Elder Gilbert Interview with Peggy Fletcher Stack

[Rivendale]

He is exactly like Jared Halverson. Jared was mystified as to why more women are leaving the church compared to men. He had no idea what women's concerns were. When blasted on social media he reached out to few of the prominent women and requested a dialog. But in private only. A few weeks later he was right back where he was before. Clark Griswald created a transcendent communication between a reanimated supreme primate and himself to learn exactly what women need. Paltry excuse.

Using overstatements like “exactly like Jared Halverson” and “paltry excuse” are uncharitable. Using such rhetoric says as much about your own worldview as it does about Jared Halvorson or Elder Gilbert.

Do you think they are both decent human beings?

Regards,
MG

Decent human beings? I am prompted to share an old MASH episode where a Jet pilot is injured and sent to the 4077. He has a conversation with Hawkye regarding the war. The jet pilot tells Hawkye that the war is a 9 to 5 job and he is back at his comfortable quarters everyday ignorant of the payloads impact.Hawkye proceeds to show him the ER as they operate on the carnage. The Jet pilot is your decent human being.

[MG 2.0]

The LDS church does rely on the average person not going deeper than surface level investigations.

I’d agree with this. It all seems normal until you find out about rocks in hats.

In a subculture (Joseph Smith's specific environment/times/culture) where folk magic, seer stones, and visionary practices were taken for granted, “rocks in hats” might not have felt abnormal at all. In fact, they didn't/weren't.

Context, context.

I would ask the question (for which there may not be any readily provable answer), as to how far and how many critics have really gone beneath "surface level investigations"? Or 'silo level' investigations.

Hard to say. Just as it is hard to say looking the other direction. How many members look below the surface level? The narrative of critics would seemingly dictate that it is none at all or not very far.

Again, not readily provable one way or the other.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

From what I've heard so far it seems as though any comment/conclusions having to do with Elder Gilbert are at "silo level".

I would again invite folks to really listen to the interview I posted. Some would like to paint Elder Gilbert as one that 'lives in a silo'. I think it is rather evident as you listen to him and then look at what he has accomplished throughout his life that he deserves a bit more respect and degree of charitability.

He's been around the block.

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

It’s interesting that when explaining belief we’re encouraged to keep things simple and personal, but when explaining rocks in hats we’re encouraged to adopt cultural complexity and contextual nuance.

[drumdude]

It’s interesting that when explaining belief we’re encouraged to keep things simple and personal, but when explaining rocks in hats we’re encouraged to adopt cultural complexity and contextual nuance.

It’s born from necessity. You can’t have your prophet taking other men’s wives and be able to hold to a simple common sense moral framework. You can’t have a fantastic ahistorical account of the ancient Americas and hold to a common sense view of history.

Fortunately none of those mental gymnastics are necessary to follow Christ, they’re only necessary to follow Joseph Smith.

[I Have Questions]

In the hastily arranged effort to get ahead of the bad PR attached to his appointment, Gilbert told PFS (who asked the questions Gilbert had prepared to answer) that he was a ‘big tent’ kind of guy. A "big tent" in the context of a church refers to an inclusive community that welcomes a diverse range of beliefs and opinions among its members, promoting unity in essential beliefs while allowing for differences in non-essential matters. This concept encourages a broad acceptance of varying theological perspectives within the church. Does the following sound like the actions of a ‘big tent’ kind of guy…

…people are discussing his previous role as the Church’s education commissioner—critics say he implemented strict policies at LDS-owned private universities, carried out intense oversight and pushed out dissenting opinions.

Again we see a stark difference between Gilbert’s words and Gilbert’s deeds.

[I Have Questions]

Some independant observations from Jana Riess

Gilbert’s appointment also signals that doctrinal conformity may be a chief priority for the church during Oaks’ presidency.

And

Because of the LDS leadership’s practice of keeping apostles and prophets in service until death instead of retiring them to emeritus status at age 70, like members of the Seventy, both Bednar and Gilbert have an excellent chance of becoming the church’s president someday and shaping its trajectory for decades to come.

Oaks, Bednar, and Gilbert. 3 peas in a jackbooted pod.

Another reason Gilbert is a surprising choice is he does nothing to diversify the Quorum of the Twelve’s international or racial representation. Like the president who appointed him, he’s a white man from the Western U.S.

The Church talks about diversity and inclusion, but deeds speak louder than words. Always.

The 93-year-old Oaks seems concerned that his legacy will be expanding the church’s religious education programs and doubling down on doctrinal orthodoxy. Gilbert shares both of those commitments — with a zeal that has alienated many.

During his years as the church’s education commissioner, Gilbert became known as something of an attack dog. He standardized hiring practices across the BYUs, which included changes to some hiring requirements. In 2022, BYU contracts began requiring employees to affirm the church’s stances on marriage and gender — specifically, that same-sex marriage is against the laws of God and that there are only two genders, male and female, that align with sex at birth. Some BYU employees also complained that Gilbert’s tenure created a hostile and suspicious environment. Some told The Salt Lake Tribune anonymously that if they voiced any opinions that didn’t fully conform to the church’s positions — even on their private social media accounts or in what they thought were confidential conversations with their bishops — they thought they might lose their jobs. Toeing the line of orthodoxy, some said, had become more important than academic freedom.

Says “big tent”, enforces “small tent”.

Historian Benjamin E. Park said on Instagram that Gilbert’s appointment was a clear indication the church is leaning toward dogmatism. “I don’t know if we’ve had someone appointed to the Quorum of the Twelve with such a clear record of culture war rhetoric and an argument for retrenchment since J. Reuben Clark in the 1930s and Ezra Taft Benson in the 1940s,” Park said.

Not a glowing endorsement for the future of women’s equality.

[Equality]

I’d agree with this. It all seems normal until you find out about rocks in hats.

In a subculture (Joseph Smith's specific environment/times/culture) where folk magic, seer stones, and visionary practices were taken for granted, “rocks in hats” might not have felt abnormal at all. In fact, they didn't/weren't.

Context, context.

I would ask the question (for which there may not be any readily provable answer), as to how far and how many critics have really gone beneath "surface level investigations"? Or 'silo level' investigations.

Hard to say. Just as it is hard to say looking the other direction. How many members look below the surface level? The narrative of critics would seemingly dictate that it is none at all or not very far.

Again, not readily provable one way or the other.

Regards,
MG

Re: the part of the quote I bolded above:

Where did you get this idea? Was it from the book Early Mormonism and the Magic World View by D. Michael Quinn?

The book that got the author an invite to a court of love for daring to document the Smith family's fascination with magic?

Interesting how 30 years later apologists are now using the work of a scholar the church considered a "so-called intellectual" deserving of church discipline for writing it.

If Oaks and Gilbert had their way, Quinn's book would never have been published, copies of it would be gathered up and burned, and the printing press that produced it destroyed, Nauvoo Expositor-style.

[Limnor]

It’s interesting that when explaining belief we’re encouraged to keep things simple and personal, but when explaining rocks in hats we’re encouraged to adopt cultural complexity and contextual nuance.

It’s born from necessity. You can’t have your prophet taking other men’s wives and be able to hold to a simple common sense moral framework. You can’t have a fantastic ahistorical account of the ancient Americas and hold to a common sense view of history.

Fortunately none of those mental gymnastics are necessary to follow Christ, they’re only necessary to follow Joseph Smith.

At the risk of further derail (too late)—if the reasoning and justification becomes context about “was this abnormal for 1825?” the next question ought to be “what does it mean for a claimed translation by the gift and power of God to come from the same rock used for folk treasure seeking?”

[I Have Questions]

It’s born from necessity. You can’t have your prophet taking other men’s wives and be able to hold to a simple common sense moral framework. You can’t have a fantastic ahistorical account of the ancient Americas and hold to a common sense view of history.

Fortunately none of those mental gymnastics are necessary to follow Christ, they’re only necessary to follow Joseph Smith.

At the risk of further derail (too late)—if the reasoning and justification becomes context about “was this abnormal for 1825?” the next question ought to be “what does it mean for a claimed translation by the gift and power of God to come from the same rock used for folk treasure seeking?”

What then, would be the answer about contextualising plural marriage - was that abnormal for 1825 America? The problem with Mormon apologetics is that it isn't joined up thinking. An argument that is used to defend one thing (in this case "it was not unusual therefore it's legit"), will be rubbished when used to attack another thing - plural marriage and stealing other men's wives wasn't commonplace and therefore wasn't legit, will be rubbished by MG by saying it was a higher law and showed the uniqueness of the true Church, or some other mangled reasoning rubbish. One should never expect consistency and intellectual honesty when dealing with an apologist for Mormonism. Take Elder Gilbert - says he believes in a big tent Mormonism, but does all he can to make the tent of Mormonism as small as possible.