Are the Apologists 'Set Apart' by the Brethren?

[_silentkid]

Mormon Apologist (on knees before desk in office at BYU, arms folded, eyes closed): Dear Heavenly Father, I come before you in humility and supplication. I've researched the Lamanite DNA issue to the best of my ability. I truly believe that the Lehite group quickly intermingled with a large group of natives in a tiny location in Mesoamerica. I will call this the Limited Geography Theory. I'm planning on writing about it in the next issue of the FARMS Review. Am I correct in my thinking? I say these things, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Holy Ghost: *sends a feeling of peace and understanding mixed with a slight burning sensation to the bosom of the apologist*

Mormon Apologist: I'm confident that my work is true.

<A couple of years later>

Critic: But the Book of Mormon doesn't mention "others". Neither do the words of Joseph Smith, the man who had the closest relationship with the book. In fact, his words suggest that the Lehites inhabited an empty land and quickly spread from shore to shore, all the way to New York.

Mormon Apologist: Some of the words of the prophets are opinions. In this instance, Joseph was speaking as a man, not as the mouthpiece of God in revelation.

Critic: But how do you know he was only speaking as a man and not as a prophet.

Mormon Apologist: I know (recalling the witness of the Holy Ghost he received a couple of years before).

[_Mister Scratch]

Do you think they were "set apart" in some sense?

Not in the usual sense and I don't know what else you mean.

I just meant that there is some sort of tacit understanding between the Brethren and the "big-league" apologists, perhaps with some laying-on-of-the-hands involved. Now, I don't think that this sort of thing would take place with a full-on circle of the Brethren---it might just be one apostle, such as Oaks or Packer, offering up a blessing to DCP, or Midgley, or Gee, or whomever else.

[_Mister Scratch]

Do the apologists feel that their work is spiritual?

I think there is a difference between considering your work to be guided spiritually and proclaiming that God has revealed certain things to you. In other words, I think the apologists view their work as spiritual, but they do no set themselves up as an alternate revelatory authority to the church.

Oh, I agree. I am not contending that they are announcing "revelations," ala Meldrum. But I do think that there is a clear "spiritual" sanction of their work---at both the individual and Brethren levels. That is, the Brethren have "blessed" them, and they have prayed for confirmation. They can deny this if it's wrong. DCP regularly reads this board, after all.

[_cinepro]

Are we talking about some apologists receiving a generic "Priesthood Blessing" of knowledge, wisdom, strength etc., or a more specific "Setting Apart" to certain duties and responsibilities?

I would guess the likelyhood of the former much greater than the latter.

Has anyone actually asked DCP or BH? I could understand a reluctance to share personal experiences, but if DCP came out and denied it, I'd take his word for it.

[_TAK]

I don't think its a stretch that DCP would have been set apart for his role with FARMS ..

[_cinepro]

I don't think its a stretch that DCP would have been set apart for his role with FARMS ..

I'm not familiar with how BYU operates in relation to the Church, so it could be possible. It just seems really weird to have people "set apart" for their jobs. Are employees at the COB "set apart" when they are hired?

[_TAK]

I don't think its a stretch that DCP would have been set apart for his role with FARMS ..

I'm not familiar with how BYU operates in relation to the Church, so it could be possible. It just seems really weird to have people "set apart" for their jobs. Are employees at the COB "set apart" when they are hired?

Its my understanding church callings get set apart and DCP insists this is not a paid position. I see his role like that of a missionary - to develop testimonies and hence it smells like a church calling. But if he wants to come here and say he was not .. fine. It matters not either way.

[_The Nehor]

When you finally leave the church, you'll probably feel inclined to apologise to a few people for calling them names. That's cool.

Whether or not I stay in the Church, that comment stands. If it makes you feel any better, I have the same perception of Scratch and Gad.

[_Mister Scratch]

I don't think its a stretch that DCP would have been set apart for his role with FARMS ..

I'm not familiar with how BYU operates in relation to the Church, so it could be possible. It just seems really weird to have people "set apart" for their jobs. Are employees at the COB "set apart" when they are hired?

Cinepro---

You're raising a lot of interesting questions, but we have to be careful about conflating our terms here. See, Mopologetics isn't a "job" for most of the apologists---hence why DCP claimed that "not one dime" of his salary was for apologetics (a statement that wasn't quite true, by the way).

The real issue at stake here is whether or not the Brethren have given any sort of "official" sanction to the actions of the apologists--i.e., sanction that goes beyond the simple existence of the MI. See, the apologists have always struggled mightily to insist that they don't have any real connection to the Church; according to them, they are just a bunch of hobbyists and dilettantes who happen to love the Church, and who happen to "take defending the Church very seriously." But many critics---myself included---have long thought that this wasn't quite true. It's far more likely, in my opinion, that the Brethren are "calling the shots" in some way---that they are pulling the strings in a more significant way than the apologists have led us to believe. (Your own thread on the Miracle of Apologetics lends further credence to this: Do you really think the Brethren would allow this sort of revisionary doctrine to stand if they disagreed with it in any way? Of course not. Probably they have given the apologists some kind of "carte blanche" in this regard.)

Thus, if the apologists were either "set apart," or were given a blessing in order to do apologetics, we would have evidence of a more "official" connection. This is what The Nehor and others don't want to be true, because it would be devastating for them. But, DCP, "The Midge," or Hamblin can clarify at any time, of course. Meanwhile, I think it is safe to continue assuming that they were given blessings and/or were set apart.

[_Jason Bourne]

Nope. Not true.

I suppose that speculation, however, passes for evidence so it must be true.

What's your evidence that they haven't been set apart?

Wow. Pure quintessential Scratchism.

Make a totally unfounded and unsupported claim that it totally out of his warped conspiracy theory mind and when challenged, why demand proof that his wild claim is false.


You are loosing it Scratch.