La Trahison Des Clercs in the Fulness of Times
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 8:20 pm
Strangely enough, no sooner had my name and the title of my presentation been posted on the FAIR website, than several members of the FAIR Board of Directors were bombarded with demands that I be removed from the conference agenda! These demands originated from people who participate (most of them anonymously) at the Mormon Discussions message board—an online forum dominated by critics and enemies of Mormonism. The premise of their demands was that I am (allegedly) vulgar, sexist, misogynistic, etc., and that I consistently engage in what they characterize as "vicious ad hominem attacks" towards the women with whom I have participated in online debates of issues related to Mormonism.
This was the beginning; the origin of the long and now matured corruption of FAIR and NMI both from within (a generalized secularistic/liberal philosophical and ideological trend within the leadership of both) and by a bizarre and puzzling united front against Will and his work (the real target) by both NMI, key members of FAIR, and the MDB posse, headed by Bridgett Jack Myers and her gang of merry anonymous pranksters, and the Kevin Klux Klan, headed by, well, you know.
Very few, at the time, appeared to note (or even recognize, it would seem) the irrelevance and irony inherent in the attempt to suppress my presentation on the premise of my being a purveyor of vicious personal attacks.
An irony so vast, indeed, that upon even a cursory inspection of the general contents of this board, and its overall purpose, since its inception, the claims should have been dismissed out of hand.
Nevertheless, these transparently ad hominem allegations failed to achieve their objective, and I was permitted to present at the conference, notwithstanding the continuing threats which were made to "take these things to the media." My presentation was considered by many observers to have been the highlight of the 2010 conference, and it was widely reported in print and online media.
The desperation to strangle Will's entire Book of Abraham apologetic project in its cradle says something very, very salient about what these anti-Mormon - and primarily apostate - critics feared such scholarship might reveal about their own arguments and their own worldview.
Unfortunately, one of the consequences of my having "branched out on my own" in terms of my research into the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, and having obtained my own set of the high-resolution images of the source materials, was that my previously collegial relationship with Professor Hauglid steadily deteriorated from that point forward.
Hauglid's finger in this pie appears to be rather personal and petty. Hauglid also apparently holds to a 19th century production view of the Book of Abraham - in total contradistinction to official Church doctrine on the matter - and so has other intellectual bones to pick with Will and the authentic ancient document school of thought.
My FAIR presentation also ignited a veritable firestorm of anti-Schryver activity on the Mormon Discussions message board... a pervasive même has evolved such that it is now the received wisdom, in anti-Mormon circles, that not only is William Schryver the single most offensive LDS apologist on the planet, but that the Schryver thesis of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers was comprehensively "destroyed" within days of its original presentation. Of course, no one can tell you precisely how the thesis was destroyed, but there is now a universal consensus among the participants at Mormon Discussions that "all qualified scholars" have rejected my thesis as a ridiculous apologetic imposture.
At that time, several of the tiny coterie of faithful LDS/apologists here followed the links to the posts and statements Myers provided as evidence of Will's "misogyny," (all all-purpose smear long used by feminists to tar and feather anyone who dares dissent from their fervid ideological dogmas) and found that, although Will had, on very rare occasions over a posting history spanning a number of years, used some intemperate and gender specific language in locking horns with some of the most notorious and visceral female anti-Mormon critics on this board, it was, as he himself stated, never more than PG-rated, and a vanishingly small fraction of his overall posting history.
The "c" word claim was, and remains, at all events, a complete fabrication. But this became the meme and the narrative. That anyone at FAIR or NMI would actually take any of these claims seriously, let alone at face value, especially given the anonymous nature of those making the claims (against a public apologist with a real name and real reputation) and the long and sordid reputation of the group from which the claims were coming, is the real scandal in all of this. That a tiny group of left-leaning LDS intellectuals, bored with apologetics and tired of toiling away in the shadows without the "gain and glory of the world" to bask in and who's personal academic and ideological interests do not intersect well with key Church doctrines and teachings, could link arms and form an alliance with the likes of anonymous, ground-pawing anti-Mormon bigots and character asassins (a practice long perfected here before Will became a prime target) on an obscure message board, and with people like Kevin Graham, a cross between E.D. Howe, Ed Decker, and Keith Olbermann, is the real shocking aspect of this whole debacle.
But the project in view by Bradford et al, and some key figures within the leadership of FAIR, which has been, it appears now, the dismantling of LDS apologetics and the reframing of the apologetic project as a secularized, ecumenical, essentially Neo-Orthodox (seeking accommodation and integration with the surrounding secular intellectual/ideological culture) religious studies discipline, unconcerned with actually defending the core truth clams of the gospel in any direct or salient way, has now matured.
At some point in early 2011, I made mention of these forthcoming articles in an online message board post. Not long after this announcement, the same group of people who had attempted to suppress my FAIR conference presentation the previous year resurrected their scheme, and posted on their message board a seemingly well-researched exposé entitled Mormon Apologetics and Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver.
In addition, this same group of militant anti-Mormon activists11 began to secretly plot to have my forthcoming articles removed from the publication agenda of the JBMORS. They were aided by two or more individuals with close association to the Maxwell Institute, as well as an influential member of the FAIR Board of Directors, who, on this second attempt, was apparently persuaded that the allegations against me had merit: to whit, that I am a notorious misogynistic thumper who has made vicious ad hominem attacks upon women a staple of his online literary oeuvre. They framed their presentation as a sincere concern for the welfare of the women involved in "Mormon Studies," should they have the misfortune of being ambushed by me on the field of rhetorical combat.
Keep in mind, given the historical nature, tone, rhetoric, and furtive anonymity of this board's core posters, it is not plausible that any of this had anything to do with any real moral outrage over anything Will had ever said or not said to anyone. Most of the posters here, and those who were the key members of this core group of "militant anti-Mormon activists" who piled on in the most consistent and excited manner, have been themselves the worst purveyors of baseless defamation, name-calling, vile four-letter smears of the Church, its past and present leaders, and various apologists; paranoid, tin foil laden conspiracy theories and soap opera intrigues regarding the inner workings of the Church, NMI, and the personal lives of sundry apologists, and, of note in this forum, and long and steady cornucopia of literary pornography, vulgar sexual referees, and crude jokes, all aimed a the Church, Joseph Smith, present leaders, apologists, garments, Temple ordinances, and anything else that comes within striking range.
One such poster, a "Mr. Scratch" (now "Dr." Scratch) has spent an inordinate amount of his personal life over the last several years in what amounts to the paranoia marinated cyber-stalking of Dr. Danial Peterson, concocting, on a regular basis (and from his "informants") an endless stream of intrigues, tabloid smears, and wild speculations about his personal and academic life.
In other words, most of these people here could care less if Will was a misogynist or not. These labels are only used by people such as infest this swamp against out-groups and the unclean. They themselves are not bound by their own high and holy leftist moral imperatives.
The real target was Will's work on the KEP. They didn't want, and still do not want, that to ever see the light of day. They fear it.
Prior to May 2010, I had no idea that this group of people had been in contact with Dr. Bradford or anyone else at BYU. Indeed, I was entirely convinced that no one associated with the Maxwell Institute was interested in, let alone persuaded by, these outrageous ad hominem attacks. My research and writing had continued unabated. I had met with Professor Hoskisson on multiple occasions to discuss the future publication agenda for the series of articles I was preparing, and therefore, when he requested another meeting for May 16, 2010, I assumed its purpose was to further discuss these matters. I drove from Cedar City to Provo that morning for a lunch meeting with him. I arrived at the Maxwell Institute offices about noon, and was invited to join him in his office. There he succinctly informed me that Dr. Bradford had ordered that my scroll-length article be removed from the forthcoming issue of the JBMORS. He also informed me that Dr. Bradford had taken steps to prevent my being published by any journal associated with BYU, and that I was no longer welcome in the offices of the Maxwell Institute.
Yup. The real sickness here is logded at FAIR and NMI, not at the Trailerpark.
...I expressed shock that the Maxwell Institute would permit itself to be intimidated and manipulated by a group of mostly anonymous anti-Mormons associated with an obscure internet message board. Hoskisson expressed sympathy for my cause, but indicated he could do nothing. He then showed me the door, and that was that.
Indeed. Interestingly, this is precisely the same way the secular Left colonized, subverted, and eventually overtook modern academia, the media, and the foundations. Bore from within, become the establishment you despise and want to change, and then expel and freeze out any dissent.
That's how it works.
I drove home to Cedar City from Provo in stunned silence. Upon my return, I contacted a close friend who works in the Maxwell Institute offices, and inquired as to his knowledge of what had happened. He informed me that certain individuals at the Mormon Discussions message board had persuaded Professor Hauglid to deliver their allegations to Dr. Bradford, and to vouch for their truthfulness.
The Days of Our Lives. Soap Opera intrigue. Petty, venal, vain "intellectuals" vying for personal prestige and supremacy within what is supposed to be an intellectually project dedicated to defending and supporting the Church in its mission and fundamental truth claims. Unbelievable.
This had all taken place while Professor Daniel Peterson, editor of the Mormon Studies Review, was traveling in Europe. Dr. Peterson was one of the few people at the Maxwell Institute who was aware of the nature of the MormonDiscussions.com message board, as well as my posting history on that forum. He and I were among the mere handful of faithful Latter-day Saints who had ventured to that site over the years to defend the Church against the attacks made upon it by the anti-Mormons that dominate the discourse there. I made contact with him while he was on a cruise ship outside of Naples, Italy. He replied with outrage over what had happened, and assured me that, as soon as he returned, he would attempt to set matters straight. However, in the meantime, someone associated with the Maxwell Institute intentionally leaked the information concerning my discommendation to the people at Mormon Discussions. This information was promptly made public as a triumphant preface to the message board thread that contained the allegations against me.
A little Hiss within NMI. Isn't that just precious?
There immediately ensued (as those familiar with the place can well imagine) a veritable orgy of jubilant celebration at Mormon Discussions. They had set out to silence an important new voice in Mormon apologetics, and they had succeeded far beyond their wildest expectations.
Yes, but only with the connivance of other key apologists and the leadership of NMI and FAIR! That's what fries one's frontal lobes.
Of course, this "leak" from the Maxwell Institute was orchestrated with the simple purpose of setting the decision in stone before Dan Peterson could return and attempt to reverse it. (Only much later would I come to understand that I was merely a pawn in a much larger political struggle occurring within the Maxwell Institute.)
Yup. That thickened plot has already worked itself out.
At any rate, I authored a description of the affair, from my perspective, and sent it via email to Dan Peterson, Glenn Rowe, and Elder Marlin K. Jensen, the Church Historian (who had already been making public mention of the findings associated with my scroll-length article). In this email, dated May 18, 2011, I made the following predictions:
Quote:
The mob will not be placated, but rather emboldened. Having brought down one of their primary targets, they will turn their full attention to others. And they will be certain to employ the same methods on subsequent targets that they have on me (successfully) and on you (unsuccessfully, to date). Their power to intimidate through threat—whether credible or not—will be greatly augmented. Their prestige among fellow critics will be greatly enhanced. Their ability to attract new converts will be greatly strengthened.
Yes, that's as it is.
As you well know, the prime directive at MormonDiscussions.com is to destroy the effectiveness of LDS apologetics in general.
Correct. FAIR didn't understand this? NMI was wandering around in the dark regarding this?
They want to replace what they perceive as the current direction of LDS apologetics with one that will work to effect things such as the abandonment of the Book of Abraham; the formal acknowledgement of what they are convinced is the ahistoricity of the Book of Mormon; the formal renunciation of things they find objectionable in church history; etc.
Exactly. However, this has also, to some extent, become part of the general tendency and primary focus among some within the apologetics community itself. That's the startling aspect of this whole episode, not that feverish anti-Mormons would be persuing such a course.
Now, a little more than one year later, my predictions have proven accurate in virtually every respect. Furthermore, it has become apparent that it is not only the anti-Mormon critics of the Church who seek to suppress Mormon apologetics, but also a substantial number of the LDS intelligentsia who oppose apologetics per se, and who instead advocate a purely secular approach to Mormon studies—an approach that will necessarily entail the rejection of traditional faithful defenses of the restored gospel.
This is the key finding and conclusion of the entire Will Schryver/Danial Peterson firing/David Bokovoy Liberation Mormonism etc., etc. trajectory within elite academic LDS apologetics as it has developed over the last decade. The rabid apostates and the elite, secularizing intellectuals within Mormonism may disagree on a lot, but the enemy of one's enemy is still, at the end of the day, one's friend, it would appear. Hence, the one thing they do share - a desire, as Will points out, to "oppose apologetics per se, and who instead advocate a purely secular approach to Mormon studies—an approach that will necessarily entail the rejection of traditional faithful defenses of the restored gospel." This is what binds them together in a united front against Will, Peterson, the entire "old guard" at FARMS, and the Church's established teachings on key truth claims.
Wheat and chaff are continuing their long and relentless separation from one another toward alternate destinations, both in time, and in eternity.
Loran