In William Hamblin's blog post here, the first comment reads,


That comment gained the following reply [emphasis mine]:


WOW! Judging by his wording, this sounds like more than just wishful thinking. I had thought that FAIR would become the clearing house for the ilk of what previously constituted the FARMS Review, but if this is legitimate, then it looks like an independent FARMS will soon resurrect like a phoenix.

Nevertheless--assuming this "intel" is accurate--would it be a form of rebellion against the agreement with President Hinckley to make FARMS an official organ of BYU? Could there be ecclesiastical consequences to such a move, assuming anyone higher than Gerald Bradford had sought to defang and declaw the Review? And, last but not least, has anyone else heard any rumblings about this purported development?

This is big news. I think that ultimately this is what needed to happen. In my view, making FARMS part of BYU was a mistake, as I thought when it occurred, and I thought DCP was very concerned about it too. The latest developments were the result of that. What Dr. Bradford did was entirely appropriate for an institute running on the campus of a Christian university, but I don't think that BYU professors should lack the opportunity to write as they see fit in some venue as they conduct apologetics and critique writing on Mormonism. Let them do as they please, just not with the implicit backing of the LDS Church itself, especially in cases where members are clearly being attacked.

You raise a number of interesting questions, lulu. I am on my phone, so I can't respond at length. Your position assumes that the point of bringing FARMS into BYU was largely one of control. I am not sure. I don't doubt that there may have been an element of that, but I think the idea of supporting what they thought was a worthy effort was also there. So, did this move finally complete a long-planned objective? I doubt it.

Academics are politically tough. At BYU they get intermingled with Church concerns. As Bob Crockett pointed out over at MDDB, it is amazing that Daniel had such a long run and it is a real tribute to him that he did, no matter what anyone else thinks.

I think a return to an independent FARMS is better for all concerned. The only problem I can see is that work for this organization will not figure into one's BYU career in any way, meaning that there would be no course releases for doing it, and those things would not be considered in measuring one's scholarship or other work. (I never bought the idea that Daniel was not in some sense a paid apologist.)

But then who will pay for all the trips and conferences? Will there still be a Review? Who will pay to publish it? Who will pay the office staff? Will there even be an office with paid staff? Who will pay for paper and supplies, computers and internet access, etc?

And who will have the time necessary to do this as a volunteer? Will the church view this as these people thumbing their noses at the church?

It will be a foundation, funded by contributions and the sales of its publications. It will have minimal staff, equipment, and rented office space. Since profs have time off in the summers, Peterson may still lead private tours to pump donors for more cash.



They did it before; they'll do it again. Enough GAs support it to make this safe. The real issue was how closely the Church wanted to be officially associated with these activities. This is not a repudiation of the activities per se.

It was a matter of time before the OMIDs broke off. The animosity had been building and escalated with the Will Schyrver secret decoder ring piece and the Dehlin hit piece. The next phase for the OMIDs will be far more hostile. Imagine the damage a Louis Midgley dreams to deliver outside of BYU controls. Imagine a Will Shyrver without some sort of formal hierarchy providing oversight.

In the end, the biggest victims will be those such a Dehlin that will be the target of OMIDs. Likewise, current members with any inquiries or doubts will be mowed over by OMIDs at a much greater rate. I predict a very hostile environment created by the OMIDs.

Why do I get a lot of manifesto vibes in regards to a ressurected farms?
Maby they will trade word Foundation with Fundamentals?

If they do break off, I'm sure one of their first actions will be to publish the piece on John Dehlin. I'd bet they go after Johanna Brooks in short order too. It will be interesting to see if the church allows the OMIDs to attack other members of the church.

What the hell is an OMID?

I think they are like Amish, but with tanks and bazookas.

There is hope it may be:
http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/581 ... he-church/

"Ousted Maxwell Institute Danite." It was coined by lostindc less than 24 hours ago; see this post and this post.

Practically speaking, this will include anyone who has been marginalized from, ostracized from, or censored by the Institute, as described by William Hamblin. We know that DCP and Hamblin himself are among them. We also know that William Schryver and now Gregory Smith are among their ranks, too. Considering the direction Dr. Bradford intends to take the Institute, we can guess that Louis Midgley is one, too, along with possibly Matt Roper. And, depending on what the impetus might have been for his move to SHIELDS, of all places, we can guess wildly that John Tvedtnes may be one of them, too.

Hamblin doesn't name names, so there are probably others. It also remains to be seen whether those FAIRites who are outraged with Dr. Bradford are honorary OMIDs or just OMID supporters.

Very interesting! Thanks for sharing, Rockslider!

I think these guys should go ahead and run a FARMS like organization separate from the Church. Why is this such a big deal?

Well, for starters, no matter what these guys produce in the future, what will always be hanging over their heads is the fact that the Church wanted nothing to do with their stated mission and agenda. Nothing they say can be tied to the Church in any way, They'll just be a bunch of disgruntled Mormon scholars who couldn't convince their own Church to support their aggressive approach to criticism. Given that fact, why should any believing Latter-Day Saint support them with funding? I bet funding probably skyrocketed when FARMS was taken over by the Church.

So these guys can go ahead and start their own organization if they want, but they'll probably have a hard time gaining credibility, even within Mormonism, now that the Church has dropped them like a bad habit.

Notice how Scott Lloyd's remarks reveal his dissatisfaction with the article:



So what?

Scott doesn't seem to grasp the fact that none of this matters. It doesn't matter if you know why this man left the Church. It is none of your business. Scott provides an open window in the psyche of the old guard apologists who are constantly striving to find reasons to blame the apostate. The fact that he doesn't have enough information to pass JUDGMENT on this man, just frustrates him. But it is interesting that the Church article didn't feel the need to demonize this person, contrary to current approaches at FAIR/FARMS.

And as a loyal pupil of the bigot Daniel Peterson, Scott most certainly agrees with his previous argument that "there is never a good reason for leaving the Gospel." So why is he pretending more information would allow him to make an objective judgment on that? He's already passed judgment. They all have.

That's a great thread at MAD, by the way. It is fun to watch the "apostates" completely outclass those LDS loyalists who are clearly upset that their own Church disagrees with them.

I'm also surprised that the mods have allowed the thread to stand.

Very revealing reaction on his part.

Hey, many important movements have started small, from the obsessive windings of Madame Defarge to the rowdies in a Munich beer hall. Were there's a will, there's a way.

I would, once again, urge caution and skepticism here--cooler heads will prevail. Of course Dougls K. Christenson and others want to fantasize about having a brand-new FARMS right away, but the "lower tier" Mopologists need to remember that line from DCP's MDD message: he said that "administrators" were concerned about some of his words and actions. Was a dossier prepared on him? If all the recent events really were connected into the decision-making process at Church headquarters, then I would imagine that the Brethren will forbid him from participating in something like a new FARMS.