Plagiarism?
This is Part 3 of a series. The first part covers a time of prayer that was supposed to be for Black people, at the Summer Leadership Conference in 2019. As discussed there, it was manipulative and problematic for a number of reasons. At times, it rises to a level I would describe as racist, and I don’t use that word lightly. Please read that first.
Part 2 covered the The Network’s response to Racial Injustice in the Spring of 2020. It shows how the 2019 teaching and prayer echoed into Luke Williams messaging in 2020 at Vista Church in San Luis Obispo, CA. It also showed how Williams seemingly leveraged that prayer as evidence that The Network cared about Black people. However, Williams talked about the prayer inaccurately, overstating its length and stating it was unplanned, which goes against available evidence.
In this third part, I share audio from Blue Sky Church in Bellevue, WA, taught by Lead Pastor Krsh Penzar on June 7th, 2020. Comparing with Williams’ sermon on the same day reveals sharing that meets common definitions of plagiarism.
What is Plagiarism?
A plagiarism scandal played a significant role in the fall of Mars Hill Church, and articles about plagiarism scandals abound on The Roys Report.
Plagiarism is bad. It should go without saying, but I want people to understand that this is a matter which has already has wide consensus in evangelical circles.
I know we’ve heard that some leaders in the network have argued that “Spiritual Abuse” is a new term. It’s not - The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse was published in 1991 - it’s older than Grudem’s Systematic Theology and almost as old as “Complementarian”. The phrase “Spiritual Abuse” gets used correctly in the 2015 movie Spotlight about the Catholic Church’s priest sex abuse scandal.
But plagiarism is not a new term, and it’s not undefined. It’s also something the evangelical church has wrestled with, with dozens of writings by Wayne Grudem, John Piper, The Gospel Coalition, Desiring God, 9marks, a former president of the SBC, and more all weighing in on the subject in agreement: Plagiarism is unacceptable and (without repentance) disqualifying behavior for a pastor.
According to Wikipedia, plagiarism is:
Plagiarism is the representation of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work.
The Network’s preferred theologian, Wayne Grudem, in his 2018 book “Christian Ethics” says this on p. 337 (emphasis mine)
2. Plagiarism. Plagiarism means publishing part of another author’s work but claiming it as one’s own. Plagiarism occurs in educational settings when a student turns in an essay or term paper containing a block of wording taken from someone else’s writing without footnoting it or indicating that it is a quotation from someone else. Plagiarism occurs in journalism when a reporter or an opinion writer copies someone else’s wordings or thoughts without attributing them to the other person. And plagiarism occurs in sermons when a pastor preaches blocks of material he has found in someone else’s sermon as if they were his own original material.
All of these are examples of claiming (or intentionally giving the impression) that an author has himself or herself written the. material and that therefore the wording and ideas originated with him or her. But that is another form of lying because the author, by identifying himself or herself as the source of the work, is understood by readers and hearers as claiming, “These words and ideas originated with me.” That is a false claim.
Jonathan Leeman of 9marks says this in response to a reader who has discovered that their pastor is using outlines and words from sermons obtainable online (Emphasis mine):
I’m sorry to hear about your situation. I agree this is distressing. Here’s the short answer: if a pastor is consistently using someone else’s sermons or portions of sermons without giving credit, he should not be a pastor. He is guilty of falsely representing material and labor as his own when it is not. He is dishonest and not “above reproach.” And any other pastors or elders or deacons who are aware of his activity but do not inform the church are complicit in this dishonesty. They too should most likely step down from their offices.
And then later (Emphasis mine):
These qualifications stated, we cross a line when we knowingly lift exact paragraphs, even exact sentences, from another person’s commentary, sermon, or book without crediting the source. It is always dishonest, and it typically amounts to stealing.
9marks (an organization which aims to help equip healthy churches) has more than 70 results on plagiarism here: Search : 9Marks.
To summarize, plagiarism requires only two factors:
You use someone else’s creative work.
You fail to disclose that you are doing so.
Factors that do not apply:
Permission: You can plagiarize even with permission from the original creator. Absent that permission, it’s even worse.
Exact Language: Paraphrasing is still plagiarism, because you’ve plagiarized the idea. “Early to sleep, early to stir, makes a man well, prosperous, and learned” is not a new quote. It’s a blatant (and terrible) paraphrase of Ben Franklin’s famous “Early to bed, early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise”.
Intentionality. Accidental plagiarism is still plagiarism. Author Sheila Gregoire has said that she avoided reading books out of a fear that she would accidentally plagiarize them.
The use of someone else’s outline without attribution is also plagiarism - the plagiarizer is still using someone else’s creative work without attribution, even if they are filling in all the details themselves.
Exceptions appear to exist for:
Common knowledge. Desiring God (article below) cites Purdue University’s “five source” rule. If five sources say the same fact, you can just say it (example: “Los Angeles is in California”).
“Inspired by…” Work that is inspired by, but not the same as, the original work. Again - paraphrasing isn’t enough - the new work needs to genuinely be a new creative work.
The problem is simply this: someone else did work to produce something creative. If you use it without attribution, you are, as Leeman said:
(Always) Bearing False Witness: Claiming the ability to produce that work.
(Sometimes) Stealing: Depriving them rightful credit for the work they did - this one does not apply if permission is given.
Thus others would come away with a view of you based not on your capabilities, but of someone else’s, while being unaware of the person who actually produced that work.
Here’s a hypothetical to drive this home. Student A is struggling in English 101. A friend, Student B, is aware of these struggles. Student B offers their paper to Student A for them to copy, but asks Student A to “just make some paraphrases so it’s not obvious.” Student A does so. When their professor notes the obvious similarities, what happens? Well, at most universities, Students A and B would both be subject to discipline for plagiarism. Depending on the severity or potentially with repeat offenses, Students A and B could be expelled from the school:
For cases of repeated plagiarism, or for cases in which a student commits severe plagiarism (e.g., purchasing an assignment), suspension or expulsion may occur.
The standard for pastors is “above reproach”. If a student can be expelled from a secular university, a pastor is surely disqualified for this practice.
Important: Plagiarism is not always a legal issue. It can be copyright infringement, but only if the source material is under copyright. I’m not arguing in this post that any crimes have been committed.
Plagiarism in Sermons
Plagiarism can take place within churches as well. And the good news is, you don’t need to wrestle with it yourself to figure out what it is (though you can!). Many writers have written on the topic. In fact, a search for “Plagiarism” on The Gospel Coalition’s website yields 70 results (some of which only mention plagiarism tangentially). Some notable headlines:
I particularly like this quote from a summary article from 2010 by Collin Hansen:
In the scenario I described, the pastor could have largely avoided the problem just by quoting or at least citing me and my publication. No one would have faulted him. In the end, however, he wanted to perpetuate the illusion that he was an expert whom his church and book readers should trust.
In the first link above, Hayden Hefner states (emphasis mine):
At the heart of all plagiarism are two sins: (1) theft and (2) deception. When a preacher plagiarizes he is not merely making an “unwise decision” or engaging in “immature indiscretion.” He is violating both the eighth and ninth commandments (Ex. 20:15–16). He is insulting a true and holy God.
Desiring God (John Piper’s online ministry) agrees:
What Is Plagiarism? | Desiring God (emphasis mine)
“To fail to acknowledge their source is to give the false impression that they have originated with you. Hence, plagiarism steals from another and gives a false impression to your audience. Both of these factors should be of utmost concern to the Christian, and especially pastors and teachers whose should have the utmost respect for the sanctity of truth.”
My Pastor Uses Pre-Made Sermons — Should I Be Concerned? | Desiring God
Here, Piper just flat asserts that plagiarism is a problem, and then goes on to say that he believes that the use of outlines or sermons even with attribution is problematic.
And this from JD Greear, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention, wrote this: What Counts as Plagiarism in a Sermon? – JD Greear Ministries, which includes:
“I want to be zealous so as not to represent myself as more brilliant and original than I really am.”
This article from “Pro Pastor” is strongly worded but fair: Plagiarism is theft, and disqualifying for a pastor. Pro Pastor is even a site that is dedicated to sharing resources for other pastors to use, but is insistent on credit being given.
And that’s the crux of it. Network pastors are put in front of pulpits at a time when they “can’t teach their way out of a wet paper bag”, as Steve Morgan said in 2019. For them to borrow wording, outlines, or material from other pastors might make them seem more competent or caring than they are, which would in turn give them more credibility among their churches than they deserve. Even if their source has given them permission, or even told them to say something, they must give attribution to their sources: “I have something that [source] sent me to read today, this is being read in all the churches around the network.”
June 7th, 2020: Blue Sky Church
This post will refer to Lead Pastor Krsh Penzar’s sermon at Blue Sky Church in Bellevue, WA, from June 7th, 2020. I share that here. It will also refer to Luke Williams sermon from Vista Church on the same day, which was shared in full in my previous post. As with last time - the transcript here is a little rougher than it’d be for an MBT. The audio is the authoritative source, the transcript is only meant to help. I listened to this audio because I was curious how another Network church approached this topic.
“The Holy Spirit moved sovereignly…”
On June 7th, 2020, Lead Pastor Luke Williams said this in his recorded sermon for Vista Church:
Last year, at our Network Summer Leadership Conference, the Holy Spirit moved sovereignly and led in an unplanned session of prayer, where all of the leaders in the church prayed for African American, African and other Black leaders and members of the churches.
On the same day, Krsh Penzar said this in his sermon for Blue Sky Church. Remember: Penzar’s Network Area Coach is Luke Williams, or at least was at the time:
Last year, at our Summer Leadership Conference in 2019, the Holy Spirit moved sovereignly and led in an unplanned session of prayer where all of the leaders across the churches in our network were praying for our African American, African, and other Black leaders and church members of all of the churches.
It’s easy to see, but here they are combined, color coded:
Blue: Same words.
Teal Italics: Penzar Only
Black Italics: Williams Only
[Black Brackets]: Williams/Penzar say slightly different things
Last year, at our Network Summer Leadership Conference in 2019, the Holy Spirit moved sovereignly and led in an unplanned session of prayer, where all of the leaders [in the church prayed/across the churches in our network were praying] for our African American, African and other Black leaders and church members of all of the churches.
It’s the same story, with identical structure and nearly identical word choice. This meets all above definitions of plagiarism. Clearly they are both reading the same statement or outline. It seems obvious that the words “the Holy Spirit moved sovereignly and led in an unplanned session of prayer” were literally being read. Each them adds some different details, with Williams talking about tears and hugging, while Penzar talks about the number of people there. But both of them go on to use the words “it was powerful” as a conclusion.
Both of them also use “African American, African, and other Black leaders and [church] members”, in contrast to Morgan’s use of “African American, African, and Caribbean” in 2019. That’s not the language used in the Network-wide statement, which refers to “African American”, “African-American” and “black” individuals.
Additionally, As I stated before, all evidence, including from someone who tells me they spoke with Steve Morgan beforehand, was that this was pre-planned. If true, Penzar and Williams are both stating the exact same falsehood. And as I discussed last time, it being unplanned actually makes it worse: “We did this thing for Black people, but we didn’t really mean to - the Holy Spirit made us do it.”
Even more problematic, Penzar says this as the lead up to the story:
Last year, in 2019, at the Summer Leadership Conference - I wasn't originally going to share the story. And this morning, as I was looking over my notes, I felt led by the Holy Spirit to share the story. It's not that - not to brag or to boast. It's just to give you guys some understanding of how these things work. [begin story]
Penzar claims that his sharing of this story was inspired by the Holy Spirit. He also claims that the notes he was looking over were “my notes.” Unless Penzar is actually ghostwriting for Williams, then Penzar is lying here about them being his notes, and at least wildly misleading with “led by the Holy Spirit to share the story.” No common sense interpretation of “led by the Holy Spirit” would include the truth: he was given the story, and the words to use for it, by someone.
And “not to brag or to boast” is something you say before you’re about to say something that you think is worthy of a brag or boast. As covered previously, the 2019 Prayer for Black People (and Steve Morgan’s intro to it) was problematic, even racist at times.
So, unless Williams plagiarized Penzar, Penzar is plagiarizing a story that is likely false, and he is lying about why he is telling that story. And he’s doing this all, seemingly in an attempt to bolster The Network’s credentials when it comes to racism. This is conduct completely unbecoming of a pastor.
Who can I…?
There’s a second instance. This time, I’ve bolded words that are common between them. Here’s Penzar:
For each of us specifically, what it means is, you look around and you say, “Who can I pray for? Who can I encourage? Who can I empathize with? Who can I include in my life? Who can I hear and understand?” Practically thinking about the practicals that are needed in life? Who can I help coach or equip either personally, or professionally or in faith in any of the many things that each person needs to live a godly life? You're effectively asking, “Who can I love?”
[expounds for a couple minutes, I’ve replaced it with a “whoosh” sound]
You know, it's not - in the church - It's not a program. We do it naturally. It's our normal life as disciples. It's not forced, it's just part of our life.
And here’s Williams:
Instead of starting with me, and ending with me, you look around, and this kind of community asks, "What can I do to love someone today? Who can I love today? Who can I call? Who can I bring a meal to? Who can I pray for? Who can I hear and understand? Who can I encourage or spur on? Who can I include?"
And here’s Williams again:
Another thing you may do, look around the church and our community. And those who you know and ask, again, “Who can I pray for? Who can I encourage? Who can I love? Who can I empathize with? Who can I include in my life? Who can I hear and understand?” And we do this relationally. This is not a program, this is not forced. This is part of our life, because this is the Christian life laid out in the Bible.
If you want the easiest way to hear it, I recommend listening to Williams (Part 2), and then Penzar.
Williams basically says that part twice, about 9 minutes apart. The order is different the first time, and he adds another couple questions.
The second time Williams says it, the six “Who can I” questions are identical to what Penzar says, with the only difference between them being “Who can I love” being either a summary statement (Penzar), or part of the list (Williams). Both use “not a program”, “not forced”, and “part of our life.” They even lead in with “look around”.
Here’s the full comparison, which shows just how similar Williams’ second iteration and Penzar are.
Who was the author?
We don’t know where these words originated. We know that, the previous week, nearly every church put up the same statement about racism. There’s really only three options:
Williams wrote it, and sent it to (at least) Penzar, and Penzar used it.
Penzar wrote it, and sent it to (at least) Williams, and Williams used it (this seems almost impossible, but is the only one in which Penzar did not outright lie when he said “my notes”)
Someone else wrote it, and both of them used it
This sermon is on Philippians 2:1-11. That was where Williams would have been naturally preaching out of, since he was preaching through Philippians anyways. But Penzar was not - he was teaching a series that was bouncing around the Bible on “Christian Joy.” This makes me think that either Penzar got it from Williams or both got it from someone else. But these points have almost nothing to do with Philippians 2.
I have not examined the rest of these sermons deeply for more similarities, so it’s possible there are more, or that the outlines are similar.
Cedar Heights Church Announcement
Perhaps one clue is this message from Dan Digman, Lead Pastor of Cedar Heights Church in College Station, PA. He announced on Instagram on June 6th, 2020 that he would be taking a break from his normal series to address “what’s going on in our country right now.” I’ve captured the video here (including mouse clicks for the slide transitions so you can see that I haven’t edited it).
June 6, 2020: Dan Digman, Lead Pastor of Cedar Heights Church, announces he’ll be addressing “what’s going on in our country right now”.
-
Hey Cedar Heights Church. I wanted to give you a few updates as we head into Sunday. One is, and I really hope that you’ll join us on Sunday. We’re gonna take some time and look to the bible on what the Bible says about what’s going on in our country right now. How do we be unified? How do we be light in the midst of darkness and trouble and pain? How do we stand together? And we’re gonna do what we always do, is turn to the Bible for help. And so I hope that you’ll join us on Sunday as we talk about the unity that we have to change the world. I’ve been deeply heartbroken over the events of the last couple of weeks that really just shine light on events that have been happening for generations and generations. And we’re gonna pause from the series we’re in so that we can take some time to biblically address those things.
[Covid update]
I’m hopeful for what Jesus may do in our hearts as we (air quotes) “gather together” on Sunday, especially in light of events that are going on around us right now.
[closing]
The description he gives of the teaching he plans to give matches the “unity” theme that Williams and Penzar both focused on. Sadly, I don’t have a recording of Digman’s sermon from that date, but it seems quite possible that he also went with Philippians 2:1-11, and would have hit on similar points. However, without the recording there is no way of knowing. But if we imagine that Digman did use a similar outline, then it’s possible that many pastors across The Network used similar language.
Digman’s empty promise
A brief note on content, because it’s so egregious. Consider that this is what Digman said the previous year:
-
And God I pray that these men and women would know that we are with them. I was sitting here praying, but looking out on the auditorium and see - there's a whole crowd of people standing behind you guys, praying and interceding. We are with you. We are with you. We will walk with you. We will listen. We will be there. We will bleed with you. We will suffer with you.
In June 2019, Digman himself says, through tears, “We will walk with you” and “We will listen to you” and “We will bleed with you.” And in June 2020, in this video shared publicly on Instagram, Digman doesn’t even use words like “racism”, “injustice”, “crime”, or “George Floyd”. He just says “events”, repeatedly. This shows his words in 2019 to be empty falsehoods. Here’s Proverbs 31:8-9 (ESV, as always):
Open your mouth for the mute,
for the rights of all who are destitute.
Open your mouth, judge righteously,
defend the rights of the poor and needy.
When has anyone in the network ever defended the rights of the poor and needy? Instead, they are like those in Jeremiah 8:11:
They have healed the wound of my people lightly,
saying, ‘Peace, peace,’
when there is no peace.
Penzar’s Sermon
There’s a lot in Penzar’s sermon regarding race and other topics as well. It’s similar to both Williams and the previous Prayer for Black People, so I won’t analyze it, but it’s worth a listen.
In Summary
This meets all the definitions of plagiarism I shared, according to many prominent Christian authors and pastors say so, including Wayne Grudem. Not only that, but Penzar seems to be claiming that the Holy Spirit led him to plagiarize. And the story plagiarized is likely not true (though this has not been confirmed).
I’d be very interested in hearing audio from other churches from June 7th, to see if the same wording is used in additional Network churches. If you have access to this audio from more churches, feel free to contact me at not.overcome@outlook.com.
I encourage people in the churches referenced to demand answers from their pastors on what happened. If they won’t answer, or even outright deny it, that’s a pastor without integrity.