I’ve been aware for some time that a reporter from the New York Times wished to raise awareness about the Hana Grace Williams case. However, there’s a challenge in writing for national media, and that’s hitting on an issue in a way that merits national (in other words, generic) concern. Mr. Eckholm’s piece ran Nov. 6th. The unfortunate downside is that it didn’t allow space to discuss anything more specific than the human-interest social issues of the moment. As Linda pointed out, the need for generic balance ruled out much discussion of Pearl or the Williams case. Also, there’s no causal linkage between the Pearls and the Texas judge who beat his daughter and ended up on YouTube. Nor do the problems with TTUAC revolve around spanking, or Pearl’s advice on the matter.

Nor do the problems have much to do with the faux-pleasantly cruel, religious nutwing persona that the media applies to Pearl–and that Pearl seems to unwittingly cultivate every time he encounters a PR opportunity.

The problem, pure and simple, is that Mike Pearl does not teach Christian doctrines.

And while many commenters to the article did their best to articulate that Pearl is not representative of Christian belief and practice, many others were very happy to take him as such.

As I discussed with the Wartburg Watch gals recently, that lumping of bad apple into orange crop is going to continue happening with the media’s presentation of Pearl until Gospel-preaching Christian leaders draw a theological line in the sand.

If your church has these books, speak to them about it. If your church doesn’t have these books, speak to them about it–as this church did to its congregation. We have a theological review of the Pearls’ teachings available to assist.