April 2024 Conference Recap

Hello and welcome to another episode of Inside Out. My name is Jim Bennett and I'm here with the indomitable Ian Wilkes. Have I called you indomitable before?

Yes, but that's okay. I feel indomitable twice, which is great.

Maybe this is 3 times. I didn't think in advance of what the adjective was going to be.

3 times indomitable is pretty indomitable.

So this may be the Lord's way of trying to tell you that you're really, really indomitable.

I think there is celestial indomitable, terrestrial indomitable, and I feel I've just arrived at the celestial indomitable.

You are celestial indomitable. You are thinking—

I've made it.

Well, that's as good as a segue as any into what we're going to be discussing. This is going to be a conference recap. We're recording this on Tuesday night. We usually release episodes on Wednesday or Thursday, but I'm thinking that as soon as we're done, I want to get this out there because there are so many people talking about conference and I am getting so bludgeoned on social media, uh, for talking about some of the things that I'm going to talk about here, that I just want to get this out there because this to me was a fascinating conference for completely unintended reasons. I don't think the church would appreciate the reasons why I found conference fascinating this time around. What I found fascinating was there, there is so clearly, at least in my mind, a theological tension in church leadership that is on full display and was on display at conference. And I frame it as a tension between exclusivity and universalism, meaning the way I would define that universalism is this in general terms, is the idea that everybody gets saved and everybody eventually— you know, the church, I believe the doctrine of the church is universalist at its core. If it's not, then what the heck are we doing in all of these temples? Why are we going through making sure that everybody gets all of these ordinances done on their behalf if we don't believe that these ordinances are going to have efficacy for everybody to whom they are offered. And so I believe that means that eventually everybody gets to the celestial kingdom, because when we talk about universalism in the church, they'll say, oh yeah, yeah, everybody's saved, quote unquote. I'm doing finger quotes here, but, uh, that's only because the celestial and the terrestrial kingdoms are really great, even though they're not the celestial kingdom and you don't really get to live with God and you're separated from your family for eternity. And to me, it's like, that's not— you're separated from your family for eternity, then the celestial kingdom isn't the celestial kingdom for anybody. Because if I make it to the celestial kingdom and my kids don't, then that's not heaven for any of us. Maybe it's heaven for them because they finally get rid of me, but I want to have them there. And so even if I make it and they don't, that's not heaven. And so a universalist idea is the idea that everybody eventually makes it. And I think the Mormon theology can accommodate that idea really quite easily with the idea of movement between the kingdoms. I mean, yes, there will be a judgment and some people will go to lower kingdoms, but in my mind, all that means is that they just need to spend more time getting to the point where they can get to where they need to be. And people will throw out, you know, well, what about Hitler? Okay, fine, Hitler. How many billions, how many trillions of years do you want to say Hitler is going to need to finally repent? And finally, you know, eternity is a very, very, very long time. Eventually everybody gets there. That's what I believe. And there is a strain of the church that believes that, and there's a strain of the church that absolutely doesn't believe that. And I think that was probably best defined by Bruce R. MacConkie in his Seven Deadly Heresies talk, where he talked about the idea of progression being in the kingdom as just being the worst possible idea in the world. And it creates this idea of carnal security, and it's terrible, it's awful, and it's from the devil, and all this and the other. And so that strain of the church has ever been with us, as has the universalist strain of the church. And what we saw in this particular conference was the ascendancy of the exclusivists, the ascendancy of the idea that what matters more than anything else is retreating from the world. You know, this was, this was absolutely a conference where we are to hole up in our temples, retreat from the world, withdraw from the world. And all that matters is going to the temple and making covenants. I heard the word covenant so many times that I felt I was signing the closing papers on a mortgage. Covenants and covenants. And we do covenants, covenants, covenants, covenants. Over and over and over again. And, and the emphasis was entirely on this idea that it's the covenants being the only thing that matters and essentially the only thing that saves you. I mean, it got kind of frustrating that Jesus sort of took a backseat to covenants. In some of this. And in fact, Elder Bednar even said Jesus is not the foundation of your salvation. He's where you build the foundation of your salvation. And it was really kind of confusing and legalistic and didn't make a lot of sense. But, but it was, it was really bizarre to me that, that, that was such an overwhelming theme that, that pretty much everybody, with a handful of very notable exceptions, which I want to talk about in a minute, but pretty much everybody kept coming back to that. And when President Nelson finally spoke, you know, he's— we've reached the point now where both President Nelson and President Eyring won't go up to the pulpit to speak. They only sit in their chair, and both of them had prerecorded their messages. President Eyring, I think, was at every session, but when it was his time to speak, his message was prerecorded. President Nelson came to half the sessions, about, or 2 out of 5, so not quite half. And he was there in the room when his talk was broadcast, but his talk had been prerecorded. And he summed it all up talking about covenants, talking about the temple and how essential was the temple was, how essential it is that we're giving the temple to everybody in the world. I mean, Elder Andersen even talked about the fact that this is why the Lord has blessed the church to be so rich, so that now we can build all of these temples everywhere, everywhere, everywhere. And, and, and I have never I don't recall a conference that has had that kind of univocality where every speaker was essentially hammering the same thing over and over and over again. But the message essentially was, we are the exclusive holders of the priesthood keys, we are the exclusive stewards of this covenant, and everybody else is screwed. We're it. This is it. Go to the temple. And withdraw from the world. And so I heard all this and was kind of getting discouraged by it. And then Saturday night, Dieter Uchtdorf spoke. And Dieter Uchtdorf, a lot of people have kind of complained that since he was demoted out of the First Presidency, that sort of he'd lost kind of his luster. He lost his mojo. And I think maybe that's true. I don't know that that's entirely fair, but I do think he recaptured that mojo on, on Saturday night when he spoke. And what he gave was this beautifully inclusive, loving message that didn't talk at all about covenants, didn't talk at all about the temple. It's interesting, somebody, a friend of mine, has noted The phrase the covenant path, which actually wasn't as used this time, which was kind of interesting because covenant was used over and over again. Covenant path sort of took a backseat to that. I mean, President Oaks' talk was all about— it was a legal brief. It was, this is what a covenant is. This is what a covenant is, not only in the church, but this is what a covenant is in the world. And this is, you know, businesses enter into covenants and you went I mean, just, it was relentless in the discussion of covenants. And all of a sudden, here comes President Uchtdorf— I'm sorry, Elder Uchtdorf, he's not a president in the First Presidency anymore— but here he comes with this lovely, inclusive, gentle, kind message. And it was like water in the desert. It was just, oh, this is lovely. But what came later was the debut of Elder Kieran as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. And we've talked about Elder Kieran here. And I, again, I am somewhat biased. I know Elder Kieran. I know Elder Kieran's family. They were in our ward for many years. I know that he is probably the best speaker the Church has ever had. Or close to it. But beyond that, up close and personal, when you get to meet him as a human being, he is every bit as delightful, if not more so, in person. And so I was sitting there just anticipating, probably with too high expectations, how wonderful Elder Kieran was going to be. And he, he exceeded those expectations. I mean, he just hit it out of the park. And his message was entirely universalist. I mean, he used phrases like, the plan of salvation is God's plan to save everybody. The plan of happiness means that everybody gets happiness. He talked about this idea that he used the metaphor of being at a hotel and looking at a cop out on the street who had to set up a roadblock. And this cop sort of enjoyed turning cars away. He said he did a little jig and he would just be happily sending cars away. And he says that is the exact opposite of what Jesus does. Jesus doesn't place any roadblocks in your way. He removes them. And he framed the whole thing in terms of grace, that this is the grace of Jesus that saves. I mean, if you listen to every other talk, you would say that it's the covenant of the temple that saves you. And Elder Kieran just sort of swept that aside and said, it's the grace that saves you. There are no roadblocks. And he said, and the plan is designed to save you and all those you love. Yeah, he made it very explicit. That the kind of heaven that everybody wants is a heaven where everybody they love is there. And he insisted that the plan of salvation is designed to save, to— for salvation, not just for the exclusive few, but for all of the people that those exclusive, exclusive few love. I mean, it was just the most sweeping, beautiful talk you could imagine. And what was fascinating to me was the reaction to it on social media, because people out of the church were commenting just how beautiful and inclusive the talk was. Oh, that was wonderful. Oh, if I'd heard more of that, I would never have left. I mean, I saw comments like that all over the place. And people who are labeled as "progmos" or progressive Mormons were just falling all over themselves to talk about how wonderful it was. And the exclusivists got furious and they were furious. They were furious with people for liking the talk. They were furious at other members of the church who listened to Patrick Kearon and said, this is wonderful. And they said, well, you're not even getting what he really means. He didn't really mean that. What he really meant was you have to do all these things and then the grace kicks in. I mean, they rewrote the talk to make it less inclusive in their own minds. And you saw that over and over and over again. And there's one account on Twitter that will repost anything I post. And somebody before conference was saying, I really don't like conference. And I said, ah, keep your eye on Elder Kieran. And then he reposted that and said, ahaha, Jim Bennett says, oh, Elder Kieran will save us. And then when somebody else posted, oh, I loved Elder Kieran's talk, they reposted it, hahaha, look at these pragmos who think that Elder Kieran is on their side. And I just was like, you know, if you're mocking somebody for praising an apostle of the Lord, Maybe you're not doing the church any favors. Maybe that's not the best way to build the kingdom. So, so Elder Kearon's talk stood out that way. Elder Uchtdorf's talk stood out that way. There were other talks that I thought sort of highlighted the tension. The one that I thought was most interesting in that regard was Elder Stevenson, Gary Stevenson. With the Quorum of the Twelve, gave a talk where he highlighted the two great commandments. And we, you know, we've talked about this on this podcast. President Oaks a while back, uh, tried to draw a sort of schism between the two great commandments. The idea was, yeah, love God and love your neighbor, but be sure you don't love your neighbor too much because if you do that, you're not loving God enough. And that, I think, is a complete misreading of what Jesus was saying. I mean, we're told repeatedly, particularly in the Book of Mormon, well, when you are in the service of your fellow beings, you are only in the service of your God. Book of Mosiah tells us that, uh, you know, inasmuch as you've done it unto the least of these, my brethren, you've done it unto me. That's in the New Testament. Over and over again, we're told the way you show your love for God is by loving your neighbor. There is no tension between the two commandments. They are essentially the same commandment. And, and President Oaks since then has backed away from that position, but a number of the General Authorities haven't really gotten that memo. But I felt like Elder Stevenson did, because he was— he talked about this idea of suspension bridges, which was a sort of unfortunate metaphor given what happened in Baltimore. Right before conference. But this idea that suspension bridges are built on twin pillars and you need both pillars to hang the bridge and they're both equally important. And I've heard some commentators, I know Radio Free Mormon, for instance, blasted that as, okay, he's leaning into Oaks saying the two great commandments are sort of in conflict. That's not what I got out of it at all. I thought what he was trying to do is sort of lead everybody back gently to the correct interpretation, which is that they are both equally important and you can't have one without the other. And, and so, so I thought that was kind of interesting. So, so there, there were a number of talks that sort of tried to navigate that space, but they were distinctly in the minority. And the vast majority of the talks were, okay, we're building temples and that's it. That's, that, that's the entirety now of what the church is. We did not hear talks on the Family Proclamation. The Family Proclamation was never mentioned. Um, there was some language from it quoted in one talk, but it wasn't even quoted about gender issues. And I think there were some veiled references. And I mean, there was one guy that said that Christian kindness is no substitute for integrity. And I think you're going to talk about that talk in a minute. And I— some people took those as sort of veiled jabs at the LGBTQ community, and they may very well have been. But this is the first conference that I can remember where no one has mentioned the Family Proclamation by name, and there wasn't any overt LGBTQ bashing. That just wasn't an issue. The other thing that was never mentioned once in any significant context was missionary work. There was no, you know, when I was growing up, I would always go to the priesthood session and we would always say, okay, the priesthood session, who's going to give the anti-pornography talk and who's going to give the go on a mission talk? Because those were just fixtures of every priesthood session. I want to speak to the young men of the church tonight. You have been called by the Lord to go. I mean, I can pretty much recite that talk that was given in different iterations by memory. So over and over again, there was no focus at all on missionary work. And cynically, I thought, okay, have we just given up? On the idea that we're going to grow the church on this side of the veil. The numbers, you know, they gave the auditing report. They did that Saturday morning, which was interesting. Usually they do that Saturday afternoon. And, and Nemo of the Nemo the Mormon podcast insists that they did that in order to be able to throw off protesters who were planning on coming Saturday afternoon to vote you know, to vote opposed to the sustaining of church officers. They did the sustaining church officers on Saturday morning. They did all that Saturday morning. And, you know, but it, it's just amazing to me. The auditing report talks about, okay, we have X number of members and X number of new stakes, and those numbers don't really line up. You know, we have far more new members than the number of congregations that we've grown in. And what's clear from all the statistical reports that are done outside the church by people who are observers is that the church is growing in Africa, the church is growing in the Philippines, the church is growing in some areas of South America. It's flatlining or imploding everywhere else. And so if anybody can see those numbers, it's the Quorum of the Twelve and the First Presidency. And the sense I've got is, okay, well, um, time to shift the focus on something that we can control. And we can control how many temples we have, and we can control— we can build temples everywhere, and we have enough money to do that in perpetuity. And we don't even have to dip into our savings to do it, right? You know, we have this $150 billion slush fund, and we're still, we've still got enough money from the annual contributions of members that we can build all of these temples without dipping into our savings. And so I really feel like the church has sort of made that shift. Okay, this is the, the church isn't really gonna grow anymore. So we're going to do temple work and that's all we're going to do. And so that, that kind of depresses me. But the thing that doesn't depress me is in listening to Uchtdorf and listening to Kieran, that idea of universalism that I find so compelling at the core of the restored gospel is alive and well, even if it's not in ascendancy at the moment. Right now, the exclusivists are definitely in ascendancy. They're controlling it, and, and the fact that they feel it's so necessary to double down, triple down, quadruple down, that they just had to hammer this home, I think demonstrates weakness and not strength. It demonstrates that they recognize just how tenuous a position that is. We're not coming at this. This is a retreat. This is a retreat from the world. It's a retreat from missionary work. It's a retreat from everything except covenants, covenants, covenants, temple, temple, temple. And, and that's a sign of weakness. Retreat is not a sign of strength. And I don't think it's something that can endure. I don't think this is going to last. And I think after President Nelson passes, which— and who knows when that will be. And the people I'm talking to say, yes, he's, he's 99, he's about to turn 100. And, and they said the biggest problem is, is he has vertigo, so he can't really stand up, but he's not mentally incapacitated. And that was very clear as he sat and he gave his talk. He was as clear and as focused and as sharp as he's ever been. And, and physically, he's still functional. He just can't stand up. He's in a wheelchair and can't do a whole lot, but he can think and he can write and he can talk. And he could go on for a few more years. I don't know. I don't know how long he could go on for. But I think that the message is that This is where President Nelson has decided the church needs to be. And I think it will have to take a new prophet to shift in a different direction. But I do not think a complete retreat from the world is a sustainable option for a vibrant and growing and thriving church. And, and I think it forfeits the rising generation. Who does not see the same appeal in temple worship that a 100-year-old man does. I mean, I can see how that would be very appealing to elderly men, that that's a wonderful place, you know, that this is all I have to do is sit here and I'm saving souls on the other side of the veil. I mean, what's not to like? Well, if you're 18, there's a lot not to like. I want to be out in the world doing things. And this is a church that is in retreat. And I think eventually we're going to have to go back out into the world again. So that's my long-winded rant and summary of conference. You did not watch any of conference, did you, while it was happening?

No, no, I had other things to do, you know, family and friends and other chores and responsibilities, but I have researched it. I have listened to a few talks and enough to make, I hope, some interesting and useful comments. First of all, thank you. I hope you feel better after— after this, Gord, sharing your feelings. I think you had a lot to get off your chest, and I think that's really healthy to be able to express yourself in the way that you have. Conference, as you know, Jim, means different things to different people. And the church has to walk a very fine line. These meetings, these two meetings every year, where all the leaders come together, and the messages for all the saints— well, the message is not just for the members of the saints, the message is to the world. But if you think about all the different audiences, the different groups, different demographics, the different strategic audiences that the church has to communicate It really is quite a balancing act trying to communicate very important timely messaging along the fundamentals of principles of the gospel, you know, to rank and file members, to traditional regular orthodox members. If you look at all the different demographics, different ages, the different political persuasions that people have and the changes in modern society, it's It's such a difficult balancing act to communicate messages to address or appeal to as many of these different audiences. But look at your experience. You've got a mixed experience with conference. You know, look at your background, your legacy, look at your history, family history, and you all see some good things, but you see lots, you obviously have lots of frustrations. So it means different things to different people. Um, one thing that, as I was listening to you, that is really, uh, had a bit of an epiphany for me. And you probably have thought about this or not, uh, if you haven't, I just want to bring this up right now because I think this is a problem that's, uh, plagued the church for many, many years. I'm sure it's been spoken of in some way. I've not heard on a podcast before, but I want to go back to, uh, your comments about Elder Kearon's talk, which I listened to and I read, and I'll come to the point in a second, but I just wanna quote what Elder Kearon said in that, I think probably the best talk that was delivered at conference. And about a third into his talk, he says here, "My friends, my fellow disciples, on the road of mortal life, our Father's beautiful plan, even his fabulous plan," is designed to bring you home, not to keep you out. No one has built a roadblock and stationed someone there to turn you around and send you away. In fact, it is the exact opposite. God is, is in relentless pursuit of you. I thought that was great. He wants all of his children to choose to return to him. And I love this bit as well, and he employs every possible measure, which bring you back. That's an extraordinary quote, but it comes with some difficulty for me. First of all, no one is pursuing me. I'm a lost sheep, but no one's pursuing me. And it's too late, I think, to pursue someone like me. I think if you knock on my door and you want to save me now, or, you know, where we were before, I'm just, I'm so far gone, I'm unsavable, I think. And I certainly don't want anyone in my state listening to this on my ward listen to this podcast and come and knock on my door. I just, I wouldn't think that would be genuine. But I don't think the church is doing enough to, to rescue those, and I don't think it wants to bring certain people back into the church, frankly, who are asking difficult questions or hold certain positions. I don't think it's interested in doing that. And I don't believe rank-and-file members, uh, really, uh, across the board, universally, or for the most part, really perhaps understand or even live or even interested in that quote, because my experience and many other people's experiences are quite different. And that comes to the main point that I want to highlight here. When an apostle like this speaks like that, and he's clearly genuine, very sincere, listen to the talk, he's got a wonderful spirit, and is of wonderful intent, you get, you're going to get different interpretations from different people on what that really means. It should be accepted universally in the way it was intended. You know, let's reach out to everyone. It's clear. He said, "God's relentless in pursuit of you." He wants all of his children to choose to return to him, not just a few or some, or some people that hold this position or some people hold that position. And so my concern, and this happens all the time since the very beginning of the church, is how do you interpret that? So when someone says, an apostle speaks like that, it's important for the church to give an appropriate interpretation because you've just said yourself earlier where people out there, you know, Orthodox or traditional members will turn around and say, "It didn't mean that, he meant something else." And then another group will say, "No, no, no, he actually meant what he said. He really meant that." And that's the problem, Jim. We have an apostle like that, that you know, I don't know him, speaking absolutely sincerely, I believe, and I trust your opinion of him, who said those words, meant it in every way, in the most universal kindness way, and that's now open to all kinds of interpretations. I think that's where the church loses itself. And I believe that those words for some will be wasted. And this happens all the time. An apostle will say something, and because it's not discussed or addressed, or the prophet or someone gives a interpretation and says, well, when President Nelson said this is what he meant, and this is what we want you— this is how you should think, this is how you should feel, or maybe not those words, but this is what he meant by that. So there's no confusion at the rank-and-file level that this is what we mean, this is what we teach, it's universal. And so I don't believe— well, but I don't believe many of the members or some of the members will see that or read that in the way that it was intended. Otherwise, why are we not, why are we not living it, right? So that's my point on that one. If you look at the, at a glance, if you look at the subjects of the talks, they're all very safe, aren't they? They've got, I mean, they've gone, if you look at the pattern of talks over the last few years, they've really gone to safe ground. And if you look at it from their perspective, It's very smart and very clever to stay on safe ground, stay above the floodwater. And they talk about, for example, put you on the law, put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ. You can't get safer than that. Covenant confidence through Jesus Christ. I mean, it's safe, right? All will be well because of temple covenants. Other talks is be still and know that I am God. You can't get safer than that. Perhaps rise, he calleth thee, is safer. And Jesus Christ is in the center of our lives. It's all very, very safe. And in many ways they're on safe ground. If you contrast that with what's going on in the world, we've entered an era of significant global geopolitical instability. You know, we have to be living under a rock not to see what's happening in the world. There's huge disruption in the world politically, economically, Without trying to sound doomsday, there's some very, very heartbreaking things happening. Things are getting worse. It's not just rumors of wars, there are real wars going on. And you know, what's the true Church of Jesus Christ, the true Church of Jesus Christ on the earth, the prophet who speaks, is a mouthpiece, speaks for the Lord, is the mouthpiece of the Lord. What's the church position on what's going on in the world? No reference to that. What's the church position on Ukraine? For example, does he support Ukraine? Does he oppose Russia? What's his position on abortion? What's his position on LGBTQ? What's, you know, what's the position on these very important issues of the day? What's its relevance in respect to today? What did Jesus Christ think to what's going on in the world? I want to know that beyond just, you know, talking about, you know, these safe subjects. Just a few of the comments here on some of the talks, and I won't put them in necessarily in a certain order, but there is one of the talks here that I don't think was given in general conference, but it was a talk by Sister— I remember the sister's name who gave this talk about the church.

Jim Bennett.

Yes. And I've got here an excerpt of this because it's been quite an interesting reaction to this. I just want to play this, if you like. I don't think this was delivered in conference. This was delivered in a devotional testimony meeting by the General Relief Society presidency, Young Women's presidency, and just overall the women's presidency and leadership of those groups. And I'm going to play this right now because there's been an interesting reaction to this. So let me just turn this up and play this for our listeners. There is no other religious organization in the world that I know of that has so broadly given power and authority to women. To her knowledge, she knows of no other organization in the world that gives the amount of authority to women than our church. And I think that's verifiable, of course. There's been a big reaction to that. And there's another talk here, Jim Bennett, that I found quite interesting from Elder Rasband when he talks about words matter. And I thought it was quite fascinating. He says here, the messages shared from this pulpit are communicated in words. Of course, they're given in English and translated into nearly 100 different languages. Always the base is the same words. And words matter a lot. Let me say that again. Words matter. They're a bedrock of how we connect. They represent our beliefs and morals and perspectives. Sometimes we speak words, other times we listen. Words set a tone. They voice our thoughts and feelings, experiences for good or bad. Unfortunately, words can be thoughtless, hasty, hurtful. Once said, we cannot take them back. They can wound, punish, cut down, cut down, and even lead to destructive actions. They can weigh heavily on us. And I was thinking about that and I thought, well, there are certain words that the church won't speak, like I'm sorry, or we made a mistake, or we got this wrong, or we misled, or we perhaps didn't communicate that as well. And so I just wonder if they actually listen to their own words. The other— there's another talk which is delivered by Elder Gerard. And one thing that stood out to me was his experience. He talks about a number of years ago, Elder Uchtdorf was assigned to reorganize our stake. During our interview, he asked me a question I've not forgotten. Has there been anything in your life that, if brought to the attention of the public, would be an embarrassment to you or the Church? Now, that's exactly what was interesting about that question. That was exactly word for word the same question that Elder Oaks asked me when they were calling me into the stake presidency. In the past, I think I've kind of paraphrased it cuz I couldn't remember the exact words, but they are the exact words. I thought that was quite, uh, quite fascinating that. And so, um, I found the conference, uh, I didn't listen to the conference, but as I researched it and listened and read some of the talks. I found it to be generally lackluster, with the exception of Hilda Kieran. I did read some of Hilda Ugdorf's talk and I found some of that quite refreshing. Those two seem to be quite liberal, but for the most part it was same old, same old. I didn't find it particularly inspirational, very safe and not really relevant to the issues that we are that we're facing today. And I think it's sad because we have a missed opportunity. I would love one of the leaders or some of the leaders to get up and be bold and to be a real leader, to be honest and talk about the issues and provide some real guidance and direction in a world that is increasingly uncertain and unstable for so many. There's a lot of pain out there. People are struggling in so many ways, and I think the church has and is losing its relevancy. And at the same time, it has to maintain its base. So out of 10, I rank conference 3, 3.5, maybe 4. And without Elder Kearon, without Elder Uchtdorf, I think it would be a flat 1 or roundabout too. So, and not as comprehensive, uh, review as yourself who've listened to it, but they're my, they're my comments and thoughts.

Yeah, uh, well, I, I, I, I can hear all that and, and I, I can understand all of that. Um, I, I'm looking at it, I think, looking more for subtext. I remember talking to somebody who was in church leadership, who said conference becomes more interesting when you realize that the General Authorities are talking to each other more than they're talking to the public, that these are messages that they're giving to each other. And they're sort of— and you can sort of see the tensions that are bubbling under the surface that they don't ever want to put out in public. You know, we've talked many times about the fact that, you know, as Les Cairns said in our interview with him, the conversations among the Quorum of the Twelve are robust. Or as Hans Mattson said, it's a minefield. You know, these guys, they each have their own ideas. They've got to put out a united front. But behind the scenes, I think there is an awful lot of, of, uh, division and a lot of differences of opinion. And so conference— I mean, if you look at conference then as different people trying to sort of push the church in different directions, all while putting on a unified front, it really does become more interesting in my mind. It's, you know, you mentioned Sister Dennis. Sister Dennis spoke. She didn't speak at conference when she talked about women's authority, but she did speak in conference. And she was the one that had to give the talk about making sure that women wear garments correctly. And the Utah Area Presidency had given a much harsher version of that talk about a week before conference. In that talk, Elder Kevin Hamilton of the Utah Area Presidency said, "We are concerned that women only wear their garments to church and to the temple, and then during the rest of the week they only wear yoga pants," which was a really dismissive and frankly obnoxious thing to say. And so you get the sense that, okay, well, we need to crack down on garments, and women are wearing them, And so what better way than to get a woman to give this message? And I just felt terrible for her because there were only 3 women who spoke in all 5 sessions of General Conference, and at least one of them had to give a message that clearly was one that was assigned to her by men. And, you know, that was, that was, I think, probably the low point of conference for me was that one talk. But the focus on garments, I mean, so you raise a very important issue. Where is the church on all of these issues of the world? Where is the church on Ukraine? You know, I just received a beautiful message from somebody who says that they've seen me on videos and how helpful it was to them, and they're in Ukraine. And they said, look, we, when the Ukraine war broke out, we were hoping the brethren would call for peace and the brethren would help us. And the brethren didn't. The brethren just sort of abandoned us. I mean, when the church issued a statement after the Ukraine war, it didn't mention either Ukraine or Russia by name. It just talked about terrible conflicts in the world, and it didn't side with Ukraine over Russia. It just sort of tried to navigate this space where they don't really have to take a stand. And I mean, there was no mention of the Gaza conflict. There was no mention of any of those things. But what that— I think that reinforced this idea of retreat. Because, because indirectly engaging with those kinds of ideas is a fraught exercise. It's difficult. You have to take sides. You have to say Ukraine is being attacked by a predatory Russia, and Russia is the bad guy, and Ukraine is the good guy, and we stand with Ukraine. They're not willing to do that. And so the only thing they can do is retreat, is hole up in the temples and everything will work out just fine. Just go to the temple, go to the temple as much as you can, uh, as often as occasion will permit was the phrase that we kept hearing. And go make covenants and that will keep you safe. That will keep you safe. And so as the world goes to hell and everything crumbles around you, just go to the temple. And as you say, that's safe. And I would say it's easy. It's easy. It doesn't require the brethren to make any kind of judgment or any kind of controversial statement that will offend anybody. It's just, you know, hide. Just go and hide and you'll be fine. And I just don't think that's a sustainable message. And I just don't see how the church can survive. I think it's a pretty good stopgap measure because it sort of stops the debate. It stops the controversy. It's just, okay, well, oh, okay, so I'll go to the temple and I'll get personal revelation and I'll figure it out that way. Okay, great. That's nice. But it's, it's a punting of responsibility to a large degree. And so that's one of the reasons why, why Kieran stood out so much was that he didn't punt. He leaned right into it. He leaned right in. You know, he didn't take sides in Ukraine, but he certainly took sides in terms of the Lord loves everybody. And the Lord just doesn't, doesn't just love the people who hole up in his temples. He wants everybody to be saved. And that's a message that when contrasted with the hedging that we heard from pretty much everybody else, it just shines like a light in the darkness. It's just beautiful and wonderful and gives me hope for the future of the church. The other talk that I— that we haven't mentioned and that we probably ought to mention was Elder Holland's talk, which came Saturday morning. It's one of the first talks. I think it was the first talk after the sustaining of officers. And it was the first time he has spoken since his near-death experience. I mean, I'm using that in terms of— I mean, he described essentially that he did have the kind of mystical near-death experience that people talk about when they use that phrase. But he came perilously close to death and was in a coma and was, you know, everybody expected him to die, I think, including his own family. And he joked about it. He talked about he hadn't been to conference since 2022, which means that so clearly I gave a bad talk and nobody wanted me to come back and they've got a trapdoor under me. If I say anything wrong, they're just going to dropped me through the trapdoor and it was kind of fun. And I mean, it was— Elder Holland is a very personable speaker, but then he got into this idea of the near-death experience and he refused to sort of give any details other than to very strongly imply that that's what happened, that he was able to see the other side, that he was able to see— and I try to remember what the phrase was— like a world too wonderful for words. Is how he described it. But he says that the message that he got while he was in that state was be more zealous in the cause of Christ, to have more vigor, to have— I'm trying, but I don't think he used either of those words, but that was— I mean, just come back and be more devout, be, you know, really, really, really hit it hard. And at the risk of sounding churlish, I was a little disappointed in that because I thought, really, Elder Holland, do you think that you haven't been hitting it? Do you think you were coasting prior to this? I mean, to me, that was fodder for scrupulosity. It was— I never respond at this point in my life. I never respond positively to messages of you're just not doing enough, you're just not working hard enough. Yes, you're fulfilling your callings and you're going to church every week and you're paying your tithing and you're going to the temple and you're cleaning the church every Sunday, Saturday afternoon, and you're doing all those things. But you could do more, more, more, more. That gets to be exhausting and it leads to burnout. And I was just disappointed that Elder Holland felt like as he went to the edge of death and came back, that that's the message that he found to be most important. So that was, I think, the most disappointing part of his talk. But there were other parts of his talk that were lovely. He paid tribute to his wife who had passed away and came close to quoting her. You know, men don't quote women in conference, but he talked about a great talk that she gave and he mentioned it by name, but he didn't quote from it. And then he talked about prayers that are answered and said that, you know, I felt the prayers and your prayers on my behalf were answered. And my prayers on behalf of my wife were answered, even though they were not answered in the way I wanted them to be. And the way he said that, just your heart, you, you couldn't help but have your heart go out to him because just those words, I think, are a bit of a cop-out. It's like, well, okay, so you prayed that she would live and she died, and that wasn't the answer you wanted. And, you know, a more cynical person would say, um, Your prayer was not answered. That's what that means. But the way that he said it and the kind of sincerity he had when he said it made it very clear that he didn't believe that, that he, he very much believed that that was an answer to prayer and that there was a certain measure of comfort. He understood that the Lord's purposes were such that that's the way it had to be. Um, so I, I, I can't really necessarily fault him for that, but That opens up the whole idea of prayer and how efficacious is prayer. Do we change God's mind when we pray and all that sort of thing? And I think that's a tangent because I don't think that this conference addressed any of that. Elder Holland's talk was an anomaly because it wasn't connected to the larger theme, nor was it in the— as it was in the case of Uchtdorf and Kieran, a sort of deliberate departure from the unifying theme. It was just a very personal expression of where he is. And, uh, you know, I, I, I was glad to have him back. I, I thought, I thought it was, it was a lovely thing for him to return. But overall, I, I just thought, okay, this conference is giving us a sense of where the church is and is unintentionally telling us where the church is. And I think the unintentional message was the church is no longer growing. The church is in a state of retreat. The church is, you know, we're not engaging with the world at large. Come hide with us in our temples. And in the midst of that, you had a couple of brave warriors who went out onto the front lines and said no. You know, we are going to engage. We are in this world and we are going to save the world. And they— those messages give me hope for the future. And so it's just very interesting to look at conference from all of those different sides and see where we are.

So, Jim Bennett, I think I've learned more about conference from you this evening than I have in my own research. I'm grateful for your gave me a more comprehensive review of conference, you having followed it and me haven't so much in that. Just a few closing thoughts, if I may, from my end as I listen to you. And you and I have messaged on this back and forward. I think the church in many ways is very smart, very clever. Let's change the narrative. Let's change what we measure. You know, these things that we typically measure, church growth, baptisms, convert baptisms, mission work, etc. Those things where we used to have a lot of success and, and were able to demonstrate that success and quantify that success numerically, where we no longer been able to demonstrate that level of performance, success. What better way to change the perception of growth by changing what we measure? So be very smart and let's measure what we know we can deliver. That makes a lot of sense to me. So what can they control? What can they measure? Well, they can measure, they can control temple growth. It can control and measure number of endowments, um, washings, anointings, baptisms for the dead. You and I have had a, a conversation on this in the past on a podcast, and we made a prediction, if you remember, that going forward as the church declines, um, uh, in terms of baptisms and convert baptisms, people leaving the church, etc. Stakes and wards being reorganized, restructured, and, and seeing those closures that we're seeing in certain parts of the world. Very clever, very smart to say, look, put the focus on things that we can control, that we can regulate, that we can measure. So more temples, let's start measuring what goes on in the temple. Typically, if you've got the handbook of instructions, at least the most two recent versions, they, they were instructed not to measure. We record what goes in the temple, but we don't measure it. And I think that's going to change. Also, I think we're going to, as I've predicted before, see more talks, more references to people's personal experiences when they're in the temple, sharing their experience of that they feel that family members whose work they've done in the temple are actually accepting the gospel. You can't question that. You can question it, but you can, you know, you have no, you can't prove it false. You know, if I go to the temple and I feel of all the names that I've done the work for, 30 names, and I feel, you know, all of them accepted the gospel, who are you to question that? You can't question that. You have no evidence, no proof to question that. And so I think we're gonna see more of that, more measurements, uh, of, uh, activity in the temple. We've talked about that. The other point I wanna say as well is that if Christ was on the earth, at least the Christ that I understand and know from my experience, if he was here, the New Testament Christ, Christ that cares, that takes a position, that takes a stand, that is unafraid, frankly, of risk, fearless, even to the point of it costing his own life, What would he be doing right now? Where would he go? What would he do? What would he say? What would his position be on what's going on in the world? I think he, he would have a lot to say and do. I don't know how long he would survive. He probably would survive maybe the same amount of time that he survived in his era on the earth before, but he'd be out there. He'd be being with people, be visiting people in the streets and in their homes, and they'd be out there and he'd take a position. You know, speak at the United Nations or speak here or speak there or demonstrate his action, but he wouldn't be playing it safe. Christ that I know isn't played safe, yet the church plays it safe. And the other thing I want to say is I want to revise my ranking of conference as I'm reminded that, thanks to you actually, of probably the most glorious revelation in the history of the revelation and the conference. I've done it. Develop my Scottish accent here and say to the world that at last, at long last, we now have a temple in Scotland. And boy, the Saints there are excited. I've been reading and following some of the comments from the Saints of Scotland, Jim Bennett, on some of the Facebook pages. They prayed for this for so long, and the Church announced the temple in Edinburgh. And what an exciting time and milestone that is. And I've got a few alternative comments, but I'm going to hold off on those because I want to focus on the positive side of that. Because I know so many of the Saints there, as you do in Scotland, and you know how near and dear a temple is to those wonderful people in Scotland. I'm not going to make any negative comments on that whatsoever. I think it's fantastic. And it's great news for the Saints there. They're so excited. And I mean, a temple in Scotland, and I put that down, frankly, to the work that you and I did specifically. You know, you and I are the reason why that temple is there. I'm joking, of course. But all the work, look at all the work that's gone into that, all those missionaries that went before you and I for, you know, over 100 years. You know, Wilford Woodruff and Orson Pratt, all that work, and Elder Haight and Bernie P. Brockbank, and all the missionaries and President Dunn, President Banks, we were there and the missionaries since then. All that groundwork and all that extraordinary sacrifice that those wonderful saints invested heavily in the church and longed, you know, another conference, we're going to hear news of a temple. Oh no, not this one, and maybe the next one. Let's keep hoping. And finally, Jim Bennett, finally, we have a temple in Scotland. You and I, albeit in some small measure, I believe, And I'm not taking any credit necessarily for this, but I think we played our part as being full-time missionaries in Scotland, even at minuscule, I think, in some way. And what a wonderful, um, uh, development I think that is for the church and all those who sacrificed so much in that beautiful country, those wonderful saints. I'm really interested in getting your thoughts on that announcement with the temple in Scotland.

Well, I physically, I was in the room when the announcement was made and I had a physical reaction, just sort of a jolt of electricity. I felt just, oh wow, it's really, it's gonna happen. Because yes, I remember being in one of my final zone conferences, President McConkie, who came after you left. But, you know, after President Banks left, he was replaced by President McConkie the last few months of my mission. This is Bruce R.'s son, Joseph Fielding McConkie. And he concluded his own conference and said, "You are all in the presence of the Holy Ghost," which is a really interesting way to put it. You know, we usually get something like, "Oh, we felt a great spirit here." But he just framed it as, you are all in the presence right now of the Holy Ghost. And I felt that to be absolutely true. He said that and he said, and you all know the purpose for why the Lord has called you here, which is to prepare this land to receive a temple of the Lord. This is 1989 that he's saying this. And I remember that just sort of just sank like fire into my heart. Fire doesn't sink. It just burned. It burned like fire in my heart. And I went, that's exactly right. And as time went on, I was like, but it's never going to happen. I can't see how it's going to happen. There isn't the growth in Scotland to justify it happening. And I remember when they announced the Preston Temple, they essentially tried to sell it to the Scottish Saints as, oh, see, this is your temple. It's in your country. It's in the UK. You know, Scots are like, no, it's in England. It's not in Scotland. And, and they never took ownership of that temple in the way that they will take ownership of this one. So yeah, I mean, I am not— I am not— this is not an indictment of temple work or temple worship. That's not what I'm trying to say. And I think there is much to rejoice with regard to the temple in Scotland. I loved the AI picture you sent me. I'm assuming it was AI. It was the temple right next to the Loch Ness Monster looking at it. And I thought, I think that's probably where most people think this temple is going to be built. Inverness is what, 400 miles from—

no, no, quite maybe 100 and maybe 200 miles north of Edinburgh.

200 miles north. Okay. It's far enough north that there's no way this temple is going to be anywhere near Loch Ness. But, you know, just it was just such a beautiful image to me of just Scotland just feels like home to me still. Even after 35 years. And I love it so dearly. And to know that they're getting a temple that they prayed for, yes, that is a beautiful and wonderful and marvelous thing. And I have nothing negative to say about it. So I think let's end this podcast on a beautiful, wonderful, marvelous thing and do that. Any last final pithy words to sum this all up?

No, other than to say that I remain hopeful the next conference will see a little bit more leadership a bit more being bold, and some comments and positions and leadership on the issues that are affecting the world beyond the Utah Mormon-based faith.

All right. Sounds good. And with that, we leave you all. Thank you all for listening, and we'll see you next time on Inside Out. Thank you very much, Ian.

Thank you, Jim.