given in France to those with wealth and education and the speech was about the importance of the wealthy and educated to have some understanding of using their natural and acquired gifts for the public good, as Americans and French in potential future collaboration, more or less. 

It's with that background in mind we can see that Roosevelt was laying the groundwork for an active and engaged upperclass in contrast to the sorts of self-absorbed cynics who did not take action. 

Now, finally, the red-letter part, without having omitted the earlier practical definition of what kind of person Roosevelt was talking about.
http://www.theodore-roosevelt.com/trsorbonnespeech.html

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. Shame on the man of cultivated taste who permits refinement to develop into fastidiousness that unfits him for doing the rough work of a workaday world.

Roosevelt's axiom can certainly hold true for the man in the arena who actually fights his own fights, works his own work, and is not necessarily someone with a history of having relied on research help.
One can generally hazard a guess that Roosevelt's "man in the arena" was someone who would do his own work.  His name's kinda not so prominent in their promotion these days but at one point Mark Driscoll had glowing things to say on behalf of The Docent Group's research assistance.

http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-docent-group-and-sermon-preparation.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20120317183037/http://www.docentgroup.com/pastor_stories
Docent has been invaluable to me. I think I have had them do nearly everything but cut my grass. They have saved me hundreds of hours of work and multiplied my effectiveness. I have recommended them to lots of friends because any ministry that serves leaders who serve God’s people is a great gift. 

Mark Driscoll, Founding and Preaching Pastor
Mars Hill Church, Seattle

up through September 14, 2013 Driscoll's voice was at the top of the page.

http://web.archive.org/web/20130914143501/http://www.docentgroup.com/pastor_stories/

Just beneath him for a good stretch was ...

Mark Driscoll first contacted me about Docent Research. After his glowing recommendations of how Docent had improved his sermon preparation, I decided to give them a try.

Mark was right. Docent proved to be exceptional at scholarly research. I was especially impressed at the speed at which they could gather information. I've found their work most useful when I give them specific requests to help in my preparation for sermons.

Craig Groeschel, Lead Pastor
LifeChurch.tv, Edmond, OK

But a year later in September 2014 and a plagiarism controversy away, Groeschel's pitch looked more like this:
http://web.archive.org/web/20140902180132/http://www.docentgroup.com/pastor_stories/

Docent proved to be exceptional at scholarly research. I was especially impressed at the speed at which they could gather information. I've found their work most useful when I give them specific requests to help in my preparation for sermons.

Craig Groeschel, Lead Pastor
LifeChurch.tv, Edmond, OK

Groeschel's advocacy for Docent had been stripped of any publicly acknowledged debt to Mark Driscoll.  And now?

https://www.docentgroup.com/pastor_stories

No sign of Groeschel, either. For whatever reason Docent Group has no current use for endorsements by Mark Driscoll and Craig Groeschel.

Now it's not insignificant to ask whether or not "the man in the arena" in Roosevelt's speech should be expected to do his own work.  Was "the man in the arena" Mark Driscoll or the research help?  Because if it was the research help, well, when Mefferd's on-air confrontation with Driscoll about plagiarism happened within a week or so what was the Mars Hill response?  This will take some time.

The initial response seemed to be this:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2013/12/10/mars-hill-church-alters-statement-on-mark-driscoll-plagiarism-controversy/
http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/files/2013/12/trial-statementmarshillsmallhighlight.jpg

In 2009, Pastor Mark preached through 1 & 2 Peter in a sermon series called Trial. To help our small groups, a team of people including a research assistant, put together a free study guide that was produced in-house and was never sold. About 5 years later it was brought to our attention that it contained some citation errors. We have discovered that during the editing process, content from other published sources were mistaken for research notes. These sentences were adapted instead of quoted directly. We are grateful this was brought to our attention, and we have removed that document from our website to correct the mistake. Additionally, we are examining all of our similar content as a precautionary measure.

The doc was removed and Mars Hill removed the statement that it was never sold.  What wasn't removed for a while was the comment that a team that included a research assistant helped put together the study guide.  Let the record show that before the December 19, 2013 Tyndale press release, the public reaction Mars Hill took to Janet Mefferd publicly presenting evidence that the Trial study guide infringed copyright was to initially state the book was never sold.  Then it turned out that because it was Mars Hill retracted that statement. 

Because the Trial study guide was copyrighted to Mars Hill Church the corporation had three problems. 

First, the way the material was appropriated was not something Intervarsity Press considered to fall within Fair Use:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/december/parsing-mark-driscoll-plagiarism-janet-mefferd-apologizes.html

InterVarsity Press tells CT:

Several paragraphs from the New Bible Commentary edited by G. J. Wenham, J. A. Motyer, D. A. Carson and R. T. France published by InterVarsity Press appear in Mark Driscoll's now out of print book Trial: 8 Witnesses From 1 & 2 Peter. These improperly appeared without quotation or attribution. With proper citation the material would have been a case of fair use.

InterVarsity Press believes all writers should use great care as they do research and prepare texts for any use to make sure that proper acknowledgement is given to source material.

IVP tells CT this will be its final statement on the matter. CT has reached out to Driscoll for a response.

Secondly, the book was sold, after all:
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2013/12/09/mars-hill-church-plagiarism-controversy-citation-errors/

The statement appears to contain at least one incorrect statement. Though Mars Hill claims the book was “never sold,” it is currently on sale by at least one vendor (Logos Bible Software) for $9.95. A screen shot of the sales page is attached. - See more at: http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2013/12/09/mars-hill-church-plagiarism-controversy-citation-errors/#sthash.0vR2VaCz.dpuf
http://mobile.tyndale.com/03-company/company-news-story.php?id=237&pref=MOBILE&lang

Thirdly, the mention of the research assistance prompted Docent Group to public refute even the possibility that whatever failings there were in handling copyright, the research help they provided was not to blame.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/december-web-only/real-problem-with-mark-driscolls-citation-errors.html?paging=off

[Driscoll] forthrightly credited two researchers: Justin Holcomb, who worked for an outside research firm called the Docent Group, and Crystal Griffin, a deacon at Mars Hill. (Glenn Lucke, founder of the Docent Group, told me his firm's records show that Holcomb provided Mars Hill all the documentation needed to properly cite the IVP commentary.) With their help, he told his congregation, "I am now sending out literally thousands of pages of content a year, as well as preaching and teaching hundreds of hours of content a year."

So why were their names not on the final work?

So Docent Group founder Glenn Lucke stated for the record Holcomb could not possibly have been responsible for the citation errors. 

Blogger James Duncan appears to have found something else, a problem of fabrication.  Whoever did complete the finished product of the Trial study guide altered the footnotes in a way that presented the consultation of primary sources in secondary literature as though it were the author having done primary source consultation.
http://www.pajamapages.com/on-driscoll-its-a-straight-red/

... The three paragraphs documented by Janet Mefferd are clearly plagiarism. The footnotes in Driscoll’s work also make it fabrication. At my school, we define fabrication as follows (emphasis added):
Fabrication is the intentional use of invented information or the falsification of research or other findings with the intent to deceive. Examples:
1. Citation of information not taken from the source indicated.
2. Listing sources in a bibliography not used in the academic exercise, unless directed by the instructor to list references consulted even if not cited.
3. Inventing data or source information for research or other academic exercise.
The in-text citations in the work Driscoll copied from
The in-text citations in the work Driscoll copied from

Not only did Driscoll copy the words, he manipulated the citations in the source material to make it appear as though he had done the research himself. By so doing, it shows that he understands the value of citations and research, but decided to deceive the reader into believing that he had done that work himself. Think about the effort it took to reformat those in-text citations and add them to his book as footnotes. Why not also footnote the original book? He did know how to use them.
The relocated and reformatted citations in Driscoll's book
The relocated and reformatted citations in Driscoll’s book

In soccer, a player can get a yellow card from a referee to warn for rough play or a bad tackle. Two yellows and the player is ejected from the game. A particularly egregious foul can be awarded a straight red. No warning. No doubts. Expelled.

With the manipulation of the footnotes, Driscoll has compounded his deception, and worked even harder to mask it. No yellow here. No warning. This is an easy call: Straight Red.

So James Duncan's understanding of the evidence at hand at the time was that since the notes were changed so that it looked like Driscoll consulted Eusebius and Tertullian rather than having seen mention of their work in the secondary literature.

The Trial study guide turned out to be an example in which Intervarsity Press said the finished work infringed copyright and was not Fair Use.  It also transpired that between the initial on-air interview between Mefferd and Driscoll Mars Hill's public response was to include mention of the research help in a way that prompted the Docent Group founder Glenn Lucke to deny even the possibility that Mark's research assistant was responsible for the mistake.  This is worth bearing in mind for when we finally got to the Tyndale press release.

It was striking that even within the confines of The City Mark Driscoll was unwilling to explain to members what the controversy was if they didn't know about it already.  The press release got reference in a missive from Driscoll, around December 18 or 19, 2013
http://marshill.onthecity.org/groups/1/topics/1461734
From Pastor Mark Driscoll:
Dear Mars Hill Church,
In light of some recent controversy that you may or may not be aware of, I wanted to communicate with you, our church family. Earning and keeping the trust of people in our church that I love and have given my adult life to matters very much to me. It has taken us some time to provide a statement, and it was because we wanted to do the right thing, in the right way, with the right heart, and that required time.
 
For those who have been patient and prayerful, thank you. I am genuinely grateful for the grace I receive from the people I am honored to teach the Bible to week in and week out.
I am sorry for any concern this may have caused some of you. Because this matters greatly, it has also weighed on me heavily.
 
Lastly, I would encourage you to not feel any need to defend me. Our job is not to win arguments but to win people to Jesus Christ.
 
A full statement on the matter from my publisher and me is posted online.
A nobody trying to tell everybody about Somebody,
–Pastor Mark

For some reason Driscoll declined to mention WHAT the nature of the controversy swirling around him was, even within the confines of The City.  Now there's no doubt Mars Hill leadership was aware that material from The City had managed to get to bloggers, but Driscoll's reticence to simply explain that the controversy surrounding him involved allegations of plagiarism was whatever it was.

But there's something about the missive in its opacity, "we wanted to do the right thing, in the right way, with the right heart ... "

What was it about deciding to mention that research assistants helped assemble the Trial study guide in a way that seemed to redirect blame for copyright infringement on to them as well as Mark Driscoll was doing the right thing, in the right way, with the right heart?  Driscoll publicly took sole responsibility for the citation errors and copyright infringement ... but this seemed to happen only after it became impossible for the blame to have been shared with any of the research help.

Let's revisit what was said in the Tyndale press release. 

From the press release
http://mobile.tyndale.com/03-company/company-news-story.php?id=237&pref=MOBILE&lang
 
2.   In a separate issue unrelated to any Tyndale title, the radio host also made an allegation with regard to a study guide that was published in-house at Mars Hill. In this instance, Pastor Driscoll agrees that errors were made. He says:  
 
 In recent weeks, it was brought to my attention that our 2009 Trial study guide on 1&2 Peter contained passages from an existing work for which no proper citation to the original work was provided. The error was unintentional, but serious nonetheless.  I take responsibility for all of this. In order to make things right, we’ve contacted the publisher of the works used in the study guide, offered an apology, and agreed to work with them to resolve any issues they had. Also, I personally contacted one of the editors of the work that was not rightly attributed. Thankfully, he and I have a longstanding relationship, which includes him teaching at Mars Hill and publishing a book with us through Resurgence. He’s a godly man who has been very gracious through all of this. I am deeply thankful for his acceptance of my apology, as I deeply grieve this mistake with a brother in Christ whom I appreciate very much.

So if Driscoll took responsibility for all of what happened why was the public response of Mars Hill prior to the above-quoted press release to mention that a research team assembled the work that turned out to have infringed on a copyright?  If Driscoll was taking responsibility for all of it why couldn't he have done that from jump?  After all, it was only his name on the published product in question, anyway.  Would Roosevelt's "man in the arena" have taken this kind of path, letting a public relations response veiled in anonymity share the blame for copyright infringement in the Trial study guide with people whom none other than Driscoll himself had publicly mentioned by name before the guide was released? 

It would appear that since one of those editors at IVP was D. A. Carson Driscoll's account was he called Carson and talked with him.  What's worth considering in all of this was that two years earlier Mars Hill let a cease-and-desist go out over trademark and logo infringement concerns.  Publicly Mars Hill expressed regret about that and yet it seems striking that when the shoe was on the other foot Mars Hill was okay with letting lawyers send cease-and-desist letters to small church plants on the issue of intellectual property when it would turn out that thanks to the Trial study guide Mars Hill itself had already been guilty of copyright infringement. 

If someone were to even hope that Mark Driscoll could be Teddy Roosevelt's "man in the arena" Driscoll would have to have been demonstrated to have done his own research.  As it stood, in the month following the confrontation with Mefferd the public relations response of Mars Hill was to mention the research help and Driscoll and Mars Hill conceded error but do not seem to have ever apologized to the people who were passively given blame for copyright infringement that only had Mark Driscoll's name on it.  It would seem that the man in the arena Teddy Roosevelt had in mind would not accept full credit for something until a copyright infringement issue came up, let the corporation he was president of cast some blame on the hired help, and only take full responsibility after the news cycle and verified sources established no one else was to blame.

Somewhat incredibly, that wasn't the end of the trouble.  It wasn't just the citation errors in a couple of books.  More research and coverage would begin to reveal there were systemic problems of attribution failure in Driscoll's published work covering at least six books.  One of the more striking offenders was Real Marriage, a book that turned out to have been given a spot on the NYT bestseller list with help from Result Source.  In the rest of Roosevelt's speech he addressed the wrongness of admiring a "false standard of success".  To that concern in Roosevelt's 1910 speech we shall turn.