Reflections on the ?????Apology Letter?????

[_Doctor Scratch]

Tom:

I’m amazed that Dr. Peterson hasn’t censored that comment. They are really shooting themselves in the foot: he’s basically saying that the Mopologists operated as a kind of “gestapo”: working in concert with the SCMC and carrying out “hits” ordered up by the Brethren. Long ago, I speculated that this is what they were doing, but DCP laughed it off as “absurd.” And yet here’s his beloved pal Lou, saying quite candidly that not only was I *correct,* but I wasn’t even close in terms of describing the extent of this corrupt, Orwellian activity.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Dr. Peterson is reporting that Kristian Heal has been watching this thread:

So is Kristian. He says that he's disinclined to engage or interject a comment, though, because he expects the matter to fizzle out. After all, he quite correctly observes, "it doesn’t seem to particularly help their narrative."

Huh. That’s not what I heard.

[_Kishkumen]

Tom:

I’m amazed that Dr. Peterson hasn’t censored that comment. They are really shooting themselves in the foot: he’s basically saying that the Mopologists operated as a kind of “gestapo”: working in concert with the SCMC and carrying out “hits” ordered up by the Brethren. Long ago, I speculated that this is what they were doing, but DCP laughed it off as “absurd.” And yet here’s his beloved pal Lou, saying quite candidly that not only was I *correct,* but I wasn’t even close in terms of describing the extent of this corrupt, Orwellian activity.

Yes, Doctor Scratch. It seems that your arguments in support of such hits ordered by the Brethren were correct. What a deeply disappointing thing to discover after all this time. I wanted to think that the FARMSies were acting as rogue agents on these matters, but it seems that the Brethren wanted to tee up members for excommunication. Well, we knew that Elder Packer interfered with Church discipline, but I had no idea how thoroughly the Brethren were involved in this.

Well, I guess I can console myself with the knowledge that the November Policy was even more despicable and heinous than this, although this is a very close second.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Tom:

I’m amazed that Dr. Peterson hasn’t censored that comment. They are really shooting themselves in the foot: he’s basically saying that the Mopologists operated as a kind of “gestapo”: working in concert with the SCMC and carrying out “hits” ordered up by the Brethren. Long ago, I speculated that this is what they were doing, but DCP laughed it off as “absurd.” And yet here’s his beloved pal Lou, saying quite candidly that not only was I *correct,* but I wasn’t even close in terms of describing the extent of this corrupt, Orwellian activity.

Yes, Doctor Scratch. It seems that your arguments in support of such hits ordered by the Brethren were correct. What a deeply disappointing thing to discover after all this time. I wanted to think that the FARMSies were acting as rogue agents on these matters, but it seems that the Brethren wanted to tee up members for excommunication. Well, we knew that Elder Packer interfered with Church discipline, but I had no idea how thoroughly the Brethren were involved in this.

Well, I guess I can console myself with the knowledge that the November Policy was even more despicable and heinous than this, although this is a very close second.

On the one hand, I appreciate the validation in terms of being proven right. But on the other hand.... well, you put it so well, Reverend.

For better or worse, I now find myself forced to reconsider Holland’s speech to the “new” MI. What if Midgley has been right all along, and Holland really *was* excoriating them for failing to do a “hit piece” on (e.g.) Denver Snuffer? What will it do to the Church’s reputation if it becomes widely known that the Brethren “use” the Mopologists as “hit men”?

[_Kishkumen]

Dr. Peterson is reporting that Kristian Heal has been watching this thread:

So is Kristian. He says that he's disinclined to engage or interject a comment, though, because he expects the matter to fizzle out. After all, he quite correctly observes, "it doesn’t seem to particularly help their narrative."

Huh. That’s not what I heard.

Yes, I am sure this will all fizzle out after six years. . . . ahem.

And what is the narrative that "we" are interested in? I am interested in knowing what happened. That is the MY narrative. At this point I don't give a tinker's damn whether the Brethren supported the ejection of DCP from the editorship of the Review or not. (I never was convinced that they played much of a role, or any role.) It was, as I said, simply a good thing that it happened. To hell with the rest. If a good thing happened, it happened. The reasons why are of historical interest, but they don't change the rightness of it one bit.

[_Kishkumen]

For better or worse, I now find myself forced to reconsider Holland’s speech to the “new” MI. What if Midgley has been right all along, and Holland really *was* excoriating them for failing to do a “hit piece” on (e.g.) Denver Snuffer? What will it do to the Church’s reputation if it becomes widely known that the Brethren “use” the Mopologists as “hit men”?

Let me put it this way, Midgley could be right. Elder Holland likes to huff and puff in anger about people who lose their testimonies. Does he seem like the kind of person who wouldn't support classic-FARMS shenanigans? I don't know. Having been burned by Dehlin, he might just be of a mind to go after others with his helping hands in the Mopologetic community.

Whatever the case may be, it does not look good, and it frankly is a failure of Christian shepherding. The Smith hit pieces were garbage, and anyone involved in them should be completely ashamed of themselves. Whether they are or not is neither here nor there to me. I have perfect moral clarity on this point, and I don't need an authority figure to tell me when I am right or wrong. Whoever supports this vile behavior is morally compromised, be that person BYU faculty, an apostle, or your average Jane Mormon.

Let them all froth and foam and attack the members of the LDS Church. They are puncturing holes in their sinking dingy. I feel badly for their victims, but, then again, their victims are big boys and girls too, generally speaking. By attacking people who disagree with them, clarity emerges. The attackers are condemned by their own actions.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Interestingly enough, thanks to this discussion I just read The Midge’s dissertation:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/444800?new ... read-now=1

and it reads like a hit piece on Paul Tillich (check his wiki if you need to understand who he was) who borrows liberally, it appears, from Sartre. I mean, that’s just what I gathered from The Midge’s dissertation. You can also see within his dissertation the seeds of his ‘scientism’ philosophy. It’s absolutely remarkable to me that he and the FARMS cabal had managed to crap out careers on the widow’s mite. Just, wow.

- Doc

[Guest]

I need to address some of Dr. Midgley’s interesting claims:

I am actually tempted to post XXXXX’s very long response to Kristian Heal's "Apology." Kishkumen admitted that its contents ran directly counter to his own biases. He clearly believed, or passionately hoped, that Dan had been fired on order from the Brethren, which is simply not true.

Those who have ceased to believe are constantly searching for any signs that their unfaith is justified, and that those who have faith and have responded to the clumsy apologies for apostasy, and rationalizing that follow, are often really angry at those who have pulled the plug on their little game. And they clearly have pounced on the purge in the hope that the Brethren, who otherwise they despise, don't want a genuine defense of the faith and the Saints.

First of all, Dr. Midgley, let’s look at what I wrote about my biases:

I went into my reading of this document expecting a strong confirmation of my own biases regarding the events of 2012 and subsequent developments at Maxwell. Admittedly, I did not see a strong confirmation of my biases. I instead see the words of a person who maintains a posture and sympathies much closer to the classic-FARMS crew than I anticipated. Some of this must be attributed to the intent of the letter, which is to heal a breach.

My biases here regard what I assumed Maxwell Institute employees other than the FARMSies thought about the removal of DCP from the editorship and what that meant for legitimate scholarship at MI. I was also frankly surprised to see the author frame the aftermath in spiritual terms, as though he had much to regret. I do not see Mopologetics as a positive, spiritually nourishing enterprise, so I could not imagine regretting its removal from Maxwell in any way. I can, however, imagine regretting harm done to the feelings of fellows in the faith.

Did I passionately desire that Daniel Peterson be fired by the Brethren? No!

Did I hope that removing Peterson from his editorship might signal the following of apostolic wisdom regarding the harm done by means of polemical apologetics coming from FARMS on BYU campus?

Sure.

Was I ever certain that apostolic wisdom directly informed the decision? No. Any such wisdom I would have seen as coming very indirectly in the form of sermons on the topic of how to interact with others when defending the Church.

Dr. Midgley, you would be better off not trying to report on what I think, as what you generally say on the topic is full of errors. I don’t relish the idea of the LDS Gospel not having defenders and a solid defense. My concern is that its defenders behave like good Christians and forward a defense that is sound and not a laughing stock. My guess is that you likely know you are misrepresenting my views and count on your readers’ lack of knowledge to protect you from contradiction.

[_Dr Moore]

For better or worse, I now find myself forced to reconsider Holland’s speech to the “new” MI. What if Midgley has been right all along, and Holland really *was* excoriating them for failing to do a “hit piece” on (e.g.) Denver Snuffer? What will it do to the Church’s reputation if it becomes widely known that the Brethren “use” the Mopologists as “hit men”?

I was wondering the same thing, reading these latest comments over. It sure does appear as if Dan has a legitimate claim that the administration grossly wronged him, justified by support from general authorities. Kind of like the COO firing a VP of Product for designing the exact product that the CEO asked him to design.

[_Dr Moore]

Let them all froth and foam and attack the members of the LDS Church. They are puncturing holes in their sinking dingy. I feel badly for their victims, but, then again, their victims are big boys and girls too, generally speaking. By attacking people who disagree with them, clarity emerges. The attackers are condemned by their own actions.

May I use this as a signature line, dear reverend?