c. 1997 Religion News Service

UNDATED _ The Evangelical Press Association, which earlier had withdrawn its ad hoc ethics committee’s censure of World magazine’s coverage of a Bible translation controversy, now has decided to take no position at all on the issue.”It is clear to us that our current Code of Ethics and our process for dealing with complaints are inadequate,”the board said in an Oct. 18 statement released Sunday (Oct. 26).”Therefore, we have decided to conclude EPA’s involvement in this case without rendering judgment.” The decision comes after articles published in March and April by the independent, politically conservative journal sparked an outcry among evangelicals about the status of the New International Version (NIV), a popular translation of the Bible.

In the articles, World reported that plans for what it called a”unisex-language”edition of the NIV were being fueled by a feminist agenda. Protests from conservative evangelicals led the International Bible Society to announce in May it was canceling plans for a proposed translation substituting gender-neutral words, such as people, for gender-specific words, such as mankind.

World’s reporting of the issue generated complaints from the Bible society and Zondervan Publishing House, the publisher of the NIV Bible, to the EPA, the professional association of evangelical journalists and publications.

In early July, an ethics committee appointed by the EPA found World had fallen”seriously short”of abiding by the organization’s code of ethics in its reporting.

But later that same month, the EPA board admitted it made a”major error”by failing to include association members on the ad hoc panel and withdrew the committee’s judgment.

Now, the board has decided making any kind of judgment on the volatile issue would only further polarize the evangelical community.”We also believe that at this point a judgment of right or wrong by EPA will accomplish no good thing,”the board said.”It may bring momentary satisfaction to one party or the other, but will not contribute to bringing clarity to the journalistic issues nor unity among brethren.” EPA officials said they now will concentrate on revising their bylaws to make their ethical code better able to handle future complaints.

The board members commended the magazine for”bringing to public attention the significant issues that arise in the translation of the Scriptures”and Zondervan and the Bible society”for their commitment to publishing and distributing the Word of God.” It also urged all parties in the dispute to be more forgiving, humble and repentant.”We regret … the rhetoric of the debate between these parties often seemed to lack charity and the debaters sometimes appeared more interested in winning arguments than in pursuing truth,”it said.

Dean Merrill, vice president and publisher of the Bible society, said he was disappointed in the decision.”It’s quite a switcheroo,”he said.”The first panel said one thing and now the board says, `Well, we’d rather not deal with this.’ So I guess this just leaves people to draw their own conclusions.” But Merrill said he believes most people already have decided how they feel about World’s reports.”There are people who say this (translation) was a sinister, diabolical plot that got its cover blown and then there are other people who say, no, this was a false alarm,”he said.

Joel Belz, World’s publisher, said the magazine”is grateful for the EPA board’s decision not to pursue any further the earlier charges of ethical violations. World accepts the EPA board’s exhortation that we conduct our journalistic task with charity.” Zondervan’s spokesman did not return phone calls.

Ron Wilson, EPA’s executive director, said there will be a discussion about the ethics code at the group’s annual convention next April in Chicago.”It won’t be a committee going off by themselves and redoing it and bringing it back as a done deal,”said Wilson.”I think what the board is saying (is) we’re just not sure how members feel.”

MJP END BANKS