More on the Financing of Mopologetics

[_Mister Scratch]

I have just received a "communique" from one of my "tipsters." Let us call this informant "Kathleen."

This I found out for certain. Matt Roper . . . gets paid by the Maxwell Institute. That is a fact. Another fact . . . is that when Dan [made one of his recent Mopologetic "trips"] he brought a "fundraiser" with him. His job was to find "deep pockets to donate to the Maxwell Institute." Those were my [source's] exact words. Fundraiser, and deep pockets. [The source] said the guy even tried to get him to upgrade his FARMS membership... And this "fundraiser" was no doubt employed by the Maxwell Institute, according to my [source].

A few things sparked my interest:

Did Dan really bring this man with him when he [went on the trip] with the purpose of hitting . . . rich members up for cash? Or was this a business trip for Dan too, and they were both on assignment? Who were they were working for? Was Dan being paid to deliver a fireside? Does the Maxwell Institute have a sales rep? What do they call people who hit rich people and celebrities up on behalf of charities? Was he one of those people? I wonder...

Hope you find this information useful, take care.

(edited to protect identities)

Well, this is very interesting. Of course, it's not out of the ordinary for non-profit organizations to engage in fundraising. But, again, I have to wonder about all this. What, exactly, is going on behind the scenes? Apparently, according to "Kathleen," Matt Roper is a full-time employee of FARMS, which means that, in essence, the Church, through BYU, is indeed paying for professional apologetics.

On the other hand, this "fundraising campaign" makes me wonder a bit about the true nature of FARMS, and of DCP's function as a kind of liaison between BYU and the Maxwell Institute. Who is paying for these "fundraising trips"? Further, who is this shadowy figure whose purpose is to milk wealthy LDS for FARMS "blood money"? In the end, I believe this constitutes yet another bit of evidence that the Church is paying for apologetics. Of course, it is happening in the sneaking, "end around" way that we witnessed during the Mark Hoffman episode: i.e., the Church, via the Maxwell Institute, is employing a professional fundraiser in order to squeeze funds out of wealthy Church members in order to finance apologetics.

Quite intriguing, in any case.

[_Trevor]

Back in the '90s, when I was a BYU student, I was aware of a fund-raising institution called the "LDS Foundation," which solicited big donations from wealthy contributors. The wife of one of my professors was a manager in this unit. I would not be surprised if the foundation were still running strong. The LDS Church is expert at raising money. BYU receives large donations from wealthy non-members who simply like the values and image of the university. Also, when I was a student, at the same time we were being counseled about the evils of credit, BYU's Lighting the Way campaign was advocating that students donate money to the university using their credit cards.

I have no doubt that fund raising is a big issue for FARMS and the Neal Maxwell Institute, but it is for all such institutions. If I were a wealthy believer, I would be more than happy to invest in scholarship that investigated the past from an LDS perspective. Does the LDS Church pay for its apologetics? Of course, and it probably does so like it pays for everything else--by getting the members to pony up the do-re-mi. Why are we so concerned about it? Because these facts make some of the apologists uncomfortable?

[_Mister Scratch]

Why are we so concerned about it? Because these facts make some of the apologists uncomfortable?

Yes.

[_antishock8]

More importantly, why do church members like Mr. Peterson only give up tiny little pieces of information until either caught in a lie, or through slip of the tongue? What is so terribly bad about the Mormon church employing apologists? Regardless, it's clear the Mormon church does it, pays for it, and encourages it. I'm not even sure why this is a mystery to anyone.

Mormon Church->BYU->FARMS->Maxwell Institute

Mormon Church employs professors @ BYU. BYU professors constitute FARMS. FARMS members make up Maxwell Institute. Voila. Round and around we go...

[_Mister Scratch]

More importantly, why do church members like Mr. Peterson only give up tiny little pieces of information until either caught in a lie, or through slip of the tongue? What is so terribly bad about the Mormon church employing apologists? Regardless, it's clear the Mormon church does it, pays for it, and encourages it. I'm not even sure why this is a mystery to anyone.

Mormon Church->BYU->FARMS->Maxwell Institute

Mormon Church employs professors @ BYU. BYU professors constitute FARMS. FARMS members make up Maxwell Institute. Voila. Round and around we go...

Yes, and what's even more intriguing is the fact that they apparently pay to fly DCP and this mysterious "fundraiser" out to various parts of the country in order to try and drum up donations. I have a dear friend who has worked for many years in university fundraising, and this sort of thing seems rather atypical. Kevin Graham suggested in another thread that Mopologetics is DCP's "passion." Thus, it is interesting to observe the depths this "passion" reaches.

[_moksha]

Since the apologists do not get paid, this fundraising money could only mean one thing: An unending supply of donuts for all at the Maxwell Institute, including all those covert operations specialists with their server farms and monitoring arrays down in the basement of the Maxwell. Even as we speak, they are monitoring our keystrokes and waiting, just waiting to somehow disrupt our communications.

[_Mister Scratch]

Since the apologists do not get paid, this fundraising money could only mean one thing: An unending supply of donuts for all at the Maxwell Institute, including all those covert operations specialists with their server farms and monitoring arrays down in the basement of the Maxwell. Even as we speak, they are monitoring our keystrokes and waiting, just waiting to somehow disrupt our communications.

Lol. Well, actually, we have learned that DCP, Matt Roper, and this clandestine "fundraiser" are all paid.

[_GoodK]

Since the apologists do not get paid, this fundraising money could only mean one thing: An unending supply of donuts for all at the Maxwell Institute, including all those covert operations specialists with their server farms and monitoring arrays down in the basement of the Maxwell. Even as we speak, they are monitoring our keystrokes and waiting, just waiting to somehow disrupt our communications.

Lol. Well, actually, we have learned that DCP, Matt Roper, and this clandestine "fundraiser" are all paid.

Might I add that research assistants are paid by the Maxwell Institue. Or has that already been established.

[_harmony]

I guess I don't understand the problem with this, from the apologists' perspective.

What is so bad about being paid for what they do? If they're uncomfortable about being paid as volunteers, they need to get into the real world more. My DH is a volunteer EMT captain with our all-volunteer ambulance crew. He gets paid a month stipend for his captain duties, plus $20 an hour for every ambulance run he's on. Most months, that adds up to several hundred dollars. Yet he's a volunteer. Everyone on the crew is a volunteer; everyone here knows they're all volunteers and that tax payer money supports the system.

Do the apologists think that if the fact that they get paid gets out to their public that somehow that dilutes their message? Or is it tied to the "no paid clergy" thing, which we all know is a crock? Or is it simply because if it's generally known that they are paid, then the expectation would be that their apologetics would actually have some substance, and they know they do not? Or is because they want to be seen as generous, to a group that is not known for its generosity outside of the mandated tithing? Or is it somehow tied to the idea that they, as apologists, are setting doctrine, not the prophet?

[_GoodK]

I guess I don't understand the problem with this, from the apologists' perspective.

What is so bad about being paid for what they do? If they're uncomfortable about being paid as volunteers, they need to get into the real world more. My DH is a volunteer EMT captain with our all-volunteer ambulance crew. He gets paid a month stipend for his captain duties, plus $20 an hour for every ambulance run he's on. Most months, that adds up to several hundred dollars. Yet he's a volunteer. Everyone on the crew is a volunteer; everyone here knows they're all volunteers and that tax payer money supports the system.

Do the apologists think that if the fact that they get paid gets out to their public that somehow that dilutes their message? Or is it tied to the "no paid clergy" thing, which we all know is a crock? Or is it simply because if it's generally known that they are paid, then the expectation would be that their apologetics would actually have some substance, and they know they do not? Or is because they want to be seen as generous, to a group that is not known for its generosity outside of the mandated tithing? Or is it somehow tied to the idea that they, as apologists, are setting doctrine, not the prophet?

Why are we so concerned about it? Because these facts make some of the apologists uncomfortable?

Yes.

I think it has to do with Bertrand Russell's theory on evidence over interest. These apologists want people to think they are doing it for no other reason than defending the church or spreading the truth. But it could have to do with the paid clergy thing. I doubt many members would want their tithing going to such a mediocre publication.
I actually got my dad to tell me yesterday that IF the GA's got paid an excessive salary, that would bother him. Now I just need to figure out a way to find out how much they get paid.