Is the LDS Church Quietly Breaking with Trump? - with Greg Prince

Hello and welcome to the latest episode of Inside Out. I am Ian Wilkes, the co-host. I'll be co-leading and facilitating this conversation, and I'm here as always with the extraordinary Mr. Jim Bennett. Hello, Jim.

Hello, how are you? Really good.

Really good. How's your day so far?

So far so good.

Wonderful. Well, we are always excited to have our resident, uh, special guest back with us, an acclaimed historian, scholar, uh, author, and somebody who we've, uh, love and have immense respect for. And so we want to welcome back our precious Greg Prince. Hello, Greg.

Hello. I am the ordinary Greg Prince as a counterpoint to the extraordinary Jim Bennett. I provide balance and grounding.

Oh, well, there you go.

You do. You are the voice of wisdom between us for sure. But I did, I did use the word precious and, and I meant that you were very valuable, incredibly precious.

That always makes me think of Lord of the Rings.

Yes.

My precious.

Precious.

If you get Greg to do the Schmiegel Gollum voice, that would be, now that would be interesting for sure. We have been discussing and planning our topics and we have today another quite extraordinary topic that I can't wait to get into because I feel so strongly about some of the things that we're talking about. And by way of context,, and we've had these conversations, extensive conversations with, with you both. We've talked often about the role and responsibility of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in public life. In, as Greg, to quote you, I think you said the public square, the importance, the value, the role, the responsibility, and the opportunity for the church to, take a position on important topics, political issues and items of the day, not just in the United States, but because the church claims and professes to be a global church, put an expectation on the church to step up and to stand up and to speak out openly on critical issues across the world. And of course, certainly, uh, within the United States and certainly within Utah. As a non-American, it's important, I think, to see the church as an international church, as it's claimed, and to understand the decisions and the actions and positions of the church on key political issues and geopolitical issues from an international perspective and not just an American-centric position. And so with that context, um, I just, we, we decided the three of us to talk about what appears to be at least, or reported to be a growing divide between the Trump administration and the LDS Church. And there's an article that I sent earlier, uh, that was posted, uh, on the Salt Lake Tribune., paper, online paper. And there is a, uh, an important conversation, I think, to have around this article. And before we get into the details, Jim, would you like to characterize this article as you read it and you understand it from your political experience and your perspective to help me complete my context to frame this so we can get into this conversation a bit further?

Oh, well, sure. So this is, I mean, it was published in the Salt Lake Tribune, and that's probably the best place for people to go to read it because the Salt Lake Tribune is now free for everybody. There's no paywall, which has been really kind of nice. But this is actually a Religion News Service article. So it's a syndicated article that's in a number of different publications, but it's written by Jana Reese, who I have met. And Greg, do you know, you know, Jana Reese, do you not?

I know her very well. We served together on the Dialogue Board many years ago.

Oh, wonderful.

I respect her greatly.

I mean, she's just absolutely brilliant, and I think she's got a number of great insights into the Church and into things that are important. She's the author of The Next Mormons, which I think is one of the best demographic studies of the Church that has ever been done. But this is an article, and the headline is The growing divide between the Trump administration and the LDS Church. And it points out that the church does not mention Donald Trump. So the divide is something that she is seeing or that she feels is happening. The word she uses is feels. I saw some commentary on this and somebody was complaining that this was terrible and this was awful journalism because the, the, you know, there's no concrete evidence that this is true. And I said, this isn't journalism. This is opinion. This is her opinion, but it's backed up, I think, by some pretty good facts. And the facts are that the Trump administration has been reaching out to a number of different religious organizations. There was an event recently, the Jubilee event, on Sunday to rededicate America to God and conservative Christian values. And there were a whole bunch of churches there. The church that wasn't there was the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And even though members of the church support Trump, uh, evangelical leaders do not see us as Christians. And the church— I think Jan is on to something here because we've talked extensively about the fact that the church is not willing to stick its neck out and say controversial things in the world of politics. But as Greg always says, don't look at what they say, look at what they do. And what the church is doing is they just recently announced a $25 million donation to UNICEF, the United Nations, uh, I don't know what ICEF stands for. One's Children's and one's Fund. Children's Education Fund. International Children's Education Fund. Is that right?

If it's not, sounds right.

Sounds like it should be. Um, so they're stepping up their humanitarian relief. Which is something that the Trump administration, with all of its rage against immigrants and rage against refugees, this is not something that is a priority. And if anything, it's something that is somewhat demonized. And this— so I'm just going to read a little bit from Jana's article. The church is leading by example, helping our neighbors and quietly showing that everyone is our neighbor. In an age of chaotic cruelty where public figures who call themselves Christians claim that empathy is dead, the church keeps calling for and practicing compassion. I've complained before in this column that the church has called itself a global church for years while behaving like an American church with colonial outposts. And she goes into some examples of that. But she, she's saying that this is actually a good sign of the fact that we are really trying to do something globally in a way that the church isn't, you know, that, that extends the church's reach beyond the Americans. And one other thing before I leave this, she, she concludes by saying This respectful outreach to Muslims is not MAGA approved, but neither is it woke, as some have criticized. It's basic decency, something many in our pluralistic society have forgotten. I'm glad my church is trying to stand in the gap. And this— another commentator read this and said, how dare she say this is her church? This is the Church of Jesus Christ. And I jumped in and I said, yes, it is. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. But there's another clause there. That clause is of Latter-day Saints. It's the Church of Jesus Christ and the Church of Latter-day Saints. Jana Reese is very much a Latter-day Saint. This is very much her church as much as it is anybody's. And that is a distinction that MAGA does not want to recognize. If you are not MAGA, if you are not Republican, if you are not Trumpy— because Mitt Romney's still a Republican, but he's not Trumpy— uh, there is a huge segment of the church that insists that you're not legitimate and that you're not really a Latter-day Saint and this really isn't your church. But if you look at the actions here of the church, it, I think, is a very strong indication of what Jana is talking about, that this is indeed a global outreach. So, Greg, now you served on the Dialogue board with Jana. You know her quite well. Do you think she's on to something here?

Oh, I think so. If you wanted to get a little bit crude about this, you could characterize this as the church lifting its middle finger against the Trump administration. Because not only does this go totally against his defunding of USAID, but the contribution was through an agency that he detests, the United Nations. Yep. So there was some forethought to this, and I applaud the brethren for taking this move. I hope it presages that we've got more like this coming down the road because it's necessary. We'll get into that in a while, I'm sure, as we talk more about the more basic issue of do we still believe in the Constitution?

As a country or as a church?

As a church. Well, as a country as well.

Yeah. Well, Ian, you're not an American. Uh, when, when the church starts talking about the Constitution, what does that do to you?

That's a great question to ask me, actually. Uh, I've always had this concern, this issue that, you know, the church is primarily interested in, uh, in, in the United States and what happens in the United States, and it's more active politically in the United States. Uh, so that's been, I think that's the evidence. That's been my observations. Uh, it, it, it, it wants to have its cake and eat it. It wants to be seen as a global relevant international charity organization do these great things, and it does. Its outreach globally is extraordinary. There's no question. You could do a lot more, of course, but it certainly has an inter— a real substantial, um, international outreach program in terms of its, uh, services that it provides. Politically, uh, as, as the, uh, its sphere of influence diminishes, uh, the, the further away from Salt Lake that you travel. Um, the counterargument to that is that it has, uh, people who are very much involved in politics at the Washington level. I've even heard that it has lobbyists or uses organizations or individuals to lobby positions quietly and privately on certain things. I, I, I, that's what I've heard from different sources that I can't, uh, not a rumor, Ian. Is, is it a fact?

It's a fact.

It's a fact, right? Okay. I'm being careful because I couldn't verify the sources. So, and that makes sense to me that the church influencing governments and local authorities in respect to its agenda, you know, that's, that's, you know, a lot of organizations and people do that. So that's not, that's, that's regular. I think that's normal. I think the, the the problem I have with the church as a someone who's now outside of the church. And so my perspective has changed, Jim, from when I was very in the church and devoted and having the position that the church is, that America is the chosen land as with Israel, that Christ will return to the United States. That the United States is chosen, that the Constitution is inspired of God. In fact, if you go back to some of the earlier Ensign publications back in the '80s, I think we were serving a mission in Scotland. There was a, an article I read when I was in being trained as a missionary, going way back where I read in the Ensign somewhere, some publication that, uh, George Washington had appeared to Wilford Woodruff. Um, get the dates wrong there. Uh, let me get the dates right. But the, the, the earlier, uh, presidents of the church had appeared to, uh, living prophets. And, uh, basically they had, uh, had this visitation and that the work, uh, for these past American presidents that had passed beyond the veil, that that work had been done for and on their behalf in the temple. That they now have the opportunity to accept the gospel. Even heard that they'd joined the church and the other life. That was a conversation I had, I think, with one of the missionaries or President Dunn at the time. And so there's this distinct, unique relationship between the church and the American Constitution and the Constitution being inspired by God and the only constitution of its kind in the world that the church protects that. There's even prophecies and statements by prophets that if and when the United States government hangs by a thread, I'm paraphrasing here, be very, um, limited here in terms of my memory of, of the exact quote, but that the, the, the Church of Jesus Christ being the only true church will come to the rescue of the American government. Um, when that happens. So you've got this unique relationship between the only true church, the prophetic, prophetic authority, uh, of the church, um, relationship with the Constitution. It's a global church, uh, yet it resides, headquartered, resides in the chosen land. And its mandate, the church's mandate, is to, uh, do everything in its power to protect the the Constitution of the United States. What that means for non-Americans and international members is mixed depending on how one is devoted in the church. When I was active in the church, this was never an issue for me. I thought, well, this is the only true church. Wherever the church says, you know, I, I, I, I can go with it. Uh, now I just see it as being, um, it's, it's mostly about United States, about America, about the Constitution, et cetera. And so, and then if you look at the article as well, there's a reference to the Book of Mormon being, you know, that America is a special nation chosen by God for a role in salvation history, which the members have embraced for a long time. And there's also reference to former past church presidents like Ezra Taft Benson, who was very political, and of course, Dallin H. Oaks, who's a legal scholar. Scholar, judge, et cetera, and their positions on religious freedom in the Constitution and supporting and upholding the Constitution. So you've got this relationship between the church and the Constitution and the American government in certain, uh, areas. But now with MAGA and with all the issues going on and The extreme situation we find ourselves in with a very unusual individual residing in the White House and the moral positions that gaps between the president of the United States and the president of the church, which I can see that, you know, that the, the, there's a widening there, appears to be a widening there, and there should be. What's that relationship look like now? So the church is now focusing on, you know, it wasn't present at that, at that meeting. It's distanced itself. It's put the middle finger up at the church, uh, which is a good move, I think. And it's now emphasizing its, um, uh, humanitarian efforts, uh, to say, look, you know, we're just gonna be focusing on that. I think although that is a, in some ways a smart move, I don't think it goes far enough. I think that the church is still afraid to speak up and stand up and to distance itself on critical issues like immigration and moral decisions and honesty, indecency in public life and the value of integrity and good governance and transparency, et cetera, and upholding those traditional Christian values, which the evangelicals talk about, but somehow it gets compromised in that whole MAGA movement there. So it, it's got this interesting relationship with the Constitution, the church, interesting relationship with the American politics and the administration, uh, and is now trying to distance itself, it appears. Well, I think it is actually, and focusing on the humanitarian. So it's, it's a, it's just a, a complex untangling of, uh, a temporary one, I think as well., its relationship with the current government. I think when Trump is removed and you get a, a more sensible, logical, intelligent person in the White House, I think the church will renew its relationships. Um, I, I hope I didn't mangle that too much. I mean, this is my perspective from a, a non-American international. I'll look at it through a very different, uh, set of eyes than you guys probably. And so some of it I understand, some of it I, I, I I admit I don't fully understand.

Well, Greg, you had said, started something that I thought was really kind of interesting because we were talking a little bit about the Constitution and you, you said that even, uh, Ezra Taft Benson, Cleon Skousen, uh, they were somewhat extremists, but at the core of their message, they were getting it right. Can you sort of expand on that?

Their defense of the democracy, their defense of the founding documents of our democracy was constant. Uh, they took it to an extreme that left a lot of us in its wake because we weren't comfortable going to that extreme, but nonetheless, that core message that This is a chosen land with divinely inspired foundational documents. That's a pretty good message. We don't hear that anymore from the pulpit, and I wonder if it's because our church, as well as nearly every other church in the United States right now, is afraid. As are so many politicians, you have an autocrat in the White House who has succeeded to an alarming extent in beating down not just opposition, but look at the primary election yesterday that you had one of the most respected members of the US Senate. Driven out of office by an embarrassingly large margin because the incumbent president didn't like him. What does that say? We've talked before about the vacuum of moral authority in this country. Where are the prophets, secular prophets even, who are willing to go into the public square and say in a loud voice, this is not right and we need to change it. Now you are starting to see some of those, but they tend not to be coming from the religious traditions.

Well, Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel, Yes. I mean, that's where it's coming from.

That's where it's coming from. And so you have the late night prophets who are trying to raise their voice as that of warning that, guys, we, we need to fix this because this is not a good road. If you look, or if you ask people why they vote, the way they vote? You'll probably get answers all over the place, but the answer in the current administration is likely to be, well, because he promised this, or because he stands for this. But the this tends to be questionable in my mind. In many cases, the this is He now allows me to let it all hang out. I don't need to hide my racism anymore. And that makes me feel good because I don't want the woke people telling me that I can't be racist. It's that kind of a deal that if you can pin people down, very often they'll say, if they're honest, well, because of this, and that in their mind justifies Totally ignoring all the garbage, and there's a ton of garbage there. That's true.

Greg, you are doing a really effective job at scraping away the, um, uh, the COVID which hides this deep dark underbelly of corrupt American politics, which I can understand why the church is trying to get away from, Right here you have a president of the United States of America in the White House, a convicted felon who will do, stop at nothing to achieve his agenda, no matter what that takes for personal gain, but also this position of American self-protectionism. Whilst I can understand, is this zero-sum game, uh, which you're probably familiar with. In terms of, uh, Trump's philosophy and business philosophy position. Essentially, um, there needs to be just one winner. Take all, grab all. You do what you can. We are gonna put ourselves first. And this whole concept around what I think is the very fabric of this individual, the very core of Trump. Is to put himself, his family, uh, his friends, those that support him, and of course America, which I, I could understand why you would do that in order to improve competitiveness, uh, in the world. Uh, and there's a, there's a whole conversation around economic development and, and, uh, trading, et cetera, and, and competing in the, uh, world economy today. And, and I can understand that conversation, but this self-protectionism, this America first at all costs on everything, not just trade or investment, but, but on traditional values and putting America first. And, and if you're not with us, you're against us kind of thing. And, and doing whatever it takes, using whatever tools and mechanism devices and instruments to, to put United States first on, on, on, on everything. And two, influence the world, hopefully for the better. We'll see how that pans out, but to exert American power and influence across the world using whatever techniques necessary, legal or otherwise, in order to advance the current American administrative agenda. Now, there's some good things probably that are happening, which people could argue, well, you know, Trump's done this, and I see that all the time. Online, you know, well, Trump's done this and Trump's done that. We've even got missionaries, uh, friends that we know really well that say Trump, uh, is needed at this time in order to, uh, protect the Constitution and to protect the American values and protect the American, um, uh, businesses, etc., and the economy. And, and I can see, I can see both sides, um, but also you've got an individual who's, uh, quite prepared to break the law to to do whatever it takes to perform illegal acts to advance his personal agenda. And I also think it's very personal for Trump. This is an individual who acts and behaves like a baby who has tantrums. And if you don't like him, then you have this big fallout. And if you don't agree with him, then you're on the wrong side. And he'll use whatever tools and instruments at his disposal to quiet his critics. It's almost like you've got this individual in the White House who is an elected dictator in America of all places, you know, Britain, which is the motherland of democracy. Well, that's gone. The United Kingdom has lost a lot of that birthright to creating what was imperfect democratic institutions and processes and organizations, which is, it's done well to an extent over a number of years, notwithstanding its, you know, colonization. And by the way, the article talks about the church having these American base with these church colonizing the rest of the world. And I, I, I agree with that. I, that makes sense to me from a church perspective. But you've got this individual in the White House who's a dictator. Will do anything in his power with the might of, that's available to do in America with all the power and institutions and the resources that he has and prepared to do whatever it takes with seemingly limited or no checks and balances from the Republican Party. And here we have the church, which is a Republican church, arguably, mostly, probably, which is very concerned with a lot of what's going on in the United States and the direction of the president who seems unwilling and afraid to deal with him head on and is now focused on humanitarian. It's a very safe play. It's cowardly, frankly, in my opinion. I expect more from the church. The Pope has done more to hold Trump to account, at least to an extent, you know, in the public square. And it seems to be unafraid to kind of stand up to him and, and actually, uh, opposed him and spoken out against, uh, Trump and speaking about global issues. So here, here we have a great example, not a perfect example, but a really good example of a religious leader taking a stand and taking a position on, on critical things. The Pope's not just talking about humanitarian and, and, and service work. He's, he's going, he's being much more substantial. So I think we are at an inflection point here, I think, between the church and the American, current American administration and the relationship on the Constitution. What is the church's position on the current Constitution and on America being the chokehold? I mean, so there's lots of questions which I think the church would not be interested in responding to, or I'm sure.

Well, I have a solution that might even be novel. It may not connect to any reality, but I think if more of the brethren became White Sox fans, they would find that they have courage.

That's, that's, uh, uh, that's right. Wonderful to have a pope who's a White Sox fan, uh, and, and I mean, his first encyclical just came out, and it talks about the dangers of AI. And it's just, it's so engaged with the world around them in a way that our church just, we could be doing so much more. And we've said that so many times.

Yeah, where is the voice of moral authority emanating from Salt Lake? Come on.

And well, so I, I, I, I want to just quickly address, Ian, a couple of the things that you said, because, uh, with a, what feels like a lifetime in Utah politics, although I haven't really been active in politics for quite some time, but I did run my father's final campaign, the campaign that brought us Mike Lee, who is still in the United States Senate. Mike Lee's entire shtick was I'm the guy that's going to save the Constitution. Uh, every race in Utah— I, I, I'm sure this is still true, but it was true while I was active in particularly Republican politics— every race in Utah, uh, on a statewide level references the prophecy of the Constitution hanging by a thread. The prophecy, incidentally, which we don't have any firsthand record of. It's all hearsay. First time I think we actually have anybody talking about it, it's Brigham Young saying he heard Joseph Smith say it. Uh, and so, so we don't even know if it's legitimate. The church has specifically disavowed what they call the White Horse Prophecy, which expands on the Constitution hanging by a thread, that there's going to be this white horse and there's going to be this black horse and there's going to be these other— and the church has said that's nonsense, but they have not disavowed The Constitution Hangin' by a Thread. And Mike Lee's entire shtick was he would always quote the Doctrine and Covenants at the end of all of his stump speeches about the wise men raised up unto this very purpose to create the Constitution. That's the Doctrine and Covenants language, just sort of tying himself into this idea. And my father lost in convention. He did not lose in a primary the way that Senator Cornyn did. He lost in Utah's archaic convention system, which I think is one of the reasons why we now have a different route to the primary ballot. You can just collect signatures and bypass the convention, and the convention is usually loaded with the extremists anyway. And so you can get more moderate people into office. And the, the thing that just drives me nuts though, is that Mike Lee, whose entire, uh, premise for running was, I have to save the Constitution, has been the most contemptuous senator of the Constitution that Utah has ever had. I think I could back that up in a court of law because Mike Lee has decided that whatever Donald Trump wants is what he will do, period. There is no other standard. There is no other criteria, uh, by which he makes decisions. And that, I think, is true largely of just about every Republican senator. Trump, his approval rating is in the dumpster for, you know, the, the populace at large, but his approval rating among Republicans is still formidable. And as we saw yesterday in the Texas primary, it's still determinative that if Trump says, hey, I want this guy, that's the guy who wins the Republican primary. Hopefully then goes on to lose the general election. That seems to be where we're going with this. But the thing that, that is just absolutely driving me crazy. And Greg, I would love to get your perspective on this too, because what's absolutely driving me crazy is that all of the constitutionalists who decided my father was somehow a communist and didn't— had contempt for the Constitution and whatever, all that nonsense. All of these guys who see themselves as the saviors of the Constitution, the prophecy says that they will The elders of Israel will carry it off on their backs, or at least that's one version that we have this divine charge to save the Constitution. All these people that believe that are supporting the least constitutional president in American history. This is a guy who tore down the East Wing of the White House without permission., without an act of Congress, without, you know, that's, that's a minor in the grand scheme of things. We're also now in an intractable war with Iran that is also unconstitutional. I, I can go through all kinds of things, uh, that Trump has done that are unconstitutional. But Trump himself, when asked questions about the Constitution, makes it clear that he Not only doesn't he respect it, he doesn't even know what it is. On a campaign stop once, they were talking about, are you gonna stand up for, I don't know, was it Article 2, Section 8? Is that the one that lists the executive powers? And he says, oh, I'm gonna stand up for Article 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, whatever article. It's like the Constitution doesn't have that many articles, Mr. Trump. I mean, he doesn't— he was asked about the Declaration of Independence and said, what does that mean to you? And he says, well, it's just a beautiful document of unity and love. It is? No, it isn't. It's a declaration of independence. It's the exact opposite of unity. It's, we are splitting up. This is a guy who doesn't know anything about the American system of governance, and he keeps threatening to run for a third term despite the Constitution forbidding him from running for a third term. And it's Utah Mormon, uh, Republicans who are cheering him on as they somehow want credit also for being the constitutionalists who are saving The Constitution, when the Constitution has never been under more attack than it is from this president. Would you agree with that, Greg, or am I being too hyperbolic?

No, I don't think you're being too extreme at all. I'd like to take a step back though, rather than just focusing on those documents, and say, what is the foundational message of Jesus. Is it not that righteousness is the only way forward? That whether it's the individual or the community or the country, ultimately the foundation that is secure is the foundation of rectitude. Well, if you believe that, then how can you possibly turn a blind eye to the exact opposite of that, which is what our good co-religionists in Utah seem to be able to do without blinking an eye at it?

No, that's absolutely right. I mean, I've been having a lot of conversations lately with people about Trump, and I point out that my opposition to Trump has very little to do with politics. One of the things that Trump has done is that he has normalized so many things that should not be normal. You know, Latter-day Saints are, you know, to quote Into the Woods, One of my favorite musicals, the witch sings, "You're so nice. You're not good. You're not bad. You're just nice." And I thought, you know, that applies to Latter-day Saints. We're just very nice. We've always been nice people, whether or not we're good or bad. We always sort of have this sense of decorum and an understanding of, okay, there are things that are out of bounds. There are things that we shouldn't be saying. And Trump has, um, removed those boundaries, particularly for Latter-day Saints. Trump has sort of set this example of now members of the church who were racist and have always been racist, but knew that racism probably isn't something they should be talking about because they knew that that's probably not good. Now it's like, Well, no, no, now I can talk about it. Now I can be as cruel as Donald Trump is. I can be as racist as Donald Trump is. And that's just fine. And that's somehow even patriotic to go to that extreme. That's, I think, the infection that Trump has given on the church. And now I realize I'm in the midst of an anti-Trump rant. And that, and I know a lot of people get upset by that, but But constitutionally, and if we're talking about the Constitution and fealty to the Constitution, what Trump has exposed in the church is that the fealty to the Constitution was always just lip service. That, I mean, I, I, I would believe that most members of the church who talk about, oh yeah, the Constitution, it's so important, wouldn't be able to tell you the underpinnings of what the Constitution is. Or why it matters. And so as Trump just goes around and he's the guy on their team that keeps winning these battles against the libs and drinks the libs' tears and blah, blah, whatever all this is, they just think, well, of course it must be the Constitution because Democrats are evil, right? So this must be constitutional, whereas an actual discussion of principle Is it there? We, there is no animating principle of the Republican Party independent of Donald Trump. And this is the thing. There's nothing in there. There's nothing. Well, we stand for this. If Donald Trump says no, we don't. Oh, then no, we don't. And you can't have fealty to the Constitution if your fealty is only to one man and it doesn't matter. What the written word says.

Let me, let me use a 19th century metaphor, and if some of our listeners don't understand it, then shame on them and they can go look it up. You have to be careful to the things to which you hitch your wagon. I doubt that there are many people in this country who have ever hitched a wagon to anything. But it's a good metaphor. I think of two examples. One is the parable, if you will, of the Pied Piper. The people of Hamelin hitched their wagon to something they should not have because they thought they were getting short-term gain, and look at the tragedy that happened there. The other is the phrase Faustian bargain, that if you're doing a deal, you better be clear-eyed about what the quid is for the pull. And it, it's starting to dawn on a lot of people much too late that they got screwed in the bargain. Because the welfare of the country not only has taken a back seat, hadn't even done that, it's just been tossed overboard. If you have somebody who will come right out and say, well, I don't care about the people, gas prices, that's not a problem, going to war, oh, that's righteous. That's when the birds come back to roost. And we're seeing that now. And I would have to ask these people, so how does that bargain look now? How much better off are you for having signed on to that? And I suspect a lot of them would not want to continue that conversation because it would be too embarrassing to them. But where is the voice coming from? The pulpit. It doesn't have to say the T-word at all. What it should be doing is to raise that prophetic voice and condemn evil in all of its forms. Those forms including lying and stealing and committing adultery and go on and on and on, where is the voice that's condemning that?

I think you've absolutely nailed it, Greg. Oh, America, America, what have you done? What is going on? You have these checks and balances in the country, right? Systems and processes and legal mechanisms to hold presidents to account. Yet this individual seems to be able to get away with murder and almost with anything that he can do. Greg, you're right to strip this conversation right back to the fundamentals. You're right to remind us of of, uh, the prime example of Christ and what his foundational teachings were. Because we have to strip this right back to the very basics of goodness and decency. You know, what is right, what is wrong, what is good, what is not, uh, what is honesty, what is not, what is a transgression or a sin, what is not, what is breaking the law and what is not, right? That's where we're at when Jim Bennett talks about normality. We've become, I haven't, I don't think we have, but some have become desensitized where things are, were not normal and now normal. And it's kind of no big deal. It's just Trump doing his, his thing. But every time he, he seems to do something, it's, it's a new level, a new, a new, uh, standard in subnormality in my mind. Just to remind us what Christ was about, what he represented at the very core level. It was three interconnected pillars. One was, you know, Jesus taught that God's reign and justice are breaking into the world. And he demonstrated through his example, how he lived, that people could be healed, that you can care for people, care for marginalized, and defeating oppressive forces. That's one of the pillars. You know, we, the scriptures talk about, um, helping the downtrodden, helping those with feeble knees and, and those who are, uh, marginalized, who are vulnerable. Christ was about helping those individuals and, and pushing back against oppressive forces, of which he paid his life. The second one is love God and your neighbor, fundamental principles which underpin the church as, as, uh, theology and many other religions around the world, not just unique to the church. And so when asked, you know, for the most important commandments, Jesus emphasized total devotion to God by, to God coupled with treating others exactly as you want to be treated, the golden rule. And the other one was radical forgiveness and grace and kindness. He taught a lifestyle of mercy, urging his followers to forgive others. Show humility, show loving kindness, and shift their focus from external rituals to internal purity and compassion. That's really describing the church. That's what the very foundational blocks of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints— I know that because it teaches that. But more important than that, the members live that. We know between the three of us, just countless number of extraordinary members that live those values at the very basic level, like good, kind, and just will do anything to help others. That's the message of Christ. That's the life of Christ, the story of Christ. And then in contrast, you've got this individual, uh, who's occupying the White House, who is, um, focused on almost the opposite. Is not interested in keeping the law, is not interested in protecting marginalized individuals. Is very much involved in, you know, his deal is the only deal that can be done. There's a lot of self-protection, self-service. I think he's even set this— Jim, help me on this, Greyhammer. There's an organization that Trump has created called— help me on the name here. There's a title to it. The Peaceful Committee, I think, or World for Peace Committee. What's that called? So that is—

was that it, Jim?

I don't, I'm not sure. Well, he's done a couple of things. Like he created a, when he was at Davos, he created a group of world leaders that included, uh, Russia and China. And this was like the something of peace with a council of peace or something like that.

But then we had all the And you have to spend a billion dollars to be a member and he's the president of et cetera. So, you know, these checks and balances, I mean, I, I, you know, uh, you know, I, I weep, wail and gnash my teeth at, at, at why America doesn't implement these checks and balances, which exist to, to stop. I mean, that's the whole Constitution of America, is it not? To stop a president from taking over. The country and for the people to have the right to rise up and to bear arms and to protect liberty and family freedom. That's the very core of the Constitution. And you've got this president that's acting completely opposite. I mean, his focus is transactional foreign policy, rejection of globalism, peace through strength, et cetera. And I think there's a balance. A good leader approaches the world in a very balanced, deliberate, strategic, intelligent way. The countries outside of America are not going away.

Okay.

The world outside of America will always be there. America might take over Greenland and Canada, but I don't think it's going to happen, but the world will exist with or without America. I think we need a good, strong, intelligent, reliable, responsible America to have a better world. Without that, the world is without a good, strong, reliable, sensible America. The world's in a difficult place. And I'm saying that as a non-American, but I think in order to be successful as a country, you have to have a balance between fairness and firmness. You've got these principles, these standards, these values. The church, by the way, and Trump equally, I believe, is my opinion, extol American values as the values. Well, there are values that exist outside of America. They're not unique to America. You know, the values of decency and honesty, integrity and reliability, et cetera. They're not, you know, American values as such. They're human values, right? And so you've got this world that we're all in. You've got this role that America and the church needs to play. Based on what should be universal, regardless of religion, universal values of honesty and decency, which is what Christ taught. And he wasn't the only one that taught that as a religious leader, but those good leaders that have lived, who now live, who advocate for decency and integrity and honesty in political life, in these different institutions, in religious life, et cetera, et cetera, Those are universal values and they're not uniquely, distinctly American values as it's sometimes packaged and marketed. And so to be successful in the world, we have to have relationships with others. And if it's built on those values, those value-based system, the value-based order, uh, which it isn't, uh, and there are countries and organizations out there that do not play by the rules. We know that we're not naive, but if there's measures to enforce them and to hold them to account without, um, uh, cutting them off entirely, uh, and I agree that sometimes you have to use force in certain situations, but that's got to be done collaboratively and collectively and intelligently through the law and through the democratic process. I think that is really important. I think that's where Trump is bypassing a lot of the American processes, and there are people allowing him to do that. What I'm saying, just to kind of summarize what I'm saying, is that to be a good, strong leader, a good, strong country, you have to engage, you have to associate yourself, you have to involve, and you have to be in a room with people that disagree with you and have different values and positions, because that's how you influence them for the better. You don't influence them by You know, the self-protectionism and just enforcing it unilaterally because the world will move on. I mean, Canada now, I, I'll tell you right now what's happening with Canada. The economy is, is doing well. Uh, we've had these major hiccups with the, with the, um, uh, the tariffs, but all the— I can't speak for all the Canadians, but I would say the vast majority of Canadians now are looking far beyond America as a trading partner. It will never go back. The relationship's changed forever. I think Canada made a big mistake by putting about 80, 83% of its economy reliant on America. I think just economically that was a mistake. But now the tariffs have woken up what I think is this great Canadian tiger, because we have everything to sell to the world and we now do, we're now doing these deals all around the world, which is good. And so you can't, America can't control the world. Trump can't control the world. He'll try, it just won't work. You have to work with people who collaborate and influence dictators and despots around the world using a collection of instruments and devices and methods and doing it intelligently. So I just think that the church's role here and the responsibility is to get in a room you know, have President Oaks meet with Trump in a room face to face and to have a conversation for the prophet of the church to communicate to the president of the United States and to remind the president of these basic values, these universal values about, you know, conducting oneself in public office and reminding ourselves of the importance of integrity. Surely that is the role like the Pope's doing. Surely that's the role of President Oaks.

Where is he?

He's nowhere. He's not even going on TV to have interviews or conversations. He's in a room, closed, irrelevant, and talking about, yeah, humanitarian is a good thing, but it's not enough. It's just not enough.

All right. I think we're all kind of in agreement here as to what the problem is.

Let, let me reiterate in different language what I said earlier. The, the core of what we're talking about is the message of Jesus, and that message mandates righteousness. Righteousness is not a zero-sum game. It is not partisan. We should have political parties built on a foundation of righteousness. Where they differ is not their degree of righteousness, it's their political outlook. That's fine. We need those counterbalancing voices. But if you have one group that throws out the window all of those core values, that's a five-alarm fire. And we're just now starting to see what the consequences are of so many people in this country having followed that Pied Piper right off the cliff. Because That was not the foundation upon which that edifice was constructed. Yeah, it was not sand, it was quicksand.

Yeah, I agree. The Pied Piper is a great analogy. Um, I want to add to what I said earlier. I want to add to what you said here as well, Greg. Here we are, two regular fellas talking about serious issues, right? You know, these are very serious issues. We're living in a, a time in a, uh, uh, which is dangerous and perilous. We, we're seeing global geopolitical seismic shift, um, which is worrying, right? You know, from a number of different perspectives, we're seeing an opportunity for the church to step in into influence and to communicated its position. We are having this conversation right now, and I believe that the brethren are having this type of conversation that we are having right now. I believe this conversation and much more that we're talking about right now about Trump happens at the apostle level. I have no doubt about that. But where it's not happening, where it needs to be happening, is at the rank and file level. When I in the past tried to bring up the relationship between church and politics in a formal setting, I was shut down. These conversations about the role of the member in public life, and we're told, the church says, be active in public life. We're encouraged, there are programs to get involved with opinion leaders. I've been at those General Authority training sessions where state presidents and bishops have to and required and expected and encouraged to get involved in communities and public life, to take a stand and a position on certain things locally. Uh, been encouraged to do that. And so, uh, that happens outside of the Sunday meetings. What I think needs to happen on a Sunday, and this does not happen, is for the bishop and the state presidents with the support of the General Authority and the leaders to have this conversation that we're having right now, to remind the members of what is right and wrong, what is decent and what is not, and to vote according to your conscience and to vote according to your integrity, to have an open, transparent dialogue with the members in a joint priesthood, Relief Society session, whatever. Including with you, to talk about that member-interested relationship with political life and the local ward and state relationship with local politics, because they're part of the community and they have a say in what goes on and they need to have a say in what's going on. It's part of the political process, part of the democratic process for projects going on or the position that they're taking or whatever, if it's an issue that is to do with morality and ethics and honesty and decency, the members of the church, just as the part of the local community as taxpayers and ratepayers and members of society, also have a role to play as members of the church and to work together for the good, for the better of the community and society. The church does not have those conversations at a local level and doesn't want to open up a can of worms with its local members because it's afraid of, well, you know, we have some Trumpers in the room and we have some liberals and, you know, we don't want to create this big, you know, contention. But you can avoid that by going back to what you said, Greg, by pinning it back, that common denominator of what Christ taught, those values. And if we bring those conversations, we frame it right, and we tie it right back to that, the fulcrum of what we're talking about, then we're able to have those conversations at a local level, grassroots level, to use your term, that will influence the members and the communities and the church for the better. So just to summarize, I know this conversation happening at the apostle level. Do I know?

I don't know.

But I'm confident that they're happening, you know, very robust conversations behind closed doors. They're not happening at the local level, and I think that's where the church needs to show more leadership and more intestinal fortitude to be able to have those conversations about the church's position on certain key political items tied to what Christ taught, you know, the vulnerable, the disadvantaged, etc., and excluded, etc. That universal principle of love needs to be happening at a local level, in my opinion.

Um, let me differentiate between two P words, political and partisan. The church has not just the right, it has the obligation to be political because we live in a political world. It should have paid lobbyists to ensure that its message reaches the corridors of political power. The line is drawn not politically, but partisan. And that's a line that at least after the first half of the 20th century, the church has been pretty good at, at observing. You go back earlier than that when they put an apostle up for US Senate and he served for, what, 5 terms, and that crossed a partisan line. But since the mid-20th century, we've generally been pretty careful as a church not to cross that line. At the same time, you got to be wise as serpents if you're going to be in the political arena. Nothing wrong with that. We deserve some of the best and the brightest minds to be active in that arena on behalf of the church. What we don't need is to cross that line and favor one political party, neither do we want to cross that line of rectitude and start not just supporting, but essentially worshiping somebody whose core ideals could not be a greater contrast to what Jesus taught and was.

No, you're, you're absolutely singing my tune there., and it, it, it's amazing to me cuz I remember in, in 2015, um, and 2016 when Trump was gathering momentum and on his way to getting the nomination, he was very concerned that Utah was the one Republican state that was holding out. Uh, it, it, he, Utah in in the convention and, um, nominated Ted Cruz. Um, Trump came in third, I think, uh, down the list. I mean, because of all of these things you're talking about, Greg.

Yep.

But once Trump became the nominee, the Republican nominee, so many Utahns thought, well, I don't have any other choice. Now, and to our credit, a third-party candidate did better in Utah that year. Evan McMullin got 22% of the vote. Uh, but that's so long ago now in, in the ways of politics. And Utah is hook, line, and sinker all in with Donald Trump, just completely all in. And it's just stunning to me that the kinds of values you're, both of you are talking talking about. Just don't matter. That partisanship for so many members of the church— partisanship transcends worship. It's more important. People are Republicans first and Latter-day Saints second, a distant second. Yeah, you saw that in COVID. You know, he's a fallen prophet because he's telling us to mask when we know the right-wingers tell us that that's a hoax and it's all, I mean, it's just, it's just, it's deeply depressing to me and a major trial of my faith still.

Yeah. I would like to query people to complete a sentence, the middle of which has the word, but the front of it is, well, yes, he's this and this and this, but. And how do they complete that sentence will be very telling.

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. That's, that's, uh, that would be a great question. It'd be great to do a survey and a questionnaire. I wonder if the church has done this, you know, I wonder if the, I wonder if the church has with all the questionnaires that it's done and all the surveys, it, it, I think it, I think it has tried to insert some of those questions if I'm not mistaken. It, without getting too political, or maybe it hasn't. Do you know if it tries to find out where the members' position is, or does it not do that and has not done that because it already knows that most of the members support Trump? I think it's probably the latter. I think the church leaders probably know that the majority of the members are kind of Trump supporters.

I don't know now, Ian, but going back decades, We knew a sociologist at BYU who was on the research correlation committee. It was an arm of the general correlation committee, and it consisted of professionals, sociologists, psychologists, statisticians. They would do these extensive surveys on behalf of the church. But he said most of the results you'll never see, in large measure because they didn't tell the story that the brethren hoped they would tell. I suspect, given all its resources, that that has continued, whether it's in that form or some other form, I don't know. But they have very sophisticated algorithms they can apply apply and look at any question they want and get the feedback. The question is, so what? What do they do with that? If they just put it on the shelf because it didn't conform with what they thought it should, that's not good. Yeah. If instead it's a corrective for them, then that's good.. But if it is, let's see the evidence of that because I haven't seen much change. Jim, you live in the epicenter. You sing in the choir, literally.

I do. I do.

Do you see responses coming out of headquarters that indicate that there is an acknowledgement Houston, we have a problem?

I don't see it publicly. I've seen it privately. I've had several meetings. I was working on a project with the church PR department and had several meetings with people in the church PR department who I don't want to name names. None of them were General Authorities. Everybody accuses me of speaking for the brethren. These were not the brethren, but these were church bureaucrats. And they, the amount of data they have is staggering and it's down to the granular level. I mean, they do research on everything and they have all of the data at their fingertips. Uh, the people in the PR department that I've talked to, we didn't talk about Trump or we didn't talk about politics.

Yeah.

We, but we talked about online. Behavior. And the brethren are wildly concerned of the fact that if you go online, particularly on social media, particularly on X, formerly Twitter, if you go online and you don't know anything about the church, the first people you're going to meet are the absolute worst representatives of the church that we could possibly have. They're white supremacists. They're Lori Daybell, Chad Daybell types. They're lunatics, and they're vicious. They think they're doing the church this wonderful service by just eviscerating anybody that they don't like. And the church is very concerned about this. The church has all this data, and I would just be flabbergasted if they did not have partisan data too. But one of the things, when I was talking to somebody who was saying, you know, I was saying it's really frustrating that as people continue to disaffiliate with the church, that we're not doing these more inclusive things. They said, what are you talking about? Haven't you seen the church's numbers? The church is growing by leaps and bounds. We had more convert baptisms than we've ever had. I said, yeah, that's a really impressive number, and the church has told us what that number is because it makes the church look good. Can you give me the number of how many of those baptisms are still active a year after baptism?

Or 6 months?

Or 6 months? Or 2 weeks? Can you tell me what percentage of people on the rolls actually show up at church on Sunday throughout the world? The church absolutely has those numbers. Those numbers are taken every sacrament meeting by the ward clerk. We know what all those numbers are, but the church doesn't release them because they don't make the church look good.

Yeah, uh, more than a decade ago I had a conversation with one of the brethren who I will not name. He said in Latin America at that time, the likelihood that a male convert baptized in youth or young adulthood would remain active and be ordained to the office of elder was 5%.

That, that doesn't surprise me, actually.

Yeah, neither me.

So, yeah, I, I'm sure Ian, the church knows what's going on here. And I am all the things, the other thing, uh, Elder Stephen Snow, when I, when, when my father lost, I went to work for the Democrat who was running against Mike Lee. And so I managed to lose two elections during one election cycle. It was great. Uh, but Sam Granado was the Democratic candidate and the church assigned Elder Stephen Snow, who is a Democrat, to be our unofficial advisor. And Elder Snow told us the church is really concerned that we have a reputation internationally as a Republican church and would very much like to see credible Democratic Latter-day Saints elected to office. Now, he was very open about that in the privacy of Sam Granado's deli where we were all meeting. But you never hear anything like that where anybody else can hear it. You don't hear that. You don't even hear that in stake conferences, and you certainly don't hear it in general conference. But the church knows this is a problem. The church, the church is paralyzed with inaction. I think there, because I think there are so many, the fact that the Twelve can't do anything unless they're entirely united. Means that there are so many people who want to approach this problem in very different ways, and invariably you just get paralysis of analysis.

Yeah.

No action.

I, I have a question. Can I alleviate my anxiety over not being able to stretch this conversation into a full hour? We were worried about that.

That's true.

Yeah, we, we were, you know, you know what's interesting? There's, I've tried to join up the dots here. Uh, when, uh, Trump supported the Conservative leader in the Canadian elections about a year ago, Canadians who were mostly liberal, not entirely, mostly liberal, reacted very aggressively and made sure a liberal that we've got right now was in power. That lost the conservative guy the position. The idea for Canadian members of the church to come to the realization that the Mormon Church is a Republican church, which it is, let's say as it is, the data seems to support that. I think if the Canadian and many other members outside of America, United States, realize that officially or had some sense of that reliability of that, I think there would be a, there'd be a reaction. I think there would be for sure. That's the first thing. The second thing is I completely agree with you both and believe entirely that the church with its sophistication, intelligence, and resources has got extraordinary data that it maintains and tracks and monitors in terms of politics and people running for politics who are members of the church. I know having seen that, uh, direct in Scotland, for example, where we had a, a member of the church run for senior public office. The church is very much involved and very much aware what's going on there. The, the, um, the, the, the, there's two more things real quick. The third thing I wanna try and finish what Greg, what you said earlier about, um, just help me remind me what, how you said it, where you talked about, um, asking a question in a certain way about a, you know, Trump individual that, you know, he's this and this, you know, speaking to a, uh, a member of the general public, or even, I think you said a member of the church.

Yeah. To fill in the rest of the sentence that ends with because.

Because, and I want to try and answer that attempt, put myself into an active Republican member mindset, because I know I know many of my friends active in the church in Utah, Republican, pro-Trump. I won't mention the names, and I've had some interesting conversations and along the same lines, keeping in mind the people that voted for America, uh, sorry, the people that, uh, voted for Trump, the Americans that voted for Trump in America are on the hook for Trump. Can't get away from that., right? So those Americans who voted for Trump are on the hook, including some of my friends. But to complete that, uh, sentence, but based on my conversations with my friends, they would say and have said, but, you know, like it'd be a convicted felon, for example, but we need him right now to change the political corruption that the Democrats have, um, uh, uh, presided over and created. We need him because we need to be stronger in the world. We need Trump because we have to deal with corruption in American politics, in American life. We needed to put America first, America first, America first, and put the American people first and to, um, push back against the globalization, which to be fair, There is evidence that globalization's, of over globalization, uh, policy and programs to an extent have overlooked certain countries and certain individuals. There's certainly evidence to support that, but those are some of the responses that I've received, uh, that I would get back, that I have got back in regards to, um, asking that question of finishing sentence you've described, that the Americans that voted for him and still support him, still believe in Trump, even though he goes through this difficult, you know, a few bumps along the road, so to speak, and let him do what he wants to do because in the end we're going to be a better country and we need him right now because, you know, the past little bit has not gone so well in their eyes. The last thing I want to say, which I would love to talk about, you could Let me pause here for a second, Ian.

My follow-up question to those folks would be, so how's that going?

Yeah, absolutely. And I've done that. That's been my follow-up question. What do you think that's going like with gas prices and with—

How's the drained swamp doing?

Yeah. Yeah.

Well, I keep seeing things like, you know, they told me if I voted for Kamala, I would have a war in Iran and high gas prices. And they were right because I voted for Kamala and we have, we're in a war with Iran and have high gas prices. Yes.

Yes.

So I have gone back and I said, you know, what do you think? What do you think? You know, uh, what have you got? What do you think now? What are you getting now? And they still justify it because they think is part, Trump is part of this crusade, this American crusade to set things right, to set the world right, to do whatever it takes to break the law or not. I've even had people tell me that he'll do what it takes in the Constitution, outside the Constitution, as long as he gets to where they think America needs to be globally, eternally, it doesn't matter. Break some eggs, et cetera, beat some people up, et cetera, do whatever it takes, what is necessary. And that's why we need Trump because all the other leaders were weak and pathetic. And Trump is the only one that can deal with the issue. I just wanna add one other quick comment, which is I'd love to talk about, and we may not have time, and it's this thing that I think underpins this Trump doctrine about America being chosen and America first, et cetera. And it goes far beyond that. It goes to who, it goes to the very nature of Trump, who he is inside at the very core. And in, um, 2019, and And I've checked my sources here. I think this is correct. And if it's not, shoot me down. He famously declared that he said, I am the chosen one at a 2019 press conference trade with China. And over time he has set himself up as the savior almost and redeemer of America. So you can see how this political, uh, ear—

take the A word out of that sentence. It's not almost.

Right, right.

It, it is.

He's done that deliberately and he set himself up as a prophet, like a savior, a savior of, of America and American, uh, political, uh, positions. In fact, he went further and he created this AI-generated image on social media showing him or depicting it as in a glowing Jesus-like pose.

Yep.

Later defended it saying that, um, it, it, it, it meant to portray him as a doctor with a Red Cross to make people feel better. I, I think that's total bullshit. So you've got this individual, um, who thinks he's the savior of the world, who's the savior of America, and that no matter what he does, it's sanctioned by God. He's even said that, uh, you know, angels were there protecting against those, uh, two assassinations, and people believe that, So it goes to these kind of extremes. So my question, if you're interested in responding to that, what's the response from President Oaks on that? Is he got a competing prophet on the earth today with President Trump? What's Oaks' position on Trump claiming, or at least depicting himself as this religious second coming leader, this savior that's going to save the world and Save America, and it's just, it's just a new, just weird. I mean, I'm laughing.

You've asked a rhetorical question we can't answer because we're not Dallin Oaks. But if I were to answer it for me, I would say give me the podium of the conference center and let's have a strong talk about false prophets. Who will deceive the very elect.

But the problem is, if you're not specific enough, Greg, if you don't point out which false prophets you're talking about, then all the Trumpers will think you're talking about Biden. It is so— unless they just specifically say, we are talking about this, we are talking about this man, we are talking about this event. It is way too easy for everybody to sidestep and say, oh, he's talking about somebody else, he's not talking about me.

Yep, you're right, you're right, because that's what people do, you know. If they don't, because a lack of specificity on a whole range of topics and issues of doctrine and policy with the church, what happens? We talked about it last night on the live episode. Members are then, uh, you have to work it out of them themselves, interpret it themselves. What does this brethren mean? Without that direct, blunt, specific message naming Trump and providing examples where he's broken the law or been breached with this or broken some, you know, moral coordinates, et cetera. Without that specificity, members will automatically think, especially MAGA members and members who are Republican and pro-Trump, they won't think about Trump. They still, they think Trump is some kind of. Political savior. You know, the prophet is the spiritual savior. Trump is the political savior that will save the, you know, save American, American, you know, so-called American values, etc. It's just this silence from Oaks is just deafening. And but what an opportunity to get onto that podium, Greg and Jim, to be specific and to call it out and to be, you know, to be unafraid. What's that quote that Thatcher gave to the Queen when the Queen was concerned that Thatcher was probably, you know, shaking things up too much? This is what Thatcher quoted. She quoted a McKay, a poem from McKay, not David O. McKay, another McKay, a Scottish poet. She says, Thatcher quoted this to the Queen back in the early '80s because the Queen were concerned that Thatcher, you know, Thatcher, are you creating all these enemies around the world? Thatcher said this, quoting the poem: You have no enemies, you say. Alas, my friend, the boast is poor. He who has mingled in the fray of duty that brave endure must have made foes. If you have none, small is the work that you have done. You have hit no traitor on the hip. You've dashed no cup from perjured lip. You've never turned the wrong to right. You've been a coward. The fight.

Amen. I, I will end my part with a simple question that I will not answer. Question is, who is the wheat and who is the chaff?

Well, and I will end, uh, building on that a little bit by saying If you think you're the wheat, uh, reconsider.

And I will end by reminding ourselves and our wonderful viewers and listeners of what Greg Prince has taught us today, remind us today, is the, the life and example of Jesus Christ, the very foundational meaning of his life, who he was, what it was about, what he tried to do, what he did do. And he was fearless to the end. It cost him his life, but that was the price that he was prepared to pay for doing the right things. And so I, I, go ahead, Greg.

I'll, I'll jump back in with my final final statement. And I've told the story before, so the listeners who don't remember it can go back and find it. Quoting Grant McMurray, the former president of the Community of Christ, if we had known which third, we would have done it sooner.

Yeah, that had reference to the ordination of women, right? And a third of the members left.

Yep. So gentlemen, uh, another extraordinary, wonderful, robust, honest, blunt conversation. Again, I hope our listeners have enjoyed it as much as we have. Grateful to you both. I just love these conversations and I learned so much from you both. I want to thank you, Jim, as always. He's just such a wonderful partner in Inside Out, a full, complete partner with incredible, valuable contributions. And Greg, as always, we want to thank you again sincerely for being part of the Inside Out program. You're a fixture, if you like, a major fixture in our program. We're grateful to you. We honor you. And we're grateful that we're able to have this very honest and open and constructive conversation. We want the church to get better and improve. Of course we do. We want it to do well and be successful. And to do that, I think we need to be able to have these conversations that we're having. So thank you, Greg, and thank you, Jim, and thank you to all of our listeners on Inside Out.

Well, I just have to leave with the thought that in my house, fixtures are things that you hang on the wall. So I gotta think about that.

Oh, well, thanks to both of you. This has been great.

Thank you.