Plagiarism in the SBC

Last updated on: August 30, 2021 at 6:26 pm by Layne Wallace

1 Comment

Plagiarism in the SBC 2021-08-30T18:26:55-04:00 Layne Wallace

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

On June 15th of this year the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) elected Rev. Ed Litton to be the Convention’s 63rd president. The election was quite contentious as differing factions of the SBC were vying for control. Since no candidate got a majority of the votes in the initial ballot there was a run off between Litton and Rev. Mike Stone. Stone had the support of Paige Patterson and a group called the Conservative Baptist Network. With Stone’s connection to Patterson and his seeming unwillingness to do an open investigation into the sexual abuse scandal in the SBC, I would have supported Litton had I been a messenger. Litton won the election on the second ballot.

Just hours after Litton’s election, problems emerged. First, the website of Litton’s church, Redemption Church in Saraland AL, had a description of the Trinity that was outside the bounds of orthodoxy. The particular heresy espoused in the statement of faith was “partialism,” the belief that each person of the Trinity is part of God. Orthodox Christian faith has maintained that each person of the Trinity is fully God. While the insertion of the word “part” into the congregation’s statement of the Trinity seems to be an oversight, it would have been helpful to have seen that information before the election.

The second problem with Litton emerged shortly thereafter: plagiarism. After Littion’s election many people went to Redemption Church’s website to examine Litton’s work. Some of those who went were likely Stone supporters looking for reasons to disqualify Litton. Whatever their motives, what they found was troubling. Litton had copied sermon material from former SBC president J.D. Greear. Shockingly, Litton told one of Greear’s stories in first person—as if it had happened to him. Even more shocking was Litton’s explanation, he described the use of a “sermon team” to help in the process of writing a sermon. That sermon team, he argued, and he decided to use Greear’s insights on Romans for a series of sermons Litton would preach (1).

One must acknowledge that sermons are very difficult to footnote. Sermons are primarily oral and so giving credit to someone else is always awkward. Think of it this way, if your pastor said, “On page 444 of his book The IVP Biblical Background Commentary noted New Testament Scholar Craig Keener argues…” you would probably want to go to sleep. On the other hand, it is also vital for the minister to research the text in question before writing a sermon. In short, you want your pastor to do extensive research on the Biblical text for the Sunday sermon. Failure to do so is irresponsible. So, how does one give credit in a sermon? A simple, “Biblical scholars say,” or “a famous theologian argues,” would be enough to alert the hearer that the pastor is quoting someone else. If Litton had just said, “A ministry friend of mine tells a story…” or “J.D. Greear states…” there would have been no problem. Instead, he has presented someone else’s work as his own. That is a problem.

One writer on twitter said that if Litton had done this in seminary he would have been expelled. That is correct. Repeated plagiarism of the kind Litton has done would not be tolerated seminary or in any other academic setting. It would result in academic discipline and possible expulsion.

So, what should be done? Many have demanded Litton’s resignation over the issue. While I see the merits of that recommendation, it is unlikely. It would also be unfortunate. Litton is doing some very important work on the sexual abuse scandal in the SBC, and he is doing that work well. Removing him runs the risk of that work being put aside, especially if a supporter of Stone or Paige Patterson assumes the presidency in Litton’s wake.

Instead of removal, which is probably not going to happen, I think censure could be a good approach. Censure would be a public rebuke for Litton, and it would signal that plagiarism should not be tolerated. Of course, the problem is the bodies who would censure Litton are so compromised by their desire to cover up the sexual abuse scandal that their credibility is shot. Leaders of the Executive Committee tried to have a private investigation on the scandal report an in-house document and keep member churches of the SBC in the dark. Many of them opposed Litton by calling him a proponent of Critical Race Theory and maligning him as a liberal. Some of them tried to censure Greear and Russell Moore (former leader of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC) because Greear and Moore wanted to get to the bottom of the sexual abuse scandal. So, why would a censure from Litton’s opponents be treated with any seriousness at all? It probably would not be.

A third option might be more palatable to all sides. SBC presidents typically serve two terms with the second being unopposed. It would be good if Litton did not seek a second term. This would signal he took the problem seriously while not throwing the SBC into chaos in the process.

The problem is, however, Litton does not seem to understand the gravity of the situation. He did issue an apology where he states he should have credited Greear. In an interview on Aug 25th, however, Litton said he had permission to use the work so it was not plagiarism.[2] With all due respect to Litton, permission is not the issue. Credit is the issue. Litton used Greear’s work without crediting Greear, thereby insinuating the work was his own. This is classic plagiarism, and Litton does not seem to see it as such.

If Litton’s behavior has no consequence, what will happen to much lesser-known pastors? With the invention of the internet, pastors can now see dozens of sermons on their particular texts in an instant. They can find hundreds of illustrations keyed to their topic with the click of a mouse. It is vital that pastors do not follow Litton’s example. In truth, most do not. Most labor over a Biblical text to understand what God has spoken with the goal of knowing what they should speak. When they use illustrations or other material, they are quick to give credit. Examples like Litton’s serve to diminish the thousands of pastors working hard on their sermons every week. Examples like Litton’s can also give excuses to pastors who are overburdened, “If Litton can use Greear’s sermon, why can’t I?”

Litton’s plagiarism is a serious issue, and churches of the SBC should treat it as such.

1 https://baptistandreflector.org/litton-greear-say-litton-had-permission-to-borrow-from-sermon/

2 https://churchleaders.com/news/404165-ed-litton-explains-i-had-permission-which-i-think-means-its-not-plagiarism.html/3

Uncategorized

Previous Post

August 23, 2021

Of God and Afghanistan