The latest from Professor Midgley:
Midgley, commenting on Sic Et Non, wrote:Early in 1980, I made the decision to strive to place my scholarship, in Elder Maxwell's terms, on the alter as my very best but also very puny offering in the hope of finding favor with God. From the moment Dan Peterson began what became the FARMS Review, which became the Flagship publication of the Maxwell Institute, he will remember the day when he opened his office door and saw me ready to beg for an opportunity to respond to something that Signature Books had just published. At that moment what became a great and wonderful adventure began that came to an abrupt end in 2012.
It's unclear why Dr. Midgley makes no mention of his review essay that appeared in the very first issue of
Review of Books on the Book of Mormon, "
Prophetic Messages or Dogmatic Theology? Commenting on the Book of Mormon: A Review Essay." Instead, he refers to what he apparently views as a watershed moment in Mormon apologetics history when he showed up, uninvited, at Professor Peterson's office door to beg to
review Dan Vogel, ed.,
The Word of God.
Midgley, commenting on Sic Et Non, wrote:In the next 23 wonderful years I published fifty publications with FARMS (which eventually became the Maxwell Institute, and also as many 40 or 50 brief book Reviews. At first, none of these publications were counted for purposed of salary increases. This went on until Elder Maxwell came to a dinner of the faculty of the Political Science Department at BYU, and announced he and his wife would be seated at a table with the Department Chairman and his wife, and the Midgleys. i had gotten to know Neal when I was a kid just starting out at the University of Utah. Our paths had crossed quite often over the years. My wife once even insisted that I promise not to ever again publish a thing in Dialogue, which I did. Both Apostles then told stories about how their wives keep them from doing stupid things and remind them of the Apostolic duties. On this occasion, Elder Maxwell began by asking me to promise him that I would continue doing exactly what i was doing, even if I never again got a salary raise. My wife said that I would make that promise, and she was right. Then he turned to Dennis Thompson and asked him whether he understood why he asked me to make that promise. There were others that evening who were straining to year what he was saying. Noel Reynolds and LaMond Tullis had both be BYU Vice President and this shielded them from the weird culture at BYU.
It is really quite extraordinary that Professor Midgley seems to have had an open forum for more than 23 years to opine up a storm and to blast away at those he considered intellectual enemies and cultural Mormons. Were any of his submissions rejected? Why did he stop publishing in
Western Political Quarterly?
I do wonder why his wife would insist that he never again publish in
Dialogue. As far as I can tell, his last contribution came in the form of a
letter to the editor in 1989. Prior to that, he participated in a
roundtable review of Cleon Skousen's
The Naked Capitalist published in 1971.
Midgley, commenting on Sic Et Non, wrote:What has any of this to do with anything. I trust that what I have written Unidentified understand why there are many people who once were deeply involved with what became the Maxwell Institute who within a few short days had the Interpreter Foundation up and running after Dan was given the boot by Jerry Bradford. Why did this happen? There were a host of faithful Latter-day Saints who were blessed by what was done at FARMS/Maxwell Institute. And they are still not happy about those very strange events that happened in 2012. The emotional intensity seems to me to mirror those of a bad divorce. Blair Hodges, who was not there and has exactly no first hand experience with any of what happened in 2012. I may not be the only one who finds that anything even close to trying to spin things revives some raw emotions. I have privately apologized for one remark I made to him, after he had posted posted 18 times trying to bush aside the justifiable concern generated by a few works in a review of that Festschrift for Richard Bushman. I suspect that if he had not posted a word, there would have only been a dozen or so comments.
Unfortunately, Professor Midgley does not provide details on the "one remark." Hodges' 18 comments are posted
here.
Midgley, commenting on Sic Et Non, wrote:He would have done Maxwell Institute a service if he had merely silently notice the energy that poured out by the very highly qualified reviewer mere mention that a couple of the essays in that book seemed to him to be evidence the Maxwell Institute is still adrift. We did not ask him to say that, but we were not going deny him the right to tell it as he sees it. In addition, that review was positive except for three essays, only one of which drew any comments. His comment about one author's obscurity in some of the things he published generated huge and ugly controversy. If Blair had merely silently watched the ugly stuff that was posted, the led to an official warning to cease or else, he could have reported back to boss something worth serious consideration.
An "official warning to cease or else"? What is that?
Midgley, commenting on Sic Et Non, wrote:I have very much preferred that people who I think have their heart in the right place would have just toned down some of the things they post. And, of course, I have also found the Internet to facilitate an outpouring of violent, rude, ugly, obscene language. Some new technology is wonderful. But it opens the door for a whole range of mischief that sweeps away civility, comity and sometimes, the latest from a tweet account may illustrate...well, I will end at this point, except to indicate that all of us should be anxious to apply Elder Holland's wonderful message first to ourselves and not merely to some Other.
Indeed.
Edited to fix typos.
“A scholar said he could not read the Book of Mormon, so we shouldn’t be shocked that scholars say the papyri don’t translate and/or relate to the Book of Abraham. Doesn’t change anything. It’s ancient and historical.” ~ Hanna Seariac
