“Once more unto the breach, dear friends”

As today is Friday, a new article was published today in Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship.  It is “Nameless to New Name: Namelessness in the Narrative of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies, or the People of Ammon,” and it was written by Nathan J. Arp

Abstract: A narrator may choose to provide or withhold the name of a character for many reasons. This article hypothesizes that Mormon intentionally omitted the name of two key characters, a Lamanite king and queen. Both feature in his narration of the mission to the Lamanites and the miraculous conversion it inspires, as recounted in the book of Alma. While it is not possible to know exactly what information Mormon and other record keepers of the Book of Mormon had or preserved, it is at least plausible that Mormon might have intentionally omitted the name of these two Lamanites. Namelessness invites the reader to encounter and re-encounter the gospel in a story simultaneously historic and symbolic, at once particular and universal. The intentional absence of these names emphasizes, instead, the new name the converted Lamanites would take upon themselves and points the reader to the name of Jesus Christ.

“Interpreting Interpreter: Two Unknown Names,” written by Kyler Rasmussen

And (sadly, my delay in calling attention to this article will, no doubt, confuse and, thus, anger some), this reprint appeared yesterday, after I had posted my blog entry for the day: “Seek Ye Words of Wisdom: “Hebrew Words Reflected in the Book of Mormon,”” written by my late friend John A. Tvedtnes.

Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article originally appeared in Seek Ye Words of Wisdom: Studies of the Book of Mormon, Bible, and Temple in Honor of Stephen D. Ricks, edited by Donald W. Parry, Gaye Strathearn, and Shon D. Hopkin. For more information, go to https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/seek-ye-words-of-wisdom/.

“From the words of Moroni in Mormon 9:33, it is clear that the Nephites were still acquainted with some form of the Hebrew language a thousand years after Lehi’s family left Jerusalem. And though at least Mormon and Moroni employed a script they called “reformed Egyptian” in place of the Hebrew alphabet, it is likely that they employed this script to transcribe Hebrew words rather than Egyptian words. Consequently, several scholars have discussed evidence that the Book of Mormon reveals a Hebrew background.”

There continues to be much controversy — or, in certain circles, no remaining controversy but, rather, a settled and cynical consensus — about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its finances.  This article, from the B. H. Roberts Foundation, is very clear and, I think, quite useful.  It has the considerable advantage, too, of being neither unfair nor hysterical: “The $100 Billion Fund”

Regarding another very controversial matter:  I raised the issue yesterday — because it had been raised by a joint presentation at the recent 2025 FAIR Conference by an attorney and a licensed professional therapist — of mandated reporting by clergy in cases of child sexual abuse.  (See “On Child Sexual Abuse and the Church’s ‘Help Line.'”)   Quite predictably, I’ve been severely criticized in certain quarters for the position that I implicitly took.  And, I think, with deliberate dishonesty, for positions that I emphatically have not taken (e.g., that sex abusers “deserve” protection by clergy), or that directly contradict the point that I made (which is certainly not that lower rates of reporting are good because they demonstrate lower rates of actual abuse).  So, being the proverbial fool who rushes in where angels fear to tread, I offer a few more links to relevant discussions:

“Utah’s Legislative Leap: From Reporting to Supporting Child Welfare: New Utah legislation follows best practices for child safety, merging legal protection with moral duty.” (Public Square Magazine, 2024)

“Mandatory Reporting Isn’t the Solution: It’s increasingly common to hear people point towards laws compelling reporting as the answer to our child abuse crisis. Yet the research doesn’t back this up – highlighting a number of complications that need more attention.” (Public Square Magazine, 2022)  For background on the author of this article, see here.

“Are Publicized Abuse Cases Exceptional or Representative of Our Faith? Responses to key questions regarding the Associated Press report alleging attempts to cover up sexual abuse cases in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” (Public Square Magazine, 2022)

“Should a member of the clergy report sex abuse of the penitent? A look inside the priest-penitent privilege” (Deseret News, 2022)

Edited to add:  I hope that he doesn’t mind, but I’ve taken the liberty of copying the bulk of a comment from one of the readers here (who is retired from a career in public health and who goes by the moniker t. tangata neneva) and pasting it here below:

Maybe this 2016 article by Palusci et al will help: ” Does changing mandated reporting laws improve child maltreatment reporting in large U.S. counties? ” (link), Children and Youth Services Review 66:170-179.

What caught my attention: “… Universal reporting was associated with higher report rates for physical and sexual abuse, and clergy reporting requirements were associated with more sexual abuse, medical neglect and psychological maltreatment confirmed reports. However, while counties in states that changed their clergy reporting laws had higher increases in total reports, they had fewer confirmed physical and sexual abuse, neglect, and psychological maltreatment reports. More pronounced changes were noted in a state that made more pronounced changes in its clergy reporting laws. Policymakers should consider whether changing requirements for mandated reporting meaningfully improves child maltreatment identification.”

Or this 2024 NPR Report: ” States find a downside to mandatory reporting laws meant to protect children ” (link).

What caught my attention: “More than 60 years ago, policymakers in Colorado embraced the idea … [and passed] the first mandatory reporting laws in the nation. … [Since then] mandatory reporting laws have expanded nationally … But now there are efforts in Colorado and other states … to roll back these laws, saying the result has been too many unfounded reports, and that they disproportionately harm families … studies do not demonstrate that mandatory reporting laws keep children safe, the Colorado task force reported in January, there is evidence of harm. …”

It would seem, in other words, that the issues here don’t easily resolve themselves into simple bumper-sticker slogans or simplistic morality plays in which those who call for universally-mandated reporting of child abuse wear white hats and those who have reservations about universally-mandated reporting — and, of course, leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — wear black hats and stand for unambiguous evil.

Here’s a new book that, I expect, will be hailed in certain circles despite the fact that, from what I can see at a distance, it deserves little or no actual attention:  “Stephen Kent Unmasks Himself: From Anti-Cult Scholar to Anti-Religion Crusader: “Psychobiographies and Godly Vision” argues that Paul the Apostle, Muhammad, and most founders of religions were no less mentally disturbed than “cult” leaders.”  For what it’s worth, I once helped to host Massimo Introvigne when he visited Brigham Young University many years ago.  More importantly, while the notion that Muhammad and his visions could be explained by epilepsy was popular in certain circles about a century and a half ago, I can think of no serious scholar or biographer who gives the idea any credence today.  (Similar reductive treatment was also briefly given to Joseph Smith but, again, there is — so far as I’m aware — no reputable authority on Joseph’s life, whether believer or unbeliever, who sees any merit in the claim that he was an epileptic.)