An Inconvenient Faith – A Conversation with Greg Prince

Hello and welcome to the latest episode of Inside Out, the podcast that takes a pragmatic, no-nonsense approach to addressing the serious challenges and issues relating to the Mormon faith. I'm your co-host, Ian Wilkes, and I'm joined as always by the animated Mr. Jim Bennett. Welcome, Jim. How are you today?

Well, I have quite the cold, so I have a voice that's almost as deep as yours at this point, uh, which, which made it impossible to sing. I didn't sing with the choir on Sunday. I, I, I called in sick, but, uh, this is a remote podcast, so neither of you are gonna get infected by me, hopefully. By this.

Well, we, sorry to hear that. Well, hopefully you will, uh, recover soon. Uh, we will get into this exciting episode. So today is going to be one of the most interesting conversations I think we've ever had on Inside Out because we'll be diving into the newly released YouTube docuseries, An Inconvenient Faith, which you, Jim, co-produced. And Jim, I can't think of anyone better to have this conversation with than Greg Prince. Greg, welcome back to Inside Out.

Thank you. Feels like this is home.

Well, that's good. We want you to feel at home. We enjoy our conversations with you, and as always, it's an honor. An Inconvenient Faith is a docuseries on YouTube that explores the challenges faced by members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, especially Those experiencing a faith crisis. There are 9 episodes and each episode tackles a range of sensitive topics and century-old issues that the church and its members still continue to wrestle to this day. I'm speaking, of course, about the big ones: polygamy, LGBTQ, race, prophetic fallibility, women and authority, the Book of Mormon. Mormon Church is a high-demand religion, and personal revelations, and other important issues. The series features a diverse group of individuals, from academics and historians to critics and devout believers. Co-produced by Jim Bennett and directed by Robert Reynolds, the series includes prominent figures such as Brandon Flowers, the lead singer of The Killers, historians Richard Bushman and Terrell Givens, Sandra Tanner, John Dallenne, Jeremy Runnels, Maxine Hanks, Patrick Mason, Jana Spangler, Robert Rees, and of course, Gregg Prince. Robert Reynolds, who has a background in filmmaking and has even published a book with Desert Books, created the project to encourage thoughtful, respectful, and compassionate dialogue and conversation about some of the most difficult issues. The reception of An Inconvenient Faith appears to be generally positive, with mixed opinions on the viewers' own relationship with the church, with some viewers praising the series for its high production values and for giving a platform to a wide spectrum of voices, including those who have left the church and those who have stayed and found a way to maintain a nuanced belief. Others have criticized the series for being too apologetic or for not delving deeply enough into the most difficult issues, feeling that it focuses on more faith-affirming answers rather than fully exploring the problems. The series continues to be a point of discussion across various online forums, including Reddit communities and other forums dedicated to Mormonism and ex-Mormonism. So who best to kick us off into this conversation than the program's co-producer, Jim Bennett. Jim, tell us about the genesis of An Inconvenient Faith and how you got involved.

Well, so first, I mean, the title co-producer is one that I— we've never really given each other titles in this. I've never asked Robert if I'm a co-producer, if that's the right way to put it. Uh, initially, uh, I had done 14 hours of podcasts with Bill Reel. Which after my CES letter reply, um, got, you know, that was the first time I'd ever actually talked to church critics one-on-one. And I got a phone call from Robert Reynolds immediately after, uh, and said I'd listened to all of it. And he said, I'm a Jim Bennett Mormon, which I thought was an interesting way to put it. And, and he started telling me about this project. And, uh, and one of the things he said was, I, um, we have a lot of material. He'd already— this was in 2019, and that he'd already filmed a good chunk of the material. Uh, he said, my problem is I don't have anybody really to edit it because the Hollywood editors just don't understand the material, and the Mormon editors just really aren't up to the task. And I said, well, I've got enough skill in that regard to be dangerous. And I certainly understand the material and I would love to take a crack at editing this. And, uh, he brought me on as the lead editor for a number of years, but I'm not the final editor. About the beginning of the year, um, of this year, or maybe it was a little earlier than that, uh, the decision was made to turn this into a docu-series. Because initially it was going to be like a 2-hour feature film. Uh, we went through many different iterations and many different cuts of what this would look like. Uh, some were as short as 90 minutes, some were as long as 3 hours. Uh, so we went through all of this and the decision was made to make it a docuseries. And, uh, I essentially had pretty much gone as far as I could go in terms of editing. In terms of my— we handed it off to a real pro, um, guy named Trent Jones, and he's, um, he's cleaned it up and, and made it look good. And so I can see my fingerprints on some of it in terms of the editing. I, you know, I sort of put together the raw assembly cut of the earlier versions, but, uh, uh, Trent has also taken it and, and re-edited pieces of it. And I, and I think he's done a marvelous job on that, but all through this, I'd been collaborating with Robert on material. I conducted a couple of the interviews myself, but I was there when Greg was interviewed and had been part of a long sort of discussion as to how to shape it. So, so I, I'm not quite sure what title that gives me, but as this launched, Robert was, did not want to go out and sort of be the face of it and initially said, I just don't want to tell anybody I did it. I just want, don't want to have my name out there. And it became very clear very quickly that that wasn't going to work. And I said to him, look, Robert, right now people are suspi— are curious, but they're getting suspicious. You know, they just want to know who's behind this. And the, if we don't tell them, they, they're going to think there's some kind of big mystery or a big secret there. And it's going to overshadow, I think, the content of the documentary. And it's going to, um, probably draw more attention to you in the long run than less. And so he very quickly wrote up a statement acknowledging that he had, had been the guy behind this. And, uh, so I'd gone and made the rounds. I've gone on a whole bunch of podcasts. I just completed a, an Ask Me Anything in the Mormon subreddit. And, uh, the. I'm going to be going on Mormon Land on Tuesday, recording an episode of Mormon Land. Greg, have you ever done an episode of Mormon Land with Peggy?

No.

Oh, okay. I'll tell them they need to talk to you because you have all the answers. So, uh, they should approach you on that. Uh, but, um, just trying to get the discussion out there and, and the selfish goal, I think, least for me, is I'm trying to get as many eyeballs on this thing as possible because one of the questions we're getting asked repeatedly is, when is season 2 coming? You know, it's been released as An Inconvenient Faith season 1. And, you know, this whole thing was funded out of pocket by Robert Reynolds. And I think it's too much to ask to get him to do that again. Uh, but if there's enough of a demand for it, I think that there are probably other ways that we could keep this going, uh, and get funding for it. And, and so I, I'm hoping to get as many eyeballs on it. And, and really, I think it's a great conversation starter. I mean, there are a lot of different people who have a lot of different ideas as to what they think it ought to have been. Uh, you know, I, I, in the, in the Ask Me Anything, a lot of people were saying you didn't have enough former members of the church, and you should have had more, and you should have given them more time to talk. Um, the one criticism that, that I've received, and it came from you, Ian, and I think it's entirely valid, is that this is very America-centric. We don't have international voices in this. It doesn't really speak to the experience of the church beyond the United States. And, uh, I would like to see a season 2 that would, that would expand beyond that. I mean, there's so much more ground to explore. There's so many more things to talk about. And, uh, I, I just want to do everything I can to keep the conversation going. So that's the background. That's where I am. And, and one of my favorite, uh, days in working on this was going up to a house in the Avenues in Salt Lake City and meeting Greg Prince and hearing his His inside, uh, there was one question I remember asking and Greg said, stop the tape. Don't, don't tell anybody this. I don't want this recorded. So I'll, I'll, I'll leave you to speculate what that was, but I don't remember what that was.

Uh, remember sitting in Brett Parkinson's living room for several hours.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, it was, you had said something like, for the most part, the people that are called into Church leadership are really good men. And I said, well, which ones aren't really good men? And you said, stop the tape. So there we are.

Jim, thank you for that. Greg, how did you become involved in the project?

I think I got into it laterally, uh, living in Washington for 50 years now, um, We have occasionally bumped into congressmen, senators, and we had a nice friendship with Harry Reid, the senator from Nevada, who became, as Senate Majority Leader, the highest-ranking Latter-day Saint ever in the legislative branch of government. But he had read and really liked my biographies of David O. McKay and Leonard Arrington, one of his staffers who's LDS, said, "He's got them in his office next to the scriptures prominently displayed on his bookshelf." So I thought maybe he would like to see the manuscript of my Gay Rights in the Mormon Church, sent it to him. He really did like it, read it very soon thereafter. And then said, could you send me another copy because I would like to give it to Dan Reynolds. At that point, my cultural literacy was somewhere near zero for that generation. I'd never heard of Dan Reynolds. I'd never heard of Imagine Dragons. I'm embarrassed now to say that, but that was the reality. And Dan and Robert told me, took it on a tour to Europe and read it. And I think that was the reason that Robert sometime after that reached out to me, told me about this documentary series that he planned to do and asked if I would be part of it. Jim, I don't know if you ever knew any of that.

I don't think I did. No. Uh, I mean, Robert, I mean, later on I was involved in getting some of the, some of the other people into this, but, uh, Robert just said, yeah, we've got Greg Prince. You want to come? And we're going to film Greg Prince this afternoon. And I remember I ruined one of the takes by coughing. And at the end of it, you tossed me a cough drop. Like, you need to come prepared next time, Bennett. So, uh, but no, the, the, the Harry Reid connection is really interesting because this is really the only time Harry Reid has ever publicly discussed his faith at length is, is in this documentary. And, you know, he, he clearly is no longer with us. He died not too long after he was filmed here. He looks really good in the— he doesn't look ill, uh, but he passed away not long after he was filmed. And I think one of the real treasures of this is we get a chance to hear Harry Reid talking about his faith, and he was so vilified by so many conservative members of the church, particularly in his home state. Yeah. Oh yeah. Uh, and my father, uh, would go out of his way to stand up for Harry Reid, uh, whenever anybody tried to make a point of him not being a faithful member of the church. His line was, Harry Reid is the best home teacher the church has ever had. Harry Reid was a devoted home teacher, but very much a devoted, thoughtful, believing member of the church. And, you know, so my father, when he died— my father died in 2016, and we held two funerals for him, one in Salt Lake and one in Washington. And I spoke at the one in Washington, and the speaker right after me was Harry Reid.

Spoke at my father's funeral and sitting on the stand together because we went to that funeral where Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell.

Correct. Mitch McConnell spoke right after Harry Reid did. Uh, so, you know, it was, I think, a testament to how respected my father was by, by both sides of the aisle, but also a testament to, uh, how much affection my father had for Harry Reid and vice versa. And, uh, you know, I will push back all the day long on anybody who thinks that Harry Reid, uh, was in any way anything less than a faithful believing member of the church.

Greg, Jim, what was the objective of the docuseries? And from your perspective, both of you, what's been the reaction from what you've seen and read?

Well, Greg, have you watched it?

I've watched all 9 segments. I did. I binge-watched.

You binge-watched?

24 hours. Yeah.

Well, I'd love to hear your reaction to it.

My reaction is that it's first-rate. I talked to Darius Gray, who figures prominently in several of the segments, particularly in the one on race. And he said, as I started to watch it, immediately I regressed to my days working at KSL. And he said, my first concern was what is the production value of it? And he said, the production value is superb. Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. It verifies, Jim, what you said earlier in this podcast. It is a polished presentation. What Robert had said to me, and I think what shows all the way through, is that he wanted to try to reach out to the people who were undergoing faith crisis. Knowing at a time when there were still some naysayers sitting at high levels of the church hierarchy, that faith crisis was not only real, it was pervasive, and it was tipping people over, people of all ages, but particularly the younger demographics. And he just felt that there wasn't enough out there that was taking these issues head on in such a way as to be credible. The closest thing that I can think of goes back to 2007 when Helen Whitney produced a 4-hour documentary for PBS that I think took a similar stand on it. And I don't think has ever been fully appreciated for the value that was in it. But I put those two, Helen's The Mormons and Rob's, uh, An Inconvenient Faith on a par with each other.

That is high praise. I very much appreciate that. And I remember with great affection that 2007 documentary. You were in it and my father was also in it. Um, that was, I think, probably more, um, more accessible to a mainstream outside of the church audience.

Yes, and it was a bit edgy. It was edgier than Helen wanted, but she did not legally have the final say-so on editorializing. And so there were some things they did with the that really infuriated her. Uh, but nonetheless, um, it, it did take an edgier approach on some things. We didn't talk in Inconvenient Faith about the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and she had a whole segment on it, right?

Right. Uh, well, that documentary, if I'm remembering correctly, is the first time we heard Dallin Oaks say it is wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true. When people show a clip of him saying that, that's a clip of him being interviewed directly for that documentary.

There's— we'll do a sidebar here for just a second, if you will. Um, there's also a clip in that documentary where he looks quite anguished in talking about the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Yeah, well, she jokes, guys.

Uh-huh. And he gives a very sincere and very heartfelt explanation that comes very close to an apology. Helen told me afterwards that when she asked him that question, he gave a very scripted answer. And she said, okay, we're going to turn the camera off and you can go think about this for a while and then we're going to do it again. And the second time around, you saw the authentic Dallin Oaks coming through, which I don't think you often see.

That is interesting, uh, you know, because one of the questions we've gotten a lot about this documentary is, um, how come you don't have official church voices in it? And we, we actually did approach— I'm going to be very vague here— we did approach one General Authority, and it, it It turned out that that was not going to happen, that they were not going to participate. And it became very clear that we, that, uh, as we talked with people in the institutional church, whether they be general authorities or whether they be part of the church bureaucracy, um, the, the general consensus was that this will be more effective without official church participation, without people thinking that the church had any kind of final cut or final say in what was done. And they didn't, the church. But, but every time we brushed up against the church and shown pieces of this to the church and let the church know what we were doing, which we did on a number of different occasions, uh, the response has always been universally positive. They've always, essentially it's, look, this is, these are discussions we know need to happen. And we, and for whatever reason, the church doesn't feel like they can have them. Uh, so they're glad when other people do. So it's really interesting to me that the 2007 documentary, uh, did have that kind of participation.

It did. And I talked while it was being produced with one of the general authorities. And he said, we made a calculation that in return for not trying to control the content and for giving Helen access to whichever General Authorities she wanted to interview, we would be able to get credibility that our own productions previously had not given us. I think that was a smart calculation on their point. Part.

Yeah, I think it was. And I think, I think it's true that, that the church's productions on these sorts of things, um, they don't have the kind of credibility with the audience I think that we were trying to reach. And, you know, Ian, I think you— this is— this was your question, right? It was like, who, who were you trying to— what was your purpose?

What is the objective of the docuseries? What were you trying to achieve?

So, you know, I think Greg outlined that fairly well, but it was really interesting to sort of watch it crystallize as the document— documentary— documentary was in production. Because again, this is— this has been— I mean, I talk about it being 6 years in the making, but that's 6 years since I came on board. I think Robert was involved in this at least a year before that, maybe two years before that. And, and initially the idea was, okay, we want to reach a broad audience. We want this to be like the 2007 The Mormons documentary for public broadcasting. Uh, but we couldn't really figure out a way in. We couldn't figure out a way to make this kind of thing appealing. And it became very clear that that's not really what Robert wanted anyway. What Robert wanted, uh, is, is a documentary that, um, that, that models how people stay rather than one that convinces people to stay, which are two very different things. Because I remember one of the earliest cuts we did that we actually screened for Faith Matters. That did not go over well, um, because it was front-loaded with all of the data. It was, okay, here's the Book of Mormon, here's the Book of Abraham, here's polygamy, here's all the problems, here's all the problems, here's all the problems, here's all the problems. And it was just very dense. And then, so when we did the screening, right, Um, Robert actually, it was very clear that people weren't responding to it, that people didn't like it. Uh, but I kept saying, well, wait till you get to, uh, Darius Gray and wait till you get to John Gustav Rathbun. Wait till you get to these wonderful, wonderful, powerful stories. Uh, but Robert actually turned up the lights halfway through the documentary and said, uh, it's clear you guys don't seem to be responding to this. And I went, can't you just keep going? Uh, but turns out that ended up being one of the best things he could have done because it, it highlighted, look, you can't like shovel exposition down the viewer's throat, uh, for 45 minutes and expect them to be engaged or care. You have to have that same level of buy-in and you have to have those personal stories Um, that, uh, that were so compelling in the race episode and in the LGBTQ episodes, because that's what people resonate with. That's what people want to see. And that ultimately is far more convincing and far more powerful than a data dump is. So when, if you can show like, okay, how do you reconcile being a gay man with having faith in the church? Well, I can give you a lecture on that, or I can let John Gustav Rathal tell you his story. And John Gustav Rathal's story is going to have so much broader impact because it's personal, it matters. You, you start to realize what— I mean, you connect with him as a human being, and so the data becomes secondary. To the experience, to the lived experience of the members. So in summarizing it, when it first launched, when it first came out, and Robert and I were talking about it, and I've been, I've been tasked with monitoring the comments and doing all of this. Uh, I think both of us were kind of surprised that it was being perceived so apologetically. I mean, one of the things we were very nervous about, at least at one point, and, and, and with the Faith Matters cut. They said, this is too critical of the church. You're way too critical of the church. You're giving the, the, um, critics of the church far too much time. And it's not that we've given the critics less time. It's that we have, uh, just sort of allowed all of the stories to breathe, uh, rather than just sort of lecture anybody on, on any of the points of doctrine or history. And it, and so when it was, when it launched and everybody started saying, well, this is just sort of soft apologetics. I was talking to Robert about that and he says, well, you know, we're not trying to convince anybody to stay and we're not trying to convince anybody to come back. He says, what we are saying is, uh, you know, we love you if you stay, we love you if you leave, if you want to stay. Here's how some people do it. And, and I think that was sort of the summation of what the purpose was. It was to try to provide models of people with integrity confronting all of these difficult issues and still choosing to stay. Does, does that come through when you watch the, the documentary or, um, Ian, as somebody who has left, uh, What was your reaction to it? What was your perception of it?

I'm really grateful you've asked me this question. Um, you know, here we are, three regular fellas, Greg Bennett, Jim Bennett. You are both incredibly devoted to the church. You're in, you're active, and you're making it work. And I think that's wonderful. And you get, you're in, you're having this wonderful experience in the church for the most part. I left because I couldn't have an honest, open conversation about my concerns, my questions, and my issues. It, the, the, the, there was no space for me to do that. There was no place to do that. There was no, I couldn't have those conversations openly. And I felt when I crossed the threshold in the church that my right to freedom of expression, share my feelings and thoughts in an environment that's very emotional. And very spiritual, where you're supposed to be open up and talk about your feelings and thoughts about all kinds of stuff. It just, uh, wasn't a safe place. And, and what was worse is that I was labeled as a, an apostate. Even when I was serving on a stake presidency, there was calls for my release. By the way, there were several people that were calling for me to be released because I was talking about the gospel topic.

Efforts.

It was extraordinary for me. Uh, I, uh, what I got from the docuseries is that, uh, a few things. It, here we are, three regular fellas talking about some of the most important issues that the church still struggles with today, which have been around for well over a century. The church can't shake these issues off. We are still talking about them. They're the big ones. I mentioned that in the introduction. So until it, it can have an open, honest, adult, mature, intelligent, mature conversation about these issues and allow people like me to talk about them, ask my questions and feel safe to do so. And don't label me as apostate and criticize me and cut me off and talk about me negatively. I just don't think the church can, can progress. You know, here we are on, on a public forum, three of us. Anyone can listen to this podcast. Anyone can criticize us, challenge us, make any kind of comments. We're okay with that. That's a good thing. And we're talking about serious issues that are affecting millions of members in and out of the church across the world. And so my, uh, my questions, my concerns here with the docuseries is that if people can get together to organize that kind of doc documentary and they talk about it in such a balanced way. Why can't the church leaders who are tasked with preach my gospel across the world, not hiding the talent under a bushel, and obligated to be fearless and to speak about these issues and spread the gospel and even going onto public platforms, not just this one or other podcasts, but the national platforms to talk about these issues and be unafraid as apostles and general authorities to get out there and to talk about them and to talk about them honestly. The other thing I want to, uh, uh, in response to your question, Jim Bennett, the Book of Mormon, which a lot of people criticize as being non-historical, including myself to an extent. I find the Book of Mormon and yes, the Pearl of Great Price inspiring. I'll never deny it. I know there's questions about the Pearl of Great Price, you know, Abraham, Moses, right? About the origin, how it came about. But I've read, you know, fictional material that inspires me, you know, many, many times. I find the Book of Mormon and the scripture, the Doctrine and Covenants, incredibly inspiring. And I'm not in the church. So there are many, many great things about the church that I want to protect. I don't want the church to be destroyed. I love the church. It breaks my heart that I'm not in the church. I've never served, uh, like I did when I was in the church. The church brought out the best in me. I miss it. I'd love to, if there's a way of getting back, I would, I would be open to that. But I need to feel safe. I want to have these conversations in a very intelligent, mature way. I would like the church leaders to acknowledge and to come on to these kind of documentaries and to get into the public platforms and the forums. And let's see and listen to what the leaders have to say instead of them being shy or afraid or whatever reasons why they're not coming on. I mean, we're on, we're talking about right now. We're having the conversations that we've said that need to be had. I, you know, I'll throw a question back at you both, if I may. What, do you know if the church leaders have seen the docuseries? And do you know if they have, what's been their reaction?

I have no knowledge of that. I can't address it at all.

I don't really have any knowledge of that either, to be honest. I don't, I haven't talked to any church leaders about it. I know that there are church leaders who are aware of it. I know there are people in the church communication department who have seen it and have liked it. But I, there, there, there has been no official response, positive or negative, right, from the church office building.

Ian, let me go back to your initial question and then address it in a different way. My mentor in pathology at UCLA told me that he hadn't seen a genuinely new dirty trick in science in 25 years. And I feel similarly about Mormon history. I haven't heard a genuinely new question in more than 25 years. 14 years ago, in the aftermath of what's been called the Swedish Rescue Mission, several people, I was a minor figure in it, put out a questionnaire on social media asking former or marginalized church members about why they left or why they felt marginalized. And then we tabulated all those data. We had 3,000 responses. And the first presentation of it was graphics, but then we bounced it off Clay Christensen, who was in Area 70 in Massachusetts. He was on the faculty of the Harvard Business School. He said, put a human face on it, get the stories. So we went back and put out another request asking people to tell their stories in 700 words or less. 800 people responded., and then we selected the 100 most poignant responses and put them together in a second very limited series publication. I went back a few weeks ago and read those 100 accounts. There's nothing new, nothing at all. Um, but that's bad news because for whatever efforts we and others, including the Brethren, have put in to try to address these issues, they haven't been resolved. It's the same questions. They're not new to those of us who have been in the field, but they're new and they're devastating to hundreds of thousands of church members. And in many cases, they're tipping those members over and they're saying, I'm done.

Yeah, I, you know, I resigned 6, 7 years ago, 7 and a half years ago. Not one person has asked me why I left. The only person that did ask had already left. I think I've been asked twice, but by people who already left or were leaving. I think they'd left these individuals, but no one that when I meet with them, when I see them rather in public, you know, and when I'm shopping or I'm out there and I see them often, they greet me. They're very nice, very kind. They tell me they miss me, which is nice, but they never ask me why I stopped calling. And I find that extraordinary. The other thing I want to say as well, and this is from my perspective, and I think it's, I think it'd be common. One of the episodes talks about, uh, Jim Bennett, uh, Greg Bennett, uh, prophetic fallibility, right? I'm okay. I'm totally cool with not being perfect. Okay. You know, get making mistakes, getting things wrong, uh, leaders not being perfect. You know, who is? I'm okay with mistakes being made. Uh, hopefully they're not done deliberately, but we're human. We make mistakes. We say things that we are wrong. We do things that are wrong, but the church teaches, it has a process for dealing with this. And I commented this online. When we make a mistake, we acknowledge the mistake. I'm teaching from the gospel lessons, the original ones that I taught when I was taught when I was investigating the church and when I was teaching as a missionary, when I was also a teacher in the seminary and in the gospel study classes. We make a mistake, we acknowledge the mistake, we stop doing the mistake, we seek forgiveness from those that we've hurt, from the mistake and error that we've made. We make restitution, we restore it if we can, and we apologize and we learn from it. That was the pattern pretty much. That was the path, right? And so, and we do that with the Lord in our relationship with the Lord. I'm okay with the church not being perfect. I'm okay if it's not the only true church upon the face of the earth. I want to go because I, I feel uplifted. That I can serve, that I can be myself, that I can talk openly, I can share my thoughts and feelings safely in a very constructive, respectful, and in a very positive environment. Because we're all there, we're all sinners. Nobody's perfect. We need each other. We need each other to get back to Heavenly Father. And I just want the church to focus on not being perfect. I want it to focus on being good or great and just being human. And I would love to get, I would love to see more leadership from the church in the world, not just on these issues affecting the church, the church-related issues, the big ones that we've titled earlier, but leaders talking publicly about where the church is on major themes and issues and challenges facing the world. You know, the church has an amazing group of leaders, incredibly intelligent. It's a very smart organization. It really is. It's got so much resources. We've talked frequently about the power of the collaborative service that the church has, being it with all the missionaries and the members being able to do more in the community and serve through these projects, through charity projects across the community and the impact that would have on, uh, its relationship and also people's lives instead of just focusing on proselyting and getting people baptized, which is, I understand that's important, but the church is like the sleeping tiger, which is still not fully utilizing all its resources, um, uh, across the United States, but also beyond internationally. It could be so much more, but it has to address these issues. It's like an open sore. These issues continue to plague the church and we're talking about them again today. We'll be talking about them next year and the year after and the decades to come unless it addresses it and has some kind of apology. Greg, you mentioned earlier that Elder Oaks came too close to sounded like he was giving some kind of apology in that PBS 2007 documentary. Uh, he said this about, uh, some of the issues affecting the church. Elder Oaks said that, I know that the history of the church is not to seek apologies or to give them. We sometimes look back on issues and say, maybe that was counterproductive for what we wish to achieve. But we look forward. I'm not backward. He added that the church doesn't seek apologies and we don't give them. Later, he clarified his, uh, his points and he said the word apology has a lot of significant connotations and that the church's focus is on, uh, principles and goodwill rather than formal statements. He also noted that the word apology does not appear in the scriptures, and when the church has been wronged, it has not sought an apology. In return. So these are my feelings. These are my perspective. These are my experiences. Uh, I think that I want the church to improve. I want it to get better. I want it to become more inclusive, kinder, but I want it to be grown up and adult and actually really let's deal with issues. And if we made a mistake, let's follow our own advice and deal with it. Yeah.

A problem that this series cannot overcome is that it's a one-way street, and what we need is a two-way street. We need a forum where we can get audience response, not just by applauding or criticizing. Uh, there is an independent journal called Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought that next year will celebrate its 60th anniversary. There are fewer than 1 subscriber for every 15,000 Latter-day Saints. So most people aren't even aware that this exists. The name was chosen carefully, but it's never achieved that goal. Because early on the editors found out that the conservative voice didn't want to be at the same table with the liberal voice in open dialogue. And that remains a problem to this day. When Mitt Romney was running for president in 2012, a religion reporter from the Washington Post met with me several times to get up to speed on Mormonism. One of the things she said was, I'm Jewish, and in the Jewish tradition, discussion, argumentation is our lifeblood. What is the venue within the Mormon tradition for doing that? And I said, Michelle, not only is there not such a venue, if you try to create one, it's likely that church leaders will try to shut it down. She was speechless. That's a hurdle we have yet to cross, but we need to cross it. We need to create a mechanism by which the church members can have that open dialogue, ask the tough questions, and not be told in return, you shouldn't be asking.

No, I think that's absolutely correct. And I— so I, I did an Ask Me Anything, just before we recorded this podcast on the, on the Mormon subreddit. And somebody brought that up, uh, this, this whole idea that where do we ask these questions and, and how do we get these, these answers? And it was framed as, how do you think this, this documentary is going to have any impact on the church? Because you're not making any demands on the church. And you're not really confronting the church. And I just kind of had to say, you know, you raise an excellent point. We don't really have a venue for that. We don't have a venue for open discussion and any kind of open discussion, uh, can be, is generally perceived as a sort of attack and. And there doesn't seem to be a way where people on the inside who wants to stay, who want to stay on the inside and very much want to see the church succeed, can just say, well, but here are my problems. Uh, please help me deal with these problems. Uh, and so often the response is just kind of a response of, well, doubt your doubts. Or whatever other sort of thought-stopping cliché you want to use. But where I think, where I have hope, and Greg, tell me if I'm wrong on this, because I probably am, but where I have hope is in the fact that the church really doesn't have a choice in terms of having to allow for these conversations because they're not going away. And the internet and technology has made it impossible for the church to control the narrative or to hide any of the information, even if they want to. And the church has made some really positive steps towards greater transparency. I think that the Joseph Smith Papers Project is just an astonishing, um, astonishing project, astonishing work of transparency. Uh, but most of the members don't have any idea that it exists. They don't know anything about it. But as time goes on, it's the church just, it's inevitable. It's the whole idea of the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice. I mean, eventually we're going to get there. I would just like to see us get there more quickly. Uh, do you share a similar sort of optimism on that, Greg?

Uh, I'm not as optimistic as you. I hope that we can get there, but we really do need to figure out some way of having those discussions without trying to control the content. It's rarely a level playing field if it's a playing field at all.

Yeah, I like that. I don't want to be told what questions to ask. I want to ask my questions. I'll do it respectfully, kindly, constructively. Absolutely. You know, we deserve that, but I don't want to be controlled. I don't like that. As soon as you control me, I mean, I'm not interested. I really don't want to be part of the conversations. We've said on previous, uh, conversations that the church is walking a fine line between trying to manage the expectations of the longstanding, um, aging member in the church, you know, traditional doctrine, you know, hanging on to those people, not making too many changes too quickly in case it upsets that group of people, you know, the bedrock, the rank-and-file members of the, the the mature memory, if you like, so to speak, it's been there for a long time. I get that. Balancing the concerns and issues that the rising generation have, who are unafraid to ask the questions and are trying to make sense whether, to your point, Jim Bennett, whether they needed religion in their life at all, right? It's not just about asking questions about doctrine that, you know, asking questions, well, is religion important to me? And Uh, where do I get my spirituality? And if they can get it from, if the church can provide that, great. But if it can't, it's going to lose the generation. But the thing that I want to say here, which I don't think has been said on this podcast, I've not heard it elsewhere either, is if the church is waiting to take a position on things because it can't, it can't, doesn't want to do so right now, it's waiting for maybe 10 years from now before people eventually come round to the idea or they're ready to have these conversations. 10 or 15 years from now. What about the salvation of those people right now? People like me and others who have questions and concerns right now. What about our group? You know, somewhere in the middle. Do we have to wait for 10, 15 years before we have these conversations? Uh, where they actually have to have the conversations because that's the prevailing thought. That's where the pressure, the pressure increases as time goes on. What about the people now? Who have got these questions and concerns. And why can't the church show better leadership and, you know, come on to some of these conversations? I've invited Matt Holland onto this podcast. Jim, you're aware of this. I think I found a way of doing that. I've got a few contacts, email address that I've sent to Matt. And I know Matt quite well. Jim, you and I, You met Matt. We served with him on our mission. I got to know him pretty well, actually, a few occasions on the mission. He's a general authority. Uh, it's somebody that, uh, I have a lot of love and respect for. Uh, I would love to have a conversation. I'd love him to come onto this podcast and to have a chat with us and to have a, you know, a very robust conversation. I, I, I think he's the kind of person that would, uh, come on, but I, I'm looking for. Leadership and looking for an opportunity to have a conversation with somebody, a leader of the church who can speak and have just a regular conversation. I still am confident that will happen. I don't know if they will do it on our podcast, but I would like to see the church more active, the leadership more active, and following the examples of their predecessors during the Restoration. If you go back to the Book of Mormon and the Bible, there were fearless— Samuel Lamanite stood on the wall. Alma, Mosiah, King Benjamin, they were unafraid. Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Wilford Woodruff, countless examples of leaders of the church unafraid to stand up and speak up on all kinds of issues. I would like my church leaders to do that. And if they get it wrong, I'm okay with that. Um, but, but let's have a conversation with them. Let's have that dialogue. And I hope Matt Holland will respond favorably and will come on to our podcast.

There is an underlying major issue that is of the church's own creation. In 2013, they posted the first of the Gospel Topics Essays, which were a Johnny Come Lately attempt to try to address these issues, not having been on the internet while everybody else was getting on it. Uh, I was giving a lecture in Logan and they had a banquet before the lecture. Steve Snow, who was then the Church historian, sat next to me and he said, you'll be interested that we will be submitting the first of those to the Twelve next week and we think they'll be approved. And I said, that's great. Now, how are you going to deploy them? And he just kind of dropped his head and said, yeah, because he knew the problem and it was one of the Church's own creation because for decades and decades, we have spoon-fed a particular line of history and doctrine that didn't necessarily align with the data. We also fell into the fundamentalist trap of having answers to every question. And I think the most poignant example of that was Bruce McConkie's book Mormon Doctrine, probably the most popular non-scriptural book in the history of the Church. But I think in the long run it created a lot more problems than it solved because the issues that it attempted to address cannot be issued— it cannot be, cannot be solved with simple one-line answers. And so the same data-based answer now that will satisfy the questioners is likely to tip over the Orthodox who thought they knew it all because the church has told them for decades, we have it all. That's the dilemma. And they haven't figured out yet a way to be able to fill the glass. It's going to be half empty for both of those constituencies, and that's not very satisfying.

That's an excellent point. I, I never saw it like that. Greg, how does the, uh, An Inconvenient Faith docuseries— how does it relate to your strategic plan for improving the church?

I think it's a good step forward because at least it's showing an on-screen dialogue. That's a step in the right direction, more than just an on-screen monologue. But to get to where we need to be, I think we need to encourage, uh, the kind of dialogue that's been missing and create venues where that can happen openly without fear of retribution. We all know that there are discussions in the hall of church or afterwards that people will get quite candid where they would never do that in a public church setting. We need to bring down those barriers. Yeah, we need to allow people to express themselves Honestly, uh, without embarrassment, without fear of reprisal.

Yeah. As I listen to you, uh, Jim Bennett, Greg's comments, uh, describe an actual incident that I had, that experts had at church. It was the two I was discussing in priesthood as a member of a stake presidency. The first essay that was issued in October, I think it was 2013, and telling the brethren about this essay, priesthood went quiet. I got some interesting looks. The lesson ensued after that. I don't think it was on the race and the priesthood. It wasn't. It was me just kind of referencing the essay. After the priesthood meeting finished, 3, 4 brethren came up to me in the corridor, challenging me and questioned me and why did I talk about these things and bringing them up in priesthood. My wife, who came up the corridor looking for me, because I was there for a good 20 minutes. You know, I had people, people were looking for me to set them apart for callings. There were people that wanted the blessing. There I was in the corridor in church with these 3 or 4 brethren, uh, challenging me. And as my wife looked on down the corridor, she could see I was, I'll quote her, I was flustered. I was uncomfortable. Uh, my face was, um, looked a little bit red and I felt I was being, I remember I thought I was being ambushed. It was a very uncomfortable, it was a, it was a terrible experience. And my wife said to me, as soon as she saw that, because she knew that I had all these questions, et cetera, she knew when she saw that, she knew it was over. She knew it was over. And I came back from that church, from that, uh, on that Sunday, I was upset. I was quite emotional. Um, I was heartbroken and it was a very difficult day and I made my decision. You know, I joined the church at the age of 16, my own choice, my own free will. Was thrown out the, thrown out of the home for doing so because it was against the Church of England to join this so-called Mormon cult. I did it anyhow because I felt it was the right thing to do. No doubts, still no regrets on doing that. Slept on a park bench for a few nights because there's nowhere to sleep. I was completely homeless. And then fast forward to that experience that changed everything for me. That corridor experience changed everything. And I felt I wasn't safe at church and I never went back. When I left that, you know, that, that's, uh, uh, I think that was it. I, I don't think I was on the state presidency at that time. I can't remember. I can't remember. Um, but when, after that experience, I never went back and I just, I just couldn't do it. And because I just felt I'd be attacked or ambushed. It was unsafe and it was the most awful. And then what was sad, I'd been to church, what, 35, 37 years, and all the time I felt safe. It was a place that I loved. I loved to congregate, meet with the members. We were friends. We had that spiritual relationship that, you know, these experiences bind our relationships for eternity. You know, I'd interviewed, I was so close to everyone. So I felt there were friends, there were lifelong friends. I felt so close to them, and there was never a time I didn't feel safe in my entire church life. But that day I felt unsafe, and it was the most awful experience I've ever had. And it, it, um, it's difficult to look back without feeling any sadness or emotion. I wish it had been different. Perhaps now it would be, it would be different, but even now, No one in the church in any capacity has asked me, you know, 7 years on, why I even left. And it's just, it's just extraordinary.

Well, Ian, I've heard you. It always breaks my heart when I hear that story. But as I listen to it, I, I, I, I am always reminded of the fact that the reason people don't ask you why you left is they are terrified of what the answer might be. I mean, that comes from a place of absolute fear and absolute terror. I think, I don't think it's people being upset with you or angry with you or condemnatory of you. But rather there are so many people who, uh, just don't want to know. If the church isn't true, they're, they're terrified that they're not going to be able to, to stay if they hear something that, that shakes their faith. One of the people involved in— I'm going to be very vague here— but one of the people involved in the production team said to me, uh, yeah, My mother won't watch any of this. I'll take it and say, hey mom, watch some of this. And so, nope, I don't want to know. I don't want to hear it. They don't even want to know what the arguments are, let alone try to address them. And so for someone to come to you and say, hey Ian, why did you leave? Your answer might be convincing enough to persuade them to leave too. And so they stay out of that. I don't know, but that, that's my diagnosis. Greg, do you have a diagnosis?

I go back to what I think is one of the more profound statements of Joseph Smith when he defined truth. The truth is knowledge of things as they are, as they were, and as they will be. When you get off onto a side road and start to say truth truth is things as we want them to have been, or truth is anything we say, then you're going to pay a price. And we're seeing that price. If people cannot deal with reality, uh, we're in big trouble. Yeah, we're seeing this nationally as well. It's not just a Latter-day Saint thing. And there is going to be a severe price that's going to be paid because of that. We have to figure out a way to get back to those basics, to respect truth, and to say, all right, if we got it wrong, let's get it right.

Right. And I respect that. I want that to happen. As I said, I want the church to succeed. It's the most amazing organization on the planet. You know, when it's being its best. The members, the extraordinary Christlike commitment and devotion, um, and a commitment to service by its members is, is amazing. It's a, it's a change my life forever. And, you know, we talk about why, you know, when people leave, they can't let it go. Well, how can, you know, when you're so involved and so immersed and so committed for so many years, how, and it's changed your life on so many levels. How can you let it go? You know, I think people think, you know, when people leave the church, that's it. They don't think about it. And that's the case for some people. But for many, it's not. Last year, Jim Gray, I went on a, I went hiking with an old friend of mine in the UK, a dear old friend of mine I know really well. Actually, there were two friends, my best friend there, it was my best man at wedding and a friend that we both knew really well. The two friends are very active. One's very nuanced. The other one is absolutely devoted, committed. As we were hiking, we were in a conversation, uh, with, um, the one who was, uh, uh, very orthodox, if I like. Uh, and we were saying to this individual, are you aware of some of the challenges and issues that the, you know, impact in the church? He said, yes, but we choose not to discuss them. We don't want to know about them because we're quite happy not knowing about them because we get a lot from the church. And we don't need to know about them. And I hadn't seen it like that before, Jim, Greg. This was an individual that we both knew, had enormous love and respect for. They're a wonderful friend of ours. Um, they don't want to know about the issues, and that's okay. We can't make people, you know, we can't force people to hear, you know, discuss stuff, but they were quite happy living a life that they got a lot from, a lot of enjoyment. A lot of fulfillment, a lot of reward from the church and the experience without having to talk about it. And you've got that element as well, Jim. You've got people in the church that don't want to talk about it because they're afraid of the answers. They've got their own doubts and questions. But you've got people that are quite happy living in ignorance because, yeah, they know about them, but they don't want them— we don't want those conversations to upset what for them for this individual at least, is a very positive, spiritual, rewarding experience that they get from the church. And they don't need to talk about that stuff. And I never saw it like that. I never, I thought once people hear about stuff, these problems, um, uh, naturally they'd want to know more about them. In this conversation, when we were hiking with that friend last year, he didn't, this person didn't. He was quite happy about that. I never saw it like that before, but I think you've got that element in the church who are just, they don't want to talk about them and they're quite happy to live. And that's okay. I respect that. It's like that living, living in ignorance. You know, if you, you know, if you don't know about something, your problems and issues, then perhaps life can be a lot easier when we're living in a, in kind of a bubble, so to speak.

Yeah, I used to feel a compulsion to try to convert people to my way of thinking. That left a long time ago, and I've realized more and more the demographic, Ian, that you just described. And my feeling is, if it's working for them, that's great, because the end purpose of this is to get you through life in a way that wins. And if people don't want to confront inconvenient truth along the way, and they can make that work, uh, they're probably the lucky ones. But for the rest of us, uh, I want to borrow the phrase from the medical world of evidence-based medicine. There are a lot of us who insist on evidence-based religion. Show me the data and I'll be fine. I can deal with the data. But, uh, I don't feel it necessary to lean on those who are comfortable where they are as long as they're not insisting that the rest of us can't think the way we think.

Yeah.

Yeah. And that becomes a problem because I see in the progressive wing of the church albeit it's a small wing, a much higher degree of tolerance towards the conservative wing than I see reciprocating.

Right, right. Yeah, that's, uh, that really, that makes a lot of sense to me. We're coming up towards the end of our podcast here, gentlemen. Again, Greg, it's an absolute honor to have you back onto our program. It really is. And, and we would love to continue more conversations in the future with you. You're now, you're part of the furniture now. We can't, we can't, I don't want to let you go. But what are your both concluding comments, remarks on the docu-series? Again, going back to the question, are you hopeful that leaders of the church, I mean, how, I can't see how it's possible for leaders of the church not to have watched this and seen this and I'm sure they have. You know, what do you think their reaction will be? Do you think we'll get any formal response from them? You know, will it, will it, will they mention it or reference any material? What do you think, uh, will happen along those lines?

I think the more likely outcome is that there's a possibility of a little bit of trickle-up revelation. I looked on online a couple days ago, and by my count, just what's listed on YouTube, there have been over 50,000 views of the aggregate of the 9 segments. That's pretty impressive to me, Jim. I don't know what the expectation was, but for me, that's a huge audience for this genre. Uh, and if enough of the people in the pews are watching this, then that could have a trickle-up effect.

I think that's the goal. It is. I don't think we will see any official recognition of it. It's— or acknowledgement of it. Uh, I, I'm hoping that maybe there'll be some quiet behind-the-scenes acknowledgement of it. But, uh, the fact that there's no condemnation of it makes me very happy. Uh, but yeah, I mean, there were 10,000 views within 24 hours of us launching it with absolutely no pre-advertising that it was even coming. The first time anybody even knew it was coming was I sent out a tweet saying something big's coming tomorrow. I was in Argentina when I sent it and I went, okay, we're going to launch this and we'll see what happens. And it seems to have, uh, seems to have had an impact. I, I, I don't see this as itself being the instigator for any sort of major change, but I do think this has the potential to be the beginning of the conversation and not the end of it. Uh, any tentative step in the direction of creating that space where we can have these conversations, where we can confront these issues head on and do so in a way that is respectful of everybody who reaches whatever conclusion they reach, whether they decide they have to leave, whether they find a way to stay. Uh, we want everybody who wants to be a part of this conversation to be a part of this conversation and to have a place where it can happen. And I think this is a step in the right direction. I, how big a step? I don't know. I hope it's a big one. Uh, I doubt it will be a huge one, but I do think it's a step in the right direction.

All right. Okay.

Gentlemen, we, as you know, we are living in a deeply divided world and increasingly very polarized across all kinds of issues. The world seems, um,, uh, at, at times destitute of moral leadership. And Greg, you've talked about this before. I'm out of the church. Okay. However, I have confidence even now, notwithstanding these issues, et cetera, and the challenges that we face with some of the leaders of the church, I have confidence that church leaders will step up, speak up, speak out. And not only address these issues that we're talking about, still talking about after so long, the ones that we've talked about earlier today, the ones that are identified in the docuseries and, and deal with those respectfully, thoughtfully, constructively to address concerns of, of its rank and file members. I don't just expect that from the leaders for the members, but I look to the leaders for moral leadership in this world. To stand up and to speak up and to speak out and to take a position on really important issues of the day. We need good spiritual and emotionally intelligent and constructive leadership, and I believe the church can offer that. I really do. I, I, I, I'm not saying the church has all the answers. I don't expect that, but it, it can do better and it we should do better. And I expect more. I can say that because I'm out the church, right? I don't have to worry about my membership or worry about whether I'm going to get released from a calling because I'm asking the wrong question or saying the wrong thing, or some rumors going to spread across the world that Ian's saying the wrong thing or asking the wrong Christian or talking about the wrong things. I don't have that fear anymore. I can speak out openly and be myself, but I look to the leadership of the church to do more and to be more, and it can and it should. And I am hopeful. I have confidence in the leaders. I really do. Even now. And I want the church to succeed. I don't want it to be destroyed or to go away. It's an amazing organization and I want it to get better. And I believe, and I hope that to your point, Jim Bennett, Greg O'Connor, the docuseries is, uh, I believe and accept it is an important step, another important step going forward. And I hope we can, uh, you both have been involved in the, in the docuseries can build on it and that there'll be a series 2. And perhaps in series 2, we could get Matt Holland on or another general authority to talk on series 2. Hopefully that might happen. But I believe the church will change and become more inclusive. I have hope and I have confidence. As we close out this week's podcast conversation on discussing An Inconvenient Faith. Do you have any final comments or remarks or advice for our listeners? Greg, Jim, if you go first, and then Greg, if you give us any closing remarks.

Well, I've, I've said everything that, I mean, I've been talking about this now for, on a daily basis everywhere. And I don't know if there are any other pithy, brilliant things I need to say to close. I'd, I'd love to hear Greg's summation. So I'll kick it off to Greg here.

My summation is bring on season 2.

Gentlemen, we'll close here now. I want to just take this opportunity on behalf of our listeners to thank you both for this amazing conversation, very constructive dialogue. Jim Bennett, as always, it's an honor to do this with you. It's all about helping people and talk about things that need to be talked about. And Greg Bennett, again, it's a real honor to have you on our podcast. We love you and appreciate you and hope that we can continue having these conversations with you going forward.

Good.

I look forward to it.

Wonderful.

Well, thank you again on behalf of listeners, to all of us. Thank you for being with us this week. Hope you enjoyed this week's podcast and we look forward to doing many, many more in the future. Jim Bennett, thank you. Greg O'Grady, thank you.

You're welcome.