Gerald Bradford succeeded Andy as executive director. In retrospect, Jerry significantly changed the course of my career. Back in 2013, he invited my perspective about a change of course he was contemplating for the Mormon Studies Review. I gave my two cents, figured I’d helped in some small way and then was stunned when he offered me the editorship several weeks later! Editing the Review has been an unexpectedly fulfilling academic endeavor for me. It also brought me into the Maxwell Institute’s orbit, for which I’m deeply grateful. Jerry perceptively saw a critical role for the Institute with the broader academic study of the Latter-day Saints and I’m unquestionably the beneficiary of that vision.
One wonders if we will get follow-up commentary from the Mopologists comparing the output of the MSR with the blog-site known as Mormon Interpreter. While many of their past swipes were aimed explicitly at Gerald Bradford, this shows that Fluhman--with whom they seem to have much more cordial relations--was actually at the helm of the journal, and that he oversaw controversial publications such as the one by Ben Park from a couple of years ago. It once again raises a fundamental question: Are the Mopologists' quarrels truly over matters of doctrine, ethics, and the gospel? Or, instead, are they motivated by personal animus?
Meanwhile, a key apologist has responded to Fluhman's posting, hailing it as a "gracious note." The mention of the note turns into an occasion to set the record straight:
Sic et Non wrote:I recently encountered a narrative online that provided its readers a fairly detailed and wholly false account of my exit from the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative or METI. With that in mind, here’s something of my own perspective on, specifically, METI.
What follows is a lucid, sometimes self-serving narrative that lays out in very nice detail the origin of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative--which, I think many of us agree, in line with Fluhman, was arguably the greatest thing that any of the Mopologists did. The entry continues:
We have not infrequently had Jewish translators working with Muslim editors on medieval Christian texts for publication by a Mormon university. I’ve loved it. I feel that the project has done something very important. Perhaps many things.
In the sense that the project represented a genuine and productive act of giving something back to the world of scholarship, it's hard to disagree with the sentiments here. The entry wraps up thusly:
On the morning of 11 September 2001, I was preparing to head up to campus when my wife called to me. “You need to see this,” she said, and we watched together in horror as the first of the World Trade Center towers burned. I wondered at first if it were merely a horrific accident. (I’d often flown into New York City and marveled, during some approaches, at how close we were to the big buildings in Manhattan.) Then we saw the second plane hit the other tower, and we knew that this was no accident. I was immediately certain that this was a deliberate attack by al-Qa‘ida. (Simultaneous attacks, as in the earlier case of the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, were their signature style.)
My little attempt at bridge-building seemed pointless, small, futile. Overwhelmed by events. And then I heard a voice. Not an audible one, but very distinct nonetheless. “The project is more important now than it has ever been,” it said.
I believe that still.
The importance of the project was affirmed by no less than the Holy Ghost, in other words. And yet, as we all know:
Last month, amidst the continuing aftereffects and fallout of the events that took place within the Maxwell Institute in the middle of June 2012, seeing literally no alternative and no way to function, I finally resigned as editor-in-chief of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative. I hope the best for the future of the project, which I believe to be of enormous importance both in terms of scholarship and in terms of things far beyond mere scholarship.
A counterpunch to Islamic terrorism, plus affirmation from the Holy Ghost, and yet he walks away from it--all apparently on the basis of a grudge? This truly must be among the most bathetic events in the history of Mopologetics. To slightly alter a quote from Marx: "History repeats itself, the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce."
The past several months have seen a massive curtailing of Mopologetic activity, such that I was led to declare the "death" of Mopologetics, and to wonder what will transpire in this new, "Post-Mopologetics" landscape. This week, as churchistrue helpfully reminded us, marks the return of the annual FAIR Conference, and already we are seeing bizarre things afoot, such as Grant Hardy's apparent endorsement of an "inspired fiction" model for the Book of Mormon. And, of course, our Prominent Apologist is giving the keynote, which has to do with making a "reasonable" case for the Book of Mormon. Haven't we heard this talk before? And multiple times at that? Or, rather, haven't we been teased that the grand argument in favor of this thesis is forthcoming...for something like a decade?
It seems to me that the key "post-Mopologetics" question of the moment is one of audience. Apart from the half-lobotomized kooks and whackos populating the various blog comment sections and Facebook feeds, who is this supposed to convince? If the apologists are preaching to the choir, then what is the point? Isn't this an indication that they've failed already? Comments like those from Fluhman suggest that the academic market for post-Mopologetic work is going to be loyal to the "new" Maxwell Institute. The "Mormon Studies" crowd has already shown the disconnect between their views and the old-school Mopologists. I and others have noted more than once that there are virtually no "young bucks" waiting in the wings--there is Smoot, who is apparently gearing up to replace Gee--and Rappleye, who did not fare well versus Jenkins, but who else? Meanwhile, the "attack dog" mentality seems completely gone from Mormon Interpter's content, which seems strange, since the Editor in Chief and his colleagues had said on more than one occasion that this was precisely the sort of thing that the big donors were paying for: "guns blazing away." What is typically on offer instead these days is a blandly watered down version of....Mormon Studies, or "general Mormon scholarship," as Dean Robbers put it.
Have the Mopologists abandoned their principal mission in life? Are they competing for readers with the "new" Maxwell Institute, thus suffering (by extension) yet another defeat from Bradford? (I.e., they were ousted for rejecting his vision and yet now they are producing precisely what he proposed?) It seems the only certainty that one can rely on the moment is fragmentation. I, for one, will be looking forward to hearing about what happens at the FAIR Conference.