Oh, really? Doesn't "know anything about them"? You have to wonder: who called his attention to his petition? Well, as you may have guessed from the title of the link, the petition is, indeed, all about old-fashioned, "orthodox" attitudes towards "progressive" approaches to Mormonism. The petition argues that BYU has become too "liberal," and some remarkably Mopologetic tactics are deployed:Sic et Non wrote:Finally, my attention was just now called to this petition, which, I think, first appeared about twenty-four hours ago:
“Emphasizing Christ-Centered Education at Brigham Young University”
I have no connection with the petition, and I neither know the principal figures involved nor known anything about them.
I assume they are referring to the "walking back" of the university's LGBTQ+ policies? Interestingly, the authors of this petition are familiar with Mopologetic lore:Moreover, even certain official actions taken by BYU have been out of accord with the clearly stated principles of the Gospel, to the point where the Church has had to issue corrections. While we are grateful to our Church leaders for exercising authority to correct BYU where necessary, we do not believe it should ever have to come to that. The fact that it has been necessary even in the last few months suggests the need for some sort of introspection within BYU.
They even--bizarrely--quote Ernest Wilkinson:Elder Holland in the 2018 Annual Report to the Maxwell Institute reminds the Institute and the greater BYU community, “of course, the missions of the Church and BYU are not identical, but their missions certainly can never be odds at each other” (9-21).
They conclude with this penultimate paragraph:We recognize the faculty’s need for academic freedom, and acknowledge that academic thought does not necessarily constitute personal opinion. At the same time, we recognize the need to, as Wilkinson put it, “place LDS religious values in all of the activities of the institution…to produce students who are fully appreciative of the principles of the Latter-day Saint faith and of their roles in the universe as sacred and independent individuals.”
In other words, they are concerned about "infiltration" by liberals and apostates. No wonder somebody thought DCP would appreciate this petition! In fact, he liked it so well that he typed up a separate post "praising" one of the co-petitioners: a BYU grad student named Hanna Seariac.We do not believe that the University should trade the eternal life of its students for the praise and accolades of modern, secular academia. To do so would be to sell our birthright for a mess of pottage. We are grateful to the University for maintaining the Honor Code, religious education requirements, and other aspects of the University that show commitment to BYU’s mission. However, we ask that the University consider whether correct doctrine is consistently taught in classes, whether the connection to religious knowledge is made clear throughout the entire curriculum and not just within religious education courses, and the University’s commitment to religious standards.
Indeed! This time, the link takes you to the Millennial Star. The author blurb describes Seariac thusly:Sic et Non wrote:And, finally, here’s a short article by Hanna Seariac, a principal mover behind the BYU-related petition that I mentioned here the other day:
“The Problems with Progressives in the Church”
I thought that some readers might find it interesting.
This is how the article opens:This is a guest post by Hanna Seariac, who recently graduated from Brigham Young University with a BA in Classical Studies. She is a MA student at BYU in Comparative Studies and seeks to become a religious author and an apologist for the Church.
It contains tidbits like this:Ex-Mormons often get much wrong about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but something they get right is that the progressive movement in the Church does not reflect the teachings and doctrines of the Church. Progressive Mormonism, not to be confused with members of the Church who happen to identify as liberal or progressive politically, represents a small section of the Church who often do not uphold the doctrinal sexual ethics that exist.
And concludes with this:A divine patriarchy exists as inherent to the nature and structure of the Church as outlined in the calling of prophets as men, the duty of holding the priesthood as delegated to men, and the responsibility men have to preside. Historically, this has been used in conjunction with the scriptural and doctrinal definition of marriage to discriminate against certain individuals, which is wrong. By seeing the patriarchy as a delegation of responsibility based on eternal principles of gender as opposed to an unequal power system, we uphold doctrine.
Wow! Quite a brutal defense of rule of law here, no? (One wonders what her opinion on polygamy is...)The Church’s doctrine is not a buffet where you pick and choose what is convenient to you or fulfills your pre-existing biases about society and culture; the law changes you, you don’t change the law.
In any event, as you might imagine, the article set off a firestorm of comments. I halfway wonder if this is a case of epic trolling, but as far as I can tell, Seariac is legitimate, and apparently serious. Just look at this comment:
Holy crap. Remember, in her author blurb, Seariac actually said that she seeks to become a religious author and an apologist for the Church. I guess I would ask her to clarify: does she mean *apologist*, or Mopologist? Because if it's the latter, she's got all the makings of stepping up to fill the shoes of Midgley, Welch, Smith, Gee, Hamblin, and the rest of the classic-FARMS crew. It will be interesting to see if her work ever appears on the "Interpreter" blog.Hanna Seariac wrote:Beyond memes, [DezNat] haven’t propagated blood atonement. And I will say, I think DezNat has done some good with correction of doctrine, etc. and I’m not entirely against them. I do think people take the memes seriously sometimes and while you could argue that the person who perceives it should take it less seriously, I think it’s on both parties to be cognizant. As for my second statement about targeting individuals in a way that is antithetical to the Church, some not all who use #DezNat have used foul language, insults, and character attacks in a way that I do not think is Christ-like.