John Woodland "Jack" Welch V

[sock puppet]

Jack Welch is the 5th generation bearing the name, John Woodland Welch. He is the 5th.

I recently spoke to someone that was a home teacher to Jack's dad, John Welch IV. Two interesting tidbits, one or both of which may have been discussed here before. The IV described his son Jack as a genius child but "a bit off." Jack apparently at some point in time was summoned by Henry Eyring and upbraided for hitting so hard on wealthy Mormons to make contributions to FARMS. Eyring told Welch to stop doing so.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I read this and understood nothing.

[Doctor Scratch]

Absolutely fascinating--thanks, Sock Puppet.

Dr. Cam: "Jack" Welch was the founder of FARMS, and is now one of the head honchos for Scripture Central. What SP is saying is that Welch once *got into trouble*--and in fact was SCOLDED--by none other than Henry Eyring!--because he (Welch) was being too aggressive with his fundraising for Mopologetics.

This is *very* interesting and makes me wonder if other branches of Mopologetics have also been warned about aggressive fundraising. (Has Interpreter gotten in trouble, too?) It also makes you wonder just what, exactly, they are doing with the donations. In Interpreter's case, we know that some of the money is going towards the President's travel, food, and lodging.

And back in the days of FARMS, they were actually paying their officers. For example, the Afore was paid over $20,000 one year for serving as "Chair of FARMS." So Maybe Eyring took issue with that sort of thing? If so, that's pretty incredible. It means that the Brethren were making some of the same criticism that *we* have been making about Mopologetics.

[Gadianton]

Given FARMS official status with BYU, wouldn't it seem to rich donors as an interesting and alternative way to give money directly to the Church? To me it seems like this official connection to the church, with Nibley as the bait, would make it easy to bring in big donations. They must have been big due to the plans to build the ziggurat. I think the level of fundraising of FARMS was way beyond the capacity of Interpreter.

It looks like Eyring shut down this attempt of FARMS to "exalt its throne above the stars of God"

[I Have Questions]

Given FARMS official status with BYU, wouldn't it seem to rich donors as an interesting and alternative way to give money directly to the Church? To me it seems like this official connection to the church, with Nibley as the bait, would make it easy to bring in big donations. They must have been big due to the plans to build the ziggurat. I think the level of fundraising of FARMS was way beyond the capacity of Interpreter.

It looks like Eyring shut down this attempt of FARMS to "exalt its throne above the stars of God"

It's early evidence that church leadership saw FARMS (and therefore the spawn of FARMS) as problematic, regardless of what one Apostle may have said over dinner one time 35 years ago. It is noteworthy that Interpreter has continued the aggressive drive for donations, but is low on transparency about how those donations are being used.

[Doctor Scratch]

Given FARMS official status with BYU, wouldn't it seem to rich donors as an interesting and alternative way to give money directly to the Church? To me it seems like this official connection to the church, with Nibley as the bait, would make it easy to bring in big donations. They must have been big due to the plans to build the ziggurat. I think the level of fundraising of FARMS was way beyond the capacity of Interpreter.

It looks like Eyring shut down this attempt of FARMS to "exalt its throne above the stars of God"

Well, recall what Tom said on the other thread:

It seems to me that the "downfall" of FARMS was set in motion six years later when BYU, led by a board of trustees made up of the three first presidency members and five or six members of the quorum of the twelve, engineered what Bill Hamblin called a "hostile takeover" of FARMS to "gain control of land that FARMS owned, and be able to manipulate potential donations to FARMS."

Prior to FARMS getting "sucked up" into BYU, it was operating in an independent fashion. But as you point out, once they got to the point where they were raising ziggurat-level funds, then the Church stepped in and executed what Hamblin called the "hostile takeover." I'm sure Eyring took issue with this when they were operating independently, but, hey: if the money is flowing into the Church's own coffers, then problem solved.

[Gadianton]

gain control of land that FARMS owned

It's quite possible that the brethren, given they basically run a hedge fund, saw that land and rubbed their hands together and then scored an easy conquest, laughing all the way to the bank. But, it's kind of interesting that FARMS, which publishes book reviews and reprints here and there, "owned land" and owned enough of it to raise the eyebrows of a significant hedge fund.

Why was FARMS into land speculation? I do have a theory. This is what a lot of organizations run into -- at least those plagued by greed. So the wealthy donors have stepped up. There isn't really much going on at this point, and most of that money isn't needed. Well, instead of just letting that money sit in an account, shouldn't it go into the stock market or possibly better, go to real estate that can be written off for business use? And shouldn't the leaders of the organization get some kind of kickback for brokering the deal? That extra interest will cover future projects, fewer donations will be needed in the future, and so shouldn't the head of the organization get a little something extra for making that happen as it's good for everyone?

[Doctor Scratch]

gain control of land that FARMS owned

It's quite possible that the brethren, given they basically run a hedge fund, saw that land and rubbed their hands together and then scored an easy conquest, laughing all the way to the bank. But, it's kind of interesting that FARMS, which publishes book reviews and reprints here and there, "owned land" and owned enough of it to raise the eyebrows of a significant hedge fund.

Why was FARMS into land speculation? I do have a theory. This is what a lot of organizations run into -- at least those plagued by greed. So the wealthy donors have stepped up. There isn't really much going on at this point, and most of that money isn't needed. Well, instead of just letting that money sit in an account, shouldn't it go into the stock market or possibly better, go to real estate that can be written off for business use? And shouldn't the leaders of the organization get some kind of kickback for brokering the deal? That extra interest will cover future projects, fewer donations will be needed in the future, and so shouldn't the head of the organization get a little something extra for making that happen as it's good for everyone?

All excellent points, Dr. Robbers. And in may be worth pointing out how successful the current Welch-led organization is (Scripture Central), compared to other Mopologetic venues. You may recall that moment on "SeN" when Midgley slipped up and admitted that the Church (i.e., the "hedge fund") siphons money into the various apologetic organizations, and I believe that someone dug up Scripture Central's tax information, and indeed it showed a big chunk of donation money coming in via one of the Church's "cover" organizations (such as the More Good Foundation). Scripture Central is slick and polished and has a much, much larger operating budget compared to Interpreter or FAIR. So, yeah: I think it's fair to wonder if we can trace things back to the "land sale" that Hamblin was complaining about.

[Kishkumen]

And back in the days of FARMS, they were actually paying their officers.

People are making a full living working for Scripture Central.