DiscussMormonism.com

Happy November, friends and colleagues! Can you believe that the holiday season is already upon us? I can scarcely wait for Christmastime! Meanwhile, I'm glad to see that the proprietor of "Sic et Non" is venturing outside of his usual Conservative, white, male echo chamber in order to engage with people and ideas that represent greater diversity. After an intro in which he name-drops Richard Bushman and lists off the academic attainments of the host, he offers up this description:

DCP wrote:Tonight’s book for discussion was Melissa Wei-Tsing Inouye’s eminently discussable Crossings: A Bald Asian American Woman Scholar’s Ventures through Life, Death, Cancer & Motherhood (Not Necessarily in That Order) (Salt Lake City: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship and Deseret Book, 2019).

Happily, Melissa herself was able to come for the discussion. (She has now left her most recent teaching position at the University of Auckland in New Zealand and is working for the Historical Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.) She is a remarkable person on multiple levels, and her book is remarkable. (Incidentally, one of its chapters, entitled “Faith is Not a String of Christmas Lights,” is an expanded version of her 2012 entry on my Mormon Scholars Testify website.)

(Incidentally, I guess that efforts at "MST" are going to be ramping up again, after the site has been basically defunct for the past 7 years or so?)

All is fine and well at first, and kudos to DCP for not omitting the fact that Inouye's book was published by the Maxwell Institute. But things quickly go sour in the "Comments" section:

Dr. Detroit wrote:Dan, I agree that Melissa is great. She is also a much needed woman's voice in Mormon scholarship. One important thing you didn't mention about Melissa is that she is a current member of the Maxwell Institute: https://mi.byu.edu/people/m...

Also, if anyone is interested in learning more about Melissa, she has done some great presentations for the Maxwell Institute: https://mi.byu.edu/?s=melissa

DCP wrote:I mentioned that her book was published by the Maxwell Institute.

Were you expecting a commercial advertisement for the Maxwell Institute, perhaps?

Dr. Detroit wrote:Dan wrote: "Were you expecting a commercial advertisement for the Maxwell Institute, perhaps?"

LOL! No Dan, I just thought it interesting that you didn't mention she is a member of the board at the Maxwell Institute. I would have chalked it up to an oversight, but you have done this before with the Givens and others.

It's almost like you have an aversion to mentioning these fine scholars work for the Maxwell Institute. It's no big deal. It's your blog.

That sends the "SeN" impresario into a fit of rage:

Daniel Peterson wrote:DD: "I just thought it interesting that you didn't mention she is a member of the board at the Maxwell Institute."

She's one of fourteen members of the Institute's advisory board, which may or may not have much more than a ceremonial function -- all of whom (including Prof. Dr. Inouye, Ph.D.) are employed and have principal responsibilities elsewhere.

Why do you imagine it essential to mention her being on the Maxwell Institute advisory board?

Why do you find it "interesting" that I didn't feel it essential to mention?

DD: "I would have chalked it up to an oversight, but you have done this before with the Givens and others."

The fact that Terryl has been connected with the Maxwell Institute in the past and that he's now more or less housed there is, to my mind, one of the less interesting facts about him. It's never occurred to me either to suppress that fact or to single it out for special mention, as you would like me to do.

DD: "It's almost like you have an aversion to mentioning these fine scholars work for the Maxwell Institute."

But, DD, advisory board members like Sheri Dew and Cory Maxwell and Kathleen Flake and Judge Thomas Griffith and, yes, Prof. Dr. Melissa Wei-Tsing Inouye, Ph.D., DON'T work for the Maxwell Institute.

My goodness: look at all the qualifications here! "Principal responsibilities elsewhere"? Wasn't that true of DCP himself when he was Editor of the Review (and even, I might add, when he was collecting more than $20,000 to serve as Chair of FARMS? I guess the counterpoint here is that was during the pre-MI era?)? And if so, why the now-seven+-year-long indignation over being released as Editor?

This, though, is just spiteful:

The fact that Terryl has been connected with the Maxwell Institute in the past and that he's now more or less housed there is, to my mind, one of the less interesting facts about him.

Uh, Givens accepted a primary appointment there, did he not? So is Peterson implying that Givens is "stupid" for having done so? At minimum, it's "one of the less interesting facts about him," which pretty much has to be read as a swipe at Givens.

Meanwhile, he goes out of his way to point out that Dew, Maxwell, Flake, and Griffith "DON'T work for the Maxwell Institute." Again: to my knowledge, neither did Peterson, Midgley, Hamblin, or any number of other prominent Mopologists. And yet, what would their reaction have been--circa 2010--if someone suggested that their connection to the MI was "irrelevant" or "one of the less interesting facts" about them, as a means of de-emphasizing the role that they played vis-a-vis the "old" MI? There is some major-league hypocrisy on display here. And it goes on:

Dr. Detroit wrote:LOL! Someone is clearly bothered by the Maxwell Institute and the people involved with its operations.

DCP wrote:Oh, I don't know that "bothered" is the word that I would use to describe the motivation behind your weird recent posts on this subject.

"Hopeful" might be appropriate. I've already used "desperate" and "pathetic," so perhaps "desperately and pathetically hopeful" would suit the case.

Kiwi57 wrote:If Dan really thought, or had ever asserted or implied, that the MI was an evil organisation composed of evil people, your clumsy and ham-fisted attempt at a subtle dig might not have missed its mark so badly.

Dr. Velho Burrhino wrote:Dr. D,

Thanks for pointing out that omission. Currently Professor Inouye is a member of the board at the Maxwell institute to be more specific.

Although Dr. Peterson may have some level of personal familiarity with Dr. Inouye, I think it was somewhat disrespectful to not state that she has a Phd and show the earned respect by signifying that. Maybe Dr. Peterson can explain that omission further.

Daniel Peterson wrote:Good grief, VB. Good grief!

You and DD are DESPERATE! And pathetic.

I linked to Prof. Dr. Inouye's testimony on Mormon Scholars Testify, which gives her (academic) biography. It mentions her Ph.D. I noted that she had been teaching at the University of Auckland, and that it was her most recent academic teaching position. Such positions typically require Ph.D.s.

I also intend to write an upcoming column about Prof. Dr. Inouye and about Prof. Dr. Inouye's book. I will mention, in that column, that Prof. Dr. Inouye, Ph.D.., holds undergraduate and graduate degrees (including a doctorate) from Harvard University.

In my circles, Ph.D.s are common. At my workplace, Ph.D.s are presumed. We don't make a fetish of referring to Dr. Hamblin, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bradshaw, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bailey, Dr. Gee, Dr. Bowen, Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Midgley, Dr. Brown, and Dr. Muhlestein.

Your relentless negativity, your desperate straining effort to portray me as evil, belong on your home board, where they'll be received with hymns of grateful thanksgiving and hums of harmonious agreement. Not here.

And, yes, Prof. Dr. Inouye is affiliated with the Maxwell Institute. So what? There's MUCH about her that my brief little blog entry didn't mention.

You completely overlook the fact that I wrote very positively about her, and very positively about her book, which I expressly identified as having been co-published by the Maxwell Institute. You plainly failed to mention my praise of Prof. Dr. Inouye and of Prof. Dr. Inouye's book and my identification of the Maxwell Institute as the co-publisher of Prof. Dr. Inouye's book in order to portray my comments as disrespectul to her and as attempting to hide her link to the Maxwell Institute.

I was under no obligation even to MENTION Prof. Dr. Inouye, Ph.D., and her book, let alone to CELEBRATE them -- and you try to turn my blog entry into an expression of hostility and disrespect?

Look up the word "integrity," DD and VB. And then try to cultivate some.

Boy, quite an eruption! For someone who claims to not carry grudges, this would certainly seem to fly in the face of that. And then there is this peculiarity from Dr. Midgley:

Midgley wrote:In my own prayer life I very often plead for divine assistance for Fair Mormon, where for many years I answered at least twenty each month that were sent to FAIR for the entire time I was a volunteer. I know and love many of those currently involved in that worthy endeavor. I also pray for Book of Mormon Central, and the Interpreter Foundation, and also for the Maxwell Institute. I specifically pray that all those currently involved with focus their attention on the real need for academics to assist in building and defending the Kingdom of God. This has become part of my prayer life because, like the huge and growing number of Endowed Saints, I have made a covenant to do just that. (However, I don't think that writing a biography of Jan Shipps helps to builds the Kingdom.) They have published some very good books, including Grant Hardy's study edition of the Book of Mormon.

Huh. Who's writing the Shipps biography, I wonder? And does Midgley specifically mention this book project in his nightly prayers--i.e., requesting that Heavenly Father put a stop to it?

In any event, it seems clear that the Mopologists are averse to the point of being "triggered" at the thought of the Maxwell Institute doing well--let alone thriving. With the recent hatchet job directed at Chris Rogers's review of Stubbs's work, we see yet more evidence that the Mopologists still can't let go of the grudge they are carrying against the "new" MI.

We don't make a fetish of referring to Dr. Hamblin, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bradshaw, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bailey, Dr. Gee, Dr. Bowen, Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Midgley, Dr. Brown, and Dr. Muhlestein.

I beg to differ.

I specifically pray that all those currently involved with focus their attention on the real need for academics to assist in building and defending the Kingdom of God. This has become part of my prayer life because, like the huge and growing number of Endowed Saints, I have made a covenant to do just that. (However, I don't think that writing a biography of Jan Shipps helps to builds the Kingdom.)

wtf?

I thought this was remarkable:

Kiwi57 wrote:If Dan really thought, or had ever asserted or implied, that the MI was an evil organisation composed of evil people, your clumsy and ham-fisted attempt at a subtle dig might not have missed its mark so badly.

The use of the word "implied" was a really bad choice here. We've had, for almost a decade now, all kinds of insinuations about the "evil people" running the Maxwell Institute: about Gerald Bradford; about unknown "moles" or "leakers"; about how Blair Hodges should "Go to hell!"; about the alleged "spanking" that the MI received from Elder Holland; and so on and so forth. Didn't Greg Smith post a lengthy comment on "SeN" about how he had procured some kind of "email evidence" that shows that "bad stuff" was going on behind the scenes at the MI? I mean, you just can't make a remark like Kiwi's when, at this very moment, one of the main topics of interest is an "Interpreter" (which Dr. V.B. hilariously calls "Interrupter." LOL!! I may have to steal that one...) is an article devoted to *attacking* an article that was published by the MI!

Gadianton wrote:

We don't make a fetish of referring to Dr. Hamblin, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bradshaw, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bailey, Dr. Gee, Dr. Bowen, Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Midgley, Dr. Brown, and Dr. Muhlestein.

I beg to differ.

Especially given that Dan mentions Dr. Ricks twice in the same sentence.
: )

We don't make a fetish of referring to Dr. Hamblin, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bradshaw, Dr. Ricks, Dr. Bailey, Dr. Gee, Dr. Bowen, Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Midgley, Dr. Brown, and Dr. Muhlestein.

No need to endlessly repeat the title Dr. in that group when secret Masonic names work just as well.

I can remember when Dr. Peterson reminded us that it is proper etiquette to include the title when those individuals using it have spent time and money to obtain that title. Still, overuse would make it akin to a Monty Python sketch.

Those working at the MI fully understand the brush war that exists between the old FARMers and the Interpreter/Sic et Non in regards to the Maxwell Institute. It all stems from the MI setting Dr. Peterson adrift on a cruise to the Holy Land and then firing arrows onto his pyre.

The Drs Detroit and Elder Donkey are ribbing Dr. Peterson based on that known animosity.

There’s obviously still a raw nerve with regards to the Maxwell Institute’s removal of some undesirables 7 years ago. Those undesirables would do well to heed Mr Holland’s recent counsel about if people go to BYU and then live worthily, whatever subsequently befalls them is God’s will for them and was meant to happen for divine reasons.

“If you will persevere throughout your life as you have begun in your degree programs here and if you will be true to what Latter-day Saint temples and universities stand for — what Zion stands for — I promise you in the name of the Lord that your future will unfold as He intended it before the foundation of the world,” Elder Holland told BYU-Hawaii students.

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-a ... les-164954

Ergo, the ousting from the Maxwell Institute of people deemed undesirable who had attended BYU was either God’s will and meant to happen, or was a result of them living unworthily. Take your pick or throw Mr Holland under the bus.

Thanks Dr. Scratch. Another epic meltdown.

I wonder if the fact that the Maxwell Institute has been able to attract several prominent women scholars is a sore spot for Peter$on? It's no secret the Interpreter has struggled to find women scholars who want to associate.

Also, maybe Peter$on and the Mopologists are angry that they haven't been placed back in power after the Holland "rebuke?" Midgley was confident it would happen soon after Holland's talk.

Regardless, this is very embarrassing. Several BYU professors have actually started calling the Interpreter the "National Inquirer of Mormonism." Need I say more?

I personally know Dr. Inouye, as well as about another dozen of her family that also have doctorates. They are an incredible group of people. Now I don't think Dr. Peterson intentionally left out her academic credentials. But I do think it is telling that in this case when addressing a colleague he chose to go to her first name. Which I saw as disrespectful. I think this is much more of a reflection of the culture that Dr. Peterson comes from which typically tries to deminish women and minorities.

He is throwing a fit because he know he was correctly called out.

I like interpreter as "the national inquirer of Mormonism." If Midge could, he would send private investigators to follow those at the M.I., trying to find evidence of disloyalty to the temple oaths they made. I'm sure those at the M.I., in private, ridicule the utter lack of support for the LGT and the Early Modern English nonsense the "interrupter" pushes, among other things. These have to be considered violations of temple oaths by the Midgster. One wonders if the subjects of the M.I. private ridicule that surely must be happening include the recent failed attempt to discredit the critique of Stubbs' venture into linguistic cloud formation interpretation or the Dales' fiasco? Further, one wonders what the brethren or at least the dodo think of the latest stumbles by the "national inquirer of Mormonism" or the "interrupter?" Maybe obeying temple oaths means at least getting some M.I. input prior to publishing this nonsense? These two articles have to set back the Mormon cause a little bit and perhaps it could have been avoided by being a little more careful, by including some outside voices such as PhD's at the M.I.?

Everybody Wang Chung wrote:Thanks Dr. Scratch. Another epic meltdown.

I wonder if the fact that the Maxwell Institute has been able to attract several prominent women scholars is a sore spot for Peter$on? It's no secret the Interpreter has struggled to find women scholars who want to associate.

Also, maybe Peter$on and the Mopologists are angry that they haven't been placed back in power after the Holland "rebuke?" Midgley was confident it would happen soon after Holland's talk.

That's an interesting observation, Stake President Wang Chung. It certainly seems to be beyond question at this point that they're very, very bitter still over the "new" MI.

Regardless, this is very embarrassing. Several BYU professors have actually started calling the Interpreter the "National Inquirer of Mormonism." Need I say more?

Wow: if that's true, it's incredible. I certainly don't doubt the possibility of it.