Today, Ingrid acknowledged here that the Newsweek article she quoted was wrong when they stated that Rick Warren would be meeting with gay father’s this Sunday. She suggests that Newsweek owes her an apology because she and others trusted their “journalistic soundness”.
Perhaps more importantly, Newsweek owes Rick Warren an apology. Perhaps those of us who were too quick to criticize him for something he had no intention of doing should apologize to him as well.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, June 12th, 2008 at 7:46 pm and is filed under In Tone and Character, Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
28 Comments(+Add)
Well done, Mrs. Schlueter? She is sorry for linking to them, not for spreading falsehoods. And will she now quit receiving news alerts about other Christians from secular sources?
It’s like posting gossip about people on a billboard, and apologizing when one juicy nugget isn’t true. “I am sorry my gossip wasn’t true, but I relied on some liars for my gossip”.
If that is a Biblical apology I’m Rick Warren.
And John, Newsweek doesn’t owe Rick Warren or anyone anything, we owe THEM the Gospel. Just what do you the unsaved people who run Newsweek and other secular news sources when they see one believer using their gossip to attack another believer?
They believe we are no different than they are, and in many cases they would be correct.
The thing is, Ingrid has done this same sort of thing I don’t know how many times now. She posts a story from some media outlet, and then she finds out that story is wrong. The fact is by even posting these things in the first place, she’s setting herself up for a fall.
I’m not saying we need to hold a grudge, but it certainly seems we need to think twice about the accuracy of what’s she posting. It’s hard for me to feel sorry for her.
Rick,
When somebody spreads a story about someone that turns out to be false, the decent thing to do is apologize. I don’t care who they are, SOL, Newsweek, you, me, it doesn’t matter.
And as for giving Ingrid a little bit of credit for a taking a step in the right direction, well, my friend, don’t you think that is conistent with the ministry of reconciliation?
I wonder if Ingrid will also apologize for taking at face value (along with sooooo many others) the wrong information supplied by USA Today about Warren teaching Purpose Driven to Mormons. I doubt it. Ah well.
RAbanes
Oh Ingrid, Heal Thyself first. I heard that somewhere today.
John – she’s not sorry she did it, she’s sorry it wasn’t accurate. That’s like saying “I’m sorry you got hurt by my words” not “I’m sorry I hurt you”.
What she does is absolutely wrong. It would be like Spurgeon reading the gossip about believers from the London newspaper. It is unchristian.
When she says “After this last incident I see that this will continue to occur if I continue to link to secular articles. I’m sorry, I will stop doing it”. That will be a breath of fresh air.
JohnD is right, though – it is good to recognize a step in the right direction… I recall Peter, I believe, asking how many time an offender should be forgiven.
Yes, it would be nice if she didn’t keep making the same mistake (with the secular media), but even so, let’s accept an apology for what is there and hope for better in the future…
I hereby announce that I will link to any secular sources about any believer without any thought to the accuracy, content, or effect it may have on the person and his family.
Should any of them prove to be false, I cannot help that and I apologize in advance.
Yes, Rick, that is still a huge problem… sometimes it takes baby steps, and maybe being embarrassed one too many times will wake her up to the greater truth…
You have great faith Chris. One of the problems is when you insulate yourself with people who will not correct you but support you carte blanche. See…that is where I come in around here!
Chris – correct me if I am not remembering correctly, but I think I remember a post by her at the beginning of her new SOL in which she said God had directed her not to be so negative (or something like that) and to have an abundance of devotional pieces.
Do you remember?
I might be misinformed here, but isn’t Newsweek a respected magazine there??
Seems a right howler
Richard did you know the story was wrong,while we were discussing it ?
But where does Chris go lol jokeeeeeee
This has nothing to do with the reliability of Newsweek. It’s a pretty reliable publication, and they’ll probably print a retraction, as all legitimate sources do when they get something wrong.
And Ingrid did the same thing, so, um…
I’m actually going to go with grace on this one, on all sides.
Now, Rick Warren is being a bit of a pain…
When my kids were little and one of them did something to the other and I made them shake hands I would not let one of them just slap the hand and have that count as legitimate. I do not see where we should applaud lukewarm
“apologies” that don’t even address the subject much less have any shred of repentance. And the one about Rick Warren is tepid comapred to what she did to Miley Cyrus.
Let us see if she apologizes for “painted girls of Sodom”.
Thanks Ingrid…
iggy
Love covers a multitude of sins, and with an apology no matter what it’s perceived intent, I will forget any past articles I read and assume a fresh slate to judge by.
hey hey! Two good posts in a row at SOL! Things are looking up!
Newsweek, that “reliable publication”, also got the Koran-flushing-down-the-toilet story wrong.
Yeah – I wouldn’t consider Newsweek any more reliable than the National Enquirer, most weeks – different subjects, same standards…
They are reliable when they suit your purpose. That is duplicitous “journalism”.
John D,
Yours was a gracious acknowledgement of Ingrid’s apology.
There was a reference to a Watcher’s Lamp Article which has the following info from another source:
Is that true? If so, what do you think of Watcher’s take on the situation, that is, that Warren is responsible for what goes on at his church?
Also, I’d like to know, was Warren aware of this planned meeting with his staff when he wrote his letter saying he and his wife wouldn’t be there? Personally I find it a bit confusing to see a pastor writing such a rebuttal yet not clarifying that yes indeed others from Saddleback would be meeting with them.
Before this recent info came up I was also confused by Warren’s reply regarding the original misinformation of Newsweek. He seemed negative towards the intents of the
group, yet it was unclear if his “being out of town” was the reason he wasn’t meeting with them.
From my perspective as an outsider I don’t see anything in Warren’s public principles that would allow him to stand against his staff meeting with this group. He has made it clear that he sees no reason to separate himself from anyone. It would seem as if he were going to be in town, he could not, by his own principles, refuse to meet with this group. Or is his basic principle of “not separating” somehow violated if he feels pushed into something?
Aha, maybe there’s some extra nuance in the story that’s missing from both the Newsweek article AND Warren’s reply.
That happens sometimes.
Amy,
I am not on staff at Saddleback so I can’t answer your questions about sequence of events, Warren’s schedule, etc.
As far as the Watcher’s Lamp “take” on things is concerned, I have to confess that I personally don’t find much there that is credible. They seem to have an axe to grind, and it is certainly their right to grind away.
You might find the Orange County Register article a bit more informative. You can find it here. Saddleback will dialog with sinners of all persuasions but in this particular case, they are not at all interested in legitimizing the gay agenda.
Hope that helps.
we shouldnt attack Ingrid. we should pray for her.
Matthew 5:44
But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
J – partially agreed.
I don’t know that any of us consider Ingrid to be our ‘enemy’ – our brothers and sisters in Christ should not be enemies – or that we ‘attack’ her, specifically, but rather the thought processes and methods employed. As for persecution, I wouldn’t consider us to be ‘persecuted’ by her, Ken, etc., though I would categorize some of their efforts against other brothers and sisters as mild persecution (when viewed on the grand scheme of things).
In this particular case, I am hoping that she might learn from this error and adjust her behavior in the future…
I do pray for her, I hope she prays for me. My disagreement with her is not about her salvation or sincerity or her dedication to Christ. I do have the German/Lutheran connection with her! (did I say that?)
Mrs. Schlueter – if you read this my mother, Joyce Frueh, had a singing group named the LutherAnns in the 1960s. I have also sung on television in a Lutheran Church in Clearwater, Florida.