Dan’s dismissal is official

Dan’s dismissal is official June 22, 2012

This just up on the MI news:


A New Beginning for the Mormon Studies ReviewThe Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship is continually striving to align its work with the academy’s highest objectives and standards, as befits an organized research unit at Brigham Young University. Our areas of endeavor include the study of LDS scripture and other religious texts and related fields of religious scholarship, including the burgeoning field of Mormon studies.

To better serve these goals, last year we renamed our venerable FARMS Review to Mormon Studies Review. For many years the FARMS Review has filled an important niche in the intellectual life of its many readers under the vigorous editorship of Professor Daniel C. Peterson and his associates, Louis C. Midgley, George L. Mitton, and, more recently, Gregory L. Smith and Robert White. We thank these colleagues and the many contributing writers to the Review for their industry and scholarship over the past twenty-three years.

We are proud of the accomplishments of the FARMS Review. But to better position the new Mormon Studies Review within its academic discipline, we are now assembling a board of scholars in this field to advise us and will appoint a new editorial team. We regret that we must suspend publication during this period of reorganization and reorientation, but we are certain that our current—and many new—readers will find the new Mormon Studies Review a valuable scholarly resource for the discipline.

We will be in contact with our subscribers shortly with information about a subscription refund. We have not yet set a launch date for the newReview, but we will post further developments on our website as they occur.

I note, for the record, that none of the editors except Dan has had any direct communication with Bradford about this decision.  They were never informed that they have been dismissed.  Indeed, Lou Midgley is out of the country on vacation, and does not have internet access, and has no idea what’s going on.  Even if this change is a good idea, treating people this way, after years of service, is simply shameful.

I should also add that in any professional organization, the old editor is not released until the new editor has been chosen, and the old editor is always part of the committee to select the new editor.  None of this is happening at the Institute.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!