David B. Speaks
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:18 pm
David Bokovoy wrote:The recent firing of Daniel Peterson as editor of the Review of Mormon Studies has been the subject of considerable attention. While almost everyone in Mormon studies has expressed concern over the way that this change was handled, several younger LDS scholars have shared their excitement over the announcement that with this move, BYU’s Maxwell Institute is seeking to increase its academic significance. In terms of the firing of Dr. Peterson, the Institute’s website states:
Quote
The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship is continually striving to align its work with the academy's highest objectives and standards, as befits an organized research unit at Brigham Young University. Our areas of endeavor include the study of LDS scripture and other religious texts and related fields of religious scholarship, including the burgeoning field of Mormon studies.
While I hate to be a pessimist, and certainly support the sentiment expressed in this declaration, I believe that the loss of Dr. Peterson will actually bring greater challenges to accomplish this goal than many have realized.
Losing Dr. Peterson will come with a heavy price. Dr. Peterson is responsible for contributing some of the most interesting observations on the Book of Mormon that the Maxwell Institute has published, including articles that explore possible Book of Mormon allusions to the Northwest Semitic goddess Asherah, as well as issues connected with Nephite kingship and authority.
Moreover, there are many LDS scholars that have made significant contributions to the Institute over the years who support Dr. Peterson and may therefore no longer contribute their work to the Institute. I’m not trying to speak for these individuals, and they may certainly think differently, but a list of Dan’s friends would include such scholars as John Welch, John Sorenson, Stephen Ricks, Don Parry, Lou Midgley, Bill Hamblin, and Royal Skousen, just to name a few.
All one has to do is simply search the Maxwell Institute’s list of authors to see the sheer number of contributions, let alone classic examples of LDS scholarship directly associated with this list of writers. If these authors no longer contribute to Maxwell publications, how will the Institute continue to foster academic research on LDS scripture? Without these scholars, who is left at BYU to contribute scholarly observations on LDS scripture? The only ones who remain are instructors in BYU’s Religious Education departments of Ancient Scripture and Church History and Doctrine.
Perhaps they are the ones who will now move the work forward into increased academic prestige?
I believe it's important to note, however, that none of the aforementioned pioneers and primary contributors to ancient studies and LDS scripture are connected with Religious Education at BYU. Historically, the contributions of BYU’s religion professors to FARMS and the Maxwell Institute have been trivial at best.
And this lack of scholarship is by design. Recent hires in the department of ancient scripture have focused primarily upon LDS seminary teachers with degrees in Instructional Technology, and Education; those currently being considered seriously for research positions in the department of Ancient Scripture include teachers with degrees in Public Administration, etc. The current Department Chair over Ancient Scripture holds a PhD in Sociology, and the former Department Chair over Ancient Scripture has a degree in P.E.
Even the few instructors in Ancient Scripture with academic degrees somewhat connected with the field do not actually have a background in ancient scripture, but instead, in an ancillary subject to ancient scripture such as Egyptology, Comparative Semitics, or Archeology. Very few instructors in the history of the department have had degrees in ancient scripture; and, not surprising, very few have contributed to FARMS or the Maxwell Institute, let alone the greater academic field of scriptural analysis outside of Mormonism. It just hasn't happened.
Without the likes of serious scholars such as Dan Peterson and his friends, how will the Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship possibly hope to align its work “with the academy's highest objectives and standards, as befits an organized research unit at Brigham Young University”?
There’s a reason why FARMS was originally founded by scholars outside of BYU's department of religious education. Religious Education, i.e. those at BYU who are left to pick up where Drs Peterson, Hamblin et al left off, are actually deeply opposed to religious scholarship. Note, for example, the introduction to former Religious Education Dean Robert Millet’s Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon:
Quote
In writing a commentary on the Book of Mormon it is not the authors' intent to suggest that a proper understanding of this marvelous book of scripture requires the interpretive helps of trained scholars. Further, we make no pretense to being such. Ours has been the blessing of opportunity. For some years we have had occasion to be both student and teacher of the Nephite record. As to the world's scholarship, it ought be observed that the best of man's learning, as it has been directed toward the Bible, has not resulted in an increase of faith in that holy book. Indeed, one of the primary purposes for which the Lord gave us the Book of Mormon was to defend the Bible and its teaching against the siege of the supposedly wise and learned. Scholars are far too wont to sift the sands of faith through screens of their own making, and in doing so often find themselves left with nothing but the rocks of their own unbelief; vol. 2 of the Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon.
This statement from Millet and McConkie in which they acknowledge that they are not trained scholars and share their perspective that academic study in the scripture leads to unbelief represents the foundation upon which BYU’s department of Religious Education has been built.
Recently, when BYU Religious Education professors such as David Seeley and Dana Pike in the Deseret Book publication Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament even made mention of the fact that most biblical scholars believe that Moses did not write the Pentateuch and that it is comprised of separate sources, these scholars were called into the Dean’s office and corrected for possibly destroying faith.
So while I applaud the efforts of the Maxwell Institute to strive to improve its efforts to align its work with the academy's highest objectives and standards, I have to ask the question that apparently no one else did.
Since the Institute has systematically removed and/or offended all of the serious contributors from BYU to the field of scriptural studies, who’s left to improve the Institute at BYU?
Perhaps Dan’s position can be given to Robert Millet.
