cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

- Religious Studies (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=35)

- - keeping the faith in Provo (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29067)

keeping the faith in Provo

I have a copy now. Just need to read it.

Read it, don't like it. :)

Here's an excerpt:

Quote:

Our alumni magazine recently republished a statement delivered in 1975 by then-president of the Latter-day Saints (whom we had sustained as Prophet) Spencer W. Kimball. Sometimes, he had said, "we must be willing to break with the educational establishment (not foolishly or cavalierly, but thoughtfully and for good reason) in order to find gospel ways to help mankind. Gospel methodology, concepts, and insights can help us to do what the world cannot do in its own frame of reference." The university must help the world when it "has lost its way on matters of principle." Mormons "can, as Brigham Young hoped we would, 'be a people of profound learning pertaining to the things of this world' but without being tainted by what he regarded as the 'pernicious, atheistic influences' that flood in unless we are watchful. Our scholars, therefore, must be sentries as well as teachers!"

At a recent faculty meeting, I asked my colleagues whether we did not need to pay attention to his concerns. I did not expect most of the faculty and administrators to attach the same urgent importance I do to his warning, but I was still somewhat startled by their casual dismissal of Kimball's concerns. In their responses, his lack of credentialed expertise in specialized matters of higher education was noted, and it was argued that he was then addressing the social upheaval of his time and it no longer was of concern to us. The call to be distinct from the academic mainstream did not apply to us.

And in case the practical conclusion was not clear to all faculty, particularly to untenured professors concerned to keep their jobs, what was expected of us was spelled out plainly: Your job, we were told, is to be good scholars and teachers as these functions are defined by the broader (secular) educational establishment by which we measure ourselves. Should you choose to break with this establishment by seeking to fulfill some distinctive Latter-day Saint mission—well, there you are on your own, and you must assume for yourself the professional risks involved. It was pointless for me to press the question of BYU's mission any further.

I read it.

He articulates a complaint, leaves us hanging about who the alliances are and what the alternative is.

I agree with you and note that the article was long on verbiage but short on substance.

I felt like he was setting up a false dichotomy--that you can either have secular success or "religious" success, but you can't have both.

Imagine if BYU were to promote professors based on their testimonies rather than their scholarly work. "This guy has an amazing testimony. Mixes in humor, then gets to tears without fail." How in the world would this be measured? Wouldn't this reward the great fakers among us?

Requiring that BYU faculty be temple recommend holders is already a pretty high bar. Now what?

And let's face it, there has been A LOT of dead weight among the BYU faculty. Esp. those hired in the 1970s when there were slim pickings.

And don't even get me started about how they grade the seminary classes that they call religion courses.

After you read the article, you get the impression that if someone were to say that they opposed gay marriage they would be driven out of BYU. Give me a break. What a doofus to make that appear to be the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 318450)

Agreed.

Did you guys buy the article? I'd like to read it too.

Hancock is one of the anchors of conservative Mormonism and although he is divisive, he is good at goading secular-minded intellectuals to question their assumptions.

PM me with an email address.

Googling the title we are the only place on the first page where this is being discussed.

I wish I had the time to do a proper critique of this article.