Interpreter is generally not considered a scholarly publication outside of LDS circles, as it is not indexed in major databases like Scopus[3] or the Web of Science Arts & Humanities Citation Index.[4]
While it does claim to be a 'peer-reviewed journal', one needn't look any further than it's own peer review guidelines which state that reviewers must be "supportive of the Interpreter Foundation's mission statement" and "not hostile to LDS truth claims."[5] This faith-based screening criterion is a departure from standard academic peer-review, where reviews are expected to be methodologically rigorous but not theologically aligned.
Background
It was established in July 2012 by the Interpreter Foundation with Daniel C. Peterson as founding editor-in-chief.[6][7] Peterson had previously been the founding editor of the FARMS Review, which in 2011 had been renamed the Mormon Studies Review (MSR) by the heads of the Maxwell Institute (MI). The MSR launched soon after Peterson's release from MI without direct apologetics as one of their goals.[8][7] Peterson believed that direct apologetics was a necessary feature of a publication like the MSR while others did not. This philosophical difference between Peterson and the editors of the MSR led to the creation of the Interpreter Foundation, which retained apologetic content.[8]
Activities
The Interpreter Foundation sponsors debates and discussions. These have included two symposia focused on the relationship between science and Mormonism.[9] The journal publishes historical surveys, responses to critics, book reviews, personal essays, and other scholarly literature, all with the primary goals of increasing understanding of Latter-day Saint scripture and religion as well as defending it.[6][10]
Controversy
In 2013, a critical review of Mormon Stories by Gregory L. Smith was published in Interpreter. In the review, Smith alleges that "Dehlin is frequently uninformed of the often controversial material he discusses with interviewees, and that he promotes views hostile to the foundational beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".[11][12] The pending publication of the piece catalyzed within the Mormon studies community a discussion (referred to by some as the Dehlin affair)[13][14][15] about the roles of apologetic and non-faith-based scholarship, respectively, within the academic study of Mormonism by Mormons.[16][17][18]
In 2013, William J. Hamblin publicly announced his resignation from his position as the Executive Editor of Interpreter for a variety of reasons with the most notable being: "I am tired of receiving poor evaluations on my scholarship because publishing with FARMS and now Interpreter is considered unscholarly by BYU."[19] To the astonishment of many in his diatribe he remarked the following: "Although many people might find it incredible, every single BYU administrator on every level of the administration has explicitly discouraged me from doing ancient Book of Mormon studies in my annual performance (“stewardship”) reviews. They have all explicitly told me to focus my research and publications on non-Book of Mormon topics, such as the crusades. In part this was good advice on their part; they were telling me if you want to be successful at BYU, don’t publish on the Book of Mormon or publish with FARMS or later Interpreter. More broadly, you must publish outside the “BYU Bubble”—that is, BYU or LDS sponsored publications. Only people hired to teach Mormon history should publish on Mormonism. Only publications in non-LDS-related venues are viewed as legitimate scholarship. Since non-LDS publications generally do not accept ancient Book of Mormon studies as a legitimate discipline, this essentially means that no publication on ancient Book of Mormon studies can be acceptable as authentic scholarship at BYU."[20] It is widely known that the First Presidency of the LDS Church & other General Authorities serve on BYU's board of directors[21] leading readers of Hamblin's remarks to conclude that the top echelons of the Church did not recognize The Interpreter as a scholarly publication.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
