SECTION TITLE DIALOGUE a journal of mormon thought is an independent quarterly established to express Mormon culture and to examine the relevance of religion to secular life. It is edited by Latter-day Saints who wish to bring their faith into dialogue with the larger stream of world religious thought and with human experience as a whole and to foster artistic and scholarly achievement based on their cultural heritage. The journal encour- ages a variety of viewpoints; although every effort is made to ensure accurate scholarship and responsible judgment, the views expressed are those of the individual authors and are not necessarily those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or of the editors. i ii DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT, 47, no. 2 (Summer 2014) Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought is published quarterly by the Dialogue Foundation. Dialogue has no official connection with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Contents copyright by the Dialogue Foundation. ISSN 0012-2157. Dialogue is available in full text in electronic form at www.dialoguejournal.com and is archived by the University of Utah Marriott Library Special Collections, available online at www.lib.utah.edu/portal/site/marriottlibrary. Dialogue is also available on microforms through University Microfilms International, www.umi.com, and online at www.dialoguejournal.com. Dialogue welcomes articles, essays, poetry, notes, fiction, letters to the editor, and art. Submissions should follow the current Chicago Manual of Style. All submissions shouls be in Word and may be submitted electroni- cally at https://dialoguejournal.com/submissions/. For submissions of visual art, please contact [email protected]. Allow eight to twelve weeks for review of all submissions. Submissions published in the journal, including letters to the editor, are covered by our publications policy, https://dialoguejournal.com/ submissions/publication-policy/, under which the author retains the copyright of the work and grants Dialogue permission to publish. See www.dialoguejournal.com. EDITORS EMERITI Eugene England and G. Wesley Johnson Robert A. Rees Mary Lythgoe Bradford Linda King Newell and L. Jackson Newell F. Ross Peterson and Mary Kay Peterson Martha Sonntag Bradley and Allen D. Roberts Neal Chandler and Rebecca Worthen Chandler Karen Marguerite Moloney Levi S. Peterson DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MODERN THOUGHT, 47, no. 2 (Summer 2014) iii CONTENTS LETTERS “Apostates,” “Anti-Mormons,” and Other Problems in Seth Payne’s “Ex-Mormon Narratives and Pastoral Apologetics” Ryan T. Cragun v Response Seth Payne xxii ARTICLES & ESSAYS What Shall We Do with Thou? Modern Mormonism’s Unruly Usage of Archaic English Pronouns Roger Terry 1 Another Look at Joseph Smith’s First Vision Stan Larson 37 Dialoguing Online: The Best of 10+ Years of Mormons Blogging Emily W. Jensen 63 PERSONAL VOICES Bo Knows Heaven Craig Harline 97 POETRY A Walk through Blenheim Karen Kelsay 107 Parable of Bones Sarah E. Page 108 Divertissement Anita Tanner 109 Grass Whistles Anita Tanner 110 Let Rocks Their Silence Break Anita Tanner 111 Faith Ronald Wilcox 112 iv DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT, 47, no. 2 (Summer 2014) INTERVIEWS & CONVERSATIONS Roundtable: As Presently Constituted: Mormon Studies in the Field of Religion Religious Studies as Comparative Religion Michael D. K. Ing 113 What Does Kashi Have to Do With Salt Lake?: Academic Comparisons, Asian Religions, and Mormonism David J. Howlett 122 Response John-Charles Duffy 128 FICTION Katy, My Sister Jenn Ashworth 133 REVIEWS Dialogue at the Crossroads Jacob T. Baker, ed. Mormonism at the Crossroads of Philosophy and Theology: Essays in Honor of David L. Paulsen Edwin E. Gantt 153 God’s “Body” and Why It Matters Stephen H. Webb. Mormon Christianity: What Other Christians Can Learn from the Latter-day Saints John W. Morehead 158 FROM THE PULPIT Deep Cheer Dana Haight Cattani 165 CONTRIBUTORS 173 LETTERS “Apostates,” “Anti- retical approaches in the social Mormons,” and Other sciences that suggest it is impor- Problems in Seth Payne’s tant for readers to understand the perspective of the author. “Ex-Mormon Narratives This view originated in feminist and Pastoral Apologetics” theory, but has since become I am a former Mormon.1 I common in symbolic interac- was raised in a very devout tionism, conflict and critical LDS family in one of the most theory, postmodernism, post- Mormon counties in all of Utah, structuralism, and many other Morgan County. I was extremely fields.2 Knowing the perspective devoted as a youth, missing of the author helps reveal the church rarely. I served a mission biases in what the author has in Costa Rica from 1996–1998. written. I included my back- My mission convinced me of the ground so readers will know my importance of religion. Before perspective, but also to illustrate my mission, I planned on becom- one of the first shortcomings ing a medical doctor. After my of an article recently pub- mission, I decided I had to figure lished in Dialogue, Seth Payne’s religion out. I completed my BA “Ex-Mormon Narratives and in Psychology at the University Pastoral Apologetics.”3 While of Utah in 2000 and started the author’s perspective was graduate work in Sociology at ultimately implied at the end of the University of Cincinnati in the article, had the article begun 2001. I left the LDS Church in with a similar delineation of the the summer of 2002 (for reasons author’s personal background I will detail below). Today, I am and perspective, it is likely I not religious. I am an atheist and would have read the article quite humanist. I am also, occasionally, differently. I would have known a vocal critic of the LDS Church. ahead of time that the article I am not, however, an “apostate” was written by a “pastoral apolo- or an “anti-Mormon,” for rea- gist,” whose methodology and sons I will detail below. interpretation were colored by I provided this background his perspective. Because I do not not because I am offering an want to be criticized for critiqu- “apostate” narrative but rather ing Seth Payne, whom I do not because there are several theo- know and who, for all I know, v vi DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT, 47, no. 2 (Summer 2014) is a very nice, well-intentioned “apostate.” People who leave individual, I will instead repeat- religions—I have argued else- edly refer to his article, the title where that they should be of which I have shortened to called “religious exiters”7—are save space: “Pastoral Apolo- primarily called apostates by getics.” The first topic I want those who remain in the reli- to discuss is the importance of gion they left.8 This is, in fact, language. Terminology matters. one of the important insights in Language can be used as a tool Bromley’s edited volume, which to further the aims of a domi- is not coincidentally called nant, hegemonic group.4 While The Politics of Religious Apostasy. I lean more toward quantitative Occasionally, those who leave research and consider myself a religion may call themselves an empiricist, I see the utility in “apostates,” often for lack of perspectives like critical theory. a better or more well-known I also see the importance of term, but rarely is “apostate” understanding those ideas as their key identity marker.9 they relate to how biases can Instead, they typically develop a enter into the work of schol- new identity.10 If their new iden- ars. As a sociologist who has tity is secular, then they likely published qualitative work will choose one of the many before, I will also examine the labels available to nonreligious methodology and interpreta- and nontheistic individuals, like tions in “Pastoral Apologetics” atheist, agnostic, humanist, or based on common standards freethinker. If the new identity for qualitative work.5 I con- is religious, then they will likely clude with some thoughts on adopt terminology that cor- the broader implications of responds to that new religious “Pastoral Apologetics.” identity (e.g., Evangelical Chris- tian, Buddhist, etc.). Apostate is Oppressive Discourse a pejorative term used by those who feel betrayed by the person “Apostates” leaving the religion to denigrate “Pastoral Apologetics” draws that individual.11 It is oppressive heavily on David Bromley’s discourse.12 work,6 but misuses Brom- Bromley lays out three criteria ley’s definition of the term for an individual to be labeled Letters vii an apostate. First, the person offers static criteria that can be has to have been a member of used by social scientists to clas- a “subversive” organization. sify an organization into one of Second, the person has to join his three types. Nowhere in his an oppositional group after chapter does he suggest that the leaving. Third, the person has classification of an organization to actively work to destroy the as allegiant, contestant, or sub- subversive organization, which versive is based on the relative he/she left. perspective of the individual “Pastoral Apologetics” who left it. describes the three types Without going into all the of organizations Bromley characteristics of the different discusses in his chapter— types of organizations, the most allegiant, contestant, and obvious classification for the LDS subversive—in a largely Church today is as a contestant accurate way. Allegiant orga- organization, not a subversive nizations align with prevailing organization. Given the first cultural norms and values; criteria for someone to be an contestant organizations are apostate using Bromley’s three moderately