Does Jonathan Neville Pose a "potential threat to the peace and unity of the Saints"?

[Doctor Scratch]

Especially when Peterson is the headliner for a cruiselady "Book of Mormon Lands" cruise to central America. And yes, the company specifically advertises these as "Book of Mormon Lands" cruises. How is that any different from Neville's approach?

You're right. The Mopologists do disagree, sometimes "violently," about some things with the brethren, and that was maybe poor wording on my part. The point wasn't about Neville being out of bounds on specific vs vague ideas. The point was that he does so with clearly questionable loyalty to the Q15.

On reflection, I shouldn't have mentioned Neville's beliefs at all, because they are entirely irrelevant to his being a "potential threat." At least on his publicly stated ideas alone, Neville is no more a threat than Jim Bennett or Terryl Givens or Richard Bushman.

As you point out, Mopologists do propound non-chapel (eg, non-Q15 confirmed) theories all the time. But, the Mopologists, and this list still includes Bennett, Givens and Bushman, do it while publicly holding their sustaining arms to the square. As soon as that arm goes down, watch TF out.

I see what you're saying, Dr. Moore, and I agree with you that the Mopologists do a better job of "concealing" their disagreements with the Brethren. And it's worth noting that Neville does not disagree with any of the Brethren per se; rather, his accusation is that some of the Brethren (such as Elder Gong) have been "deceived" by the Mopologists! So, Neville sees that "Interpreter" crowd as being a legitimate enemy of the Church, not unlike the way that the Mopologists see him.

The deep irony here, in my view, is that the Mopologists actually hold the Brethren in contempt, and resent their power and authority. Midgley's comment about Elder Petersen illustrates that sentiment pretty clearly.

[Dr Moore]

I see what you're saying, Dr. Moore, and I agree with you that the Mopologists do a better job of "concealing" their disagreements with the Brethren. And it's worth noting that Neville does not disagree with any of the Brethren per se; rather, his accusation is that some of the Brethren (such as Elder Gong) have been "deceived" by the Mopologists! So, Neville sees that "Interpreter" crowd as being a legitimate enemy of the Church, not unlike the way that the Mopologists see him.

The deep irony here, in my view, is that the Mopologists actually hold the Brethren in contempt, and resent their power and authority. Midgley's comment about Elder Petersen illustrates that sentiment pretty clearly.

Doctor, I am reminded why you hold the B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies. What a tangled mess.

At first I read your comment and it sounds like a sort of prisoner's dilemma. I mean, both Neville and the Mopologists care about discovering the "true facts" of restoration historicity, right? And as you describe it, both are bound, to a degree, by some notion of public fealty to the brethren, no?

So why wouldn't they all just cut the finger pointing and work together? I guess that's because both sides realize that something happens, say 10-12 moves down the road, leading to unacceptable or mutually exclusive conclusions. I suspect it has something to do with the concreteness of Neville's ideas compared with the ever-shifting maybe-ness that the Mopologists prefer. Neville can't just backtrack, or win on a tie. His views are ultra-clear and he's either right or wrong.

On second thought, Neville and the Mopologists aren't really playing at the same game. I think Neville has the weaker hand, and the Mopes know it. Neville may say the brethren are deceived by the Mopologists, but the excuse is irrelevant if what Neville accomplishes is drawing people away from following the brethren. He's saying the brethren are wrong, and if people follow him, he's done. That's why we don't see the usual tactics against Neville. Instead we see this lone faceless defender in the form of this pseudonymous Peter Pan, and an occasional me-so-bewildered missive from Peterson.

You've made the point about Mopologists holding the brethren in contempt before. I see the logic. Some of them probably do. The ones who eventually leave sure do, so it stands to reason there's a spectrum of contempt among active Mopologists as well.

I suppose as they age and reflect on the product of their academic lives, it's inevitable. To be a living martyrs who isn't celebrated. To have been used, is the reward. So much potential, early on. So much sacrificed on the altar of loyalty, including and especially, the freedom to form conclusions from evidence, not the other way around. I'd be pissed too.

[sock puppet]

I’ve learned approximately everything I know about him from the invaluable Neville-Neville Land blog, which follows his writing pretty closely and quotes him extensively.

People say all the time that DCP is such a nice person in real life. I don't doubt it. But I ask that they cease to judge Neville without knowing him in real life.

Huh? Why would criticism of DCP equal a "potential threat to the peace and unity of the Saints"? Does Dr. Peterson really feel that he's that important?

Totally nuts. But this is what the Mopologists do. If any random person says anything at all negative about the sacred LTG or other Mopologist doctrine, they are blown out of proportion as a supreme danger to the Church, thereby justifying any force desired in response.

Besides, they don't know what kind of Member Neville is. Perhaps he's a devoted home teacher, or on fire as a ward mission leader?

Maybe Neville posing a "potential threat to the peace and unity of the Saints" (per DCP) is "totally nuts." Maybe not. Book of Mormon geography has led to many defections by thinking Mormons because it doesn't make sense located anywhere, on any scale. Sorenson's LGT, a healthy dose of vagueness and then the Brethren's silence after the 1st (well, only) Watson letter on the location of the Book of Mormon "Cumorah", has given Mormon academics (apologists and otherwise) cover from the geographic fallacy of Joseph Smith's musings. That cover is delicate, and any pronouncement by the Brethren would yank that cover right off and expose that geographic fallacy. I think what DCP fears is that if Book of Mormon geography discussion grows among the members, it will not only cause more defections but might also prompt another Watson-letter type pronouncement from the Brethren. Therein lies what I perceive as Neville posing a "potential threat to the peace and unity of the Saints."

[sock puppet]

It never ceases to amaze me when people -- invariably critics of the Church -- say that FAIR or Interpreter (or BoMC or FARMS or take your pick) has done more to hurt the Church than anything. Were that the case, I would think that critics would cease their own efforts and back (even monetarily) any one of those organizations because, after all, they hurt the Church more than anything.

Yet, having been intimately involved over the years with both FAIR and Interpreter (and at least tangentially involved with the others), I've never seen an outpouring of support from any critics for any of these organizations.

I can only draw from that fact one of two possible conclusions. Either (1) critics are trying to poison the well when it comes to the organizations because they don't know how to actually deal with what the organizations do, or (2) the critics are blowing smoke and don't have the slightest idea of what they opine upon.

What about you, CS? Are you willing to make a donation to help these organizations that are harming (the most! the most!) the Church with which you find fault? I'm sure it could do nothing but good in your eyes.

So, it's about money, then? What a weird chain of logic here. If something is working just fine, why throw money at it? I mean, I know that Wyatt is fishing here, but still. What a dumb argument.

It is a dumb argument. Wyatt does not admit of the possibility that rather than support FAIR, critics can damage the LDS church much more by provoking FAIR into making more twisted "explanations" in response to criticisms or going off on tangents and screeds. FAIR and the apologists so readily take the bait that the most effective tactic for critics is simply to poke FAIR with more criticisms of the LDS church. FAIR takes it from there and inflicts the damage for the critics.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

For a guy who doesn’t give much thought to Neville DCP sure does devote a lot of space to Neville. He just posted another couple of links to hit pieces on Neville. Speaking of “pants on fire”!

- Doc

[Dr Moore]

Won’t it be interesting to find how much money comes from More Good or a related shell to fund Neville Neville Land. I’m sure Smoot isn’t paying for the domain and hosting fees out of pocket.