Re: Midgley and Nathan Whilk Slam Blair Hodges, Exult in Changes to "New" MI
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2021 2:49 am
Dripdripdripdrip ...
President Wriston > Louis Midgley
This is a distortion of the truth. Many, many people had complained about the behavior that had been exhibited in the FARMS Review over time. Everyone from John Charles Duffy, to Morgan Davis, to Richard Bushman and the people at Signature Books had complained, all to no avail. Up until the "changing of the guard," that is. Throughout all of this, there absolutely were some among the 15 who didn't approve of FARMS's more extremist antics.The tall tale that was (and still is) being circulated, when Professor Peterson was fired by email yet, when he was on University business in Jerusalem, is that the Brethren had ordered it, and they had done so because they hated our defense of the faith and the Saints.
It's also not accurate that the Brethren "hated [y]our defense of the faith." Some of the Brethren approved, but there were others who didn't. Ultimately, things lined up such that enough of the Brethren had finally had enough of the "No uncontested slam dunks" approach to apologetics. They were tired of things like "Metcalfe is Butthead," and the squabble with John Dehlin, and so the plug was pulled. Jerry Bradford was willing to allow Prof. Peterson to stay on board in a consultative capacity, but as we all know, Prof. Peterson stormed off in an angry huff.
−————-
DanielPeterson > President Wriston
PW: "Many, many people had complained about the behavior that had been exhibited in the FARMS Review over time. Everyone from John Charles Duffy, to Morgan Davis, to Richard Bushman and the people at Signature Books had complained, all to no avail."
To whom had Richard Bushman complained? Richard never complained to me. Nor did Morgan Davis, until shortly before he helped to engineer my ouster.
That John Charles Duffy and the folks at Signature Books disapproved of writing that disagreed with them is scarcly news.
PW: "Throughout all of this, there absolutely were some among the 15 who didn't approve of FARMS's more extremist antics. . . . Some of the Brethren approved, but there were others who didn't."
Who? And how do you know that?
PW: "Ultimately, things lined up such that enough of the Brethren had finally had enough of the "No uncontested slam dunks" approach to apologetics."
In other words, you're saying, they rejected Elder Maxwell's concept of apologetics.
Evidence, please? Be specific.
PW: "They were tired of things like "Metcalfe is Butthead," and the squabble with John Dehlin, and so the plug was pulled."
Evidence, please?
PW: "Jerry Bradford was willing to allow Prof. Peterson to stay on board in a consultative capacity, but as we all know, Prof. Peterson stormed off in an angry huff."
No, we don't all know that. I don't know it, for example.
Please provide your sources for these allegations. Or, alternatively, stop spreading malicious gossip.
−——————
President Wriston > DanielPeterson
It's hardly a secret who supported what I've called the "extremist antics." Just look up the old accounts of which of the 15 came and spoke at FARMS events.Who? And how do you know that?
Are you really saying or suggesting that "Elder Maxwell's concept of apologetics" included things like "Metcalfe is Butthead"? How about getting sued by Kurt Van Gorden? Was that part of Elder Maxwell's playbook? To extend the metaphor: you can stop a dunk by blocking the opposing player's shot. You can also stop it with a flagrant foul. I think that Elder Maxwell and the Brethren understood which approach was preferable.In other words, you're saying, they rejected Elder Maxwell's concept of apologetics.
Do you mean that Bradford offered to keep you on as a consultant? It's right there in his email to you.No, we don't all know that. I don't know it, for example.
−—————
DanielPeterson > President Wriston
PW: "It's hardly a secret who supported what I've called the "extremist antics." Just look up the old accounts of which of the 15 came and spoke at FARMS events."
In your pseudohistorical comment here, PW, you allege that there were complaints from the top Church leaders in Salt Lake City. I simply ask you for specific names and for your sources.
PW: "How about getting sued by Kurt Van Gorden? Was that part of Elder Maxwell's playbook?"
It certainly wasn't part of mine. Mr. Van Gorden was upset by a negative book review. But anybody can sue anybody for anything, and the judge tossed Mr. Van Gorden's suit out "with prejudice," as having no merit.
PW: "I think that Elder Maxwell and the Brethren understood which approach was preferable"
You can, of course, think anything that you like. I'm asking for specifics and for evidence. Otherwise, you're simply engaging in malicious gossip.
PW: "Do you mean that Bradford offered to keep you on as a consultant?"
It's quite undeniably clear that, for whatever reasons, Jerry Bradford wanted me gone. I've never denied that. I'm asking you for evidence that the Brethren were upset with me and that they ordered my expulsion.
Put up or shut up.