why me Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 I think it is time to bring public Bradford bashing to an end. Neither Bradford nor BYU can respond to your charges, as it is a personnel matter. We can't know BYU's side of the story as to Dr. Peterson's change of position, nor of the termination of his assistants. Nor it is it very likely that Bradford was an independent actor. BYU is a very deliberative body.Well Bob, I can promise you that if you as a church employee or as a leader of a church institution fired a church employee by email while they were away from the country giving lectures and tours i would also be criticizing you for doing so. It was a terrible thing to do to Dan. And it matters not if you were an independent actor or not. Your hands would be dirty for carrying out the order.
why me Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) Why is it so hard to see that apologetics can be a nasty business? BYU has simply pulled the plug. This has nothing to do with apologetics. It has to do with decency. Why can't you see that? BYU can pull all the plugs they want as long as they do it with love, empathy and decency. A firing email while some fellow is away from the country doing work for the lord, is not the way to do it. See the point? It is holding the lord's anointed (in this case someone who oversees a church institution) accountable. Edited June 24, 2012 by why me
Calm Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 It is holding the lord's anointed (in this case someone who oversees a church institution) accountable. Directorship of the MI is not a church calling. 1
Bob Crockett Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) Well Bob, I can promise you that if you as a church employee or as a leader of a church institution fired a church employee by email while they were away from the country giving lectures and tours i would also be criticizing you for doing so. It was a terrible thing to do to Dan. And it matters not if you were an independent actor or not. Your hands would be dirty for carrying out the order.I don't respond to anonymous types any more. Best wishes. Edited June 24, 2012 by Bob Crockett
why me Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 I don't respond to anonymous types any more. Best wishes.But you can see the point. This has nothing to do with dismissing Dan but much to do with the way it was done. There was a better way to handle this. And because it happened in the way it did, Bradford needs to be held accountable for his behavior. And this is what is happening. If this were done in a pleasant manner by calling dan into the office, explaining to him the problem, outlining the new vision to him, and telling him that he will be replaced as editor because of the change in direction well...I don't think that you would have seen the responses that you have now witnessed.
why me Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 Directorship of the MI is not a church calling.But as an elder in the church, he is anointed to hold the priesthood.
Calm Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 Bob, do you agree that Dr. Bradford had to be aware that there was a leak in his office months ago when he chose to not publish Greg Smith's paper?
ERayR Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 This has nothing to do with apologetics. It has to do with decency. Why can't you see that? BYU can pull all the plugs they want as long as they do it with love, empathy and decency. A firing email while some fellow is away from the country doing work for the lord, is not the way to do it. See the point? It is holding the lord's anointed (in this case someone who oversees a church institution) accountable.Let's not get too carried away. BYU employment is not a church calling. It is a major educational endeavor (business). But even in the messy, filthy business it is considered tacky to treat employees this way unless you want to damage them. 2
why me Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 Let's not get too carried away. BYU employment is not a church calling. It is a major educational endeavor (business). But even in the messy, filthy business it is considered tacky to treat employees this way unless you want to damage them.And that was my basic point. It was a terrible way to treat a brother in the gospel and another human being. People do not get fired from church callings but they are released. This was a firing by a church institution. And yes, it was tacky.
zerinus Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Bradford told them by making a public announcement of their dismissal on the FARMS web page. He didn't even bother to send them a personal email.It looks like a serious breakdown of relationships, which couldn't have happened overnight. Something has been simmering for a while, and there has been a history behind it.
ERayR Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 And that was my basic point. It was a terrible way to treat a brother in the gospel and another human being. People do not get fired from church callings but they are released. This was a firing by a church institution. And yes, it was tacky.Yes I see you point but please understand a position, even at BYU, is not a church calling. Years ago, in another life, my father gave me a very sage piece of advice. I was looking into a job with a church member, a friend of my dads by the way, and I was telling Dad about all I had been promised. He listened and when I was through said "did you get him to sign a contract"? I said no he is a good member of the church. I will never forget what Dad said then. he said "just because he is a good member of the church don't let that fool you into giving him any advantage". I ask what he meant and he said "time passes and spoken words fade, circumstances change and so do memories so get it written and signed. So in business with a brother treat it like a business and you will be more apt to stay brothers. 1
Pahoran Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 In my humble opinion this is the reason that the higher ups, whomever that might be, is squelching the Petersons and the Hamblins. They don't want members losing their testimonies after reading apologetics for it.Except that there is not a shred of credible evidence that this has ever happened.The fact that this is an industry-standard, shrink-wrapped, off-the-shelf apostate exit narrative merely diminishes its credibility.Like myself, I learned so much more history by reading apologetics and very disturbing things to boot. I feel one day Fairlds will be a thing of the past because it deals with all the issues upfront. With a click of the mouse. Things no one would be privvy too had they not went to Fair.That is completely untrue. FAIR indeed "deals with all the issues upfront," in that it responds to the issues that are being canvassed by the Church's enemies -- and nothing else.Regards,Pahoran 1
Calm Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 So in business with a brother treat it like a business and you will be more apt to stay brothers.This is good advice for even brothers by blood.
Pahoran Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 The problem is that if there are informants, that suggests that there is information that the institution doesn't want people to be informed about. I question whether that is appropriate. I also question whether researching and publishing apologetics requires polemics or personal critiques or that it requires an "us vs. them" mentality that might breed this type of drama. At least at a university like BYU.Joseph,Perhaps you don't know this, but every instutition of three or more people, without exception, has sensitive internal information that it does not wish divulged to the public. At best, someone in the MI has been showing off their "insider" information in order to bignote themselves with others; at worst, there is a grossly disloyal individual who has been deliberately feeding information to the Church's enemies while accepting the Queen's shilling.Whoever it is, they've got to go. And if Bradford smiles benignly upon this person's antics, then he is every bit as incompetent (or manipulative) as some seem to think.Regards,Pahoran 3
Tacenda Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Except that there is not a shred of credible evidence that this has ever happened.The fact that this is an industry-standard, shrink-wrapped, off-the-shelf apostate exit narrative merely diminishes its credibility.That is completely untrue. FAIR indeed "deals with all the issues upfront," in that it responds to the issues that are being canvassed by the Church's enemies -- and nothing else.Regards,PahoranIn the beginning of my research fairlds.com did bring up so many things I was unaware of. I kept thinking is this anti? All the time. Try it, go to the topics and see for yourself. When you have a person like me that was once clueless with church history and even what it meant when I got married in the temple (plural marriage in the eternities), I just didn't know it. And the feeling of being lied to. So many things caught my eye. Peepstones, no clue. The list can go on and on. And I did utilise the wonderful volunteers that work there. But they're so scholarly that it was hard to understand their answers, over my head alot of times.
wenglund Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) In the beginning of my research fairlds.com did bring up so many things I was unaware of. I kept thinking is this anti? All the time. Try it, go to the topics and see for yourself. When you have a person like me that was once clueless with church history and even what it meant when I got married in the temple (plural marriage in the eternities), I just didn't know it. And the feeling of being lied to. So many things caught my eye. Peepstones, no clue. The list can go on and on. And I did utilise the wonderful volunteers that work there. But they're so scholarly that it was hard to understand their answers, over my head alot of times.Lurn'n is fur the birds cuz you can find things out that will shake yur wurld and confuze the heck out of you. If that happens, its the teachurs fault. All text books ought to be burned. Ther's safety in ignurst.Thanks, -Wade Englund- Edited June 25, 2012 by wenglund
Pahoran Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 It looks like a serious breakdown of relationships, which couldn't have happened overnight. Something has been simmering for a while, and there has been a history behind it.Zerinus,If you click the link in the OP, you will see some of that history.Regards,Pahoran
Evangeline Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 In the beginning of my research fairlds.com did bring up so many things I was unaware of. I kept thinking is this anti? All the time. Try it, go to the topics and see for yourself. When you have a person like me that was once clueless with church history and even what it meant when I got married in the temple (plural marriage in the eternities), I just didn't know it. And the feeling of being lied to. So many things caught my eye. Peepstones, no clue. The list can go on and on. And I did utilise the wonderful volunteers that work there. But they're so scholarly that it was hard to understand their answers, over my head alot of times.Unfortunately, by this standard, God, the LDS Church and all the standard works must be "anti" as well.
Tacenda Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Lurn'n is fur the birds cuz you can find things out that will shake yur wurld and confuze the heck out of you. If that happens, its the teachurs fault. All text books ought to be burned. Ther's safety in ignurst.Thanks, -Wade Englund-Make fun of my unlearnedness all you want. If you go to topics at fair, hit it and scan down through all the apolgetic answers it's sure to bring up some things that one is unaware of. But someone of your background probably listened to conversations about these things all the time. I been not as lurky as you, I guess.
Calm Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) Make fun of my unlearnedness all you want. If you go to topics at fair, hit it and scan down through all the apolgetic answers it's sure to bring up some things that one is unaware of. But someone of your background probably listened to conversations about these things all the time. I been not as lurky as you, I guess.Your experience does not preclude the information being elsewhere, all it means is that you yourself were unaware of it.People are addressing your claims, not your personal experience. (in particular this claim: "Things no one would be privvy too had they not went to Fair.")PS: all one has to do to see that material on FAIR is not only available at FAIR is to look at the footnotes from where the FAIR authors got the info in the first place, we are not coming up with this info out of the blue, digging into archives no one else has seen or anything else like that. Edited June 25, 2012 by calmoriah
Tacenda Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Your experience does not preclude the information being elsewhere, all it means is that you yourself were unaware of it.People are addressing your claims, not your personal experience. (in particular this claim: "Things no one would be privvy too had they not went to Fair.")PS: all one has to do to see that material on FAIR is not only available at FAIR is to look at the footnotes from where the FAIR authors got the info in the first place, we are not coming up with this info out of the blue, digging into archives no one else has seen or anything else like that.In all honesty I truly appreciate what fair is doing, I just think that the church may be worried that it does open some worms up. Why did they quit funding it? I just realised I spelled privy wrong, why oh why is there not a delete or edit button? Ok, walking on pins and needles here. For many years I devoured the MD&D board until it made me sign up. And then I actually got brave enough to write on here. I'm a hick I know. But I see that I would be better off not going to bat any longer, I just fall on my face. Sometimes the brain doesn't always work. But I realize this board is for smarter cookies than myself. I kind of don't belong, thanks for some of your patience. Oh, I actually had Wade England respond to a post! Too bad I disappointed the guy.
BCSpace Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) I see DCP is still listed as one of the administrators at MI. The middle paragraph(s) has been removed from his bio but he remains the Director of Outreach. Is this reflective of a reluctant acceptance by him of Bradford's desire to keep him in that function, just a hopeful fantasy of MI, or just late updating even though it's already been edited?http://maxwellinstit...ration.php?id=5 Edited June 25, 2012 by BCSpace
ERayR Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 In all honesty I truly appreciate what fair is doing, I just think that the church may be worried that it does open some worms up. Why did they quit funding it?I just realised I spelled privy wrong, why oh why is there not a delete or edit button? Ok, walking on pins and needles here. For many years I devoured the MD&D board until it made me sign up. And then I actually got brave enough to write on here. I'm a hick I know. But I see that I would be better off not going to bat any longer, I just fall on my face. Sometimes the brain doesn't always work. But I realize this board is for smarter cookies than myself. I kind of don't belong, thanks for some of your patience. Oh, I actually had Wade England respond to a post! Too bad I disappointed the guy.Don't sell yourself short. I, myself am but a country kid. I think you are mistaken. I don't think FAIR was ever funded by the church. I don't know the early beginings but I don't remember hearing of any church funding.
Calm Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) In all honesty I truly appreciate what fair is doing, I just think that the church may be worried that it does open some worms up. Why did they quit funding it?The Church has never, ever funded FAIR. It has been fully funded by volunteer donations and volunteer hours.The only thing the Church has done for FAIR is printed stuff up about its conferences in Church News (Scott Lloyd can tell you all about that) and IIRC has some links to it in its newsroom for further information...but I could be wrong about that.Oh, and it allows us to have firesides at various chapels, that kind of stuff.PS: there is an edit button down at the bottom of your post. Edited June 25, 2012 by calmoriah
Tacenda Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 The Church has never, ever funded FAIR. It has been fully funded by volunteer donations and volunteer hours.The only thing the Church has done for FAIR is printed stuff up about its conferences in Church News (Scott Lloyd can tell you all about that) and IIRC has some links to it in its newsroom for further information...but I could be wrong about that.Oh, and it allows us to have firesides at various chapels, that kind of stuff.PS: there is an edit button down at the bottom of your post.Oh maybe it was Farms, not Fair. Sorry. And thanks for letting me know about the edit button!
Recommended Posts