The Top Ten Happenings in Mopologetics, 2014
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 7:39 pm
Ah, Christmas--one of my favorite times of the year, as it brings out the sentimentalist in me. Of course, the Mopologists love Christmas, too, but for very different reasons. For instance, many of us feel warm and fuzzy about the way that Christmastime lends itself to bridge-building and togetherness. It can function as a means to learn more about the way that diverse cultures celebrate the holiday. For the Mopologists, though, it's an opportunity for retrenchment. Did you know that at least one prominent Mopologist actually celebrates "Smithmas"? Christmas is about the Savior's birth--sure. But, for the Mopologists, it's also about battening down the hatches, making a (hit) list and checking it twice, and ensuring absolute adherence to Mopologetic orthodoxy. Liberals, environmentalists, and worshippers of the Documentary Hypothesis have no place in the festivities: lumps of good ol', mined from the earth and burned for fuel exactly as it should be for them!
But I digress. This holiday season, I want instead to examine some interesting manifestations of the Christmas spirit in non-U.S. locales. In doing so, I think we can observe some fascinating parallels with classic-FARMS Mopologetics. For example, have you ever heard of the Yule Lads?
These simultaneously jolly and sinister characters are a key feature of the Christmas season in Iceland. According to tradition, each of these lads comes at an appointed time and has a specially designated task, and they have colorful names, like "Meat-Hook," "Doorway-Sniffer," and "Stubby." Stekkjarstaur (a.k.a. "Sheep-cote Clod"), for instance, turns up between December 12-25, and he's described as being someone who "Harasses sheep, but is impaired by his stiff peg-legs." Wikipedia helpfully informs us that, "The Yule Lads were originally portrayed as being mischievous, or even criminal, pranksters who would steal from, or in other way [sic] harass the population." In a year when average, TM-carrying TBMs were slammed for their failure to stay up-to-date on important Mopologetic issues and anti-Mormon literature, I think you'll immediately realize how and why this is reminiscent of Mopologetics.
Above: Is Professor Emeritus Louis Midgley (PhD, Brown) down for some sausage this holiday season?
And just imagine the mirth to be had! I've heard rumors that some students of Mopologetics have devised a game wherein they try to determine which prominent Mopologist resembles which Yule Lad. For instance, who "Has an abnormally large nose and an acute sense of smell"?
Above: DCP (Ph.D., UCLA) calls himself a "dejected loser." But which Yule Lad is he most similar to?
Which Mopologist is most similar to "Þvörusleikir," a.k.a., "Spoon-Licker," who "Steals Þvörur (a type of a wooden spoon with a long handle - I. þvara) to lick" and also "Is extremely thin due to malnutrition"? Who "Likes to slam doors, especially during the night"? Would that be Allen Wyatt, perhaps? Or Steve Smoot? Or John Gee? Kerry Muhlestein? You'll have to join in the holiday merriment to find out!
What this means, of course, is that it's time once again to revisit the days of 2014 past. It's time, dear friends and colleagues, for you to join me, the B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetics Studies at Cassius University, as we take a look back at the Top Ten Happenings in Mopologetics, 2014.
10. John Dehlin is Called a "Family Destroyer." In spite of the fact that we're now some two-and-a-half years out from the monumental events of June 2012, we nonetheless continue to feel aftershocks from the crumbling of FARMS and the booting of the classic-FARMS Mopologists from the Maxwell Institute. Indeed, right around the second anniversary of the event (which also coincided with coverage of Church discipline for John Dehlin and "Ordain Women" leader Kate Kelly), Daniel Peterson took the opportunity to lash out viciously at the "Mormon Stories" founder, who was the subject of a "hit piece" that many felt was pivotal to the Mopologists' getting canned from the Maxwell Institute:
Readers in the know, however, will remember that Dehlin had conducted a somewhat informal survey showing quite the opposite: i.e., that "testimonies [had] been destroyed" and "families [had] been grievously wounded" by the activities of the apologists--including Peterson himself. The numbers in Dehlin's survey, of course, carried a lot more evidentiary weight compared to DCP's "I know quite a few of them." But the incident is noteworthy as a key event in 2014 insofar as it demonstrates the ongoing tension between classic-FARMS apologists and the "New Order Mormon" movement which Dehlin, to a certain extent, represents.
9. The Essays. 2014 saw the institutional Church itself getting heavily into the Mopologetics game via the issuance of a series of essays meant to "explain" problematic aspects of LDS doctrine and history. Perhaps most notable among these was the essay dealing with Joseph Smith's polygamy--including his marriage to other men's wives, and his coupling with brides as young as 14 years old. This particular essay received widespread coverage in the mainstream news media, and led to something like a small uproar in the LDS community, with many members expressing shock and dismay over the fact that, in spite of decades spent in the Church, they never knew anything about this particular tidbit.
The release of the essay once again highlighted the central insight of Dr. Shades's "Chapel/Internet Mormon" distinction: members of the LDS Church can often be categorized according to their knowledge of problematic issues, information which suddenly became much more widely available after the advent of the Internet. The Mopologists, as always, in typical Internet Mormon fashion, insisted that they knew about these issues all along, in spite of their having grown up with no Internet. The boneheaded Latter-day Saints who are only just now finding out were too lazy to get up off their duffs and explore the issues for themselves. When asked which Church sources the Saints should have consulted, the apologists responded by referring them to materials from FARMS, FAIR, and Mormon Interpreter.
8. The October Surprise is a Dud. After a long, drawn-out set-up, ex-Mormon and 2nd Anointing whistle-blower Tom Phillips finally unveiled his long-awaited "October Surprise": he had successfully managed to get a court case going against LDS Prophet, Seer, and Revelator Thomas Monson, who was being sued for "fraud." The announcement was met with excitement in some circles, skepticism in others, and deep disappointment in yet others. The event was, without question, a circus-type event for online Mormonism, though as we all know, the case was eventually tossed out of court.
At first glance, it may not be entirely clear how and why the "October Surprise" is a Mopologetics-related event, but in hindsight, it seems clearer than ever that it was yet another key moment in the complicated web that constitutes LDS apologetic behavior and psychology. Along with last year's "Swedish Rescue," the "October Surprise" seems like part of the puzzle relating to the issuance of The Essays. The apologists had always (ostensibly) been in the business of "defending" the Church, and both of these events, along with the essays, represent massive failures on their part. While everyone watched and waited, speculating on the outcome of Phillips's case, the Mopologists sat quietly, hoping and praying for a dismissal, and yet to an extent, one could detect a certain sheepishness in their commentary. The fact is, events like the Swedish Rescue and the October Surprise would probably not have been possible in the same sense without the heavy dissemination of problematic issues (and the attendant nastiness and aggressiveness) that the apologists have been engaging in for some 30+ years.
7. Greg Smith and DCP Accuse the Maxwell Institute of Evidence Tampering and Conspiracy. In yet another instance of fallout from the 2012 ousting of the classic-FARMS Mopologists, Greg Smith and Daniel Peterson engaged in a series of vague accusations concerning the events of June 2012:
In a massive "Comments" thread on Sic et Non, Smith and Peterson carried on, accusing Maxwell Institute employees of lying, conspiracy, and covering up the truth. Once again, this represents a battle on the part of the apologists to "control the narrative," as FAIR's Mike Parker put it. To most observers, the removal of the classic-FARMS apologists was seen as a positive change: no longer would the toxic smear campaigns, hit pieces, and character assassinations be "officially" sanctioned under the imprimatur of the MI and BYU. The firings were acknowledgement of what both critics and even friends of the apologists had been saying all along--that these sort of antics have no place in serious, scholarly discourse, and the firings were a repudiation of virtually everything that the Mopologists had done. This doesn't fit with the apologists' own view of themselves, though, and with no evidence whatsoever, they continue to insist that the "ousting" was a purely bureaucratic matter--a coup staged by a handful of closeted, liberal apostates who've infiltrated the Maxwell Institute.
Whatever the case may be, one wonders if the full truth of the incident will ever come to light.
6. Women Trouble. If 2013 was marred by the apologists' problematic relationship to race, 2014 saw them awkwardly trying to engage with issues of gender. 2014 marked (among other things), a rather uncomfortable tokenism applied to African American political candidate Mia Love, and also the announcement of the Ruth M. Stephens award at Mormon Interpreter. These seemed like somewhat positive gestures, but 2014 was marred by some noteworthy missteps, too. In February, for example, Daniel Peterson invited women to explain to him how "rape culture" applies to LDS culture:
When several explanations were given to him, he summarily dismissed them all and then went completely silent. Later, in the wake of the Kate Kelly disciplinary events, MDB's own MsJack penned an eloquent letter that was published in the SL Trib, and was subsequently attacked by the impresario of "Sic et Non":
Other years have seen apologists characterizing liberal women as "witches," yukking it up at the prospect of watching Angela Lansbury die, and dismissing feminist-driven criticism as nothing more than petty griping from the "wimmen." Further, the apologists have faced some withering criticism for their lack of gender balance, both in ventures like "Mormon Scholars Testify," and among the ranks of their contributing authors. Though the apologists are clearly engaging in "outreach" efforts, 2014 clearly illustrated just how backwards they so often are.
5. Mormon Interpreter Begs for Money. Thanks to the stalwart efforts of MDB poster "Tom," we've seen a steady rise in spending and income for the fledgling operation known as Mormon Interpreter (along with a perhaps coincidentally sharp uptick in vacations for MI "CEO" Daniel Peterson). And indeed, the apologists have consistently trumpeted the blog's "success": "Here's yet another YouTube video of us talking," they announced. "We've published an 'article' every week for 100-odd weeks," they boasted. In spite of this, as Tom recently reminded us, Mormon Interpreter seems forever to be confronting a financial deficit:
Of particular note, though, was this item:
As attentive readers know, Skousen's project has been controversial, with some people alleging that he defied the Brethren in order to pursue it. After all, in effect he is--without divine fiat--attempting to produce newer, better, Mopologetic versions of LDS canonical texts. What this means is that, in effect, the apologists are trying to drum up $40,000 to remind everyone that they know better than anyone else in the Church--including the apostles and even Joseph Smith himself.
4. The Church Pays for Its Employees to Attend the FAIR Conference. In mid-September, "Mormon Disclosures" dropped a bombshell. Author David Twede managed to procure and post an email from FAIR apparatchik Steve Densley:
After years--if not decades--of denial on the part of apologists that the Church was funding them in any way, we at last were given this nugget from an official representative of FAIR. Last year, it was revealed that some of the LDS Church's subsidiary organizations were used to funnel money to "The More Good Foundation," which in turn funneled the money back over to FAIR. What, one wonders, is the real truth about the way that the Church funds apologetics? If anything, this year's revelation from Twede and "Mormon Disclosures" provided us with another key piece in the story.
3. The Letter to a CES Director. No piece of criticism gave the apologists a bigger headache than Jeremy Runnels's powerful "Letter to a CES Instructor" and its various sequels. In a series of logical, and easy-to-follow points, Runnels carefully documented the various reasons for his departure from the Church: an exit that was made all the more resonant due to his attempts at reaching out for help from the Church's own education system. Of course the apologists seized on this, and quickly slapped together a "response" on the FAIR Wiki, with part of their argument being (naturally) that he should have come to *them* for help. (Indeed, one of the themes of 2014 was not just that newly-minted ex-Mormons were lazy, failed to read their scriptures, and so on; it's the ex-Mormons failed to do the most important thing of all: consult materials from FARMS, FAIR, and Mormon Interpreter.) Runnels responded in kind, as did the Mopologists, with the whole thing culminating in Runnels's absolutely devastating takedown of Daniel Peterson's seemingly hastily-composed keynote address from the FAIR Conference.
2. Bill Hamblin Launches 'Enigmatic Mirror'This year readers were treated to something of a companion blog to Mormon Interpreter and "Sic et Non." Early in the year, Bill Hamblin began authoring entries on a blog that was named, oddly, "Enigmatic Mirror," and which featured an unaccountably disquieting image of Hamblin's disembodied head and shoulders superimposed over a panoramic view of a Middle Eastern city. The blog, one of Hamblin's fellow Mopologists assured us, would "infuriate" people, and indeed, Hamblin has endeavored mightily to make good on that promise.
In its early days, the blog saw Hamblin slamming popular LDS scholar David Bokovoy's new book (and also attempting to smear him), and later we watched as he was "taken to the woodshed" by his critics. Indeed, "Enigmatic Mirror" became something of a barometer for the key issues confronting apologists in 2014. It was consistently a reliable source for malicious gossip and general nastiness. Most recently, Hamblin made a series of strange comments related to the tape recorders that were found hidden in the classrooms of several BYU Religious Education faculty; he attacked the "new" Maxwell Institute, calling it "Sunstone South"; and he reacted with hostility to the new BYU curriculum, calling it "appalling."
All of this comes in the wake of an infamous entry on Hamblin's old blog, in which he wrote that he was forced to resign from the board of Mormon Interpreter after being pressured by his home department to do so. One has to wonder: to what extent do his administrators and colleagues view his continued blogging as a direct repudiation of their advice? Time will tell, I suppose.
1. DCP Erupts at the FAIR Conference. If there is one thing that defines Mopologetics, it is an undercurrent of anger: a self-righteous indignation over being challenged, mocked, or derided in any way. And in 2014, the incident that most accurately summarized the state of contemporary LDS apologetics can be summarized in two lines of dialogue:
"You're a coward. You're all cowards."
"You go to hell!"
At this past summer's FAIR Conference, the stage was set for an epic confrontation. Shortly before the conference began, Mopologetic "Kingpin" Daniel Peterson had posted an item on his blog which juxtaposed an image of Elder Maxwell's grave with a link to information on Kirk Caudle's resignation from the Church. Though it wasn't explicitly stated, most readers were able to read between the lines and realized that the post was an attack on the "new" Maxwell Institute: the insinuation that the "liberal," "secretly apostate" members of the MI had somehow brought about Caudle's apostasy. The suggestion wasn't taken kindly by a number of people--including Seth Payne, and also Maxwell Institute employee Blair Hodges (who, incidentally, was this year's winner of the Sampson Avard Golden Scepter Award), and Kirk Caudle himself--and the matter came to a head as Hodges confronted Peterson at the FAIR Conference.
Unsurprisingly, the rather heated exchange served as yet another opportunity for the apologists to attack the Maxwell Institute and its supporters, and Bill Hamblin eagerly lapped up the gossip and posted about it on his blog. The accusations flew wildly, with Hodges threatening to sue the apologists for defamation, and subsequently being ridiculed by them for losing his cool. Ultimately, the entire back-and-forth seemed to come down to a question of who said what first, or rather, who was the first to get upset. Did Hodges only call Peterson a "coward" after being told to "Go to hell!"? Or, instead, did Peterson tell Hodges to "Go to hell!" only after being called a "coward"? More importantly, does any of that matter in the grand scheme of things? Of course not. What's important is that this incident provides us with the best window into the inner-workings of Mopologetics. And in fact, not long ago, Daniel Peterson continued to wax nostalgic about the incident:
That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? Even if you don't agree that "This mortal experience" can be strange, certainly it's hard to deny just how "strange" Mopologetics often is.
Now, how about some fruitcake?
* * * * * *
As in year's past, the honorable mention list:
--More fallout from the discovery of "The Great War"
--Meet the Mormons screens in theaters
--DCP is Publicly Trolled by Mike Norton
--Dean Robbers Identifies the Top Ten Mopologetic Books
Who knows what joys and moments of excitement will greet us in 2015? I know that I can hardly wait. In the meantime, I hope you'll all join me for some Cassius-approved yuletide fun! Happy holidays, everyone!
But I digress. This holiday season, I want instead to examine some interesting manifestations of the Christmas spirit in non-U.S. locales. In doing so, I think we can observe some fascinating parallels with classic-FARMS Mopologetics. For example, have you ever heard of the Yule Lads?
These simultaneously jolly and sinister characters are a key feature of the Christmas season in Iceland. According to tradition, each of these lads comes at an appointed time and has a specially designated task, and they have colorful names, like "Meat-Hook," "Doorway-Sniffer," and "Stubby." Stekkjarstaur (a.k.a. "Sheep-cote Clod"), for instance, turns up between December 12-25, and he's described as being someone who "Harasses sheep, but is impaired by his stiff peg-legs." Wikipedia helpfully informs us that, "The Yule Lads were originally portrayed as being mischievous, or even criminal, pranksters who would steal from, or in other way [sic] harass the population." In a year when average, TM-carrying TBMs were slammed for their failure to stay up-to-date on important Mopologetic issues and anti-Mormon literature, I think you'll immediately realize how and why this is reminiscent of Mopologetics.
Above: Is Professor Emeritus Louis Midgley (PhD, Brown) down for some sausage this holiday season?
And just imagine the mirth to be had! I've heard rumors that some students of Mopologetics have devised a game wherein they try to determine which prominent Mopologist resembles which Yule Lad. For instance, who "Has an abnormally large nose and an acute sense of smell"?
Above: DCP (Ph.D., UCLA) calls himself a "dejected loser." But which Yule Lad is he most similar to?
Which Mopologist is most similar to "Þvörusleikir," a.k.a., "Spoon-Licker," who "Steals Þvörur (a type of a wooden spoon with a long handle - I. þvara) to lick" and also "Is extremely thin due to malnutrition"? Who "Likes to slam doors, especially during the night"? Would that be Allen Wyatt, perhaps? Or Steve Smoot? Or John Gee? Kerry Muhlestein? You'll have to join in the holiday merriment to find out!
What this means, of course, is that it's time once again to revisit the days of 2014 past. It's time, dear friends and colleagues, for you to join me, the B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetics Studies at Cassius University, as we take a look back at the Top Ten Happenings in Mopologetics, 2014.
10. John Dehlin is Called a "Family Destroyer." In spite of the fact that we're now some two-and-a-half years out from the monumental events of June 2012, we nonetheless continue to feel aftershocks from the crumbling of FARMS and the booting of the classic-FARMS Mopologists from the Maxwell Institute. Indeed, right around the second anniversary of the event (which also coincided with coverage of Church discipline for John Dehlin and "Ordain Women" leader Kate Kelly), Daniel Peterson took the opportunity to lash out viciously at the "Mormon Stories" founder, who was the subject of a "hit piece" that many felt was pivotal to the Mopologists' getting canned from the Maxwell Institute:
Daniel Peterson wrote:But I hope that compassion will also be felt, and prayers also offered, for those whose testimonies have been destroyed and whose families have been grievously wounded over the past several years — often, in my judgment and in that of many families and many who claim to have benefited, as a direct result of the activities of John Dehlin and (to a far lesser degree) of Kate Kelly. I know quite a few of them, and I’m aware of many more.
Readers in the know, however, will remember that Dehlin had conducted a somewhat informal survey showing quite the opposite: i.e., that "testimonies [had] been destroyed" and "families [had] been grievously wounded" by the activities of the apologists--including Peterson himself. The numbers in Dehlin's survey, of course, carried a lot more evidentiary weight compared to DCP's "I know quite a few of them." But the incident is noteworthy as a key event in 2014 insofar as it demonstrates the ongoing tension between classic-FARMS apologists and the "New Order Mormon" movement which Dehlin, to a certain extent, represents.
9. The Essays. 2014 saw the institutional Church itself getting heavily into the Mopologetics game via the issuance of a series of essays meant to "explain" problematic aspects of LDS doctrine and history. Perhaps most notable among these was the essay dealing with Joseph Smith's polygamy--including his marriage to other men's wives, and his coupling with brides as young as 14 years old. This particular essay received widespread coverage in the mainstream news media, and led to something like a small uproar in the LDS community, with many members expressing shock and dismay over the fact that, in spite of decades spent in the Church, they never knew anything about this particular tidbit.
The release of the essay once again highlighted the central insight of Dr. Shades's "Chapel/Internet Mormon" distinction: members of the LDS Church can often be categorized according to their knowledge of problematic issues, information which suddenly became much more widely available after the advent of the Internet. The Mopologists, as always, in typical Internet Mormon fashion, insisted that they knew about these issues all along, in spite of their having grown up with no Internet. The boneheaded Latter-day Saints who are only just now finding out were too lazy to get up off their duffs and explore the issues for themselves. When asked which Church sources the Saints should have consulted, the apologists responded by referring them to materials from FARMS, FAIR, and Mormon Interpreter.
8. The October Surprise is a Dud. After a long, drawn-out set-up, ex-Mormon and 2nd Anointing whistle-blower Tom Phillips finally unveiled his long-awaited "October Surprise": he had successfully managed to get a court case going against LDS Prophet, Seer, and Revelator Thomas Monson, who was being sued for "fraud." The announcement was met with excitement in some circles, skepticism in others, and deep disappointment in yet others. The event was, without question, a circus-type event for online Mormonism, though as we all know, the case was eventually tossed out of court.
At first glance, it may not be entirely clear how and why the "October Surprise" is a Mopologetics-related event, but in hindsight, it seems clearer than ever that it was yet another key moment in the complicated web that constitutes LDS apologetic behavior and psychology. Along with last year's "Swedish Rescue," the "October Surprise" seems like part of the puzzle relating to the issuance of The Essays. The apologists had always (ostensibly) been in the business of "defending" the Church, and both of these events, along with the essays, represent massive failures on their part. While everyone watched and waited, speculating on the outcome of Phillips's case, the Mopologists sat quietly, hoping and praying for a dismissal, and yet to an extent, one could detect a certain sheepishness in their commentary. The fact is, events like the Swedish Rescue and the October Surprise would probably not have been possible in the same sense without the heavy dissemination of problematic issues (and the attendant nastiness and aggressiveness) that the apologists have been engaging in for some 30+ years.
7. Greg Smith and DCP Accuse the Maxwell Institute of Evidence Tampering and Conspiracy. In yet another instance of fallout from the 2012 ousting of the classic-FARMS Mopologists, Greg Smith and Daniel Peterson engaged in a series of vague accusations concerning the events of June 2012:
Greg Smith wrote:A friend saw what people were saying about me (and much worse things about Dan and other MI employees.) I remarked that the difficult thing about such matters was that verbal remarks made by employees cannot be documented, and can always be denied and it becomes a case of "he said/she said."
He said that he had written remarks from an MI employee which matched precisely what was being reported verbally.
But, those remarks had been sent with a caveat in them, a line to the tune of, "Do not circulate this information, but I am telling you so you will know what is _really_ going on, since I am in the know. But keep it under your hat."
He did not agree not to make them public before receiving them, but did not feel he could simply show them to me.
So, I wrote the author of the mail and asked if I could see what had been said about me. The author agreed, but insisted that I not show others. I wasn't thrilled by that, but preferred to see written corroboration of what I was being told was being said by the same author verbally to others.
It provided it, and confirmed that what many unrelated sources were telling me was true.
I would be very happy to provide this documentation, but said I would not without his permission.
So:
I suggest you contact the Maxwell Institute. Tell them that I have an e-mail written by a Maxwell Institute employee, in which that employee "explains" the real state of affairs about Dan, me, and others. That employee makes claims about information and documents which he has seen because he is an MI employee, and so he certifies the truth of what he says because he's seen the evidence.
That employee knows I have the e-mail. He knows I have said I will not make it public without his say so. If he is willing, I will provide the full text, unedited, for public inspection.
Blair Hodges is the MI public affairs person. His e-mail is here:
http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.ed...
The MI website is here if you want to talk to someone else:
http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.ed...
Please let us know if they allow its release. If they deny its existence, I am then able to make it public because I told the author that I would make it public if he made public claims which the e-mail would prove to be false. I have a blog site; I'll just throw it up there.
If Blair or whoever you decide to talk to can't find out which employee wrote the letter, I can tell them.
They can then either allow the letter to be made public, or refuse to let it be made public, and I will comply.
If they deny that such a letter exists, then I will provide it, as I describe above.
In a massive "Comments" thread on Sic et Non, Smith and Peterson carried on, accusing Maxwell Institute employees of lying, conspiracy, and covering up the truth. Once again, this represents a battle on the part of the apologists to "control the narrative," as FAIR's Mike Parker put it. To most observers, the removal of the classic-FARMS apologists was seen as a positive change: no longer would the toxic smear campaigns, hit pieces, and character assassinations be "officially" sanctioned under the imprimatur of the MI and BYU. The firings were acknowledgement of what both critics and even friends of the apologists had been saying all along--that these sort of antics have no place in serious, scholarly discourse, and the firings were a repudiation of virtually everything that the Mopologists had done. This doesn't fit with the apologists' own view of themselves, though, and with no evidence whatsoever, they continue to insist that the "ousting" was a purely bureaucratic matter--a coup staged by a handful of closeted, liberal apostates who've infiltrated the Maxwell Institute.
Whatever the case may be, one wonders if the full truth of the incident will ever come to light.
6. Women Trouble. If 2013 was marred by the apologists' problematic relationship to race, 2014 saw them awkwardly trying to engage with issues of gender. 2014 marked (among other things), a rather uncomfortable tokenism applied to African American political candidate Mia Love, and also the announcement of the Ruth M. Stephens award at Mormon Interpreter. These seemed like somewhat positive gestures, but 2014 was marred by some noteworthy missteps, too. In February, for example, Daniel Peterson invited women to explain to him how "rape culture" applies to LDS culture:
Daniel Peterson wrote:I want to hear whether, or how much, believing women resonate to, or grant validity to, the sorts of things said in this article. I’m a member of the privileged Western and Mormon patriarchy, so, plainly, I’m very liable to overlook and minimize misogyny, sexism, and the like. But I really want to hear.
When several explanations were given to him, he summarily dismissed them all and then went completely silent. Later, in the wake of the Kate Kelly disciplinary events, MDB's own MsJack penned an eloquent letter that was published in the SL Trib, and was subsequently attacked by the impresario of "Sic et Non":
Daniel Peterson wrote:A column by an Evangelical who graduated from Brigham Young University and who is now a candidate for a master’s degree at a Midwestern Evangelical theological school appeared two or three days ago in the Salt Lake Tribune. She is an outspoken feminist, and it is sharply critical of the Church and its leadership.
Using as her illustration the practice of blessing babies — which, in Mormonism, is a priesthood ordinance and, thus, performed solely by men – she remarks that “when a father comes under church discipline, he will be barred from participation in ceremonies such as the blessing and naming of his children as part of his punishment. This outsider finds it curious that the church punishes unrighteous fathers by treating them like faithful mothers.”
There is much in the article with which I disagree, and much about it that I dislike. But I found the statement above quite disingenuous, or, at a minimum, poorly thought-through.
Why?
Suggesting that the Church treats “faithful women” like “unrighteous fathers,” that Mormonism values devout women so little that it equates them with men under Church discipline, is rhetorically effective. It was a clever touch to suggest to readers that disgraced Mormon men are punished, in the Church, by being lowered to the presumably debased level of committed, believing Mormon women.
But the insinuation grossly distorts the reality. Mormonism distinguishes between faithful women and unfaithful men in many ways.
For instance, unordained but faithful women can hold leadership positions and teach in their local congregations, at the stake level, and at the general level of the entire Church. Men under discipline cannot. Unordained women can pray publicly in Church meetings. Men under discipline cannot. Unordained women can serve as missionaries. Men under discipline cannot. Unordained women can speak (i.e., deliver sermons) in church. Men under discipline cannot. Unordained women can partake of the sacrament, worship and serve in the temples of the Church, and wear the garment emblematic of covenants made in the temple. Men under discipline cannot. The covenants and sealings of unordained but faithful women are wholly valid in the eyes of the Church. Those of men who have been excommunicated are not.
The differences are enormous. And they are far more central to Mormon life as it is actually lived, week in and week out, than is the relatively rare blessing of a baby.
I was also unfavorably impressed by the article’s sarcastic closing line: “The prophets have spoken and the thinking has been done.”
This represents one of the most hackneyed and tired of all tired anti-Mormon arguments, and it was very disappointing to see the article’s author, whom I knew and liked when she was a student at BYU, resort to it. I expected more from her.
For some background information and context for her jab, see
http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/ ... nking-done
Other years have seen apologists characterizing liberal women as "witches," yukking it up at the prospect of watching Angela Lansbury die, and dismissing feminist-driven criticism as nothing more than petty griping from the "wimmen." Further, the apologists have faced some withering criticism for their lack of gender balance, both in ventures like "Mormon Scholars Testify," and among the ranks of their contributing authors. Though the apologists are clearly engaging in "outreach" efforts, 2014 clearly illustrated just how backwards they so often are.
5. Mormon Interpreter Begs for Money. Thanks to the stalwart efforts of MDB poster "Tom," we've seen a steady rise in spending and income for the fledgling operation known as Mormon Interpreter (along with a perhaps coincidentally sharp uptick in vacations for MI "CEO" Daniel Peterson). And indeed, the apologists have consistently trumpeted the blog's "success": "Here's yet another YouTube video of us talking," they announced. "We've published an 'article' every week for 100-odd weeks," they boasted. In spite of this, as Tom recently reminded us, Mormon Interpreter seems forever to be confronting a financial deficit:
The Mormon Interpreter Fundraising Team wrote:The vast bulk of our work is done by volunteers. We have no full-time employees, and our senior officers are actually barred from receiving salaries from the Foundation. We track donated volunteer service but, if anything, our accounting of donated time skews low, because not all of our volunteers report their hours—we have no salary check to hold over them, forcing them to report!—but, crude though our accounting of volunteered hours may be, it reveals a substantial investment of time and effort by many people.
But our list of projects designed to provide quality scholarship and study aids for the Saints is expanding, and our expenses are, consequently, increasing—and substantially so.
Of particular note, though, was this item:
DCP wrote:Moreover, owing to unwelcome external circumstances, Professor Skousen’s landmark Critical Text Project suddenly needs to find a new home and (certainly by our standards) substantial funding. He has just approached The Interpreter Foundation for help. The amount required—approximately $40,000 for a year—dwarfs anything we’ve heretofore done. But this is an opportunity for Interpreter to participate in an undertaking that will benefit the Saints and the Church for generations to come.
As attentive readers know, Skousen's project has been controversial, with some people alleging that he defied the Brethren in order to pursue it. After all, in effect he is--without divine fiat--attempting to produce newer, better, Mopologetic versions of LDS canonical texts. What this means is that, in effect, the apologists are trying to drum up $40,000 to remind everyone that they know better than anyone else in the Church--including the apostles and even Joseph Smith himself.
4. The Church Pays for Its Employees to Attend the FAIR Conference. In mid-September, "Mormon Disclosures" dropped a bombshell. Author David Twede managed to procure and post an email from FAIR apparatchik Steve Densley:
The Church has started to address some of the big issues that cause concern for many people by posting articles on LDS.org in the Gospel Topics section. The Church will also be creating a webpage for seminary and institute teachers that includes a link to the FairMormon website. Furthermore, the Church has notified all seminary and institute teachers of the FairMormon conference, the Church is giving them a vacation day in order to attend and FairMormon is waiving the fee for seminary and institute teachers.
After years--if not decades--of denial on the part of apologists that the Church was funding them in any way, we at last were given this nugget from an official representative of FAIR. Last year, it was revealed that some of the LDS Church's subsidiary organizations were used to funnel money to "The More Good Foundation," which in turn funneled the money back over to FAIR. What, one wonders, is the real truth about the way that the Church funds apologetics? If anything, this year's revelation from Twede and "Mormon Disclosures" provided us with another key piece in the story.
3. The Letter to a CES Director. No piece of criticism gave the apologists a bigger headache than Jeremy Runnels's powerful "Letter to a CES Instructor" and its various sequels. In a series of logical, and easy-to-follow points, Runnels carefully documented the various reasons for his departure from the Church: an exit that was made all the more resonant due to his attempts at reaching out for help from the Church's own education system. Of course the apologists seized on this, and quickly slapped together a "response" on the FAIR Wiki, with part of their argument being (naturally) that he should have come to *them* for help. (Indeed, one of the themes of 2014 was not just that newly-minted ex-Mormons were lazy, failed to read their scriptures, and so on; it's the ex-Mormons failed to do the most important thing of all: consult materials from FARMS, FAIR, and Mormon Interpreter.) Runnels responded in kind, as did the Mopologists, with the whole thing culminating in Runnels's absolutely devastating takedown of Daniel Peterson's seemingly hastily-composed keynote address from the FAIR Conference.
2. Bill Hamblin Launches 'Enigmatic Mirror'This year readers were treated to something of a companion blog to Mormon Interpreter and "Sic et Non." Early in the year, Bill Hamblin began authoring entries on a blog that was named, oddly, "Enigmatic Mirror," and which featured an unaccountably disquieting image of Hamblin's disembodied head and shoulders superimposed over a panoramic view of a Middle Eastern city. The blog, one of Hamblin's fellow Mopologists assured us, would "infuriate" people, and indeed, Hamblin has endeavored mightily to make good on that promise.
In its early days, the blog saw Hamblin slamming popular LDS scholar David Bokovoy's new book (and also attempting to smear him), and later we watched as he was "taken to the woodshed" by his critics. Indeed, "Enigmatic Mirror" became something of a barometer for the key issues confronting apologists in 2014. It was consistently a reliable source for malicious gossip and general nastiness. Most recently, Hamblin made a series of strange comments related to the tape recorders that were found hidden in the classrooms of several BYU Religious Education faculty; he attacked the "new" Maxwell Institute, calling it "Sunstone South"; and he reacted with hostility to the new BYU curriculum, calling it "appalling."
All of this comes in the wake of an infamous entry on Hamblin's old blog, in which he wrote that he was forced to resign from the board of Mormon Interpreter after being pressured by his home department to do so. One has to wonder: to what extent do his administrators and colleagues view his continued blogging as a direct repudiation of their advice? Time will tell, I suppose.
1. DCP Erupts at the FAIR Conference. If there is one thing that defines Mopologetics, it is an undercurrent of anger: a self-righteous indignation over being challenged, mocked, or derided in any way. And in 2014, the incident that most accurately summarized the state of contemporary LDS apologetics can be summarized in two lines of dialogue:
"You're a coward. You're all cowards."
"You go to hell!"
At this past summer's FAIR Conference, the stage was set for an epic confrontation. Shortly before the conference began, Mopologetic "Kingpin" Daniel Peterson had posted an item on his blog which juxtaposed an image of Elder Maxwell's grave with a link to information on Kirk Caudle's resignation from the Church. Though it wasn't explicitly stated, most readers were able to read between the lines and realized that the post was an attack on the "new" Maxwell Institute: the insinuation that the "liberal," "secretly apostate" members of the MI had somehow brought about Caudle's apostasy. The suggestion wasn't taken kindly by a number of people--including Seth Payne, and also Maxwell Institute employee Blair Hodges (who, incidentally, was this year's winner of the Sampson Avard Golden Scepter Award), and Kirk Caudle himself--and the matter came to a head as Hodges confronted Peterson at the FAIR Conference.
Unsurprisingly, the rather heated exchange served as yet another opportunity for the apologists to attack the Maxwell Institute and its supporters, and Bill Hamblin eagerly lapped up the gossip and posted about it on his blog. The accusations flew wildly, with Hodges threatening to sue the apologists for defamation, and subsequently being ridiculed by them for losing his cool. Ultimately, the entire back-and-forth seemed to come down to a question of who said what first, or rather, who was the first to get upset. Did Hodges only call Peterson a "coward" after being told to "Go to hell!"? Or, instead, did Peterson tell Hodges to "Go to hell!" only after being called a "coward"? More importantly, does any of that matter in the grand scheme of things? Of course not. What's important is that this incident provides us with the best window into the inner-workings of Mopologetics. And in fact, not long ago, Daniel Peterson continued to wax nostalgic about the incident:
Daniel Peterson wrote:Incidentally, while looking for something else online yesterday, I came across a discussion, more than two years old, of my ouster from the Maxwell Institute at BYU. It was amusing to read accusations of toxic behavior on my part there, from someone who, in the months since, has spread malicious untruths about me, attacked me for my alleged pseudo-scholarship, publicly accosted and loudly insulted me in a public place, faulted my mean-spirited lack of charity, and so forth. This mortal experience can be a very strange one.
That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? Even if you don't agree that "This mortal experience" can be strange, certainly it's hard to deny just how "strange" Mopologetics often is.
Now, how about some fruitcake?
* * * * * *
As in year's past, the honorable mention list:
--More fallout from the discovery of "The Great War"
--Meet the Mormons screens in theaters
--DCP is Publicly Trolled by Mike Norton
--Dean Robbers Identifies the Top Ten Mopologetic Books
Who knows what joys and moments of excitement will greet us in 2015? I know that I can hardly wait. In the meantime, I hope you'll all join me for some Cassius-approved yuletide fun! Happy holidays, everyone!
