Fiona givens leaves maxwell institute

[Scott Lloyd]

16 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

With today being Mother's Day, it was inevitable that this topic was brought up in our sacrament meeting.  One of the speakers quoted from the Gospel Topics essay on Mother in Heaven.

I did that as well a few years ago when assigned to speak during Mother’s Day. I felt it was safe to use a correlated and authoritative source like the Gospel Topics essay. 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

It was a fireside, not Sunday School. My experience is that tons of personal opinion is shared when talking about research during firesides.   I doubt that has changed in recent years.  I have been to some pretty out there ones. 

I don’t think that’s supposed to happen in any Church-sponsored meeting.
 

Maybe that’s why the Church, a few years ago, ceased to use the term “fireside” and began using the term “devotional” instead. (And yes, I’m speaking knowledgeably on this. I was with the Church News then, and we got the directive.)

Edited May 9, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

Margaret Barker has made this standard stuff. She has said the same thing in FM conferences.  FM is listed as an approved source by the Church. So exactly where is the lapse in judgment? There is, obviously, some support for these concepts...at least for those who value Biblical scholarship and early Christian history.  

It depends on your definition of “approved source.” Yes, FM has been cited favorably in official Church media such as the website. But when I covered FM conferences for the Church News, I was always directed to make it clear in my stories that FM is not officially affiliated with the Church.  To me, this indicated the Church leaders want to keep an appropriate measure of distance there. 

[juliann]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It depends on your definition of “approved source.” Yes, FM has been cited favorably in official Church media such as the website. But when I covered FM conferences for the Church News, I was always directed to make it clear in my stories that FM is not officially affiliated with the Church.  To me, this indicated the Church leaders want to keep an appropriate measure of distance there. 

As did FM. But that is irrelevant to the church listing FM, along with MI, BOM Central, etc., as approved sources. 

[Calm]

https://m.facebook.com/697221327301013/posts/1377429225946883/?d=n
 

She left by her own choice. 
 

If she suddenly disappears from the church talks circuit, then there might be something to talk about imo about her crossing some sort of line. 
 

She gave a Dialogue Come Follow Me lesson on the subject if anyone wants to hear what she teaches from the actual source....don’t believe there was any outcry when this got published. 
 

On another subject for those interested in hearing what she speaks about directly:

https://mi.byu.edu/mip-givens/

There is a transcript if you prefer to read. 

Edited May 9, 2021 by Calm

[juliann]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

https://m.facebook.com/697221327301013/posts/1377429225946883/?d=n
 

She left by her own choice. 
 

If she suddenly disappears from the church talks circuit, then there might be something to talk about imo about her crossing some sort of line. 
 

 

That was a truly scurrilous article.  

[Calm]

32 minutes ago, juliann said:

That was a truly scurrilous article.  

Wonder if there will be an added “clarification”.

Quote

More than 200 people signed on to Givens’ Zoom presentation, according to Delaney Plant, who was among them.

It was a singles ward fireside/devotional.  I have never been to a ward fireside with that many people. Does that happen with singles’ ward or does that number suggest there were non ward members attending?

Edited May 9, 2021 by Calm

[blueglass]

2 hours ago, InCognitus said:

With today being Mother's Day, it was inevitable that this topic was brought up in our sacrament meeting.  One of the speakers quoted from the Gospel Topics essay on Mother in Heaven.

Who wrote the essay?  Sure a short one.  How much was redacted?

[JustAnAustralian]

2 minutes ago, blueglass said:

Sure a short one.  How much was redacted?

We can't really expect a long one when pretty much all we have is that she exists.

[blueglass]

19 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

We can't really expect a long one when pretty much all we have is that she exists.

Not sure I agree.  The Paulsen pulido essay drew upon hundreds of sources. 

"We have compiled over six hundred sources of all types referencing a
Heavenly Mother in Mormon and academic discourse since 1844.¹⁶

 

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, Nofear said:

Most of the article is ... meh (at best). I would like more information on the small part of it that talks about Fiona Givens and her leaving the Maxwell Institute.
Anybody know anything?

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/05/08/latter-day-saints-are/

Wild, uncontrolled speculation may be fun and even fulfilling for some, but it can lead to some pretty odd claims, and it may be that Fiona Givens simply went too far.  Neither the Holy Ghost nor the pillar of light in the First Vision were our Divine Mother.  At least Dan Peterson was on firm scholarly ground in suggesting that the goddess Asherah was used deliberately by Nephi in his vision, "Nephi and His Asherah," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 9/2 (2000):16-25,80-81, online at https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol9/iss2/4/.

I enjoyed Peggy Fletcher's Mother's Day article, and was glad to know of the sorts of notions being bandied about, and one of my very favorite hymns is "Oh My Father."  However, that does in no way objectify any of the claims or complaints being voiced.

If one seeks to find a religion which allows a strong appeal to a holy female, it is surely Roman Catholicism with its Mary the Mother of God, who can intercede on behalf those who seek her in prayer and vision.  In ancient times, the Divine Mother was a very powerful figure, and was widely worshiped under a variety of names -- according to culture.  Many of them had temples in which esoteric rites were performed, and we even have some accounts of those rites of passage (not so odd from the POV of our own LDS mystery rites).  See, for example, Lucius Apuleius, The Metamorphoses, explained online at https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/ElAnt/V12N1/takacs.pdf

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, CV75 said:

Did the SLT Editor time this article for Mother's Day?

Obviously.

[JustAnAustralian]

 

2 hours ago, blueglass said:

Not sure I agree.  The Paulsen pulido essay drew upon hundreds of sources. 

And ended up in pretty much the same spot.

Headings from the Paulson article, together with the church essay paragraph that addresses it (remembering that generally when fathers and mothers are mentioned in doctrine, the implication is that they are married)

Quote

Heavenly Wife and Parent - para 1,2,3,4,6

A Divine Person - para 3

Co-creator with the Father - para 1 (at least in as far as spirit children)

Coframer of the Plan of Salvation - para 4

Involved Parent in Our Mortality - para 4

Mother in Heaven in the Hereafter

The final point should be evident from what we know about exaltation (i.e. relationships don't change).

And of those, most or all points could easily be roped back under the heading of "she exists".

Edited May 10, 2021 by JustAnAustralian

[Tacenda]

I hope this isn't the way the church is headed as far as letting Fiona go for speaking of Heavenly Mother. If that is indeed the case. It's already bad enough that Mother in heaven is non existent or non spoken of. On Mother's Day we could use this analogy I read someone post on another format. 

"So in honor of heavenly mother, I am going to ignore my mom all day today. I won't call her, I won't think about her, I won't talk about her or make a public social media post about her, I'll ignore her if she calls. Because I love her and respect her THAT much! Instead I will call my dad and thank him for everything."

Edited May 10, 2021 by Tacenda

[strappinglad]

It is obvious that a female was heavily involved with creation, otherwise ,instead of 200 + kinds of shrimp there would only be three, a black one , a brown one , and one with spikes on the bottom. 🤭

[JustAnAustralian]

39 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I hope this isn't the way the church is headed as far as letting Fiona go for speaking of Heavenly Mother. If that is indeed the case.

The article has been updated with the following.

"On Sunday, in the wake of this story’s original publication, Givens wrote on Facebook that “after almost two years of employment, I voluntarily made the decision to leave the Maxwell Institute to focus on my own study, writing and other personal endeavors. I maintain the highest regard and warmest relations with the Maxwell Institute and its wonderful faculty.""

Edited May 10, 2021 by JustAnAustralian

[InCognitus]

40 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I hope this isn't the way the church is headed as far as letting Fiona go for speaking of Heavenly Mother. If that is indeed the case. It's already bad enough that Mother in heaven is non existent or non spoken of. On Mother's Day we could use this analogy I read someone post on another format. 

From the Facebook source posted by Calm, above, and at the Faith Matters website, she chose to leave to focus on her own study and personal endeavors:

Quote

As many of you know, Fiona Givens is a valued member of the Faith Matters Advisory Board and a frequent contributor to important conversations. Like countless members of the Church, we have benefited greatly from her passionate and insightful scholarship and teaching.

An article published in the Salt Lake Tribune on Saturday, May 8 has been interpreted by many readers as implying that Fiona’s position at BYU’s Neal A. Maxwell Institute was terminated due to her work on the subject of Heavenly Mother. We feel it’s important to clarify that this is not the case. Fiona chose to leave The Maxwell Institute and plans to focus on her own study, writing and other personal endeavors. We hope and expect to continue learning from Fiona’s expansive views of restoration theology.

Fiona has dedicated much of her life to helping members of the Church strengthen their faith and deepen their understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We honor her for her tireless efforts and look forward to continuing to support her work.

Sincerely,

David Turnbull
Co-Founder, Faith Matters Foundation

In other words, the Salt Lake Tribune article was just speculating and trying to stir up suspicion, and not reporting on facts alone.

Edit:  JustAnAustralian posted the same time as I did, but with a different quote, so I'll leave this one up  

Edited May 10, 2021 by InCognitus

[strappinglad]

17 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

the Salt Lake Tribune article was just speculating and trying to stir up suspicion,

In other news... water is found to be wet. 

[InCognitus]

2 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

23 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

the Salt Lake Tribune article was just speculating and trying to stir up suspicion,

In other news... water is found to be wet. 

Even so, some dispute the definition of "wet" and how many molecules of one oxygen and two hydrogen atoms will be required to produce wetness.  

And the sad part is, many people who read the Salt Lake Tribune article will never fact check what the newspaper prints, and will be misled into thinking that Fiona Givens was fired from the Maxwell Institute for her speculation on heavenly mother based on a fireside from nine years earlier.

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I hope this isn't the way the church is headed as far as letting Fiona go for speaking of Heavenly Mother. If that is indeed the case. It's already bad enough that Mother in heaven is non existent or non spoken of. On Mother's Day we could use this analogy I read someone post on another format. 

"So in honor of heavenly mother, I am going to ignore my mom all day today. I won't call her, I won't think about her, I won't talk about her or make a public social media post about her, I'll ignore her if she calls. Because I love her and respect her THAT much! Instead I will call my dad and thank him for everything."

So in honor of this quote I will cut out my tongue, puncture my eardrums, and gouge out my eyes. That will show 'em.

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

From the Facebook source posted by Calm, above, and at the Faith Matters website, she chose to leave to focus on her own study and personal endeavors:

In other words, the Salt Lake Tribune article was just speculating and trying to stir up suspicion, and not reporting on facts alone.

Edit:  JustAnAustralian posted the same time as I did, but with a different quote, so I'll leave this one up  

When will we learn our lesson not to fall for the first news about a supposedly controversial event?

[Nofear]

I saw the Faith Matters post this morning too. It seems more consistent. Does Fiona Givens have some positions that are slightly unorthodox? Yes. But she's certainly one who is ok disagreeing with others and *if* some colleagues gave some inappropriate pushback, I don't think that would sway her. That  would seem incongruous with her character. That is, I believe the Faith Matters post is accurate (as opposed to the sltrib article).

For fun, another Faith Matters facebook post this morning:
"Scholars David Paulsen and Martin Pulido found that there has never been -- even once -- an instance of a prophet or apostle saying we shouldn't speak of Heavenly Mother."

Edited May 10, 2021 by Nofear

[Teancum]

19 hours ago, smac97 said:

There are a few interesting bits.  That said, it is a bit odd to watch the Tribune, ostensibly a news outlet, turn itself into essentially a purveyor of theological grumblings by carefully selected members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Grumblings that pretty much always veer into politicking, feminism, race theory, LGTB stuff, etc.  And such articles are pretty much always by Peggy Fletcher Stack.

I am a member of the Church, so I have an interest in news items about the Church.  The personal musings of Peggy Fletcher Stack's carefully curated groups of "intellectuals" about largely imponderable topics don't quite fit the bill.  How much eye-rolling must "news" articles like this get from non-members?

Sounds like Fletcher Stack indulged in a bit of pos hoc, ergo propter hoc reasoning:

A few thoughts:

1. "Plant wants answers," but since BYU's internal policies prohibits it from providing them and Givens isn't commenting, there's not much more to say.

2. I think it's potentially problematic that Sis. Givens used a Church meeting to preach her personal speculations and opinions.  This isn't the first time I've heard Sis. Givens opine about things that are unsettled and speculative.  And generally that's just fine and dandy, provided that the time, place and manner of sharing such opnings are appropriate.  I wonder if Sis. Givens' remarks were inappropriate for the context in which they were given.  I wonder if she was given the opportunity to preach the doctrines of the Restored Gospel, but instead shared her personal speculations.  She's done this before.  For example, in 2016 Sis. Givens spoke with Jana Riess about her (Sis. Givens') theory that Joseph Smith gave Emma Smith priesthood keys.  I commented on this here:

The issue, then, could have less to do with the speculative stuff and more to do with the time, place and manner in which she shared it.

3. The article states that "several attendees {at the fireside, a meeting of the Church} complained" about what Sis. Givens said.  I wonder if she went a bit too far in her remarks, particularly given that:

• A) she was speaking in a Church meeting,
• B) she was possibly/apparently invited to speak in some sort of representative capacity, whether it be a representative of the Church, or of BYU and the Maxwell Institute,
• C) she seems to be willing to mix her personal speculations/opinions with established doctrine, even to the point of contradicting the official teachings of the Church (which is problematic when she does not while speaking in a church meeting and/or in a representative capacity), and
• D) she has apparently done this sort of think before (in 2016 Jana Riess described Sis. Givens as "a Deseret Book author who has been traveling widely in response to local invitations (with her husband, author and renowned intellectual Terryl Givens) giving firesides and  touring with the 'Time Out for Women' series that is sponsored by Deseret Book").

Again from the article:

This is where Fletcher Stack's article becomes a bit weird.  Sis. Givens was speaking in 2021, and yet Fletcher Stack quotes something she said eight years ago.  Why?  Putting your thumb on the scales, Peggy?

Anyway, it seems unusual for members of the Church to complain about a fireside.  That "several" did so may indicate just how "out there" Sis. Givens went.

That said, I'm curious how Peggy Fletcher Stack knew about any of this.  To whom did these "several attendees" complain?  And weren't the attendees from "a Latter-day Saint young single adult ward in Harlem?"  So how did a reporter in Utah find out about this?  We don't know, 'cuz the "news" article doesn't tell us.

4. To the extent that Sis. Givens' fireside talk affected her relationship with the Maxwell Institute, the issue does not seem to be the topic.  Plenty of people in the Church have talked about this, including Daniel Peterson's Nephi and His Asherah article that was published in 2000 by the Maxwell Institute.  See also this 2012 article by Warren Aston: The Other Half of Heaven: Debunking Myths about Heavenly Mother

He goes on to discuss these three "myths," and does a good job of it.  From the first one:

And this:

5. Our Mother in Heaven seems to be a topic that, when discussed in some quarters, almost inevitably devolves and degrades.  Just look at the Trib article:

• "Some feminists don’t want to be handed Heavenly Mother from church leaders but would prefer to have members, mostly women, 'find her ourselves,' says Rachel Hunt Steenblik."  Huh.  It seems odd to affirmatively reject and dislike prophetic statements about a sacred and revelatory topic.  I also note that the Gender Wars continue to be imported into the Church.
• "{S}ome feel that progressive members 'are not any better at including single people or people without children in these types of conversations,' the poet says, 'and feel that they also highly privileged women who are married and have children.'"  Oi.  This is the language of disunity and division.
• "These are conversations that female members should be having, says Latter-day Saint historian and theologian Maxine Hanks, instead of waiting for the church’s male leaders to offer the last word on Heavenly Mother."  Again, this is about rejection of prophetic revelation.  And it borders of usurpation, too.
• "These days, the church’s view of Mother God has become most frequently entwined with the earthly roles for women spelled out in the faith’s family proclamation, with men as presiders and women as nurturers.  That leaves women like Kerry Spencer Pray feeling alienated.  'I’m a mother and a queer Mormon, married to a woman,' says Pray, who taught writing at BYU for 15 years. 'For me, the rhetoric about Heavenly Mother is a little bit tricky because she has a husband and children. My life doesn’t fit.'"  Again, this is supposed to be a news article.  And note how Fletcher Stack bolsters Pray's street cred by irrelevantly noting that she "taught writing at BYU for 15 years."  

6. It appears that Sis. Givens used a church meeting to espouse her personal opinion that Heavenly Mother was the "pillar of light" during the First Vision, and that She is the Holy Spirit.  As Warren Aston astutely noted: "There is no need to speculate or teach beyond the body of material given by the leaders of the church for the past 180 years."  But it looks like Sis. Givens may have done just that.  And she did that during a church meeting, while speaking in a representative capacity.  If so, then that was an unfortunate lapse in judgment, and I hope she avoids repeating it in the future.

7. I very much like Sis. Givens and her writings.  She seems like a wonderful person.  I also appreciate her discretion in not running to the Internet or the Tribune to foment ill will against BYU and/or the Church, to self-aggrandize, to elicit sympathy and adulation for herself at the expense of BYU and/or the Church.  I wish her the best.

Thanks,

-Smac

I have no doubt is she continues to talk about this topic is such a way she will be given the boot. The church seems to be reverting back the the 19990s and wants to purge out anything that does not seem orthodox enough if spoken about in public.  You seem to promote the tone that one needs to toe the "party" line.  I mean my goodness. She spoke at a fireside and shared her speculative musings and has even labeled them as such.  And some poor little souls were so hurt by this they had to complain.  I guess they feel more comfortable with their correlated pablum mind numbingly boring correlated Sunday school milk toast.

[Teancum]

19 hours ago, bluebell said:

If Fiona made the decision to quit, how is that BYU silencing anyone?

I highly doubt she simply quit.

[Teancum]

19 hours ago, juliann said:

I don't know what church you go to, but you can ask any bishop or RS president about how common complaints about lessons are . And it is usually an indication of how "out there" the complainers are. 

 

Thanks for pointing this out. When men speculate on the same topics, is is considered scholarship. 

So very true.  It is interesting to me that it is so easy to just assume Fiona Givens, a women, was "out there" because some people's tender views were hurt. A woman talking about a woman deity seems to be more the issue to me.