The Institute seeks to honor Nibley not through any sort of worship or blind adherence, but through exactly what Nibley always wanted--scholarly engagement. As I've suggested elsewhere, one interesting aspect of Nibley's scholarly approach was his awareness of the shelf-life of scholarship. He strongly encouraged reappraisal. 'We need it all the time,' he wrote. 'If there is any other thing that characterizes the recent appearances in the journals and periodicals today, it is reappraisal.' Most importantly, he did not exempt himself from reappraisal. He continues:'I refuse to be held responsible for anything I wrote more than three years ago. For heaven's sake, I hope we are moving forward here. After all, the implication that one mistake and it is all over with—how flattering to think in forty years I have not made one slip and I am still in business! I would say about four fifths of everything I put down has changed, of course. That is the whole idea; This is an ongoing process, and I have some interesting examples of that...The two rules to follow here are 1) to ask the right questions, and 2) to keep looking.'The quotes are from Hugh W. Nibley, 'The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham,' Sunstone 4 (December 1979): 49-51, available on the Maxwell Institute's website:http://mi.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/?id=69Nibley's not a sacred cow and never wanted to be one. Focused engagement is the scholar's finest compliment.Compton was not uncritical of Nibley. In fact, he was outright critical. And that's great.