The "Anti-Mormon" Bushman Challenge
Posted: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:36 am
I sit before my computer today weary and tired. As I peer down at the hands moving across the face of my pocket watch, I'm reminded that I just don't have time to follow up on all those little things I'd like to in life, so I come before you all today, humbled, seeking your help.
I had the thought that maybe I've been wrong about the L-Skinnyesque Trojan Horse usage of the word "Anti-Mormon". So I'm going to allow the testimony of an expert witness weigh heavy on my considerations. Prior to seeking an expert witness, I had explored some online materials which, quite frankly, only added credibility to my suspicions about the apologists. For instance, I consulted Wikipedia:
My first reaction was that maybe I am wrong, maybe it is very common for the term to describe "anything critical" of the church without implying dishonesty or inlammatory rhetoric. But when I followed the footnote, expecting to find some scholarly source material, I am led to none other than SHIELDS and FAIR, and particularily the "L-Gang up" on James White and Migdley's definitions! Yes, I admit, I was triumphant at that moment.
But, I hate to take my victories so easily. I felt -- since I have virtually no competition from the apologists -- I must try harder to falsify my views.
Since clearly, FAIR and SHIELDS are the worst sources one could look to for TBMs to define "anti-Mormon" in an objective way, it came to my mind that given the relative praise of Richard Bushman from both TBM and critic alike, that I should take great interest in the way he uses the word in "Rough Stone Rolling".
Back to the issue of time, I just don't have it to pursue this myself right now. So any of you who have read Bushmnan's book, please feel free to chime in and enlighten me on how Richard Bushman uses the term "anti-Mormon".
Thank you.
I had the thought that maybe I've been wrong about the L-Skinnyesque Trojan Horse usage of the word "Anti-Mormon". So I'm going to allow the testimony of an expert witness weigh heavy on my considerations. Prior to seeking an expert witness, I had explored some online materials which, quite frankly, only added credibility to my suspicions about the apologists. For instance, I consulted Wikipedia:
Wiki wrote:Today, the term [anti-Mormon] is primarily used as a descriptor for persons and publications that oppose The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, although its precise scope has been the subject of some debate. It is used by some to describe anything perceived as critical of the LDS Church,[5] whereas others reserve it for critical persons or publications who enlist dishonest or inflammatory rhetoric.[6]
My first reaction was that maybe I am wrong, maybe it is very common for the term to describe "anything critical" of the church without implying dishonesty or inlammatory rhetoric. But when I followed the footnote, expecting to find some scholarly source material, I am led to none other than SHIELDS and FAIR, and particularily the "L-Gang up" on James White and Migdley's definitions! Yes, I admit, I was triumphant at that moment.
But, I hate to take my victories so easily. I felt -- since I have virtually no competition from the apologists -- I must try harder to falsify my views.
Since clearly, FAIR and SHIELDS are the worst sources one could look to for TBMs to define "anti-Mormon" in an objective way, it came to my mind that given the relative praise of Richard Bushman from both TBM and critic alike, that I should take great interest in the way he uses the word in "Rough Stone Rolling".
Back to the issue of time, I just don't have it to pursue this myself right now. So any of you who have read Bushmnan's book, please feel free to chime in and enlighten me on how Richard Bushman uses the term "anti-Mormon".
Thank you.