Was Margaret Barker an element in FARMS Being Dismantled?!
Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 6:33 pm
Something just gonged in my head while re-reading Margaret Barker's materials (right now her book "The Mother of the Lord" just finished "On Earth as it is in Heaven" a nifty little book)
Barker is unconventional to say the least! But she knows her materials and languages. She isn't just whistling in the dark, but does minute examination of texts and writes very well. Hers is a detective story, and in many cases sort of melded into the Mormon apologetics themes of lost religions and future restorations. She has written a LOT. And FARMS began using her, praising her, inviting her to world conferences, interviewing her on video and posting on You Tube, encouraging the reading of her books, buying her materials, quoting her constantly in positive ways, etc. She was becoming THE go to "outsider" for some confirmation in some areas of apologetics, easily eclipsing the other outsider female author/scholar Jan Shipps. She became famous, well loved, well read, and everyone was being encouraged to read.
Now from a Mormon leadership (a.k.a. "The Brethren") point of view:
1. Who is this woman? Why is she being touted more than the prophets and apostles here concerning Mormonism?
2. She's a woman and does not have priesthood authority. How come she is more important than male Mormon authors who do have priesthood authority?
3. She is a non-Mormon, a Methodist preacher. Her word cannot possibly be more accurate, true, or right than ours from the Lord Jesus Christ himself.
4. Her Methodism should not be seen as valid, therefore quoting her so much cannot be acceptable.
5. Her insights cannot be had by the Holy Spirit because she has not and will not join the Church and accept proper Priesthood authority. Therefore why is her reading of the scriptures more used, appreciated, and supported than ours?
6. She is a woman minister. Others will see that this is a tacit admission that it is ok for women to lead a church, and Mormonism cannot abide by this. It is a very bad example and a threat against us.
7. Her books sell far better out of the BYU bookstore than anything we write or have written. This cannot be even implicitly good for our reputations.
8. For a non-Mormon to have a greater appreciation, following, and authority on how to interpret scriptures than we, the inspired brethren," cannot be allowed to stand. Her appreciation and evidence in favor of a powerful Divine and Worshipped Mother in the temple is absolutely forbidden! Even if she finds Her in the temple being worshipped and throughout Israel. We do not advocate that, and therefore her influence here has just got to be stopped.
9. Her research undermines the biblical priesthood authorized lines of proper descent as Joseph Smith taught. We cannot allow her materials to become more important than our own in this subject. We have the priesthood properly descended through the Fathers. Her work threatens this.
10. She is dividing our Mormon scholars. Some who accept our version of the truth and use our reasoning are implicitly shown to be out of touch with new scholarship, and many others of our brethren are persuaded by a woman and her research which is different than Joseph Smith's view. This cannot be tolerated.
Crazy as it seems on the surface, I now suspect Barker came to be more perceived as a threat than a help, but as she was so enmeshed and coordinated with apologetic efforts to confirm Mormon scriptures (at least how the apologists were using her materials) that she, as an outsider could not, of course, be directly told to go away, but the threat she posed could be eliminated handily if apologetics was to be changed. She had everything going against her ironic enough, from the Mormon hierarchy point of view, and she was without any malice or intent on her part, giving them all an ugly black eye. THEY were the ones who were supposed to be able to actually be able to defend the doctrines and historical interpretations defending Joseph Smith, not an unauthorized priesthoodless woman from another religion! There is simply no possible way to imagine Boyd K. Packer, Dallin Oaks, and Jeffrey Holland as being ok with her stardom within Mormonism, her materials being quoted and used in Sunday school lessons and Sacrament Meeting talks, and LDS firesides. They were and are thoroughly outclassed by her remarkable biblical scholarship and knowledge. Her place, as all other LDS women from the leadership point of view, was in cleaning the churches and their bathrooms, and providing food for the congregations at their parties and gathering, and doing the dishes afterwards while the men talk together at the tables about their latest research among themselves, not taking a lead in analysis of scripture and historical criticism, and doctrinal issues. She was to be an helpmeet, not the leader of our own priesthood bearing men. That is for the men to determine doctrine, not a mere non-Mormon woman.
Hey, to me that makes a great deal of sense.
Barker is unconventional to say the least! But she knows her materials and languages. She isn't just whistling in the dark, but does minute examination of texts and writes very well. Hers is a detective story, and in many cases sort of melded into the Mormon apologetics themes of lost religions and future restorations. She has written a LOT. And FARMS began using her, praising her, inviting her to world conferences, interviewing her on video and posting on You Tube, encouraging the reading of her books, buying her materials, quoting her constantly in positive ways, etc. She was becoming THE go to "outsider" for some confirmation in some areas of apologetics, easily eclipsing the other outsider female author/scholar Jan Shipps. She became famous, well loved, well read, and everyone was being encouraged to read.
Now from a Mormon leadership (a.k.a. "The Brethren") point of view:
1. Who is this woman? Why is she being touted more than the prophets and apostles here concerning Mormonism?
2. She's a woman and does not have priesthood authority. How come she is more important than male Mormon authors who do have priesthood authority?
3. She is a non-Mormon, a Methodist preacher. Her word cannot possibly be more accurate, true, or right than ours from the Lord Jesus Christ himself.
4. Her Methodism should not be seen as valid, therefore quoting her so much cannot be acceptable.
5. Her insights cannot be had by the Holy Spirit because she has not and will not join the Church and accept proper Priesthood authority. Therefore why is her reading of the scriptures more used, appreciated, and supported than ours?
6. She is a woman minister. Others will see that this is a tacit admission that it is ok for women to lead a church, and Mormonism cannot abide by this. It is a very bad example and a threat against us.
7. Her books sell far better out of the BYU bookstore than anything we write or have written. This cannot be even implicitly good for our reputations.
8. For a non-Mormon to have a greater appreciation, following, and authority on how to interpret scriptures than we, the inspired brethren," cannot be allowed to stand. Her appreciation and evidence in favor of a powerful Divine and Worshipped Mother in the temple is absolutely forbidden! Even if she finds Her in the temple being worshipped and throughout Israel. We do not advocate that, and therefore her influence here has just got to be stopped.
9. Her research undermines the biblical priesthood authorized lines of proper descent as Joseph Smith taught. We cannot allow her materials to become more important than our own in this subject. We have the priesthood properly descended through the Fathers. Her work threatens this.
10. She is dividing our Mormon scholars. Some who accept our version of the truth and use our reasoning are implicitly shown to be out of touch with new scholarship, and many others of our brethren are persuaded by a woman and her research which is different than Joseph Smith's view. This cannot be tolerated.
Crazy as it seems on the surface, I now suspect Barker came to be more perceived as a threat than a help, but as she was so enmeshed and coordinated with apologetic efforts to confirm Mormon scriptures (at least how the apologists were using her materials) that she, as an outsider could not, of course, be directly told to go away, but the threat she posed could be eliminated handily if apologetics was to be changed. She had everything going against her ironic enough, from the Mormon hierarchy point of view, and she was without any malice or intent on her part, giving them all an ugly black eye. THEY were the ones who were supposed to be able to actually be able to defend the doctrines and historical interpretations defending Joseph Smith, not an unauthorized priesthoodless woman from another religion! There is simply no possible way to imagine Boyd K. Packer, Dallin Oaks, and Jeffrey Holland as being ok with her stardom within Mormonism, her materials being quoted and used in Sunday school lessons and Sacrament Meeting talks, and LDS firesides. They were and are thoroughly outclassed by her remarkable biblical scholarship and knowledge. Her place, as all other LDS women from the leadership point of view, was in cleaning the churches and their bathrooms, and providing food for the congregations at their parties and gathering, and doing the dishes afterwards while the men talk together at the tables about their latest research among themselves, not taking a lead in analysis of scripture and historical criticism, and doctrinal issues. She was to be an helpmeet, not the leader of our own priesthood bearing men. That is for the men to determine doctrine, not a mere non-Mormon woman.
Hey, to me that makes a great deal of sense.