Elder Gilbert, new Q12 member

[Calm]

18 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

But beyond the 4 categories are there there SPECIFIC that someone can name that he has done? Did he fire someone he shouldn't have? Did he execute a policy that was inhumane?

I would like to know the evidence for spying as well.  I don’t consider it impossible or even unlikely, we have the example of Wilkinson from the past to show it does happen.  But it is a serious accusation, so there should be a solid documentation showing it, imo, before assuming there must be a reason for it (no smoke without a fire is a false proverb in both a literal and figurative sense as peat and other substances can smoke without flames, upholstery is apparently known for it if cigarettes are left on furniture).

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is what I see a lot of. Combined with talk of Jesus grabbing up illiterate peasants to be his disciples/apostles.

Then again historically the apostle that appears to have moved the needle the most and probably ensured Christianity thrived was Paul who was from the privileged elite. Trained as a pharisee, fluent and literate in Greek, Roman citizenship, pretty much the whole elite package. Paul didn’t seem to think much of Peter either.

So are the Clark Gilberts of the world the ideal apostles and Jesus just worked with those that weren’t ideal because that is all he had? I dunno.

I go for a variety are needed because the needs of humanity are very varied.

[The Nehor]

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes, it does.  Just look at this and previous threads.  He has members of the Church publicly disparaging him.  I suspect his efforts as CES Commissioner were undertaken with the understanding that his efforts would yield that result, and he proceeded anyway.

And that bravery and bold risk taking led to becoming an apostle. Truly a heroic sacrifice.

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Whom did he "root out"?

And what evidence exists that he did so because of their "not conforming to orthodoxy"?

He literally divided faculty into four groups based on their “orthodoxy”.

Please stop the whole Socratic innocence pretense where you pretend you don’t understand what anyone is talking about.

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

And what does "not conforming to orthodoxy" mean in the context of BYU faculty/administration?  He spoke of working against the "loss of administrative governance" of BYU.  Again, I do not think he was tilting at windmills.  I think he stopped and rolled back efforts by some at BYU which were calculated to subvert the Church's "administrative governance."  I have said previously:

And this:

I think these issues needed to be addressed, and cannot be reduced or characterized to merely "not conforming to orthodoxy."

Yes, he really did.  "Conformity" would be kowtowing to trends popular in academia, including having religious schools abandon their religious character and purpose and mandates, and/or allowing elements of BYU faculty/administration subvert the institution, or otherwise speak/act against it, from within.

Yes, he really did.  Some members of the Church are publicly berating him for not conforming to their sociopolitical preferences and ideologies.

"'Conformity' is doing what everybody else is doing, regardless of what is right.  'Morality' is doing what is right, regardless of what everybody else is doing."

There are, I think, people in the Church who think "morality" means altering the doctrines of the Church to suit the preferences and dictates of others, particularly doctrines and policies pertaining to marriage, sexuality, abortion, race relations, etc.  To be sure, the Church can learn, and has learned, some things from "The World."  However, "The World" has some things to learn from the Church, such as pertaining to the Law of Chastity and marriage.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited February 13 by The Nehor

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

He has members of the Church publicly disparaging him. 

And more progressive church leaders don’t?  We even had significant numbers imo of members condemning Pres. Nelson as being apostate when he shut down in person services and promoted vaccination and that was hardly progressive.

You are damned if you do and damned if you don’t in today’s world (and probably were at any time in history, we just have much more publication of the damning now with the internet).

[smac97]

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

If he was at a nonLDS institution, I would also agree with this.  But I don’t see how this is going against the grain given it’s CES we are talking about.

CES is a part of "academia."  He very much went against the grain of this larger grouping.

He also went against the grain of the subversive/antagonistic elements of BYU faculty/administration.  I think it's hard to deny that such elements both existed (as evidenced by comments from Elder Gilbert (making assurances against the "loss of administrative governance" at BYU wouldn't make much sense unless, well, there was a risk of that loss at BYU), Elder Holland (the "muskets" comment), Pres. Reese, etc.

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

Was he publishing similar critiques prior to working for the Church? (Serious question as I haven’t researched him and I don’t see a reason why this kind of stuff would have come up for him prior to that.)

I don't see a reason either.  Not all academics are self-appointed pundits.  But he sure seems to be willing to "do the difficult."  He massively downsized Deseret News' staffing and materially modified its approach to news coverage.  He really seems to have boosted BYU-PW.  And his direct and forceful statements as CES Commissioner were startling.  It was only in this last job, though, that I think he became situated to publish broad critiques of academia.  And even then, he only did so in the context of BYU working within it.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

A few were fired. Some quit.

https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2025/01/06/byu-academic-freedom-religious-salt-lake-tribune

I don’t subscribe even for free unless it’s something I must.  Perhaps you could provide the names for alternative research?  Please? (Ignore if someone else does)

[Anonymous Mormon]

8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

A few were fired. Some quit.

https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2025/01/06/byu-academic-freedom-religious-salt-lake-tribune

It looks like this is a link to a news article that summarizes all of the other news articles of anonymous quotes and scary vague/ambiguous statements about how bad he is.

I don't see any specifics of names or dates or other details.

You say 'A few were fired. Some quit.' - How many? Of the >5,000 employees how many left? How bad was the purge? Who were they? Did Elder Gilbert personally fire any of them? Did he personally discuss any of them?

Can you give any specifics, not just news articles and anonymous quotes?

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, Duncan said:

know one brother who this exactley happened to, PH.D. in a certain area, from a prestigious university, that has members that do what he does maybe less than 25 i'd imagine

 

Sorry, but I am not understanding this.  Could you clarify please?

[Anonymous Mormon]

12 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I know one brother who this exactley happened to, PH.D. in a certain area, from a prestigious university, that has members that do what he does maybe less than 25 i'd imagine

"Under him, the requirements for being hired as faculty began to include a sort of "loyalty oath," which is stricter than even what is required to hold a temple recommend. It basically uses one's testimony as a job requirement, but in an ambiguous way that leaves BYU higher-ups in charge of determining if your testimony and loyalty to the church is high enough. There are other aspects to it, but for some it's basically become "I don't want to make this comment in Sunday School because it might be seen as controversial and so-and-so could mention it to the boss and I could lose my job." I posted this below, but my chances of being hired at BYU are pretty small now since my spouse has left the church and that has begun to factor in as well regarding the potential faculty's loyalty to the church."

I meet with him via zoom usually once a week. He doesn't live in the US anymore and couldn't get hired at BYU, and their loss

here's another comment I found from someone

"

"He’s definitely on the very conservative end of the spectrum, which is one thing. But what majorly bugs me is that he’s really opposed to moral relativism and DEI. He’s actually described these as being ‘worldly influences’ in quite a number of CES events.

As someone who is an immigrant and has suffered direct racism from other members, it doesn’t sit well with me for obvious reasons. And his view in the past was that racism is something that is worldly. But it doesn’t really work in practice because the self-improvement requires self-realization, of which is then some element of DEI. He cited Mandela and reconciliation, but doing so requires self-understanding.

I also once had a discussion with other members where I pointed out that in Judaism, doing good is placed higher than being pious. The response from quite a few members was that we do good because Jesus said so. But by that response, does it mean that non-Christians are incapable of doing good things because they don’t believe in Jesus?

And different cultures have different values. Does it mean that a matriarchal society is inherently lesser? I don’t think so. But based on past talks and speeches, I would think he would say so."

and i've seen this type of comment a few times

"

"Like all the “adjunct professors” At BYU — their secret code for “a woman who can teach this as well as a highly paid faculty member, but who we won’t hire fulltime, AND will pay her in ‘blessings’ instead of a living wage.”

BYU’s bread and butter is being a shady employer, forcing people who could/should be compensated properly to work for peanuts and pats on the head."

The Church is its own worst enemy, forget evangelicals, atheists etc. it's the people in the church

I just said there were lots of anonymous quotes in news articles and forums, but no specifics. You made a very strongly worded negative comment about Elder Gilbert, so I asked for specifics. You said you know someone and then gave me 4 quotes that seem anonymous.

Can you give anything more SPECIFIC about how bad it actually was at BYU? Out of the 5,000 employees, how many were fired? Is there a survey that shows the fear is real? Anything more than anonymous quotes? 

[Duncan]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Sorry, but I am not understanding this.  Could you clarify please?

oh, he is and was a temple worker and so he has his recommend but couldn't get his endorsement from his Bishop because of something he said to the guy sometime earlier that the Bishop took the wrong way and now he couldn't get hired. He protested, and had an interview with someone but because his bishop wouldn't sign off he wasn't hired and so he was like  F BYU and moved to Europe and works there now. His MP was a GA and I think? he got him the interview to see if they could by pass the bishop but alas nothing came from it

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Under him, the requirements for being hired as faculty began to include a sort of "loyalty oath," which is stricter than even what is required to hold a temple recommend.

I remember this being talked about, but not sure if the policy has been written up.  My memory says “likely”.  I don’t trust my memory.  Anyone know and if so, a link?

Quote

But what majorly bugs me is that he’s really opposed to moral relativism and DEI. He’s actually described these as being ‘worldly influences’ in quite a number of CES events.

This is concerning to me if so, but something could easily be taken out of context, misunderstood with all the baggage this topic is currently carrying, so I need to see quotes. (I know there may not be any available, not saying you should get them, though I wouldn’t mind it  ).

[Calm]

19 minutes ago, Duncan said:

The Church is its own worst enemy, forget evangelicals, atheists etc. it's the people in the church

It has always been so, hasn’t it?

[Duncan]

2 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

I just said there were lots of anonymous quotes in news articles and forums, but no specifics. You made a very strongly worded negative comment about Elder Gilbert, so I asked for specifics. You said you know someone and then gave me 4 quotes that seem anonymous.

Can you give anything more SPECIFIC about how bad it actually was at BYU? Out of the 5,000 employees, how many were fired? Is there a survey that shows the fear is real? Anything more than anonymous quotes? 

asked and answered. I gave you the example of my friend, another who said women weren't valued, with quotations, and the comment about DEI. Time will tell to see how much a mess the church has made, we're still slogging out ole' Bruce McConkie

[Anonymous Mormon]

1 minute ago, Duncan said:

oh, he is and was a temple worker and so he has his recommend but couldn't get his endorsement from his Bishop because of something he said to the guy sometime earlier that the Bishop took the wrong way and now he couldn't get hired. He protested, and had an interview with someone but because his bishop wouldn't sign off he wasn't hired and so he was like  F BYU and moved to Europe and works there now. His MP was a GA and I think? he got him the interview to see if they could by pass the bishop but alas nothing came from it

I am sorry to hear that this happened. It does sound like an unfair situation and a potential abuse of power. My father worked at BYU for years and I know there are politics and issues with the honor code, etc.

But how exactly does this relate to Elder Gilbert? Couldn't the story you just told also have happened before Elder Gilbert's time? Was Elder Gilbert personally involved some how and/or in favor of what happened?

[Calm]

19 minutes ago, smac97 said:

CES is a part of "academia."  He very much went against the grain of this larger grouping.

Do CES leaders hang out on a daily basis with the rest of academia?  Seems like it’s more likely he is surrounded by other CES leaders and employees as well as interacting more with church leaders, though I can see him attending academic conferences/gatherings perhaps, but how often is that?

Their job security doesn’t depend on the opinion of other university systems, but church leadership which likely has a very different standard.  Now if he was likely to work outside the Church after his stint working for the Church, that would be risky, but how often does that happen?  What typically happens with CES leaders who enter at the level he did? (Serious questions because I only know of those who have then gotten called to church full time callings, but there must be others)?

Quote

He also went against the grain of the subversive/antagonistic elements of BYU faculty/administration. 

Which my guess is still the minority at BYU given what professors I know.

Edited February 13 by Calm

[Anonymous Mormon]

5 minutes ago, Duncan said:

asked and answered. I gave you the example of my friend, another who said women weren't valued, with quotations, and the comment about DEI. Time will tell to see how much a mess the church has made, we're still slogging out ole' Bruce McConkie

I said that all hatred of Elder Gilbert seems to come from anonymous internet quotes. I asked if there was anything more concrete and you gave me . . . anonymous internet quotes.

If his policies were so bad, can you share what SPECIFIC policies they were? What were the top x3 policies he made that were so awful?

Or how many people were purged during his tenure? Or is there a survey of morale that shows he ruined BYU employee morale?

Is there anything other than anonymous internet quotes that has shaped your opinion of him? 

[Duncan]

2 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

I am sorry to hear that this happened. It does sound like an unfair situation and a potential abuse of power. My father worked at BYU for years and I know there are politics and issues with the honor code, etc.

But how exactly does this relate to Elder Gilbert? Couldn't the story you just told also have happened before Elder Gilbert's time? Was Elder Gilbert personally involved some how and/or in favor of what happened?

this was a few years ago and he HATES BYU but what can you do now? I feel for him.  He didn't say what he said to his bishop but he qualifies for a recommend so what's the issue? I talked two weeks ago about how people in the church, and out, are getting convicted of various crimes...of course you won't admit to it if your livelyhood was on the line, like if you vape, your bishop could take away your recommend and you lose your job and so depending on what is going on the problem could get worse or you get caught and we are seeing that now with that BYU football player, investigated for a year and now he's out

[Duncan]

Just now, Anonymous Mormon said:

I said that all hatred of Elder Gilbert seems to come from anonymous internet quotes. I asked if there was anything more concrete and you gave me . . . anonymous internet quotes.

If his policies were so bad, can you share what SPECIFIC policies they were? What were the top x3 policies he made that were so awful?

Or how many people were purged during his tenure? Or is there a survey of morale that shows he ruined BYU employee morale?

Is there anything other than anonymous internet quotes that has shaped your opinion of him? 

They sound real to me so good enough for me, as I say the church falls on it's own sword and we'll see what happens

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

I said that all hatred of Elder Gilbert seems to come from anonymous internet quotes. I asked if there was anything more concrete and you gave me . . . anonymous internet quotes.

If his policies were so bad, can you share what SPECIFIC policies they were? What were the top x3 policies he made that were so awful?

Or how many people were purged during his tenure? Or is there a survey of morale that shows he ruined BYU employee morale?

Is there anything other than anonymous internet quotes that has shaped your opinion of him? 

Were you expecting CES employees to publicly criticize him and get fired?

[Anonymous Mormon]

2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

this was a few years ago and he HATES BYU but what can you do now? I feel for him.  He didn't say what he said to his bishop but he qualifies for a recommend so what's the issue? I talked two weeks ago about how people in the church, and out, are getting convicted of various crimes...of course you won't admit to it if your livelyhood was on the line, like if you vape, your bishop could take away your recommend and you lose your job and so depending on what is going on the problem could get worse or you get caught and we are seeing that now with that BYU football player, investigated for a year and now he's out

I sincerely want to understand how this ties into your dislike for Elder Gilbert?

So your friend couldn't qualify for a job at BYU because of Elder Gilbert? Was it because he had to have an ecclesiastical endorsement as a professor? Was this a new policy under Elder Gilbert? (I had to have an endorsement as a student back in the day)

Sorry, I am a slow learner so you may need to connect the dots more specifically here for me.

On a side note, my user name is because I attend 12 step groups through the church. BYU now has a policy that they won't hire any professor who has viewed pornography in the last 6 months and it also can impact tenure and other career advancements. Amongst BYU professors in the group, it causes a lot of consternation and debate about bishop roulette, how much it helps to be honest v. lying and other factors.  I am guessing that this policy was implemented under Elder Gilbert?

(note: I personally have mixed feelings about this policy. I too would prefer to have a high caliber of BYU professors not addicted to porn. On the flip side, I know some great people who are still working through compulsive porn issues)

[Anonymous Mormon]

12 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Were you expecting CES employees to publicly criticize him and get fired?

Yes, if there were an abuse of power or a policy that was so awful that it would make Elder Gilbert a poor candidate to be an apostle, then I would expect some coconscious objectors.

Or if it were a major purge, I too would expect someone who was fired unfairly to raise objections after the fact.

But if it's just a few people who are hurt that the church isn't endorsing their political views or changing to meet their agenda, then I would expect them to make anonymous online statements and anonymous statements to Peggy at the Tribune
(and of course there are lots of exmo trolls that make up fake comments on forums - some comments could be trolls posing as BYU professors just to stir the pot - there is plenty of exmo trolling around all church topics, even here on this board)

Edited February 13 by Anonymous Mormon

[Duncan]

2 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

Yes, if there were an abuse of power or a policy that was so awful that it would make Elder Gilbert a poor candidate to be an apostle, then I would expect some coconscious objectors.

Or if it were a major purge, I too would expect someone who was fired unfairly to raise objections after the fact.

But if it's just a few people who are hurt that the church isn't endorsing their political views or changing to meet their agenda, then I would expect them to make anonymous online statements and anonymous statements to Peggy at the Tribune
(and of course there are lots of exmo trolls that make up fake comments on forums - some comments could be trolls posing as BYU professors just to stir the pot - there is plenty of exmo trolling around all church topics, even here on this board)

this is ridiculous and shame on you, people who disagree with you are labeled as "exmo" or "trolls" or "fake" screw you and your high horse you rode in on

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

Yes, if there were an abuse of power or a policy that was so awful that it would make Elder Gilbert a poor candidate to be an apostle, then I would expect some coconscious objectors.

Why? It wouldn’t realistically change anything. They aren’t going to undo making him an apostle.

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I know one brother who this exactley happened to, PH.D. in a certain area, from a prestigious university, that has members that do what he does maybe less than 25 i'd imagine

I don't know what this means.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

"Under him, the requirements for being hired as faculty began to include a sort of "loyalty oath," which is stricter than even what is required to hold a temple recommend.

Well, yes.  A TR is intended to facilitate entry into the temple.  As a lay member, I am free to criticize the Church to a fair extent, as I would be speaking in my own capacity.  In contrast, a BYU faculty/admin may face strictures on what they can say while functioning in their representative/paid capacity.  See my prior comments about West Point.

I think what Elder Gilbert (and, before him, Elder Holland) encountered was members of BYU faculty/admin using their paid position at BYU to speak/act against BYU and/or the Church, to subvert and undermine the faith of students, etc.  Assuming, arguendo, that this was happening, would you have been okay with that?

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

It basically uses one's testimony as a job requirement, but in an ambiguous way that leaves BYU higher-ups in charge of determining if your testimony and loyalty to the church is high enough.

Basically, yes.  Hasn't this always been the case? 

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

There are other aspects to it, but for some it's basically become "I don't want to make this comment in Sunday School because it might be seen as controversial and so-and-so could mention it to the boss and I could lose my job."

I'm skeptical.  I think "it" involved a lot more than making a stray comment in Sunday School.  A lot.  See the January 2025 thread I linked to for examples (e.g., letters from parents alleging faculty at BYU subverting the faith of their children at BYU).

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I posted this below, but my chances of being hired at BYU are pretty small now since my spouse has left the church and that has begun to factor in as well regarding the potential faculty's loyalty to the church."

I wonder how he knows this.  

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

"He’s definitely on the very conservative end of the spectrum, which is one thing.

"Very conservative" in what sense?  Doctrinal?  Political?  Sartorial?

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

But what majorly bugs me is that he’s really opposed to moral relativism and DEI.

And others are "majorly bugged" by people who really supportive of "moral relativism and DEI."  Can't please everyone.

How did "moral relativism and DEI" become unassailable and absolute indicators of moral decency?  Is it possible to be "really supportive" of these sociopolitical philosophies and still be a disciple of Jesus Christ?  Is it possible to be "really opposed" to these sociopolitical philosophies and still be a disciple of Jesus Christ?

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

He’s actually described these as being ‘worldly influences’ in quite a number of CES events.

Is that within the realm of possibility?  Could they be "worldly influences"?

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

As someone who is an immigrant and has suffered direct racism from other members, it doesn’t sit well with me for obvious reasons.

Understood.  

Some of the things you believe don't sit well with me.  And yet we are both Latter-day Saints.  

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

And his view in the past was that racism is something that is worldly.

I would like to hear this from his own words.  But in any event, is he wrong?  Isn't "racism" condemned by the Church?  Don't we all agree it's a bad thing?  That it has no place in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ?  If so, wouldn't it make sense to categorize it as "worldly"?

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

But it doesn’t really work in practice because the self-improvement requires self-realization, of which is then some element of DEI. He cited Mandela and reconciliation, but doing so requires self-understanding.

"DEI," like "feminism" and "human rights" and a host of other labels, often have "eye of the beholder" meanings which can vary a lot from person to person.  I have a friend who spent years seeking a position in academia, only to be past over in favor of another candidate not nearly as qualified, except that she was a woman (a member of the selection committee inadvertently admitted to my friend that being of the XX gender was a specific and required, but unstated, qualification for the position).  As you can imagine, his perspective on "DEI" and its merits might vary from yours.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I also once had a discussion with other members where I pointed out that in Judaism, doing good is placed higher than being pious.

Not sure these ("doing good" and "being pious") are mutually exclusive.  

"Doing good" for the wrong reasons can be problematic.  Some examples (from Grok) :

Quote

Here are several well-documented historical examples of notorious or deeply harmful individuals who performed acts that benefited others—often communities or the poor—but primarily for ulterior motives like building loyalty, improving public image, gaining protection from authorities or locals, laundering reputation/money, or securing political/power advantages. These "good things" were frequently PR stunts or calculated investments in their criminal/tyrannical enterprises.

• Pablo Escobar (drug lord, responsible for thousands of murders, bombings, and widespread cocaine trafficking that devastated Colombia and beyond): He funded the construction of hundreds of homes (e.g., Barrio Pablo Escobar with ~2,500 houses), schools, hospitals, clinics, soccer fields, and sports facilities in poor neighborhoods around Medellín. This earned him the "Robin Hood" nickname locally and massive popular support—many residents protected him, tipped him off to police, or voted for him when he ran for Congress. The clear motive was to buy loyalty and create a human shield of grateful civilians against law enforcement and rivals, while laundering his image and drug money through these visible projects.
• Al Capone (Chicago mob boss, infamous for bootlegging, racketeering, and ordering hits like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre): During the Great Depression, he opened and funded one of the first prominent soup kitchens in Chicago (starting around 1930–1931 at 935 South State Street). It served free meals—soup, coffee, donuts, and full dinners—to thousands of unemployed people daily (estimates say over 120,000 meals total, including big Thanksgiving feeds). No questions asked. This was widely publicized and made him look like a generous benefactor compared to a failing government. The ulterior motive was image rehabilitation amid intense scrutiny and to curry favor with the public and politicians during his tax evasion trials—he hoped it would soften perceptions and provide community goodwill/protection.
• Saddam Hussein (Iraqi dictator, known for wars, chemical attacks on Kurds, mass executions, and brutal repression): He implemented compulsory free education nationwide, dramatically boosting literacy rates (from low levels to near-universal in some periods) and building schools across the country. This was framed as modernizing Iraq. The primary reason was consolidating power—educated populations could be more easily indoctrinated with Ba'athist ideology, monitored through state systems, and turned into loyal bureaucrats/military personnel, while projecting an image of benevolent progress to counter internal dissent and international criticism.
• John Wayne Gacy (serial killer who murdered at least 33 young men and boys, burying many under his house): Before his crimes were discovered, he was active in his community—running a successful painting/decorating business that he offered for free or low-cost to political groups (e.g., cleaning Democratic Party headquarters), serving on local committees (like street lighting), and organizing/leading the Polish Constitution Day Parade for years. He also performed as "Pogo the Clown" at children's events. These acts built his reputation as a civic-minded family man and businessman. The motive appears to be camouflage—maintaining a wholesome public facade to deflect suspicion, gain trust (especially around youth), and blend into society while committing horrors.
• Ted Bundy (infamous serial killer who confessed to 30 murders, known for extreme brutality): In the early 1970s, before his killing spree escalated, he volunteered at a suicide prevention hotline in Seattle, taking calls from distressed people and reportedly talking many out of harming themselves. He was described as charming and helpful by coworkers (including crime writer Ann Rule, who later wrote about him). The underlying reason ties into his manipulative personality—he used empathy and charisma as tools to understand/control people, honing skills that aided his later crimes (luring victims), while projecting an image of a caring, normal guy.

These cases illustrate "philanthropy" or community aid as a strategic tool—often called "reputation laundering" or buying influence—rather than genuine altruism. The acts did provide real, tangible benefits to some people (meals, homes, education), but they were overwhelmingly motivated by self-preservation, power consolidation, or evasion of consequences. History is full of such gray areas where evil and apparent good intersect for cynical reasons.

And, of course, representing oneself as "pious" (to be "seen of men" and all that) is likewise specious.

What I think we need to do is embrace the healing power of "and."  We ought to be "doing good" because we are "pious" (that is, being deeply religious, devout, or showing sincere reverence for a deity and religious duties").  From Moroni 7:

Quote

5 For I remember the word of God which saith by their works ye shall know them; for if their works be good, then they are good also.
6 For behold, God hath said a man being evil cannot do that which is good; for if he offereth a gift, or prayeth unto God, except he shall do it with real intent it profiteth him nothing.
7 For behold, it is not counted unto him for righteousness.
8 For behold, if a man being evil giveth a gift, he doeth it grudgingly; wherefore it is counted unto him the same as if he had retained the gift; wherefore he is counted evil before God.
9 And likewise also is it counted evil unto a man, if he shall pray and not with real intent of heart; yea, and it profiteth him nothing, for God receiveth none such.
10 Wherefore, a man being evil cannot do that which is good; neither will he give a good gift.

Affectio tua nomen imponit operi tuo.  Roughly translated: "Your motive gives the name to your act."

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

The response from quite a few members was that we do good because Jesus said so.

Yes.  We should do so for love of God and our fellow man.  There can be lesser, more venal motives (fear of punishment, hope of reward), but the highest and best motive is love and obedience.  "If ye love me, keep my commandments."  (John 14:15.)

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

But by that response, does it mean that non-Christians are incapable of doing good things because they don’t believe in Jesus?

No.  See Moroni 7.  See also "The Last Battle" by C.S. Lewis (the character of "Emeth").

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

And different cultures have different values.

And if and when those "values" conflict with the Restored Gospel, the latter ought to predominate over the former.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Does it mean that a matriarchal society is inherently lesser? I don’t think so. But based on past talks and speeches, I would think he would say so."

I think it might be better to ask him rather than impute things onto him.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

"Like all the “adjunct professors” At BYU — their secret code for “a woman who can teach this as well as a highly paid faculty member, but who we won’t hire fulltime, AND will pay her in ‘blessings’ instead of a living wage.”

Conveniently anonymous, this.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

BYU’s bread and butter is being a shady employer,

Oh, brother.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

forcing people who could/should be compensated properly to work for peanuts and pats on the head."

We live in a free market.  Nobody is "forced" to work at BYU.

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

The Church is its own worst enemy, forget evangelicals, atheists etc. it's the people in the church

I respectfully disagree.  I think the Latter-day Saints are, cumulatively, a great group of people.

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

57 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

I’m grateful for all the negative commentary regarding Clark Gilbert on this thread! Silly me, I’m embarrassed to have to admit I was naive and foolish enough to think it was the Lord who had called Elder Gilbert to be an apostle, but it’s now painfully obvious I was mistaken!  When are the leaders of the church going to wake up and realize that the church needs to be led by popular people, people as popular and accepted by the world as were the ‘rock star’ prophets of old?! Thanks to the many keen insights provided by the sagacious Peggy Fletcher Stack, and all the other enlightening comments from the unbelievers, embittered quasi-believers and apostates who’ve graciously taken the time to participate on this thread, I’ve been freed from my ignorance and am now able to bask in the glorious light of sparks!!

This but unironically.