I just read this article from the SL Tribune.
With quotes like,
“We can no longer afford to teach only what is useful and hope people won’t discover what is true. In this day of easy Internet access, a person can find more real history of the LDS Church in 30 minutes online than the same person would in a lifetime studying approved church materials. “
I am wondering if we can expect any sort of actions against Jeffrey Nielsen, the philosophy teacher at BYU who wrote the article.
Well, he’ll probably get a visit from his Bishop, but I doubt that he would be disciplined.
I hope he has tenure. Those who are mouthy have a tendancy to have their contracts not renewed by BYU. Just look at Darron Smith’s experiance, (He’s got a great interview on Mormon Stories)
So, Rick, you don’t even know whether anything at all will happen to this person, but you’re already using his quote as an excuse to make a cutesy gibe about Church disciplinary councils? Seems a little premature. I guess not, though, if all you want is a chance to provoke.
And the truth shall set you free.
Sadly, tenure means nothing at BYU. Let’s hope this guy already has a job somewhere else and this is his parting shot. I’d hope they’d get rid of nut job Steven Jones before they’d even contemplate going after this honest guy, but they’re not that smart.
ltbugaf, does the name D. Michael Quinn ring any bells?
People who speak out at BYU have a way of finding themselves without jobs.
How about Grant Palmer or Todd Compton?
The list goes on and on of people who voice dissent about the coarse the church is taking, or say things that are truthful but not useful, and are punished for it.
…and the name ‘Court of Love’ has always been funny to me – ironically named at least.
hey, Todd Compton has a job!
And, his new book, Victim of the Muses is out, published by Harvard University Press. I’m going to a press party to celebrate.
Interesting question. Personally I think BYU is a quack school with no real credibility. That being said, absolutely I agree with the statement. Does the “bad” history of the church make the LDS church a “bad” church? Not in my opinion. Embrace the past, move on. Will it affect some peoples’ testimonies? Probably, but if it does then their testimonies were based on the wrong foundation. Does the fact that JOe Smith may or may not have had some many wives affect my relationship with Christ? NO. I enjoy church history, all of it, the good the bad and the ugly. Church members need to move on.
Let’s remember though, Joseph Smith never went by Joe. I always wonder why some people insist on calling him that?
Concurring with thejoneses, I’m quite embarrassed to be a BYU alum these days. Are all the GAs clueless how badly they’ve undermined the national reputation of the university with the purges over the years?
Regarding JS, I’m surprised there isn’t a “Mormon Joe’s Nauvoo Brew†beer or some such brand with an alcohol-free “Joe Smith’s Mormon lite†version.
’cause beer smells gross I am betting it tastes gross. But his name isn’t Joe anyway.
“…and the name ‘Court of Love’ has always been funny to me – ironically named at least.”
Yes, Rick, I know (as I’m sure you can tell from my comment). You were so eager for another excuse to denigrate the Church for its use of this “funny” term that you resorted to this example of a person who’s not had ANYTHING done to him for making his statement. Whoa—look out! Somebody said something! Now I can toss out some wild speculation about what could possibly happen to him if my crystal ball is working right, and start criticizing the Church before anything’s actually happened!
“I’m quite embarrassed to be a BYU alum these days.”
Yes, obviously—you’re so embarrassed you mention it on virtually every thread. Even when you’re not bragging about how many 17-year-olds you had sex with there.
“Now I can toss out some wild speculation about what could possibly happen to him if my crystal ball is working right”
I believe the correct term is “seer stone”.
Why would you assume a person should be ex or would be ex just because they have an opinion that does not give 100% support of current church dogma?
Church doctrine changes and maybe we should allow people to have different views on things.
Because it has happened before.
Itbugaf,
Again, you know my point was regarding embarrassment as an alum from the decline in academic freedom and resulting decline in the reputation of BYU.
For the record, most gals I dated at BYU were 19-25. Alcohol was always involved with the 17 year olds, and I’m privately embarrassed about that now. But that stuff happens at any school and causes me no public embarrassment. Didn’t the false gang rape allegation against those blank BYU football players a few years back come from a 17 year old? My relationships were the normal romantic type, no weird group stuff.
“Because it has happened before.”
… several times.
“Now I can toss out some wild speculation …”
There’s nothing even remotely wild about my speculations here. Not prone to hyperbole much, eh?
This speculation is based on a track record by BYU and their employees who do not stick to the precise message the church wants to show to the members and the outside world.
The profs offer dissent – the profs get let go.
That’s how it works at BYU, so the original question of this post is by all means warranted.
Todd Compton has a job — but not at BYU, not in Utah, and not in academia. You have to do something to keep bread on the table.
Neither Palmer nor Compton were ever on BYU faculty (though Compton may have taught some classes.)
Quinn still can’t find a job. BYU’s fault? Hardly. He ghetto-ized himself.
In China you get arrested for not following the party line At BYU you get fired for not following the party line. Is this what you are saying?
If so, what is the difference between a Communist and a Mormon Leader. They both punish you for not following their ideals.
Does the 11th article of faith apply at BYU?
Except of course that the Chinese are not communists.
What is the Canadian view of the Chinese regarding their politics?
Would you say they are totalitarian?
Bill, well asking for the Canadian view would be like asking for the American view. I am sure you couldn’t find that ALL Canadians agree on it. Obviously some Canadians think China is communist, others don’t believe it is pure communism (which it isn’t. I don’t think there is a pure communist government on the earth, quite possibly never was, if you judge it by the true definition, at least not for an extended period). I would say it’s close to totalitarianism, but China certainly doesn’t exert that much control over their citizens, even if they think they do. I am not a political expert though, so what do I know? I just know that the Chinese have a great history.
A communist state is an oxymoron.
The term “Court O’ Luv” is highly derogatory. We can hardly do without church courts – they are a scriptural injunction, and necessary to protect the integrity of the Church in any case. Would one rather adulterers and child abusers retain their positions?
I do agree though the “Court of Love” is a misnomer – save the member if possible, but the primary obligation in a court, once guilt has been established, is to the innocent, not the guilty.
We have to distinguish between the terms mercy and justice for them to retain any meaning. Courts are all about justice – mercy comes later.
“The term ‘Court O’ Luv’ is highly derogatory.”
I’m failing to see how it is any more derogatory than calling it a ‘Court of Love’.