Elders

Hello and welcome to the latest episode of Inside Out. I am Ian Wilkes. You know who I am, and I am here as always with my partner in crime, Mr. Jim Bennett. Hello, Jim.

Hello, Ian. How are you, sir?

I am doing well. I'm excited about life. I know we have a lot of challenges in the world, and I think, you know, last night we were just having some time as a family watching War of the Worlds movie with Tom Cruise. The fire was on, family was around, all was good with the world. And those moments with family and the friends are just really reminders of what, you know, life is, what, you know, what the value is in life, right? You know, we can shut our doors, we can be at our homes. Um, I know a lot of people, or some people don't experience this, and that's very sad, but to be able to be with family and at least have some moments of personal time and peace is really, really important, isn't it?

Wonderful. Yes, absolutely.

Yeah. So we were feeling comfortable and safe watching War of the Worlds.

Alright.

Aliens taking over the world. Anyway, uh, so I am really excited about this episode because I think this is going to be a very different and a very interesting conversation with you. We are so grateful for all of our, uh, listeners and, uh, followers, and we hope that you will gain from this conversation as much as we will. So let me kick off by introducing our listeners to this experience. So yesterday, Jim Bennett, I was in a place that you don't normally find me. Have a guess where that is.

Church?

That's one very good answer.

I wasn't there.

I don't think you'll ever find me in church, but I was in a shopping mall. And I don't go to shopping malls, but anyway, I had to go because I needed a new laptop. So I went to Best Buy, got this laptop, and on the way to the, you know, buy this laptop, I saw two young missionaries sat down on their phones talking, and I was heading that direction, and I decided to stop and introduce myself. I did so politely. And I think they were surprised that someone actually was talking to them. And so we sat down together and we had, I think, one of the most interesting, intriguing conversations I've had in a long time. I think we spent about 40 minutes. I think they wanted to, this is quite unusual, I think, I think they wanted to get rid of me. Usually, you know, on a mission, on our missions, you and I served together in Scotland and we tried our best to get any time we could from anyone, you know that,, right? And people were desperate to get rid of us, right? On the doorstep, they're like, hey, we're done now. Thank you. Just go. Just piss off. We're not interested. And we would go from door to door, like, you know, pleading and praying with all the faith that we could get a few bit of time, have a conversation with someone, right? Uh, this conversation with the missionaries wasn't the other way or as bad as that necessarily, but I think there were probably, um,, you know, ready to end the conversation. And I don't say that negatively, it was quite positive. So I had this conversation with them and we had, we talked about all kinds of stuff. They, I asked them where they're from, how long they'd been on a mission. You had one there who'd been on a mission for 8 months and the other one had, I think, been on the mission, uh, quite a bit longer. And there were two young kids, young lads that reminded me of me and you. And I said, what's it like serving a mission? You know, is it, is it tough? And he said, well, yeah, it's pretty tough. I said, how are you dealing with the issues, the questions? Oh, he said, um, he said, we, we've got, um, uh, a strategy for that. I said, well, what's your strategy? And he said, well, we've got fixed answers to certain questions. Okay. I said, I mean, like questions like what? Polygamy, Joseph Smith polygamy, polyandry, Book of Mormon, race in the priesthood and blacks in the priesthood. And I said, uh, you know what? Do you say? You know, how do you deal with those questions? And they said, well, uh, one of the, they said one of the common threads is that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young lived in a different time. It's a different time back then. And you and I have heard that before. It's quite common. Those decisions, those, you know, were made in a very different time. People thought differently, people felt differently. So, you know, that was one of their responses. They also said that, uh, the prophets back then, um, had limited knowledge and the prophets now have greater knowledge. Uh, I said, okay, that sounds reasonable. Uh, they also said that, uh, uh, over time, uh, the prophets receive further light and truth. I said, okay. I said, does that mean the church changes? And they said, well, kind of. I said, well, it, it does, you know, I mean, the church does change. I mean, you and I've talked about in order for the church to survive, it has to change, right? Uh, we didn't, I didn't get into that with the missionaries, but they gave me a number of, uh, uh, typical examples of response that they would give to some of those difficult questions. I said, when you get asked a question that you can't answer, what do you do? And you and I know the answer to that, right? What do you do on your mission, Jim Bennett, uh, if you couldn't answer something or you didn't know how to respond or you didn't know what to say or do? What did you do? What was your default?

You bear your testimony.

You bear your testimony. And that's what they do. So that's not changed. So if they can't, you know, that's their safety net is to bear the testimony. So if they can't answer a question technically or doctrinally or historically,, doesn't matter so much. If they bear testimony, that's, that's what they do. That's what they are. That's what, that's how the answer. I said, what about the more complex, difficult issues and questions that people throw out? They said they go to the mission president and he guides them. Okay. I also said, how much information can you research online? They said, well, actually quite restricted. Um, there's a new policy in place. So they've got this policy in place that where they can't access A lot of the information on the internet is only approved sites. I said, okay. I said, did you guys get the chance to listen to, uh, President Oaks's address at the recent, uh, his first address has been called, uh, as the prophet, um, that he gave early this week on Tuesday. They said, yes, they're allowed to watch some stuff like that. I said, what do you think about that talk? They said, they said it was great. That was incredibly, uh, inspired. I said, okay. And then we got into some of the, uh, operations of the mission. Um, I asked, by the way, the, the mission that they're serving in is the, uh, Vancouver, uh, British Columbia mission. And the church is pretty well established here. Uh, and the religious culture here is not the same as the UK. Uh, by the way, this time in the conversation, they'd asked me, you know, where am I from? What am I doing? Um, I didn't disclose that, you know, I was the former member of the State Presidency, uh, because they were in the same ward that I attended, you know, uh, in this town where I'm living right now. You know, after all those initial, um, that information during that introduction, asked me where I'm from and my accent and stuff like that. We then got into a whole bunch of stuff, um, which I'll cover in a moment here, but we also talked about. How many baptisms in the mission. Keeping in mind North America, as you can testify, is a very different religious culture and history and tradition than Scotland, right? In Scotland, they're steeped in Catholicism— Catholicism, you pronounce that right?

Catholicism. Yep.

And Protestantism. And these religious history and culture and traditions stem hundreds, if not, you know, over 1,000 years in Scotland. And people are in these religions from generation to generation, just like in the Mormon Church. And very difficult to change all of that. In North America, I think people tend to be much more open-minded than, in my experience at least, than people are in Scotland, right? And it's much more liberal, much more progressive. But notwithstanding, you know, the church has pretty well established, uh, and it's Orthodoxy in British Columbia. But anyway, uh, for, um, uh, and, and I said, how many missionaries in the mission? They said 200 missionaries, 210 missionaries. Have a guess how many baptisms on average they have for the whole year last year?

Oh, in the year?

Not the whole year. Um, it's not Scotland now. It's not Scotland where we did what, 9 a month or 7?

200? 300. 300.

Okay. So it's a lot less than what I thought for 200 missionaries. You know, church is established, progressive. It's a very different environment and culture than, you know, than Scotland. It's not steeped in as that, you know, uh, as tradition, as history, certainly as Scotland. And 200 missionaries, it's, um, you know, it's, it's a lot less than what I thought. Um, and so we got, I said, how's your experience so far? And they said, it's, It's, it's challenging. It's tough. I said, what's a day look like for you? I said, do you knock on doors? Not allowed to knock on doors. Um, I said, how do you generate inquiries? They said, well, it's through the Book of Mormon Facebook ads. We get inquiries through Facebook.

Oh, yeah, sure.

Yeah.

Same with my sons when they were missionaries.

Same as your sons. And they get through social media and then they have to get permission to go and teach. I said, how does that work out? And they said, well, it's, it's challenging. It's tough. So, uh, and they do it, you know, the bulk of the time is on social media. I shared with them my experience of serving a mission and knocking on doors, that physically it was grueling and mentally, but it's, I said, it's not nothing like what you guys do in terms of social media. And Jim, you can speak to that being a parent of two sons that served at a time when, you know, social media is around. You and I didn't have, like, the internet didn't exist when you and I were on our missions, right? I never even heard of that word. That's how old we are. We're getting old. So anyway, as they come, and then we get, got back into some of the doctrinal stuff. And I said, what are some of the, um, more challenging questions that you get? There's a polygamy, polyandry, Book of Mormon, uh, related questions. And we got into some of the, um, you know, some of the, I said, what about the essays? By this time it's 20 minutes into the conversation. And one of the missionaries is asking me more questions than his companion. He was the younger missionary, the one that had been out the least. And I said, have you heard about the essays? And they said, one of them said, no, what is that? And then as I asked that, I swear I saw this. I'm pretty sure I saw The Mancini missionary kick the younger missionary. I could see, because it's like the seating was open and the younger missionary or newer missionary was the one asking the more questions. I said, oh, the essays, they're fantastic. They came out in 2013. And he said, oh, I'd heard about them. I said, you know, it started off with Raising the Priesthood and we, you know, I said, we, I said that, I said that was great. The church was able to address some of the issues. I said, do you have access to that? And they said, well, not, not really. So they'd heard about them, but they don't use them, uh, or maybe have access to them, which is interesting. And access might mean they're not allowed to use them. I don't think it's access on that one where they can't, I think they're probably discouraged from reading them because I think the church, if they could rewrite those essays, is a question for you. I don't know, I'll be talking for too long before you come in, but, um, if they had the opportunity, Jim Bennett, to rewrite those essays, do you think they would?

Uh, I don't know. Uh, I don't know that they would rewrite them. I don't know that they're upset with the content of them as they exist. The question is, would they write them at all? And I don't know the answer to that question either, particularly given the kind of retrenchment that we're seeing now.

Right. So that's a really good point, actually. And so the missionaries had heard about them and hadn't read them or remembered them, either because they weren't allowed or discouraged or they didn't have access. They probably did have access, probably because they got access to the church website, it's on there. But I don't think they are documents that they speak from because they open up a whole bunch of questions. You know that, right? Those essays generate many, many difficult questions. And I think for the young missionaries, that's the last thing that they probably want to deal with. Anyway, through the conversation, probably 20, 25 minutes in the conversation, it was clear that one of the English missionaries was very intrigued by some of this information. And I said, we had a big conversation about race in the priesthood, and I mentioned the essay there. And I said, I said, what, you know, what are you hearing about that? You know, what's the, you know, the pushback on that? And they said that they do get questions on that. And they're difficult conversations to have. And they go back to their response being that that's, you know, Brigham Young and Joseph Smith, that's was a different time. So we talked about that. And then we said, one of them actually said, well, it's quite extraordinary that that, uh, change in position and policy happened only quite recently. And they're talking as young kids. And I said, well, you know, I'm a lot older than you, and, and I joined the church in '82, and the, uh, restoration of the priesthood to blacks and the temple blessings happened 4 years before I joined. I think at that point, I think they saw me as someone quite ancient. And I said that, I said, do you see that as a mistake? And the Morsini missionary said, well, no, you know, it was, um, you know, that's what they felt and thought at the time. But the newer missionary said, oh, that, no, that was a mistake. There's no question. That was a mistake. Right. And you can see that very different, um, positions and perspectives from two very different, you know, very different, uh, individuals. And I said, um, I think that was a mistake and I think it's good that the church has acknowledged that, um, you know, they disavowed that, right? And I said, um, you know, what about some of the other, uh, issues, uh, you know, like LGBTQ and, and, um, uh, and we talk, I mentioned women, in the priesthood and, and other questions that might come up. And they said, well, they have got a fixed narrative, you know, very prescribed, fixed lane that they have to teach in. They've got these trained responses to the more common questions. Uh, they've got the safety net of testimony. Any complex questions, they can refer, get back to them because they hate, you know, because it's online, some of it, they can go back to them and get some kind of response. So they can script. You and I couldn't do this on the doorstep, right? Or in teaching, we, when we got asked a question, we were expected to have an answer. If we didn't, we'd go to the mission president, but we'd have to deliver it verbally in person, right? They can, what's interesting, they can script this, they can write this, which is, um, something that you and I didn't have the benefit of. And so they've got to stay in this lane. They've got to stay in the lane in online. Um, and I said, how's morale? You know, and they said, oh, it's, it's, it's good. It's good. I said, well, it must be difficult and challenging. Anyway, at that point, this other missionary, English missionary, was asking me all kinds of questions about, um, the prophet. And then something interesting came up, a subject near and dear to Jim Bennett, which is fallibility. Fallibility. I said, do you think the prophet is fallible? And the Murmushi said, well, he's a prophet of God. You know, and he said, you know what prophets do? I went, yeah, yeah, I think I do. I know what prophets, you know, like see and revelate to kind of stuff. He said, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh, by the way, he talked about a stone in the hat. I'll come back in a second. And he said, yeah, they, you know, they, they, They, uh, they tell you what they think best to the best of the knowledge. And I said, but they, and then the other missionary said, well, they're human. Right. I said, they are human. I said, do you think they make mistakes? And they said, the missionary said, well, not when they're speaking as a prophet.

Oh, geez.

Yeah. And the other missionary said, well, I mean, I was not intentionally trying to cause any divide with these two. Uh, I really wasn't.

At this point, do they know your background at all? Have they figured out you're no longer in the church?

Good question. Yes. Sorry. I should have mentioned at the beginning. My apologies. When we were doing the, you know, the introductions there, the first part of the conversation, they asked me, you know, I said, Ian, and they asked me within a minute, you know, are you a member? I said, I used to be. I said, oh, interesting. And then we got into it and I shared a bit about my background. I'm like moving to Canada and, you You know, I didn't talk about the church history necessarily, moving to Canada, um, and talked about, you know, did you serve a mission? I said, yeah, I served a mission, uh, in, uh, in Scotland. And I kind of shared with them about, I think that's how the conversation went into it quite nicely that I'd shared my very, very different experience with them, you know, compared to theirs. And they had loads of questions about, you know, knocking on doors and stuff like that. And it was, it was a completely different environment experience. What they're experiencing. So that was the first few minutes. Um, and it was, it just, we got along. It was, I think they felt, um, comfortable for the most part. But as the conversation got into more detail, they didn't, I think they could tell that I had a little bit of knowledge of the church as you know, and rather maintained some of that knowledge of the church, uh, even though we'd left. They never asked me why I left, by the way.

No, they'll never.

Not one time in the 40-minute conversation about it did they ask, you know, why did I leave? And I wonder, Jim, if that was a decision that they'd made or if they were instructed, and I'm being skeptical, maybe, maybe they were, they're advised not to ask why people leave. Maybe that, maybe that's me being a little bit too cynical or skeptical, cynical., that where they're trained on this stuff. But anyway, as the conversation, uh, developed, there was, uh, young missionary had a bunch of questions, uh, that he wanted, you know, answers to. And the other missionary was wanting to stay, you know, in, in their safe lane. And then we talked about fallibility. And I said, well, do you think prophets make mistakes? And then one said, well, not when he's a prophet. And he said, well, yeah, kind of makes mistakes. I said, like, Bracing the Priesthood or polygamy, do you think they were mistakes?, and I got one different, one answer, you know, not really from one missionary, um, but the new missionary, uh, yeah, you know, made mistakes. And I said, that's the thing. I said, you know, we make mistakes. Let's be honest about it. We make mistakes. We made. And I think that's when we can be in a more comfortable, safer position when people are asking questions about the church. I said, you're dealing with investigators. When they ask questions where it's clearly about something that where we had made a mistake, we need to own it and say, hey, we got that wrong. Uh, I don't think that, um, was agreeable with one of the missionaries, whereas the new missionary, um, I think that was music to his ears because it, for the, for the first time in a while, perhaps he was having a conversation with someone that probably agreed with him internally. I could tell Jim that this individual, this young missionary, and I felt for him. I called you straight after, by the way.

Yeah, I remember that.

You know, I was, I, I just, when I left, the first person I wanted to speak to was you. It was a minute after I'd left and I was a bit emotional because I felt for these guys. You know, they could be my sons. You had two sons serve a mission. My sons could have served a mission. I'm grateful they didn't. That I felt for them because they're wonderful guys and I felt a compassion for them and I felt my heart was breaking for them because there was elements of the conversation that they were struggling with internally, emotionally, and I could tell one of the mishas was, um, really, it was like manna from heaven where somebody was having a conversation with him addressing his questions in a way that perhaps wasn't. I mean, I don't, I don't know for sure, but there was these two young men, uh, going through this experience, dealing with all of this, and trying to get through this experience in the most positive way, um, just like our sons would be, you know, going through. And I felt emotional and sad and, uh, felt that they couldn't be themselves or, you know, be true to the truth and be the authentic selves. And how sad that was. Um, because if I'd have known these things and my mission, I can't speak for you. If I'd have known these were my mission, I would've struggled like hell. You'd have this conflict of not going home early, which we've talked about recently. Mm-hmm. The, the guilt. That kept you and I, you know, you was thinking of going across Russia. I, that's extraordinary. It's extraordinary. I, that's just extraordinary. It blows my mind. This, I said I would die first. I, I probably meant that, I think. But if I had known these issues now that I know now that are on my mission, I will be ripped apart emotionally, spiritually. Um, so So we talked about the fallibility, um, they acknowledge that the prophet is, um, you know, is, um, human, but still, you know, speaks God. I'll, I'll finish on this last point, which is disturbing and worrying. I asked, I said, look, if Oaks reintroduced, and this is where the conversation was going, by the way. So this wasn't something I plucked out of my mind. This wasn't a trick or loaded question. It's important to share with you that the way the conversation was unfolding was these problems that the church still faces that were made from prophets who are now dead. And those prophets made at the time the right decisions in those circumstances at that historical point in time. And since then, we've now progressed and moved on. Yes, we disavow them, and yes, they made mistakes, uh, as men, not as prophets. And we're now dealing with all that mess. They still maintain that those prophets, as well as today's prophets, were doing the right thing. So, because I asked, did Joseph Smith make the right choice by practicing polygamy. One of the missionaries, no surprises, the older one, said yes. The other one was quiet. And I said, what about blacks in the priesthood with Brigham Young? And they said, at that time, it was the right choice. And so we don't know why he made that, but God told him to do that. I said, okay, this is where the conversation is coming to an end. I said, if the prophet reintroduced a ban on blacks holding the priesthood, uh, what would you do? And the young missionary said, nope, that, that's something that he couldn't support. But the Mawssini missionary said, yes, if that's what the prophet would have me do, then, then I would have to do that. The missionary said, and I'm gonna try and quote him, said, I said, if the prophet tells you to do something that's wrong, morally, ethically, would you do it? He said, yes. The other missionary said, no. And the older missionary, I said, why would you do that if it's wrong? He said, because that's what God's commanded. And God's laws are higher than man's laws. And I said, because you know, God has commanded things that have turned out to be wrong, or the Prophet's done things that turned out to be wrong. He acknowledged that. I said, so if the Prophet again said something that you know was wrong, you would do it? And he said yes. And I was absolutely blown away by that. And what was interesting is that you, you had these two very different individuals, one who was prepared to do anything and be completely and totally obedient, no matter, no question. Whereas the other one, his conscience was so strong, he said he couldn't, he couldn't do that. So it was a positive conversation. It was a difficult conversation at points. It was an emotional conversation. We left on very friendly terms. And I said at the end, I said, look, I really appreciate the conversation. You probably stayed with me a lot longer than you wanted to. And they said, um, the other missionary, the newer one said, no, no, no, that's okay. Enjoyed the conversation. And I said, I hope I didn't make you feel uncomfortable. That wasn't my intent. And they were okay. They were okay with that. So it was a complete random encounter with two fine young men who got good hats. And, but it was difficult to not feel the, you know, sadness, the heartbreak of 2 young missionaries, uh, serving a mission in the current climate. And then I called you immediately, uh, to share it with you and you were kind enough and patient enough and you listened and then we agreed that we would share that. So, uh, what I got from that, Jim, and I communicated this to you and I'll, I'll end here, but I, what I got from that experience was the church is in real trouble. Not just trouble in terms of growth, retention, policy, history, doctrine, doctrine, which it has got a lot of issues there, right? Almost every aspect of the church is a problem. Not every, but almost every aspect. But now we have all these problems and difficulties and challenges playing out in real life situation in the life of two young missionaries who are trying to, at this stage in their life, with support from the family and friends, serving a mission, trying to navigate all of that. The, and so I, uh, for a church organization, for any organization with a moral conscience, To place two young men, young people, in no situation, dealing with all of that, is unforgivable. The emotional burden that they have to carry is intense, and no surprise that when they come to the realization that things aren't quite what they, you know, there's other facts and truths which the church doesn't want to address, and they come to that realization at some point in the mission. And then having to navigate that and the emotional, um, intensity and struggles emotionally to keep on a mission and to try to figure this out and get home in some peace, right? I'm not surprised some of them, um, break and have an emotional breakdown and have to go home early. I think they reflect— some of the missionaries going through that reflect the broken heart of the of the issues that they have to face each day. Anyway, I have taken probably more time than, you've been very patient with me. I don't normally do these long monologues, so thank you for your patience.

No, no problem. It's, you know, when you say that it's unforgivable that the church is putting these young people in this situation, I can understand where you're coming from, yet at the same time, Aren't you grateful that you were in that situation at one point in your life? I am.

I think the big— it's a great question. The biggest difference, which I've referenced earlier, is I, and I think as I speak for you as well, I know I do, and many of the missionaries there, when we were out there, Jim, on serving our missions, right, we believed, right? We were in. We were in. We, we, we believed every part of it. We didn't question. We might question a little bit, but maybe operations of the mission or mechanics. But, uh, you and I and, and most of the missionaries, we were devoted, obedient, committed, um, serving missionaries that, um, taught what we thought and believed at the time was correct. We trusted our leaders. We trusted the MTC training. We trusted the apostles and the prophets that what they knew and what they said was absolute 100%. I was serving in the mission with, with absolute certainty that what I was teaching was correct. Uh, if I knew what I, serving then, and if I knew, um, what I know now back then, my, I, I couldn't, my whole body, mind, emotions would just tear apart. I would go home. I, it would be, I would have to reconcile this guilt and this commitment I've made to serving a mission with teaching things that I knew at least in part were not true, and I couldn't do that. So I would not have completed my mission. I would've got sent home cuz I would be asking questions and President Dunn, I could tell you right now, I'd be on the train like tomorrow morning with him. No, very little compassion. You, you, you were in or you're out. No, Dunn.

Banks did.

Yeah. Banks was different. Banks was, you know, we know missionaries that should have been sent home, no names mentioned here, that didn't get sent home. Right. Um, and Banks, uh, you know, labored, uh, patiently, kindly, lovingly with these individuals. I think if anyone would get, get me through, it would be Banks would get me through and Banks would address my questions and I probably would survive with Banks, but not with Dunn. Right. But yeah, I'm built that I can't— how can you teach something that you know to be untrue?

Well, um, you know, I— you can't, you can't teach something that you know to be untrue. Now, we weren't teaching something, you know, to be untrue. And if I were to be sent on a mission and be given the missionary discussions, I would likely veer away from the script probably more often than I'd be allowed to. But I mean, all of these things all presuppose a really black and white approach to the church, to the gospel. So I— and I don't take that approach anymore. And so I bristle at the idea of, okay, I've got to go and just do the party line. But I also bristle at the idea that you would be going out and teaching stuff that is untrue, because you've said many times, particularly even after leaving the Church, how much inspiration you still draw from the Book of Mormon, that there are principles, that there is Anyway, I don't want to get into an indictment of that, but I think that kind of is a segue into what I think a lot of people are tuning in to hear. They want to hear our reaction to the calling of Clark Gilbert as the newest apostle. And I spoke to you almost before— I mean, you called me right after your missionary experience. I called you right after I heard Clark Gilbert was the new apostle, and you didn't know a whole lot about Clark Gilbert at the time. Uh, have you had an opportunity since then to take a look at some of that?

I have. I've seen the church, uh, news release on that. I've been reading some stuff on Salt Lake Tribune, but I've also been reading some of the comments and actually some of the, what, what looks like very strong backlash. And outcry. They're the words I've read on Reddit and other platforms in respect to this decision to call Clark Gilbert and the issue, specific issues, and Clark Gilbert's history with BYU in particular, and Clark Gilbert's alleged contribution to the BYU policies and culture. Where some allege that his deliberate actions have made learning and teaching at BYU unsafe. So I've read about him from different perspectives, but I don't know much about this individual. So I defer to your knowledge on this individual.

Uh, well, You know, I know a lot of people, uh, I mean, some of the comments that I was seeing from people were comments like, oh, Jim Bennett's mind is about to explode. And if I, I, I have had time to sort of think about it and to process it. And I, I want to, um, I, I want to respond in the form of two stories. The first one particularly is gonna sound completely unrelated, but it isn't. I'm gonna do what Donald Trump calls the weave. You know, you take these unrelated stories and they all come together, except for when Donald Trump does it, they don't all come together. But that's another story altogether. A few days ago, the Church News put out an article announcing the formation of the first Swahili-speaking ward in the United States in Boise, Idaho. There were a number of African refugees that lived in Boise, and they were struggling to sort of get on their feet, and they ended up organizing a, a branch, and then it became a ward. And this was the first Swahili-speaking ward in the United States. And this was called to my attention because the comments— this was on Twitter, X, or whatever you want to call it— and the comments on this article would turn your hair white if your hair wasn't already white like mine. They were atrocious and unbelievably racist. One used a variation of the N-word. You know, only the first syllable. So I guess if you take out the second syllable, it's okay to refer to Black people that way. As a member of the church. I mean, this is just stunning to me. But it was the comments that were racist, vicious. These are low IQ, terrible people. They're going to replace us. I mean, just Nazi stuff. I mean, this isn't just And those comments outnumbered the positive comments by about 20 to 1. And it was just a flood of comments from members of the church just expressing the most vitriolic, vicious, racist sentiments you could possibly imagine. I commented and said, "Wonderful, so glad to see this.". And as of now, my comment has 2,600 views. Comments don't get that many views. Comments usually get, if it's a good comment, it gets a few hundred views at best. But I think it got so many views because it was one of the very, very few positive comments to all of this. And what it says to me is There is a huge, uh, probably overrepresented on Twitter because the loudest voices on Twitter are not necessarily statistically representative of the membership of the church, but for that many people to respond to a church article in that way suggests that we still have a massive problem with racism. In this church, just a massive problem with racism. And it's tied, frankly, to politics, whether you want to admit that or not. But, you know, Donald Trump just last week posted a video with Barack and Michelle Obama as apes in the jungle, which is just grotesquely racist. And yet two-thirds of American Mormons have thrown in with this guy. So we know that this is all part of a rancid stew that is posing, I think, a huge threat to the church long term. If we are the church that breeds racists, if we are the church that encourages racists, if we are the church that just turns a blind eye to racists, you know, in the Martin Luther King Chapel Morehouse College, which is where the Tabernacle Choir sang last year when I went there. One of the greatest experiences of my life, just singing in that chapel. In the Hall of Fame, they have unveiled just recently a picture of Joseph Smith. And there, you know, the Church has, particularly under President Nelson, done all kinds of work to build bridges with the African and African American communities, and which are, which are two different things, frankly. Uh, but I think that's going to figure into the discussion as we go down the road here. But, uh, the church is doing all these things to build bridges here. Our racist past and our racist present are a millstone around our necks that we have to get rid of. And I absolutely thought that this next apostle was going to be a Black apostle to do precisely that. Now, all of the people that were commenting in this thread would scream at me, "Oh, you're just woke, you're just DEI," and, you know, again, this rancid mixture of politics with reality is this church is growing, and the place where it is growing the fastest and the most significantly is Black Africa. And what would it mean to a young Black Latter-day Saint in Nigeria or Kenya, uh, uh, to every general conference see an apostle that looks like them? What would it tell all of these racists who were commenting on the church's website and on the church news that you're commenting about people, uh, you're commenting about people who are, who look like an apostle, that these are not— it would be so much harder for these racists to otherize black people if we were to take that opportunity to call a black apostle. And Nemo, our good friend Nemo, was talking. He posted, he posted a video, I think just today or yesterday, talking about how absolutely wrong he was because he insisted that the amount of time that it was taking to call the new apostle was because Elder Kosé was called within days. Of President Nelson's passing. And it's been over 2 months since President Holland's passing. And so Nemo's theory was, well, they're trying to talk all of the racists into accepting a Black apostle. And today he said, I couldn't have been more wrong. Well, I don't know that he was entirely wrong, because I think the amount of time was an indicator of the controversy as to who the new apostle was going to be. There are a couple of stories of Ezra Taft Benson trying very hard to call his son Reed Benson into the Quorum of the Twelve. And if these stories are to be believed, and these are family stories, I heard this from my father and from my Uncle Howard, who was the stake president in Los Angeles. Uh, Dallin Oaks supposedly threatened to resign from the quorum if Reed Benson were called, and there were all kinds of battles over this, and eventually Joseph Worthland was called to fill that position. Now, I don't have any documentation of that, But the one thing I do have some documentation of, and Greg Prince has helped provide this, at one point LeGrand Richards approached David O. McKay and said, "You need to call your son Lawrence," who was my grandfather, "as an apostle. It will be a wonderful thing for your legacy. It will be a wonderful thing." And according to my mother, that was the unanimous recommendation of the Twelve. That my grandfather was to be called as an apostle. And David O. McKay absolutely nixed it and said, "That's nepotism. I'm not doing that. I'm not going to do that to him. I'm not going to do that to the Church." And so my grandfather was never called as an apostle. It seems very likely to me that the calling of Clark Gilbert got pushback. This is the first time in my memory, and maybe you have a different memory this. But it's the first time in my memory that a genuinely controversial figure has been called as an apostle. Can you think of— am I missing somebody? Was there ever a call of somebody where like, ooh, this is a guy that's generated a lot of controversy?

No, I can't think of one.

I mean, I remember when there were 3 vacancies and everybody was kind of hoping we'd get a black apostle then. Under President Monson, and they called Rasband and Renlund and Stevenson. Yeah. And so there was a bit of a controversy that, oh, they just called 3 Utah guys and we didn't do anything international and we didn't do anything in terms of ethnic diversity. But nobody had a problem with them individually. Nobody was like, oh, how could you call Oh, you know, Gary Stevenson is an apostle. He's such a controversial figure. I mean, they weren't— none of these people have been controversial figures. And it's not, it's not a statement of opinion, but rather a statement of fact to note that Clark Gilbert is a man who has generated a great deal of controversy in recent years. That's not That's not me weighing in on whether I like this or not. That's simply a reality that was in the headline of the Salt Lake Tribune. The church has made a controversial choice with Clark Gilbert. And as I have thought about it and as I have looked at it, something else occurred to me. So that was all my first story. I said there are going to be two stories and there are a number of stories there. So I apologize, I'm rambling here too. Second story is my Uncle Howard again, stake president of Los Angeles, telling me a story about President Benson. Now, as we all know, President Benson, he was a controversial figure. When he was called, he was a controversial figure as a member of the Twelve. He was very political, very outspoken. Politically, and we're still sort of paying a price for that today. There are still people that reach back to President Benson's really partisan addresses and justify a lot of bile today by referencing him. But by the time President Benson became president of the Church, that had all but disappeared, and he very quickly lapsed into dementia and sort of disappeared from the scene. You know, his most famous and influential talk was his talk on pride, which was delivered while we were missionaries, and it was not delivered by him. He ostensibly wrote it, but it was President Hinckley who read the talk. He read it on his behalf because President Benson was too ill to read it. Prior to President Benson sort of disappearing from the scene, he stopped speaking in conference. He stopped, you know, he just wasn't up to any of that. But prior to his disappearing from the scene, he had a few episodes that showed that he maybe should have disappeared from the scene earlier than he did. And my Uncle Howard was telling me this story. Of President Benson going to Fullerton College and repeating himself. Fullerton College in Southern California, outside of Los Angeles. Repeating himself over and over again, kind of speaking off the cuff, and he kept saying, "May the Lord bless you and the devil miss you." And he apparently said that over 10 times in one address. And Howard just was rolling his eyes and saying it was just so embarrassing, and it was just so awful. And I just— and I said to Howard, well, it sounds like you don't like this guy. And Howard's answer to me is something I have never forgotten. And he looked at me like I was from Mars, like I had just asked the dumbest question in the world. And he said, of course I don't like this guy. This is a stake president, right? He's talking about the president of the Church. Of course I don't like this guy. I didn't covenant to like this guy. I covenanted to sustain this guy. And that has stuck with me ever since, and I have leaned on that in so many different ways. In my lovely unpublished book that I don't know what to do with, one of the chapters is titled Sustain Versus Agree. And the, the general consensus among members of the church is that they are synonyms, and they are not. If you get any thesaurus, there's no thesaurus that's going to pull up agree as a synonym for sustain. And, and Howard and others have sort of taught me the reality that one of the great challenges of disciples is respecting and sustaining the authority of someone with whom you disagree. Now, this is not— has not been as big a challenge on a macro level with the church. I mean, there are a number of apostles that I could point to that I could say I don't agree with, uh, on a number of different things. But in terms of a day-to-day kind of impact on my life, that hasn't had much of a day-to-day impact on my life. What's had a day-to-day impact on my life is having bishops or, you know, just direct priesthood leaders that you work with who drive you nuts, who are— and who you don't see eye to eye with on anything. That's happened to me more times than it should have. It's It's still relatively rare. Uh, most of my bishops have been wonderful, but some have not. So what do I do? Well, I sustain them whether I agree with them or not. I respect their authority. I accept who they are and accept their responsibility. I don't speak out against them. I don't attack them, but I don't have to agree with them in order to be able to sustain them. And so this is kind of where I landed with Clark Gilbert. I met Clark Gilbert on one occasion. I used to be a writer, an editorial writer for the Deseret News, and I was called into his office for some reason. It was after he'd slashed 42% of the Deseret News's, um, staff. And I wasn't on staff. I was a contracted writer. I just got paid piecemeal for what I would write.

A freelancer.

I was a freelancer. Yeah. And, uh, but he called me into his office and, and I think I said about 3 words. I think I told him my name and I shook his hand and the rest was Clark Gilbert telling me what a genius Clark Gilbert is. And I just remember leaving the office going, what was that? What just happened? What? He didn't call me in to get mad at me. It wasn't a lecture. It was just, here, let me share you my vision and share you why this is all brilliant. And I just remember going, oh, well, this, I'm kind of glad I don't work here. I wouldn't want to have to do that on a daily basis. I'm glad I'm a freelancer. Uh, but Clark Gilbert's tenure at BYU. Um, you know, I have a number of friends— anybody listening to this, if you, uh, I have a number of friends who either work at BYU, worked at BYU. I had a recent conversation with someone who just recently retired from BYU, but they're either teachers or they're staff or they're anything, and all of them to some degree or another have been impacted by Clark Gilbert and in ways that, you know, even the most faithful professors, uh, were— are like, well, where we— the problem we have is we don't know where the line is. You know, we interviewed Sue Bergen. Do you remember that? I do. Used to work for BYU, and she— her contract was not renewed, and she was not told why her contract was not renewed. And she went and tried to talk to Clark Gilbert about why her contract was got renewed and couldn't get any answers. And my cousin Peggy wrote an article that talked about Clark Gilbert's black box, that it wasn't just that Clark Gilbert was a hardliner, it was that nobody knew where the lines were. Nobody knew when they were in danger and when they were not. Is it, is, you know, uh, one friend of mine Jim Bennett, who has since retired from BYU, after the musket fire speech and Clark Gilbert's black box was in effect, asked one of his supervisors, "Is it okay? Is my silence enough?" I mean, he had a really hard time with the musket fire speech, but he recognized that if he were to come out against it, that would be the end of his career. And he asked somebody higher up, is my silence enough? Is it enough if I just don't talk about it? And the higher up didn't know the answer to that. Didn't know, you know, I mean, so, so I look at all of these and all of these challenges, and then Clark Gilbert gets called as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve. And one of my first reactions is, uh, it's going to make life a lot easier at BYU. Because Clark Gilbert— Clark Gilbert is a— what he calls himself, a disruptor. You know, he was— he graduated from Harvard Business School. First of all, he's extraordinarily bright, extraordinarily capable, uh, has accomplished a great deal in a short amount of time. It's a little, uh, unsettling to me to have an apostle who is younger than I am. And I, I did, you know, my actuarial tables, and it's very likely he will be president of the church when I die. So that's, that's, that was just a little unsettling and a little bit unnerving. But, uh, he prides himself on sort of disrupting things. That's kind of the Harvard Business School model. And that's so what he was, the publisher for the Deseret News. He fired 42% of the staff. When he went to BYU, he instituted all of these really disruptive things. And the fact that people were sort of off balance was kind of the plight, and he sort of delights in that. And I think it likely that the next commissioner of Church Education probably won't be similarly disruptive, and so this may very well make it easier for people at BYU to know where the lines are. So I think that's kind of a positive that comes from this. Um, but, uh, I— looking at it I also go, okay, this is something that we should have taken from President Oaks' talk. Because President Oaks' talk, he outlined in some ways for the first time the myriad of problems that the Church is now facing, that even active members are having serious problems with history and doctrine and social issues, as he talks about, and that returned missionaries are leaving the Church. And, you know, these are things that a president of the Church does not usually admit from a pulpit. I thought that President Oaks was being very candid. But then President Oaks offered the solution, which really was no solution at all, which was, okay, retrench. Okay, um, don't talk to your friends that aren't believers. Surround yourself with believers. Uh, be patient. Just— the answer in, in President Oaks's mind seems to be retrenchment. And if retrenchment is what he wants, you could have absolutely no greater advocate for retrenchment than now Elder Clark Gilbert, because that's what he does. That's what he did at BYU, and that's what President Oaks wants. That's the approach that he has decided to take. So it— this really comes as no surprise. Um, it is, I think, a— an extraordinary missed opportunity, you know, in a time when he called Elder Caussey. Elder Caussey— the elder before him was Elder Kieran from England. Elder Caussey is from France. Before him was Elder Soares from Brazil. Before him was Elder Gong, who is American but is also Asian American. And so we were sort of seeing this kind of opening up beyond the Wasatch Front. And you could not call a more Wasatch Fronty apostle than Clark Gilbert. Clark Gilbert would have been an acceptable choice 50 years ago, 75 years ago. I mean, he's cut out of the same cloth as J. Reuben Clark. As just kind of these hardliners. And, you know, we talked about the passing of President Holland, talked about him as a company man. There is no greater company man in the Church than Clark Gilbert. And that's what President Oaks wants. And so the more I have thought about Clark Gilbert's calling, because initially I bristled, I mean, I, again, with Uncle Howard, I have covenanted to sustain Clark Gilbert, and I will sustain Clark Gilbert. I am not covenanted to like Clark Gilbert, although I am open to the possibility of liking Clark Gilbert. Right now, I'm frankly not there, but I may very well get there. But as I've thought about this, and I've, I've I realized, look, Clark Gilbert is doing exactly what the president of the Church wants him to do. And so if my, my problem is not with Clark Gilbert, my problem, if I have one, is with President Oaks. And I recognize again, as we've talked many, many times, that the church is kind of— we're in the midst of so many different changes, not just in the church but in the world at large. And watching the church try to find its footing with all of them means that the church is going to do some things that I love, like creating a Swahili-speaking branch in Idaho, and some things that I don't love, and some things that are going to be frustrating to me. And I'm reminded of the time when I was talking to Bill Evans, the director of governmental relations for the church, who found it maddening when people would just dismiss everything he did because, oh, you're just the government relations arm, you're not the president of the church, this didn't come from the prophet. So for everybody to go, oh, well, this is just Clark Gilbert being this wild and dangerous whatever he's being as director of— if Clark Gilbert were stepping out of line, if Dallin Oaks did not want Clark Gilbert to be the disruptor that he has been, then Clark Gilbert would have been removed from that position long, long time ago. And the fact that he has now been elevated to the Quorum of the Twelve demonstrates that Clark Gilbert has done exactly what the church has asked him to do and is required of him to do. And so I, I, it has, it has put me more sort of at peace with the calling of Clark Gilbert because first of all, I have no issue with him on a kind of— this isn't, this isn't the Trump administration calling, um, terrible human beings who are, you know, Clark Gilbert is a, is a man who's been faithful to his family, has 8 children, and is very accomplished and very bright. And so there is no nothing about Clark Gilbert's life that disqualifies him from being an apostle. The fact that I don't see eye to eye with a number of the things that he has done is largely irrelevant. And it just sort of, it calls my bluff when I say, okay, are you willing to sustain people that you do not agree with? And, you know, I sustain President Oaks, and I can tell you a number of times I've disagreed with President Oaks, and I can tell you a number of times that I had been deeply frustrated with things that President Oaks has said, but I don't attack him publicly. And I don't— I mean, that's, that's it, you know. This is inside out, and if I want to be in, uh, these are the boundaries. And I recognize where those boundaries are, and those boundaries can sometimes be rather frustrating. But that's the reality of where we are. Uh, and the other thing my Uncle Howard always used to say with regard to callings that he like, as he said, it's not my name over the top of the door, it's the Savior's name, and I let him worry about it. And I think anybody who wants to stay in has to sort of take that approach. Uh, the, the Lord, um, I— the Lord is capable of using all of us in our weaknesses, in our fallibility, and It's, you know, it's the Lord's name over the door on this church. And if I, if I'm going to honor my covenants, I have to recognize that and live up to that. And so that's kind of where I've landed. And so if I sound a little uneasy, I am a little uneasy, but I'm going to get through this. And I was texting back and forth. I got inundated with messages from people from every walk of life. And one that really kind of broke my heart is a childhood friend who has a gay child. And this friend is struggling and very much wants to stay in the church, but is seeing so much pain being inflicted on her family by this. And they just felt absolutely kicked in the gut by the call of Clark Gilbert because it seemed to be this. But, you know, we both go back and forth. We're going to get through this. We're going to be okay. And, and the other thing. So again, I've rambled longer than you did, Ian. Have you? Okay. I'm not sure. But the other thing from this is is that I still have confidence. You know, when I went through my massive, when I, when I was teetering on the edge of leaving and I received that revelation that I have described many times on this podcast, uh, one of the things that I was told was be patient. It will all work out in the end. Now, I don't know if it's going to work out the way I want it to work out or how it's going to work out. But I have confidence enough in that the hand of the Lord is in this church that even if someone like Clark Gilbert or anybody else were to decide, no, okay, we are going to retrench so hard that we are going to absolutely— we're going to go back to, like you said with your missionaries, we're going to pull the priesthood away from Black people.

Now.

We're going to, I mean, we're going to become the church as it was in 1887, and we're going to bring back polygamy, and we're going to— even if somebody like that wanted to do that, I don't think that's possible anymore. I really think that the horse has left the barn to the point where, where the changes that are coming are going to come in spite of anybody who doesn't want them to happen. I just, I just see these changes as being somewhat inevitable. And the Lord has asked me to be patient enough to see his hand revealed as these changes come. And I don't know when they're going to come, and I don't even know if they're going to come in my lifetime, but I, I'm still confident they will come. All right, so that's my long, lengthy whatever it is. Do you have any— and I know we're over time, but I would love to hear your response to what I just said and your response to Clark Gilbert and your thoughts in general on this whole point.

Yes, thank you. And I'll be, I'll be brief. Um, I, I, as I listen to you, I hear a kind, thoughtful, respectful, faithful serving member who is indicative, um, and an example of somebody who follows Christ, wants to do the right thing, sustains the prophet, knows that the prophet is not infallible, uh, people make mistakes, uh, we, we, in just in life in general, we work with people we don't like. We work with people that we like. That's in any organization, right? And we work with people to the best that we can. As I think President Hinckley said, is, uh, you know, this, we're all that God has to work with, right? Uh, so that said, I, I think again, I just to add to that, I think you've been kind. I I think you've been patient. I think you've been gracious about, um, Clark Gilbert. I don't know the individual, but what I did, you remember you asked me right at the beginning, what do I know about this individual? Well, when we chatted on the phone yesterday, I didn't know very much, but I went online and I did some research and I want to share with you what people are saying. Okay. So they're saying that there's another side to, uh, to Clark Gilbert. Uh, I'll quote some of the comments online here. Uh, people have said about, uh, Clark Gilbert, he has tirelessly created an environment of fear among both students and faculty by punishing their livelihoods for holding dissenting opinions and tightening the vice of authority across the board. Uh, the appointment by Oaks will only serve to perpetuate strict enforcement of obedient to church practice and policies and adherence to church ideology. Others have said that Gilbert seems to be another shining example, shining example of the worst Mormonism has to offer the world. Others have said but they will parade out his education as evidence that educated people can believe that they should be considered part of the elite. So, and the list goes on and on in respect to what some have described as the outcry and the backlash to a failed decision and a missed opportunity to be strategic and moral and ethical and and representative and, and some have, have called for, or, or was expecting a Black apostle to be called. And these comments online, these conversations have been around for quite some time. Clearly Oaks took a very different approach, different direction for reasons that we probably don't fully understand. I agree with you that there, there have been some fierce debate internally. I suspect Uchtdorf, uh, Patrick Kiran, probably Bednar, other more probably liberal-leaning apostles, um, had their say and pushback. I think you're right that this period of 2 months since, is it Elder Holland passed away 2 months, that there's been, uh, intense, fierce discussion, debate. On this, but the church has opted, I think the church thinks, uh, they've opted for someone, a pair of safe hands. But what is that? Is calling someone, you know, if those comments online, if there's any substance in them, and I suspect there is, where this individual is a company man, a yes man who will do whatever it takes, fear, um, other techniques, methods to enforce traditional orthodox, practices, behaviors, et cetera, et cetera, and willing to do that unquestionable. And again, without question and do it with complete total obedience. Uh, that sends a very, very dangerous message to, uh, even the liberal conservatives, but certainly the liberal people in the church. And I agree with you, I think the church is split. Across politics. There's no question that the church is highly influenced, regulated, governed, um, and persuaded by the political spectrums, you know, MAGA, you know, some right-wing hardline, um, even, uh, white supremacists perhaps, from what I understand. That type of thinking still exists in the church. You and I know people that think, um, Blacks shouldn't have the priesthood, that the Black people before they were born chose that, right? There are people who have that mindset in the church, those extreme fundamental thinking that exist in the church. The church is not there, you know, as a whole, but this calling, uh, from, you know, to calling Clyde Gilbert is sending a message of retrenchment, backward thinking. Again, if the online comments are anything to go by, and there are hundreds of these comments, by the way, Jim, these are not, you know, I picked out a few comments, there are hundreds of comments, but if this individual has got this other side, this dark side, to him and he's 55 years old, uh, that mindset, that thinking, which is set, I think it's gonna be set, is gonna be around for a long time. So the progress that's been made and the progress that probably will come from Uchtdorf, Bednar, you know, Kieran at some point, um, there is a risk of at least two things, the rate of progress slowing down because Yeah, he's not gonna be the prophet for a while, but he's an apostle and he's going to dictate his opinion and position based on, you know, what we're hearing about him. You know, this fixed thinking. Um, you, you said that he would be a good candidate 75 years ago. Well, that, that's worrying. When I heard that, that's very, very worrying. So he will influence these conversations and will be a, um, a force for going back to the way things used to be. And, and some of the, my worry is that some of the progress that the church is making, albeit slow, frankly, could even be undone, could undo the good work that some of the church has done to change people's hearts and minds. If he's not challenging these extreme views and mindsets in the church that we see in ugly politics today, in MAGA, certain elements of MAGA, deeply racist behaviors and activities that we're seeing from a living president of the, uh, uh, of the United States of America and some of those around him where these comments and awful racist, outrageous, disgusting racist comments, um, are being published online and then denied. And then you have this element of that in the church. That the idea of those people having a stage to take the church back into those dark ages, those are dark ages, Jim Bennett, right? You know, and the church has come a long way, and I hope and pray that the qualities of Elder Gilbert Bennett, um, uh, are more powerful than the dark side of him, if you like, and that he will, you know, we can look to his good qualities, his Christlike qualities as, as a force for good to influence and encourage positive and strategic change in the church. I, you know, we, we, we look to that good side of him, but if that good side doesn't prevail, if the other side that we are hearing about, if that's real and true, then I, worry about the church and the church will become narrow thinking, more racist, less inclusive, less safe. Uh, any liberal-minded, um, you know, individuals, uh, who've got doubts or questions, you haven't got a chat in the old church. You won't survive. You even talked, you even talked about, uh, the faculty there surviving in silence and they couldn't get an answer on that. You might not even be si— safe, even if you're silent, even if you hold these opinions privately and you share them, you could be, you could be in danger. Share them privately, you could be in danger, right? So I, I, I think this is a reading, you know, weighing up what I'm reading online versus your very kind, gracious, and very, uh, respectful and faithful, um, uh, views and perspectives on Elder Gilbert. There is a, a, uh, uh, a, a very significant other side to that, which I suspect has some truth to it. Um, most likely there's usually two, two sides to the coin. And you know, where will this fall with Ollie Gilbert? Um, we need to hold out for the prospect of him being, yes. Mm-hmm. You know, hold out. Hope, like we do so many times, that, you know, he might change his mind on things. And, um, and, and hold out for hope for these individuals in the apostleship who can do so much change, perhaps quicker, and commit the church in the future to behaving and, and acting in a certain way and changing things where it becomes impossible for someone like Gilbert, um, you, you know, that dark side prevails to undo that. So notwithstanding the two sides there, there's still hope that the church— and we're Inside Out, the podcast is Inside Out. You're on the inside, you're faithful, you're committed. Uh, you know, President Oaks has said, by the way, and you know this, that, uh, it's wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true. Uh, that's a very difficult line to walk, right? I mean, you've spoken respectfully, you've not criticized him. But, uh, if you don't agree with someone, that's the thing. What's that line between sustaining, uh, somebody who's doing something wrong? It's that conversation with the missionary yesterday who would sustain the prophet regardless, even if the prophet broke the law. He would sustain the prophet because that's what God tells him to do. No matter ethics or morals or whether it's right or wrong, some people will, uh, uh, uh, follow the prophet without question, without any doubt. And you've got, you know, a sizable percentage of active faithful members that would do that, uh, no matter, you know, no matter what, um, uh, people say. So I am seeing two very different sides to this individual, a very dark worrying, dangerous, uh, threatening individual that has implemented, um, some very, very, uh, dangerous, uh, strict policies, uh, which is instilling fear in some, uh, allegedly. And the other side of, you know, uh, what you're saying, you know, that there is a, um, you know, he's got qualities and attributes, etc., and, uh, we should, um, expect and hope for that side to prevail. So we'll see. But I, I think we can agree that this is a missed opportunity to make the church more representative across the world. And I think we can agree that it would be a good thing one day for the prophet to call a Black apostle. Do you agree?

Oh, I absolutely agree. No, I absolutely agree. And I, you know, the reality is we're going to get several new apostles in the next few years. Well, we're going to get at least two new apostles relatively quickly. This sounds really morbid and terrible, but both President Oaks and President Eyring particularly are not in good health. They simply are not in good health. They are men in their mid-90s. And, you know, men in their mid-90s that are not in good health don't tend to be around for a long time. And that also, I think, sort of figures into President Oaks's thinking here and calling Elder Gilbert, because I think he was looking for somebody who would keep sort of his flame alive after he was gone. And I think that he couldn't— if that's what he wanted to do, I don't know that he could have found a better person to fill that role than Clark Gilbert. I guess I'm supposed to now call him Clark G. Gilbert. I've gotten into this habit of calling General Authorities by their first and last names as if they were people or something. The whole middle initial thing is really ridiculous. It's always kind of has been. But anyway, I really think this is President Oaks kind of sensing the short time that he has and to some degree sensing— I mean, it's clear again, we've talked about this over and over again. It is clear that President Oaks knows what the problems are and President Oaks can see What changes are on the horizon? And I think retrenchment is almost always a fear-based response. It's, it's fear. It's not that things aren't going to change. It's that things are changing and I need to make sure that they don't. And I think that was the thinking kind of behind the decision. And I keep coming back to something I've said many, many times, which is whenever you, whenever you tell me something can never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever change. And the more passionate you are in trying to tell me that, the weaker and the more fear-based you sound to me. Because if things, something is never going to change and you had confidence that it's never going to change. You don't need to constantly reassure yourself and reassure others that it's not going to change. It is a sign of weakness, not strength, when you do that. And so I, and I have confidence, I, for whatever reason, I retain my confidence that the Lord was not lying to me when he said, be patient, it will all work out in the end. I think this church has a grand and glorious future, and I think that it's going to, uh, enter into that future, uh, making the changes necessary to be able to bless the lives of all of God's children. And it's going to do that in spite of all of us, not necessarily because of all of us. And so If somebody enters into the equation that I don't agree with and that has an approach that I don't like, that is no impediment to the Lord's purposes ultimately being fulfilled. So that's where I am.

I think that's very fair. We are way over, so we'll wrap it up here.

Well, I just feel better, so thank you for letting me rant a little bit.

No, that was good. I always learn from you. I listen, I learn, and I know that our listeners feel the same way, you know, when they listen. And it's okay to disagree with us. We know that we don't, we don't know, we accept, you know, everybody's going to like us. And that's okay. We accept that nobody's going to agree with us. That's okay. But we try to do things kindly, thoughtful, with respect. And we, you know, that's the kind of conversations that we're trying to have here on Inside Out. Jim Bennett, as always, it's been an absolute honor to be able to spend this time with you, share and be able to open up and share our thoughts and feelings on hope, these really important things that are impacting the church. Any final thought from you before we close?

No, thank you very much for your wisdom and insight. I always learn from you as well. I think that these perspectives are necessary. I think these conversations are necessary, even if they're hard sometimes. Just very quickly, this just brought to mind, I was walking out of the Tabernacle last night going, heading to my car to head home. And I walked past the guy who was probably a little older than I was. He wasn't in the choir. And he goes, Jim Bennett, love your podcast. And I said, well, thank you. Do I know you? Do we know each other? Nope, we don't. And that was it. And so I was really, really grateful to hear that. And so I, I don't think I couldn't do this without you. And your perspective, I think, is so invaluable to this. And I think when people listen to us, they may not like what we have to say, but I think they know that we are authentic in what we're saying.

We are grateful for, for your words there. You know, we are inside out, but also equally importantly, our listeners are inside out, right? You know, we're all part of the inside out conversation. Respectful, kind, thoughtful, uplifting, constructive, critical, yes, healthy conversations that people want to have. Like this missionary was wanting to have the conversation yesterday, and I could feel some relief on his face. He was able to talk to somebody who was giving him, you know, honest answers and talking about stuff that he probably couldn't talk to his companion about, right? You're having that safe, healthy environment where we can talk about our feelings and thoughts and our concerns and our worries and our successes and our failures and the things that affect us emotionally. And, you know, just have that— I listen to myself. So, I'm such a private person, but I see, I can't believe I share some of the stuff that I have about my life to be honest, but I see strength in vulnerability. Strength, you know, there are people out there that when you're vulnerable, there's enough people that are kind and thoughtful. Yeah, you're going to get criticism and ridicule and condemnation. We get that, but we are authentic. We are real. These conversations that we're having need to be had. The church is not having them, not like this. Wouldn't it be great to have a leader on the Inside Out podcast and have a conversation like this, right? And talk in a mature way about, hey, we got this right. Oh, that's fantastic. Look at that. Look at the results of that. Hey, we got this wrong. We're learning from it. We need to do better. That's worth gold, right? And we're trying to kind of have that experience. Here on Inside Out. So with that in mind, I want to again, thank you so much, Jim Bennett, as always, for being a— Inside Out wouldn't exist without you. So I want to thank you for that. And I also want to thank our listeners, our followers. We are with you. We are equal with you. Do we have all the answers? Yes. We probably do. That was a joke. Maybe.

Who knows?

Who knows? But anyway, we're the only true podcast upon the face of the earth.

Yes.

Say that with a bit of tongue in cheek, but we love you. We respect you out there, all your different opinions and views that we might agree with or disagree with, et cetera. We understand the importance of these conversations. Thank you for being with us. I hope you enjoyed this conversation. And until this time next time, whenever that will be, when we have a plan this audio, we, uh, we extend our love and appreciation to you, Jim. Thank you as always. And again, to all our listeners, thank you.

Thank you, listeners. Thank you, Ian.