(shutterstock) My latest in the Deseret News: no freedom without religious freedom. “It is unsettling to recognize that the benefits of a “secular” political order derive from and ultimately depend upon an authority beyond politics. But the necessity of such an authority is a matter of quite simple logic: if there is no appeal beyond secular power, then that power is in principle absolute.”  Read more

The indomitable Maurine Proctor has said what so many faithful Mormons who support the Church leadership were thinking: the more militant among our dissident “intellectuals” and activists have a lot in common with Korihor and Nehor. Does that seem harsh, “judgmental”?  Maurine herself seems to soften her critique at one point: “Please be clear that I am not calling Kate Kelly a Korihor, nor would I, but it is the arguments that bear exposing.”  I hope indeed that there is... Read more

If you’re ready to think deep, and against the grain, try this remarkable essay that frames questions of sex and family in the broadest and deepest context.  Maybe it challenges the modern paradigm (“equality” as sameness — even when this is denied) too squarely to persuade a critical mass of our contemporaries.  But truth is still a good thing, no? Some highlights: Patriarchy is the social project of insisting men act as fathers in a meaningful and productive way before... Read more

So just what is my problem with a certain “secularism” that seems to be setting the tone among a group of enthusiasts for a New Mormon Studies (notably at the New Maxwell Institute)? I hope I’ve already made it clear in my previous post that my objection is not to intellectual engagement with non-Mormons, or, for that matter, with non-Christians or even non-theists.  Such intellectual engagement is part of my “spiritual journey,” as it is part of David Bokovoy’s.  Some... Read more

I was trying in my previous post, “Who’s Afraid of ‘Secularism’?”, to provide some clarity on just where David Bokovoy (and the “progressives” he favors) and I disagree on the question of “secularism”.  It would be nice to reach an agreement on what we are disagreeing about. First, we saw, David seems to think there is some difference between us on making available historical facts that some members may not welcome.  I can’t see what the difference is.  I fully... Read more

Disagreement I can deal with.  As a scholar of political philosophy and its history, you can say that I’m in the disagreement business. But what I still find a bit frustrating is not to be able to agree on just what it is we are disagreeing about. So it is with recent discussions of the question of “secularism” as concerns “Mormon studies.”  To be sure I have occasionally used the term “secular” as a shorthand to name arguments I have... Read more