MYTH DISPELLED: LDS Apologists Are Paid

[_Mister Scratch]

For those who seldom visit the Telestial Forum, I figured it would be worthwhile to bring up some very intriguing material that came up during my brief conversation with Prof. Peterson. It turns out that, despite much talk to the contrary, that LDS apologists do indeed get paid to do apologetics. For the most part, their "payment" appears to be relatively minimal, but DCP and others are trying to change that. You can read the entire back-and-forth down in the Telestial Forum, but I'm going to go ahead and cut-and-paste some tidbits for those who prefer to read the "Cliff's Notes" version.

First, DCP mentions the many amateur Mopologists, such as those who operate FAIR and SHIELDS, thus helping to establish a kind of hierarchy of Mopologists:

The overwhelming number of those who participate in apologetics receive no financial compensation whatever, so far as I know. Writers for the FARMS Review, on the other hand, receive a free copy of the book that they're reviewing (if they're reviewing a book and if they don't already own it) and a free copy of the Review in which their piece appears.

What he's describing here is pretty much standard practice in academic publishing. Next, he goes on to describe the remuneration he is given for editing the FARMS Review:

For the past few years -- five or six, I think -- I have received a small token payment when an issue of the Review comes from the press. This is supposed to reward me for my editorial services, though I'm not sure, when it's apportioned by hour of effort, that it even rises to the level of the minimum wage. That's it.

This is where the question of payment for Mopologetics gets more complicated.

I receive no salary for apologetics. (I've never, despite your allegation, said that I receive absolutely no compensation whatever. I realize that you would love to catch me in a lie, but you haven't.) My salary is for teaching and, over the past decade or so, especially for directing and editing the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative and performing certain other administrative duties at BYU.

(emphasis added)

I wondered if these "administrative duties" had anything to do with apologetics, and so I asked.

Do part of these "administrative duties" relate to apologetics?

And his reply:

On the whole, no. And very seldom directly. They relate to personnel issues, editorial discussions, financial questions, dealings with the Dead Sea Scrolls Foundation and the Vatican Apostolic Library, and the like. Not a penny of my salary rewards me for writing a single word of apologetics; my salary would be unchanged if I never wrote a single line of apologetic materials.

(emphasis added)

I think that these bolded portions are very important, since DCP has strenuously attempted to argue that "none---not a dime" of his salary related to apologetics. He is now saying "on the whole" that it does not. That's fair enough, of course, but is he now admitting that, in fact, it can legitimately be said that some of his salary comes from being an LDS apologist?

Not that I think him getting compensated is in any way wrong, of course! I just wish there were a bit more transparency here from the Church, and that Mopologists would simply say, "Yes, we are being paid to defend the Church."

Later, DCP went on to elaborate a bit about what his "editorial duties" entail:

Strictly speaking, the small token payments have come from editorial work. Correcting punctuation, rephrasing sentences, etc., is not really apologetics; the process is the same whether I'm editing Mark Ashurst-McGee responding to Dan Vogel or a translation of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.

Here was my reply:

Oh? Is that what it says on the paycheck---"for correcting typos and spelling errors"? I think you're trying a bit to hard to distance yourself from the real truth, which is that you get paid to do apologetics. In your capacity as editor, you also cull through the slush pile, right? Oh, wait---that's right. Unlike normal academic journals, FARMS Review doesn't really have a slush pile, as nearly all of the pieces are commissioned. In that case, I assume that part of your remuneration stems for your function as a "selector" of authors, and of peer reviewers.

Come to think of it, doesn't that finally drive the last nail in the coffin for your claim that peer review for FARMS Review is a-okay? I mean, isn't it the truth that you both commission articles, and select the peer reviewers? It seems to me that that would compromise the process significantly. Certainly, it marks a very big departure from normative peer review practices. Doesn't it?

Perhaps the most interesting tidbit that surfaced was this:

Editors of books published by the Maxwell Institute have, over the past few years, begun to receive similarly token compensation for their efforts, and contributors to anthologies have generally received a check in the $50-100 range for their contributions. Authors of FARMS books originally received no royalties (the money was plowed back into the Foundation), but, lately, we've revisited that policy in an effort to make publishing with us roughly comparable, financially speaking, with publishing elsewhere in the Mormon market.

What does this mean? As far as I can tell, DCP is stating that they are in the midst of trying to improve their finances so that they can attract more and more people into the Mopologetic fold. Amateur Mopologetics, as exemplified by the folks at FAIR, and people such as juliann, Scott Gordon, and Kerry Shirts, apparently leave something to be desired. It seems clear to me that the Maxwell Institute wants to get better apologists, and this seems to be acknowledgment that they will need more cash to do it.

So, in summary:

---LDS apologists are paid. Their payment might be rather small, but plans are in the works to change this.
---Part of DCP's salary seems to related to apologetics, contrary to his many denials on this issue. (It's worth noting that he fled the scene after this was revealed).
---It remains unclear whether apologetics is a part of the salaries of other "high-end" apologists such as Bill Hamblin and John Gee.
---On a sidenote, DCP admitted that he both commissions and selects the peer reviewers for FARMS Review, meaning that the objectivity one strives for in normal peer review is a virtual impossibility.

All in all, it is nice to lay this very old Mopologetic myth to rest. This has long been comparable, in my opinion, to the TBM faith-promoting belief that the Brethren don't---or didn't---profit from their status in the Church.

[_Infymus]

What does this mean? As far as I can tell, DCP is stating that they are in the midst of trying to improve their finances so that they can attract more and more people into the Mopologetic fold. Amateur Mopologetics, as exemplified by the folks at FAIR, and people such as juliann, Scott Gordon, and Kerry Shirts, apparently leave something to be desired. It seems clear to me that the Maxwell Institute wants to get better apologists, and this seems to be acknowledgment that they will need more cash to do it.

Doesn't that mean they are trying to find better liars?

Those who are like Peterson can write fifty thousand word documents whose soul objective is not to provide an answer - but to bury the real truths so deep in hypocrisy, mile long tangents and total obsfucation. People like Kerry, Julian, Gordon and Shirts are making the first mistakes of Mopology: Try to provide answers and show proof. Mormonism can't do any of this - it never could. The best defense Mopologists have is to lie, bury and obsfucate. When challenged to debate always personally attack the character of whomever asks for the debate as being spiritual, morally or intellectually bankrupt - or better yet, accuse them of not having as high a standard as the Mopologist has.

We all know that Peterson is paid by being an apologist. If I spent all of my time at my job doing work for which I was not paid for, I would be eventually fired. Peterson, OTOH, spends countless hours on apologetics and the COB and BYU absolutely look the other way day in and day out, year after year.

The Mopologists need to retreat. They are being beaten on every front. Every time they come out with some kind of archaeological "evidence", it immediately is shown how they took some wild idea out of their asses and tried to make it fit within Mormonism.

The best thing Mopologists can do is retreat. Lock up all of the doctrines, all of the scrolls, all of the books, manuscripts - or anything else relevant to the Cult, and continue to spout off testimonies and obedience. Otherwise, as with the recent discussions about the KEP and Book of Abraham, they are going to be exposed for what they are: Total frauds.

OTOH, look at what Peterson has been able to accomplish lately. He is changing over a hundred years of Cult teachings. He has become the new Mormon Cult Prophet. Because really, he is changing the doctrine. And because the COB is doing absolutely nothing to silence him about such things as the seer stones and the head in the hat, the money he is paid by BYU to be a professor isn't affected by his constant Mopologetic works.

Julian is just a self centered controlling bitch. If it wasn't for her forums where she can have complete control while tirading around in her year long PMS rage, she'd be an absolute nobody.

And the other apologists out there like Jeff Lindsay. Every time he posts something new it is riddled down and shown to be exactly what it is: A bunch of farking crap that he has pulled out of his ass in order to try and prove to himself and Mormons that the Cult is true.

I don't know Scratch. I don't see it as a big secret that Mopologists like Peterson are paid. It actually surprises me that the COB doesn't keep better track of him, considering the assanine statements he has made over the last year about the Jews and what not. /Shrug.

[_Droopy]

Doesn't that mean they are trying to find better liars?

Those who are like Peterson can write fifty thousand word documents whose soul objective is not to provide an answer - but to bury the real truths so deep in hypocrisy, mile long tangents and total obsfucation. People like Kerry, Julian, Gordon and Shirts are making the first mistakes of Mopology: Try to provide answers and show proof. Mormonism can't do any of this - it never could. The best defense Mopologists have is to lie, bury and obsfucate. When challenged to debate always personally attack the character of whomever asks for the debate as being spiritual, morally or intellectually bankrupt - or better yet, accuse them of not having as high a standard as the Mopologist has.

We all know that Peterson is paid by being an apologist. If I spent all of my time at my job doing work for which I was not paid for, I would be eventually fired. Peterson, OTOH, spends countless hours on apologetics and the COB and BYU absolutely look the other way day in and day out, year after year.

The Mopologists need to retreat. They are being beaten on every front. Every time they come out with some kind of archaeological "evidence", it immediately is shown how they took some wild idea out of their asses and tried to make it fit within Mormonism.

The best thing Mopologists can do is retreat. Lock up all of the doctrines, all of the scrolls, all of the books, manuscripts - or anything else relevant to the Cult, and continue to spout off testimonies and obedience. Otherwise, as with the recent discussions about the KEP and Book of Abraham, they are going to be exposed for what they are: Total frauds.

OTOH, look at what Peterson has been able to accomplish lately. He is changing over a hundred years of Cult teachings. He has become the new Mormon Cult Prophet. Because really, he is changing the doctrine. And because the COB is doing absolutely nothing to silence him about such things as the seer stones and the head in the hat, the money he is paid by BYU to be a professor isn't affected by his constant Mopologetic works.

Julian is just a self centered controlling bitch. If it wasn't for her forums where she can have complete control while tirading around in her year long PMS rage, she'd be an absolute nobody.

And the other apologists out there like Jeff Lindsay. Every time he posts something new it is riddled down and shown to be exactly what it is: A bunch of farking crap that he has pulled out of his ass in order to try and prove to himself and Mormons that the Cult is true.

I don't know Scratch. I don't see it as a big secret that Mopologists like Peterson are paid. It actually surprises me that the COB doesn't keep better track of him, considering the assanine statements he has made over the last year about the Jews and what not. /Shrug.

Exhibit 'c'.

[_Jersey Girl]

People like Kerry, Julian, Gordon and Shirts

Who?

[_Droopy]

What is the thread title?

[_The Dude]

For those who seldom visit the Telestial Forum, I figured it would be worthwhile to bring up some very intriguing material that came up during my brief conversation with Prof. Peterson.

Thanks Mr. Scratch. I rarely visit the Telestial Forum. Maybe I should go there more often.

I thought this part was most interesting, but I think it goes against what you are seeking as a mythbuster:

On the whole, no. And very seldom directly. They relate to personnel issues, editorial discussions, financial questions, dealings with the Dead Sea Scrolls Foundation and the Vatican Apostolic Library, and the like. Not a penny of my salary rewards me for writing a single word of apologetics; my salary would be unchanged if I never wrote a single line of apologetic materials.

emphasis added

DCP said he wouldn't loose any salary if he stopped writing as an apologist. If this is true, and it most likely is, then it cannot also be true that DCP is getting paid to be an apologist. So the myth that apologists are paid is still a myth, in my opinion.

On the other hand, he does get paid for his faith in the LDS church, just like every other professor at BYU. If he obviously stopped having faith in the Church, or stopped presenting the facade of belief, he would be in danger of loosing his job. Ergo, they get paid for their belief. Isn't that just as scandalous as what you are trying to nail down?

[_bcspace]

Just as I thought. Apologist are not paid, nor are there any plans to do so in the future. I think you guys are straining at a gnat.

LDS apologists are paid. Their payment might be rather small, but plans are in the works to change this.

I think the Church realizes that this would create an unyielding self-aggrandizing theologian class which is why it's not going to happen. We have the nazis at Student Life to thank for this lesson..........

[_Trevor]

I am with the Duder on this one. One of the brilliant things about religion is its ability to motivate people to work without remuneration. Why pay people to do something that they would do gratis? The LDS Church is a notoriously stingy employer. They typically underpay for just about everything, and mostly because people consider it a blessing to be able to contribute to the cause.

The larger reality of how the LDS Church handles paying for goods and services, i.e. letting the members foot the bill and donate stuff, flies in the face of what you are trying to pin on DCP et al. The truth is that these guys believe so fervently that they work for peanuts, give some of their salary back as tithes and offerings (it all belongs to God in the first place, no?), and are only too happy to spend much of their free time in the service of the great cause of Zion.

Besides, the real money in LDS publishing has always been in the Deseret Book spiritual books, not in apologetic writing. If you want to see BYU professors who make some decent cash for writing, look to the religion department. Those guys get pretty nice book deals. One of my former friends in the religion department was practically frothing at the mouth when he explained it to me. People writing for the FARMS Review and the like get practically nothing. DCP is not getting rich off of apologetics, and I frankly wouldn't care if he did make a couple of bucks off it.

[_Mister Scratch]

On the whole, no. And very seldom directly. They relate to personnel issues, editorial discussions, financial questions, dealings with the Dead Sea Scrolls Foundation and the Vatican Apostolic Library, and the like. Not a penny of my salary rewards me for writing a single word of apologetics; my salary would be unchanged if I never wrote a single line of apologetic materials.

emphasis added

DCP said he wouldn't loose any salary if he stopped writing as an apologist. If this is true, and it most likely is, then it cannot also be true that DCP is getting paid to be an apologist. So the myth that apologists are paid is still a myth, in my opinion.

On the other hand, he does get paid for his faith in the LDS church, just like every other professor at BYU. If he obviously stopped having faith in the Church, or stopped presenting the facade of belief, he would be in danger of loosing his job. Ergo, they get paid for their belief. Isn't that just as scandalous as what you are trying to nail down?

Well, Dude, I think that you have to take great care in interpreting what DCP says on these matters. He is very, very careful to avoid outrightly admitting that he gets paid---even on penny!---to do anything pertaining to apologetics. Thus, in all of his answers, he avoided stated that he gets paid to "write" apologetics. But, does that mean that he's not paid to edit the FARMS Review, and select peer reviewers, and commission articles? I mean, does anyone want to try and argue that those things aren't crucial to the Mopologetic undertaking?

The fact of the matter is that he *does* get paid to do Mopologetics. For him to try and sidestep the truth of this by claiming that he doesn't get paid to "write" is merely sophistry. (What, does his paycheck stipulate that his Editor's Intro cannot and does not count towards his supplemental Maxwell Institute income?) In any case, my point is that there has been a longstanding "myth" amongst TBMs that apologetics is a purely volunteer venture. And that isn't true.

[_Droopy]

Pure, unreconstructed sophistry. All as usual.

Move along, nothing to see here.