The John Sweeney Interview

Hello and welcome to the latest episode of Inside Out. I'm Ian. This is Jim. And Jim, we have an extraordinary guest with us tonight. Uh, we have, uh, John Sweeney, who is a leading British investigative journalist and an author. He was educated at the London School of Economics. Uh, John spent 12 years at the Observer paper covering wars in more than 60 countries before joining the BBC in 2001 as a reporter for Panorama and Newsnight, where he specialized in human rights abuses and authoritarian regimes. In 2007, he investigated the Church of Scientology for Panorama, and in 2012, he made the BBC documentary The Mormon Candidate, which examined the LDS Church through the lens of Mitt Romney's candidacy. And he, uh, featured a famous or infamous interview with Elder Jeffrey Holland, who Matt and I know members of their, of his family. He left the BBC in October in 2019 and now works as an independent journalist and is currently writing or has concluded writing a book. John, welcome to Inside Out.

A pleasure to be here.

Wonderful. A little bit about your book, if you will. What is it and what are you writing about?

It's about Nigel Farage, who, for American people who don't know who he is, he's kind of Mr. Brexit. He was the man who, as leader of the UKIP party, was perhaps the single, the politician singularly responsible for Brexit. He led a campaign and essentially he's further to the right than the Conservative Party, and his pressure and the success in particular at the European elections pushed David Cameron to saying yes to a referendum. When that referendum happened, Britain by a very small margin voted to leave the European Union. And the problem is that since then our economy's been in trouble. Now Farage is now, he keeps on changing the name of his party, but it's always the same kind of vehicle. And Farage is the leader of Reform UK, which is the most popular political party in Britain at the moment. And if the opinion polls are right, he could well become our next prime minister at the next general election. Now, um, there's a lot of concern because he was, uh, the evidence is compelling that he used racist and antisemitic language when he was at Dulwich College. And that's a story that's been out there reported by, uh, The Guardian and, um, my friend Michael Crick, uh, who first told the story in 2013. But also, and this is why I'm here in a sense, is that Nigel Farage has got a problem with vetting. Lots of his candidates for councillors, they get elected on the Reform ticket and then we find out that they've been extremely abusive on social media or even worse, and they've had to stand down. But if we're looking at MPs or MEPs, 3 of them, um, were, uh, elected for Farage vehicles, 2 for UKIP, 1 for Reform. And 3 of them, these 3 in particular, were, um, were convicted and sentenced to prison for offenses of dishonesty. The one that's of interest to us is Nathan Gill, who, uh, last, um, at the end of last year, was convicted of taking bribes from a Russian spy. Now, this isn't quite treason, but it's next door to it. And the question for Nigel Farage, who might become at the next general election, our next Prime Minister in Britain, is why are you so hopeless at vetting? Why do you keep on selecting people, um, for your political party who then get on, who end up in prison? But in particular on Nathan Gill, what on earth were you doing promoting this man because he was the leader of Reform UK in Wales? Why did you promote him? And what on earth was he doing essentially receiving bribes from a Russian spy? The name of the spy was Oleg Oshin. But also the interesting thing about Nathan Gill, which is why I'm here, was that he was, for quite a time, a bishop in the Mormon Church. So there are questions about Nigel Farage. Why did he promote this man in the way that he did? Why didn't he do a proper check? How on earth did he become so corrupted that he was happy to do what the Russians wanted him to do for money?, but also there are questions about, for the Mormon Church, why on earth was this man, um, because if you look at Nathan Gill's CV, there are some serious questions about that too, as well.

John, thank you for that. Uh, you and I, when we chatted last time, I think I've made reference to the fact that the church is, um, strategic and, uh, quite intelligent at trying to, in my opinion, influence politics. And if it has a member of the church that is a potential candidate and it aligns with the Mormon Church's, political, doctrine, then this, this, I understand, I believe there's quite a bit of support for individuals getting into politics who are members of the church. I'd love to get back into the Nathan Gill, a little bit later in the conversation. But, but the, the two, I think the one main topic that we'd look to get into with you is your, Um, you did some extraordinary work with this Church of Scientology that Jim would like to have a chat with us about. But in 2012, uh, you made, uh, a documentary, uh, called Modern Candidate. What was the background to that? And you were involved in the decision-making then. What, what was it that attracted you to that story with, at the time, with Mitt Romney, who was running for the president of the United States? Can you give us the backstory? And your, uh, perspective on how that, uh, unfolded.

Yeah, well, it kind of starts with Scientology because in 2007 we made this, um, film called, um, Scientology and Me. And the thing is, if you investigate Scientology, they will investigate you. And they were very, very heavy and they came to our hotel at midnight. They, um, they, uh, attacked me for verbally for, um, interviewing people who had left the church who were saying rude things about the church. They're saying that it was brainwashing and blackmailing. By the way, there are two court decisions, um, one in Britain, one in California, where judges have talked about the church blackmailing and brainwashing. So this isn't just me. The church, by the way, says that I'm psychotic and a liar and a drunk. Um, They eventually, after a week of them really, really hounding me, I lost my temper with them and I exploded. And you can look it up on YouTube to this day, 41 seconds. And I, as one American observer said, boy, that Sweeney can holler. So the purpose anyway, so certainly in the mindset of BBC management, I had become the man who does strange cults and weird American things, which they pass off as religion. By the way, this is kind of, um, a simple, um, America or the United States of America, um, the Founding Fathers and the, you know, the people in the Pilgrim ships were they have a deep belief in freedom of religion, and that is part of the reason why the pilgrims sort of set sail in the Mayflower. The problem is that if the mafia or the Coca-Cola Corporation or a blend of those two decides it's a religion, does the American system let that happen without question? And so in a strange way, I think people in Britain and in Europe are way more skeptical about what is or what isn't a religion than people in the United States are. And so what you've got anyway, so when Mitt Romney was selected to be to be the Republican candidate. The BBC said, Sweeney, you're the expert on these, this kind of stuff. Because the thing about him is, yes, he's the Republican candidate, but he's a Mormon and have a look at Mormonism. And I didn't know, I was conscious of it and I knew when I was at school, I knew some, I had some friends who were Mormons and I liked them as human beings and all of that. So my attitude was, was way more sympathetic, um, than it was to Scientology from the get-go, because Scientology has a pretty dark reputation in Britain, deservedly so, I think. But I was much more sort of easygoing about Mormonism until I started to talk to ex-Mormons, and I was, um, I became pretty shocked by some simple things. The first of which is that if you define this for a cult, there are 3 big ones, that it has some kind of messiah, that it does brainwashing of some kind, and it does harm. Now, the test of the harm is simple. If you leave the church, the Latter-day Saints, the Mormon Church, if you leave, do you get shunned? Does the church tell your family members to the black sheep, don't shun the black sheep. Now if that happens, that's wrong. And by the way, I was brought up a Catholic and I'm a bad Catholic, I think. But I know because I don't go to church very often, very, very rarely or whatever, but I still have some sense of it. But I also know that when I stopped going to church, my parents, you know, carried on talking to me. It was just one of those things, you know, that, for example, I mean, I'm not saying I'm a complete atheist, but I've got some faith, but it's certainly not very strong, but I was never shunned. And so a church that shuns, in my view, does harm if you seek to leave it. So that's one test. And I went to Utah and I met, for example, a former intelligence officer in the CIA who was a very fine bloke, and he was deeply wounded by his experience of leaving the Mormons because of what happened to him afterwards. And that's a simple indicator. And then the other thing was, does it have some kind of Messiah? Now, Scientology has this guy called David Miscavige, and there are terrible allegations against him which he denies, that Miscavige goes around hitting people and is abusive to his, um, to senior members of the Church of Scientology. Now, Holland wasn't like that, and the, um, the charges against, or the criticisms of Holland weren't as bad as they were against David Miscavige. That's completely true. I would not compare them to say like is like, but there are echoes. So what I found was that Elder Holland was authoritarian and he didn't like the fact that I was asking him questions. I was putting him and the Mormon Church under scrutiny. And his reaction was not the kind of reaction I would get, I think, from the Archbishop of Canterbury, or even if I was ever to do so, the current Pope or whatever. There was something I thought wrong and unseemly and out of kilter with a man who is, I think at that time, the leader of the Mormon Church or one, a very senior figure in it, and his attitude towards somebody who's exercising a bit of scrutiny on it.

Right. I served, Jim and I served with Elder Holland's son, Matt Holland, in Scotland as missionaries. And we have nothing but affection for Matt. You know Matt, Jim, and we know the family indirectly and we, our experience, certainly when I was in the church and I resigned, by the way, and just so you know, I was shunned immediately. I lost a community overnight as soon as I asked questions and I decided to investigate further, I was shut down. And once I decided to resign, the almost entire church cut me off, which is, which is pretty awful.

But did that include, by the way, Ian, did that include family members?

Yeah, some family, some of the relationships in my family have been strained. Yeah, there's been pretty strong reaction. We kind of repaired things because it's on my wife's side who are members of the church. And been members of the church in the UK for 3 generations, which is, uh, rare in the UK. In America, it's different. Um, you know, Jim comes from a long— right, Jim comes from the original apostles. We'll get to Jim in a second. But, um, so that was my experience, and it happened immediately, happened quickly. But when we— Jim and I served in our missions in Scotland back in the '80s, we knew Matt, and he was a fine missionary, wonderful man. And I've worked indirectly with Elder Holland. But that interview, when I saw that interview that you did with Jeffrey Holland, it was an absolute train wreck. And for me, that was just an absolute eye-opener of insight into how a prophet, apostle and a prophet, that's what Elder Holland claimed to be. And I watched, I was advised, John, to watch his body language. So when I watched it and I listened to you in the interview, and then I kind of went over it again, I focused on Elder Holland's body language, his hands. The questions you asked were brilliant and he was extremely uncomfortable. Uh, what, how did that happen? That interview came about and what's your, uh, when you finished that after the interview, what was your take on the Mormon Church and Elder Holland in that experience?

Well, I can remember wanting to go for a drink and I can remember finding it hard, uh, because I was in Utah. Um, and that kind of irritated me. I mean, it's, it's my job. Well, essentially what you do is you go and find people, um, if they exist, who, um, who tell you stories, which you then put to the authorities and say, okay, what's happening here now? Um, So, you know, I don't go around, um, monstering nice old ladies who help out at Oxfam or, you know, uh, spend their time looking after cats and, and watering their gardens. That's fine. You know, and people have a right to, uh, believe. And I, and let's be clear, I respect people's right to, um, to religious belief. Um, and I, and I would fight to uphold that people have a right to believe in, um, in their religious faith that They do. And I've been to North Korea where atheism is officially enforced and it's a horrible place. And I know this sounds weird, but I know that North Korea will be truly free if one day there is a Church of Scientology and a Mormon Church in Pyongyang. Right? So we're clear about that, that I'm not a bigot. At the same time, I think that if an organization has got billions of pounds and millions of followers like Scientology, like the Mormon Church, then it ought to be strong and big enough to cope with criticism and deal with people, or rather not deal, deal is the wrong verb, and behave towards people who wish to leave the church in a decent and civilized way. And so what I found in the course of research was that there was a case for the Mormon Church to answer, that shunning was real and it was cruel. And in a weird way, that the higher up you were or the closer you were to the origin story of the church, the fact if you'd been a relative of the early apostles and that, that you got it harder.

Yeah.

That you, um, you got more grief and this felt to be wrong. Yeah. And, and that's, so the origin of the interview with Holland is, hey, what about X? What about, what about this guy? What about that guy? And I'd met these people and they told me their stories that they were, had been brought up, you know, uh, as a Mormon. Uh, they had a long history of through generations back of belief and faith in the Mormon Church. They'd lost their faith and then they'd been treated disgracefully. And frankly, Elder Holland didn't have a good answer because the charges against Mormon Church, they would shun people who would leave, were bang on. By the way, I was so Fascinated and appalled by this, I went on to write a novel called Cold, which is about Vladimir Putin and his, or a character like Vladimir Putin. It's about Vladimir Putin and his hold on Russia, but it's also about a former deputy head of the CIA who'd been brought up in the Mormon Church and then fallen out. And part of the backstory of the novel is how cruel the Mormon Church was to its apostates, the people who say, right, I've had enough. And by the way, in the 21st century, I do not think that's right.

This is fantastic. Jim Bennett, you have an extraordinary history in relationship with the early church leaders. You have prophets.

Firsthand, but yes.

Firsthand, but in terms of your family history, ancestry, your great-grandfather, you speak to that. And also you have quite a distinct relationship with politics, McMonaghan, your father. What's your, in that context, on those two points, what's your response to what John's been sharing with us so far.

Well, no, I, I'm really fascinated, uh, John, by your reaction, by your experience with Elder Holland. I remember watching that, that special and seeing that you were very much comparing, uh, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to the Church of Scientology, and I didn't think the one-to-one comparison, uh, really quite worked. And I think that Certainly Jeffrey R. Holland was, was more respectful and kinder to you than Tommy Davis, per se. And, you know, the Scientologists that you were dealing with. But what, what I think is fascinating is that since that interview, there has not been any sort of credible journalist that has been given access to an apostle or to a member of the First Presidency. Way back when— well, way back when, maybe 20, 30 years ago— Gordon B. Hinckley was the president of the church, and he went on 60 Minutes and was grilled by Mike Wallace. He was a frequent guest of Larry King's. But since then, that kind of access to the press has been limited, and I think after Elder Holland's frankly disastrous performance in his interview with you. Um, the church has sort of backtracked. The church has kind of said, okay, we're not going to do this anymore. Um, how difficult was it for you to get that access, and did you have a sense that Elder Holland was sort of going off the rails while you were talking to him, or is that an assessment that maybe you came to later, or maybe you haven't come to that assessment.

Well, so, um, I wasn't aware that since that interview, um, they've, uh, the church has, uh, closed up like a clam. Actually, to be fair, um, I've got a bit of a track record of this because the, the Church of Scientology opened up for us in, um, 2007 and then has never given an interview or, um, I mean, this was Tommy Davis, not Miscavige, but even so, but they'd closed down. I have to say that I also, after the murder by car bomb of Daphne Caruana Galizia, the wonderful investigative journalist in Malta, I gave, I did an interview with the then Prime Minister of Malta, Joseph Muscat, and I gave him a lick with the rough edge of my tongue. And he hasn't given an interview to an international journalist since. So I've now, I've done that 3 times. I'm, I'll stick it in my memoirs. But like, so one version of this, Jim, is I'm just a really irritating prick and, uh, and I, I'm not, I'm good at winding people up, but, but I think to be fair, all I was doing was in the same ways, it's the same procedure as with Scientology is that you talk to people who've left, what are their experiences? And then you say, what about these people? And I've met these people and I can vividly remember there was an ex-CIA guy who I found was a very good man and I just thought, okay, he's had some difficulties with the church and church belief and the church or establishment have behaved to him in a cruel fashion and Elder Holland just couldn't handle that. By the way, it's also true to say that I think that Mitt Romney was a good politician. This is my own personal view. I've left the BBC so I can say this stuff now. Way better than Donald Trump, way better than Donald Trump. So if Mitt Romney had won, I don't think America would be in the mess that it is now and the world would be in the mess it is now. So let's be clear, I'm not You know, I believe in the free people's freedom to choose their own religious belief. And, um, and that also applies to Mormonism, difficult as it is. It also applies to the Church of Scientology. But at the same time, with that expression of, of, of, of belief, um, or rather, um, I believe that people have a right to, to choose their faith if they so wish. Also that those organizations, big organizations, big churches, whatever, this is true of Islam, of Buddhism, um, et cetera, et cetera, have a duty to be open to scrutiny because they're about, uh, getting people closer to God and, and, and that should be open to scrutiny. And if it's not, there's trouble, I feel. So, Um, and it felt, it felt like, um, Elder Holland, yes, and I get it, the Scientology is far worse and far more, um, obviously poisonous than the Mormon Church. But even so, there was something weird after that interview. Um, we were doing the edit back in London and, um, there's, um, a rather creepy and sinister PR company called APCO, A-P-C-O. The Mormon Church hired Apco and they found there's like 18,000 people in the BBC. It's a big organization. One of the people, a junior person in, in not a, a front public-facing, uh, department, you know, nothing like a reporter at Panorama like me. But this guy was a member of the Mormon Church, I think, and he managed to get, um, a couple of Mormons into the office of my editor, the editor of the program I was working on, and hand her, deliver a letter complaining about me. Now, that was actually more impressive than the Church of Scientology, and they can walk through walls.

Walk through walls?

They say that Scientology have got either a— They have power over mass, energy, space, and time. They can walk through walls. But it was the Mormon Church that got this letter. Right. And my editor was a woman, a lovely and good person, but she was really spooked out by this. I mean, by the way, it's perfectly possible to email it or post it. This was the hand delivery. She wasn't there, and there's a letter on her desk sitting on a laptop or whatever. Waiting for her. So look, you know, look at our power. And that was creepy. The other thing which was weird about, and I write about this in my novel Cold, was the back history of Mormonism, which again, I wasn't properly aware of, but there's this wonderful professor of, I think it's Assyrianology at Oxford University called Archibald Sayce. Uh, who wrote in something like about 1890 when he, he was asked to analyze Joseph Smith's, I think it's Joseph Smith's stuff where he finds the, uh, what looks like, you know, ancient scrolls and this stuff. If, if my memory serves correctly, um, what he did was he, uh, well, according to the professor at Oxford in 1890s, 1900s, something like this. Archibald Sayce, it's an impudent fraud. And so what he was doing was taking Egyptian Dead Sea Scrolls stuff, or no, sorry, Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Yeah, this was the Book of Abraham, I think you're talking.

Yes, the Book of Abraham is according to a professor at Oxford University, long since dead, but this guy Archibald Sayce said, this is an impudent fraud. So the basis of the religion, according to critics, and I'm a critic, but is a fraud. What really happened was the young whites, Europeans, British people, many others, but they were upset that there was no, there wasn't there was, there were no churches, no religious tradition as far as they could tell in the whole of, of, of, of America. Now obviously the Native Americans have got their own thing and their own, but, but nothing that they could plug into. And then there was a kind of a longing to, to have something. And then Joseph Smith comes along and says, hey, okay, so we're, we've, we've got Um, Jesus came to North America and, and, and then, and then people wanted this. Okay, what have we got? You know, what's, what's the substance of this? And the substance of this is a fraud. So now listen, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm a bad Catholic. Uh, you can cynically, or cynics would say I believe in a magic baby, and I, I kind of do, and I, I feel So I'm not saying all of the traditions of the Mormon Church are horrible, but there are questions to be asked about it. There are questions to be asked about its origins and the questions to be asked about its behavior right now. And the thing that's obvious to a journalist like me is simple. Is if you leave the church, you should not be treated cruelly for doing so. And that happens to this day.

It does for sure. I, I like your comment earlier that, you know, a, a mature, intelligent organization, uh, so there's nothing to hide, would be open and transparent. And in my experience, the Mormon Church is not that, uh, almost at all on its it's very good at promoting its doctrine and all the resources to bring people in. But once you start asking questions, the wrong kind of questions, as I was told, then you get into hot water. Just going back to the Holland interview, which is an absolute train wreck, and for our viewers and listeners, if you haven't seen it, you just go online and look at it. It's just extraordinary. I've never seen anything like that ever. It is just mind-blowing. Um, in the letter that—

by the way, Ian, I do this all the time. It's what I do.

Right. Okay. Well, that is a snapshot.

I'm joking. I'm joking. I'm joking.

Okay. So in the letter, what was he complaining about? You know, when you asked him a question about, you said that you'd met with people who'd left the church who described the church as a cult. You remember his reaction on that? He did not like that, did he? Right. And his hands are all over the place. He was pretty pissed off at that, frankly. And then he said, why don't you get them and come into the room and then we'll talk, et cetera, et cetera. And then at the end, he said, you know, if they think they're a cult, et cetera, we're not a cult. We, you know, I'm not a dodo. I've read a few good books, et cetera. We, we 15 million are, I was just, I just couldn't believe those words were coming out of his mouth. Um, I presume he didn't get those people together. Um, you know, that invitation, he did not like being described as a cult, but what was in the letter that he complained about when you got that? You read that?

I was, it's, it's been so long and, um, um, that kind of stuff is like water off a duck's back. So the question is, is the Mormon Church a cult? And again, you know, there's a wonderful anti-cult guy in the States called Rick Ross, and he defined it for me, that it has some kind of messiah, that it does harm, and there is some kind of brainwashing. Now, on the Messiah point, I don't think that Elder Holland was, is like David Miscavige, but he is a bit of an authoritarian and he didn't like scrutiny. Secondly, it does harm and the ex-members say they've been treated cruelly and I've met them and I know that to be true. And thirdly, the brainwashing. Well, the brainwashing is when you say to a family member, somebody you, you like or even love. I'm not going to talk to you ever again, or I'm going to give you a hard time because you've, your view of the church is, you know, you've left. That is a kind of brainwashing.

Yeah.

Yeah. So I, I, I'm not saying that it's a cult like Scientology, but there are echoes or there are identifiers pointing to a cult. Now, for example, I've also met the Dalai Lama, the God King of Tibet, a long time ago. And what he said to me was, listen, if you're critical of Tibetan Buddhism, go ahead. I've also been, I was in, um, because the America is currently having a war with Iran. I was in Iran in '92 and, um, a terrible thing happened, um, in the early days of the Iranian Revolution when the, um, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards killed the son of the Anglican Bishop of Isfahan. And there's about 30 members of the Church of England in Iran. These are old servants or whatever of the British Empire, of a British businessman or whatever, who at some point converted to the Church of England and have stayed true to that. But 30 people in the country of what, 60, 70, 80 million people, it's, or now it's 90 million people. And I said to the governor of Isfahan, who is some revolutionary connected with the Revolutionary Guards, why on earth did you find it necessary to kill the son of the Anglican Bishop of Isfahan? So I'm, I'm not just picking on Mormonism. I want to know why a great big religion with a lot of money and a lot of followers, millions of followers, has to behave in this cruel way. And as you can see from the interview, that, um, the Mormon Church didn't have a good answer to my questions. And from the way they played the, you know, the, the letter, and what they're trying to do is put pressure on my editor. So get rid of me, fire me. This is what Scientology got John Travolta to phone up the, um, Director General of the BBC 8 times to get me the sack. Um, and, um, each time, uh, the Director General was in a meeting, and so his team took turns to say to Travolta, no, I'm terribly sorry, uh, while secretly dancing along to Saturday Night Fever. Anyway, I'm joking. Now, Elder Holland didn't do that, but they got the letter in.

So who was the letter from specifically? Was it from—

I can't remember. I can't remember. But it was essentially, it was saying that I was out of control. I was unfair and I was wrong. And I would say, phooey, tell that to the fairies. There are real people who were in the church, the Mormon Church, who've left, who have now been, you know, they've got family members who don't talk to them. That's wrong. Get with the program. Understand in the 21st century, you don't have to do this. It's a great big organization. It's big enough that the great big PR disaster of the Mormon Church is of the Book of Mormon. Because I mean, like, it's, you know, I've seen it. And there are moments of real artistic truth in that. But the Mormon Church is big enough to say, okay, we're letting this lie. We're not going to get very upset about this. We're going to let the critics and the people who poke fun have their moment, off they go. And good on, actually, good on the Mormon Church, or maybe it can't do anything about it, it's just worked out that it lives, it functions inside a free society. So if it does respect the rules of a free society, which is simple, is that if you're in a church, people will respect that. At the same time, if they want to leave or if somebody wants to leave, don't be cruel to them.

I remember specifically in that interview when you asked Elder Holland about shunning and he insisted that that's not our, one of our practices. That's not a word we use. I would sooner cut off my right arm than shun one of my children if they were to leave the church. And I, I think actually that, that is an honest answer. There is no direct instruction to shun people who leave, but in practice, in culture, uh, that, that it— that is certainly something that happens. And I think the church has gotten better particularly since the time that you conducted that interview, and there have been more things said to sort of discourage that practice, but that practice does continue. But the thing that I found so powerful about your interview is that the church continues to pretend that it has a choice as to whether or not it's going to confront all of these difficult issues. I am still an active member of the church. I'm actually a member of the what used to be called the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, although that's now the Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square. I believe that there are answers to a lot of these hard questions, but they're answers that require an acknowledgment that the church is fallible, that the church is capable of making mistakes, and that is not an acknowledgment that the church is willing to do specifically. Um, so it— in your memory of that actual interview, um, do you find Elder Holland's answer to that question in any way satisfying? Because I know that the Church of Scientology, for instance, shunning, disconnection is an actual formalized practice that when someone becomes a suppressive person they are instructed by the church to disconnect from them. There is not any sort of similar mechanism in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but culturally that is something that a lot of people— and Ian has experienced this firsthand— that's something that a lot of people do anyway. Do you see any sort of differential there, or do you just think that that's kind of a disingenuous answer?

No, no, there is a difference because it's a policy inside Scientology. It's an official policy. And inside Mormonism, it's not a policy, but it happens. The problem is, as an outsider, if, you know, okay, so Holland says it's not shunning, we don't shun, but there's something like that happens. And, you know, I use the English language for a living. And, um, and if, if it, if it goes quack and walks like a duck, I call it a duck. Um, now the, but, but I'm not saying that the Church of Scientology is, um, and the, the Mormon Church are, are the same. They're not. Uh, my experience is the Mormon Church was, uh, it would, there was the letter to the boss's office. Yes. And, and I didn't like that. But at the same time, I didn't get the, the same level of personal harassment that the Church of Scientology.

I remember you hiding in the bathroom at one point with the church.

Yes. No, there was, there was a moment when, uh, when after a long interview and that they had like 3 cameras and we had 2 cameras and I just, I just needed a break. I just wanted a break from this continual watch, watch, watch that they were doing all the time, which is one of the ways they put pressure on you. And, um, and, um, I took the team, the producer and our cameraman. It was only 3 of us, but we all went into the bathroom and then, um, and I closed the door. So the 3 of us are in the loo, but we're, you know, we're just hiding. And then there's a, and, and, and, and so, what are you doing in there? Uh, and, uh, you've gone to the bathroom together. And I said, it's the BBC request.

Requirement.

Now, to be fair to the Mormon Church, they didn't, you know, follow us into the loo. And by the way, that's a joke. It's not a BBC requirement. I just wanted a bloody break from them. But I also feel, I do feel that the Dalai Lama's right. If you've got a great thing, then, you know, by all means, tell people about it. You know, come and join us. But if somebody wants to leave, the best way of handling a journalist like me who's asking critical things is saying, listen, I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sorry to hear that. I don't call it shunning. We don't have a policy of shunning, but I think you might have a point. So tell me about the people you've met and I'll meet with them personally away from the cameras and I will try and do something about it. And if he said that, if he'd said that, then I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.

Yeah.

Yeah.

But because he got angry with me, I felt the power and I felt the, the, the dark authoritarianism and I didn't like it.

Yeah. No, he was incredibly defensive. We want to be respectful of your—

I need, yes, I need to go soon.

I was gonna say, we're very respectful of your time here. Uh, John, you, the, you are the kind of journalist that we need more of because we need accountability. We need to shed a light on politics. You know, Nathan Gill sentenced to 10 years for corruption. Uh, treason perhaps. Uh, you know, taking bribes.

Not to be fair, taking bribes, not treason. Treason is off to the tower.

I know there was conversation on the media there in UK whether it was trees or not, but yeah, so, and it was a farmer, Martin Bishop, the Elder Holland train wreck, and the question you asked about the temple and the Mitt Romney and the covenants and the slitting of the throat was just extraordinary, perhaps the most difficult question for Holland there, it's worth watching for sure. And you are the kind of journalist that we need more of to hold these organizations and these people to account. And, you know, this professional, honest, open journalism is what we need more of. Before we close this, we want to give you the final word, John. Jim, do you have any final comments or thoughts before we close?

No, I'm just very appreciative that you would spend your time here with us and talk to us about this. I, I said before we started that I was afraid I was going to fanboy all over you because I am a big fan. And I am a bigger fan now, having actually had a chance to visit with you here a little bit and just very, very grateful for what you do and for your integrity and, and for taking the time to talk to us.

Thank you, Jim. And go ahead, Geoff.

Well, no, no, thank you. I mean, I— Jim, fair play that you're taking part in this podcast and you're also still an active Mormon and, and in the choir. So there is a way forward. Listen, you know, you say to someone like me, okay, we're sorry about this, we can do better, we're going to try and fix it. That's the answer. That's the answer. It's right there. And, you know, good luck with, good luck with your, but at the same time, Ian's left. Ian should not be under pressure for having made a decision that I've left now. That should not happen. And so, the Mormon Church isn't, There's nothing like as dark as the Church of Scientology, but could it do better? Yes, it bloody could, and so it should.

Yeah. John, on behalf of all of our viewers and listeners, thank you so much for taking time to come on Inside Out. We're so grateful. It's such an honor. Keep up the good work. Give me, give me the title of the book again that you've written.

Oh, it's called The Real Nigel Farage. That's coming out in, um, in September. I've written, uh, 15 books. Uh, The Church of Fear is about the Church of Scientology. The novel where there is one of the protagonists is, um, Deputy Head of the CIA and an ex-Mormon, uh, that's called Cold. That's on Amazon. Um, and I've also got a website. I've got to update it, but it's johnsweeney.co.uk. If you like my stuff, I've got a Patreon which you can, um, send me some. I do a lot of work in Ukraine. I'm hoping to go there in the autumn. One of my books is Killer in the Kremlin, and I'm going to swear a bit, but I do a festival in October on Putin's birthday called the Vladimir Putin Do Fuck Off Festival. You may have to bleep that, but there we go. But, but I can't, by the way, Compared to the Kremlin, the Mormons are okay, but that's not a good comparison.

Yeah, that's not the blurb you want on the back of your book.

This will rank them on the back of the book. Jim, as always, thank you. Awesome contribution, valuable. Thank you, John. Thank you again on behalf of Inside Out.

Very good. Oh, and the other thing is you can follow me on Twitter, my Twitter handle, or X, whatever it's called these days, @JohnSweeneyRaw, as in R-O-A-R. Which is what I did at the Church of Scientology.

Yes, indeed.

Lovely.

We all—

thank you, John.

Thank you very much. John Sweeney had to leave, but, uh, Ian, I wanted to just talk to you, follow up. I just thought that was an amazing conversation. Um, one of the things that, that really struck me there, particularly the, at the end, is that he said, look, if, if Elder Holland had said, "Geez, yeah, that isn't our practice, but gosh, that's something that happens and we need to do better," he said, "I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on." And I think he's sort of singing from our hymn book here, in that if the church were just willing to admit that it makes mistakes, that there are problems, because genuinely the church does not have a shunning policy. And in fact, well, they're kind of mixed messages on that because Elder Hall— Elder, I'm sorry, President Nelson, President Oaks have both gone into the whole peacemaker thing and, you know, please reach out to people. But then 6 months after President Nelson gave the peacemaker talk, he also said never take counsel from those who do not believe. And, you know, so a lot of people who were like, oh, well, jeesh, sort of looking for an excuse to treat people like garbage, and the peacemaker talk made them uncomfortable, all of a sudden went, oh, okay, well, this is what he meant. What he really means is we shouldn't take counsel from those who don't believe. And President Oaks has given the same sort of mixed messages. He, in this last conference, gave this wonderful talk that was building on the peacemaker idea. And then he also— but when he gave his devotional, he said, well, the way to avoid all of the challenges the church is facing is surround yourself with believers. And, you know, just don't talk about these things, don't worry about these things. And to John Sweeney's point is that a mature organization needs to be able to take criticism. And if they were able to take criticism, I think that interview would have been a real net positive for the church if Elder Holland had just been vulnerable and said, yeah, you know, we do all these wonderful things, but yeah, we still fall down over here, and oh geez, it's terrible if people who leave feel that way. We really need to address that. I think that would have just been hugely positive for the church, but the church seems to believe that any acknowledgment of, of fallibility, any acknowledgment of error somehow makes them look bad, whereas I think the veneer of perfection is what makes them look bad. Would you agree with that?

I'm very grateful that you are talking about this because during the interview or the conversation with John, I found myself strongly disagreeing with some of the things that you said. And I didn't want to bring it up then.

I agree with what he said.

No, I said I find myself disagreeing with what you said during the conversation with John only because when you chose, that's what, because that's why I'm so grateful you talk about this because I would have brought this up if you hadn't. So. Yes, the church doesn't have, as far as I'm aware, any active policy. I get it. Uh, but then it— you, you've, you've absolutely appropriately and rightly referenced three talks where there's kind of an inference to do that, right? And that's real. I mean, yeah, it's not in the handbook. Uh, whether it's in the Apostle Handbook or not, I don't know, but it's not in the handbook, but It is kind of—

The Apostle Handbook? Jeez, I'd love to read that.

Oh yeah, I'd love to read that one, yeah. But it is kind of, well, it's said from the pulpit, for goodness sake, right? So there is a clear, in my opinion, inference that, you know, don't deal with apostates. I mean, the church hates apostates, can't stand people like me, right? I'm worse than if I ever was, ever joined the church because I've received all this light knowledge and those who receive the further knowledge who have fallen, uh, you know, from the heights, whatever, especially if they had a leadership calling, especially a bishop, you know, then you are like doomed, right? And I was told that, I was told that in, you know, leadership circles, but these talks, and so I really appreciate it because I was going to bring this up because I was, um, just didn't agree with you, frankly, on some of the stuff that you were saying. So, Um, but I also acknowledge it's not a policy and, and you're right, going back to the main point there, I think, uh, you know, if the church, I want to go back to the right beginning of what you said, cause you've just nailed it in the first sentence. John lifted almost word for word, some of the statements and comments that we've had, you and I've had with Greg Prince, right? About, um, you know, being mature, being honest, being transparent, full disclosure, and just owning it, right? We've had many conversations with Greg and you, right? Just wonderful conversations about simple things, basic, basic, and just be freaking honest, right? And if you made a mistake or not, and, and John, I mean, it's a, I think people that like the three of us and Greg and many other people and people like, you know, so-called outsiders like John Sweeney, who just want to do good, honest journalism. That's their instinct is to look, if you've messed up, if you made a mistake, just own it, right? Just, you know, have the balls to just say you made a mistake. We'll have so much more respect for you. And then, and then when they don't know, when they hide stuff and like people like me, they shut me down. You shouldn't be asking these questions. Then you think, ah, you've got some, I'm, I'm onto something. I need, I need to figure out what's going on here because you're hiding it from me, right? You disrespect me enough not to tell me the truth. That's how much you think about me. You really don't give a damn about me. You don't care about me. You don't care about my questions. It means you don't care about me. You say you love me. You say you want, you've got my salvation at heart, but you don't really because you're not helping me understand some of the, um, answers to the questions. And if you've made a mistake, just say, own it, and I'll have so much more respect for you. I can't, you know, when we have these conversations with Mio and Greg, I can't understand why the church doesn't take that opportunity to be able to move more effectively, efficiently towards, you know, a more honest disavowing of some of the doctrines. We spoke with Sandra Tanner live on Tuesday, an extraordinary lady, and we probably would get some we'll get some stick. You might get some stick. I am— I will get this.

I've already gotten some stick.

Tell us about that.

Well, I had— I mean, there's— there are a number of accounts online, particularly on X. I should— I should leave X, but I feel like that's one of the places where the only way we advertise this podcast, we don't pay any money to advertise it. All I do is I put up an announcement on X and I have over I have 4,200-something followers. That's the only way that we get the word out. And so I don't really want to leave, but I've got members of the church who, I mean, the people who hate me more than anybody else are active members of the church. And there's this one account that really freaked out when we had Sam Young on, and they tagged the Tabernacle Choir. How dare! Is this all right that some, you know, a member of your choir is talking to this terrible apostate? And they did the same thing with Sandra Tanner. I called her, I think, an icon and a legend. And it's like, how can you say that? And how can he be an active member? And this is just absolutely terrible. And from my perspective, and if you listen to what John Sweeney is saying, when you, when you do that, when you sort of mystify, I think, people who leave— I mean, from where before I sort of got into this whole world with you, Ian, I think, like, particularly when we were missionaries, I was scared of Sandra Tanner. It wasn't just that I wouldn't— didn't want to read her. I was terrified of what would happen if I were to expose myself to this sort of agent of Satan. Uh, I, I don't— and I don't think that's even too strong language. I don't think I'm really exaggerating it. It's— when you do that and when you're like, oh my goodness, you know, you can't talk to these people, stay away from these people. It's very much like the parent who says, don't read this book, I'm going to put it up on the highest shelf and don't you dare read it. Well, what does a kid do? The kid's fascinated by it. What's in that book that I'm not allowed to read? And when you just talk to these people, let me— it's not that I'm sitting there going, yeah, Sandra Tanner, you're absolutely right, the church is just awful and the church is completely wrong. I don't believe that. I believe actually, as I said to John Sweeney, there are answers to these questions. They're not tidy answers. They're not. But I mean, you can engage with these ideas the way, you know, Judaism has been engaging with difficult ideas for thousands of years. And their answers, they've got a lot of answers, but they're not neat and tidy you know, simple things. They are mature answers. That's the way life works, is that you have to wrestle with difficult issues. And I think the church is in a position to be able to do that, but isn't willing to do that because they're scared to do that. But I think once— if anybody, if any member of the church were to sit down with Sandra Tanner, they'd fall in love with her in 5 minutes. I mean, she's just this charming, wonderful person. And, and if you don't agree, and it diffuses all of the tension, it diffuses all of the mystery, it diffuses— it's exactly what John Sweeney was talking about, is that if you can admit error, if you could admit, oh my goodness, you know what, you may have a point here, all of a sudden all of that hostility goes away. All of the desire to shun goes away. Because once you realize that all of the goodness in somebody doesn't evaporate the minute they leave the church, then you can continue to have relationships with your spouse or with your children, because these are the people who are leaving. Every family in the church at this point has someone close to them that has left the church. And if we can't figure out a way to deal with that kindly and productively, and we just sort of— shunning, I think, is a fear-based response. People shun you, Ian, because they're scared of you. You know, they've seen you as— you were in their stake presidency, you were their bishop. And if Ian Wilkes could leave, Maybe I, you know, my— I don't know if my faith would be strong enough. His faith was so strong and he left. So they're terrified to talk to you. They're terrified to find out what— why you would leave. That's where it's coming from. I don't think it's hatred. I don't— I think it's just— it's, it's all fear as far as I'm concerned.

I think you've articulated that extremely well. I don't think I've heard such a as well-put-together summary as what you've just said. You could even take that and just put it in like a short clip and a statement and send it to the church leaders. I think you've done an amazing job there, and everything you said just makes so much sense. And there's such an opportunity here for the church to, you know, to do things differently, to do things better. You know, in many of us in the world, not everyone, we all don't feel the same, there's this insatiable appetite for truth and honesty, and it's just built into us, some more than others. Sandra Tanner's one of them for sure. You, me, I think we're in there, but you've got people that go beyond, like, it was, you know, just extraordinary scholarship like Sandra Tanner and others who were, you know, Jeff Strong, who we had on recently, who was just, you know, former mission president that came on, such a great guy, such a real person, a real individual that cared. And you know, He asked me a question, Jim Bennett, before we started the podcast with Just Ron, before we press record. He asked me a question that I don't think I've been asked, and if I have, it's been years. And he asked me, how am I doing, you know, since I left? And I'm like, well, I got a little bit emotional before we recorded. And I said, well, it's hard. You know, when we talk about the community of the church, the things that I miss, you know, I love and enjoy about the church. The community, the parts of the culture of the church which I enjoyed.

You have great affection even for the Book of Mormon.

Was that—

sorry? You even have great affection still for—

I do, more than a lot of people, actually, and I defend it when— because I know, and I just know right to my very core that there are— I mean, John said some beautiful two words there. He said, what did he say? Uh, artistic truths. And I thought that was amazing, you know, about the Book of Mormon. And it is true. What he said is true. It's got some passages in there that are just absolutely inspirational. And they are to me. And I feel something when I read it. And I think it's inspiration. And I just think it's wonderful. And I'm, I resigned from the church. When the church is doing right, I defend it. Right? When the church is teaching correct stuff, I will defend it. I've been described as an enemy of the church, yet in many other, in lots of areas, in many areas, I've actually defended the church. And so I just, I think it's a tragedy that the church can't be mature enough and grown up enough to be able to respond. You know, you look at Elder Holland interview, and definitely recommend our viewers, listeners, go watch that. Just, you can watch it a couple of times and listen to the inner word. You'll see the back and forward. And then if you can, just switch off, uh, from what's being said, uh, uh, um, verbally and just watch Elder Holland's body language. For me, that was mind-blowing. More than, more than the words, way more than the words. How he moves his hands is so uncomfortable. Not the behavior that you'd expect from an apostle, somebody who's confident in the truth and the facts. And that's the problem. When we are lying, when we're not telling the truth, or we're not being open and honest as much as we, you know, what do you say, we tell the truth as much as we know how to, is that right? But when we're not being completely honest and transparent and being completely, you know, offering complete disclosure. Then we, you know, we, we, the alternative is to hide and cover stuff up. And, uh, Holland is not a very good liar in that, certainly from his, his body language, his body was saying something. I mean, his body was completely over here and his words are completely over there. Just go watch it. It's unbelievable.

Right.

And I think when you tell them the truth, you don't have to worry about that. Right. You could just be honest. And if you don't know something, you just say it. So I think. John, as an outsider, summed it up perfectly in that, you know, in that interview, in that conversation there. And I think we can learn a lot from people like that who are professionals, journalists, critical thinkers. I love the— I love the— er, that's not the right word, but I appreciated the comment you made that, which John was not aware of, that that's the last time, as far as you're aware, that the church has opened up to any outside journalism. And we've said with Greg Prince often with with Greg Prince, I think a lot with Greg, about the opportunity for the prophets and for the leaders to go onto a news media channel or any channel, any podcast, anything where they're accessible. I mean, they're so inaccessible, it's ridiculous. The prophet of God is inaccessible to the world. You can't get to him. You can't have a conversation with him. It's ridiculous. It's a joke. It's just shameful. And so why can't they just go on TV and have a conversation? Because they're afraid. But if they went on and said, you know, we, yeah, we got that wrong, we got Polly wrong, Rachel Peterson wrong, we made a mistake on the LGBTQ stuff, etc., etc., we made a mistake, um, I think they can go on and be intelligent enough to retain, uh, many, but perhaps not all of the rank of our members. I think we might lose some, but I think it was, um, who was it, Jim? Was it Geoff Strong, uh, or was it someone else recently? Richard Oster, I can't remember who it was, who said that if we did the right thing and we were bold enough and courageous enough to have these conversations, right, in public, yes, we'd lose some people initially, but in the long term we'd gain. Who was that? I'm trying to remember the person that said that.

I've said That's you, Steve. Oh, I don't know. I'm sorry.

Jim Bennett. I should quote Jim Bennett. Jim Bennett. You've said that. I'm sorry. I need to credit you where you need to be credited. So, Jim, that's true, isn't it? I mean, yeah, there'd be some people that would, you know, my gosh, what's going on here? But in the long term, from what Jim Bennett has said, there'd be a gain, wouldn't they? There'd be an improvement, right?

Well, I don't think there's any question about that. I mean, the thing that Greg Prince keeps saying, he keeps quoting Grant McMurray, that when the church, the Community of Christ, uh, gave the priesthood to women, says a third of the church left. And if we knew which third it was going to be, we would have done it a long time ago, right? Uh, I don't think our church is willing to go that far because there are very clearly people people who would leave if the church were to, for instance, accept marriage equality. Not even marriage ceilings in the temple, but if they were to just say— and they could today without changing any doctrine, they could today say, you know, we recognize and will not take any ecclesiastical action against anybody who is legally and lawfully married, period. And, you know, same-sex marriage is legal and lawful. So they could do that and there would be a mass exodus of a number of people who have sort of based their faith on that particular idea. And there would also be— but there would be— I don't know if there would be as big a mass exodus. If the church were to say, you know what, we have made some mistakes, we've made some serious mistakes, and we don't want to do that anymore. We want to go forward, we want to be honest, we want to be transparent. Uh, denying the priesthood to, uh, people of African descent, uh, was not rooted in any revelation. It was rooted in racism, and we reject it wholly. And we apologize for all the damage we did. Now, if they did that, I don't know that you'd see a mass exodus. I think you'd see a lot of people going, "What?" But as John Sweeney pointed out, he says, "If Elder Holland had said that, I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on." The elder, I mean, once somebody is vulnerable like that, it increases trust. It doesn't diminish trust. There would be a moment where people would all go, oh, oh, but when the dust settled, I don't know that you'd lose.

Yeah, I agree. Why, why do you know that and President Oaks doesn't know that? And I think you've answered that. I think it's a, it's a fear thing. You know, you and I have lived long enough to have made mistakes, right?

Not me, but, but you're a bit older though. You're much, much older.

I'm much older. Yeah. Not much older. A little bit older. Uh, You don't make mistakes. I certainly made mistakes, right? Uh, we've had successes between us, you know, quite a few successes, which is nice, but we made mistakes. Uh, do we not learn most from the mistakes? I certainly have. You know, if I look back, I think I've learned more from my mistakes in my life, um, than I have my successes. And I think, you know, the church teaches that, doesn't it? We, you know, it's that whole change pattern, isn't it? You know, acknowledge you made a mistake, you're sorry. You want to make restitution, you know how to do it again, you learn from it. I mean, that's the pattern, right? Isn't that the program? That's the step-by-step plan, should follow its own plan. And if it did, I think you're right. I, we talk about this reaction from the members and the, might get some people leaving. Probably not as much as we think because the human spirit for most people who have got that personal connection with, you know, honesty and truth and integrity that's built into, I think, most of us, maybe not all. I think at some point with individuals who just don't seek truth, they're so corrupted. It's like the Book of Mormon, again, another inspirational component in the Book of Mormon where we become past feeling, right? You remember that? Again, another, you know, artistic truth, if you like, in the Book of Mormon. What would be compass feeling, but I think most people do yearn for truth and honesty and when they hear it, Jim, when they see it and they hear it, it connects. Yeah, there'll be this, oh my gosh, but the spirit will say, it'll be like, ah, thank goodness it's been said because that's how I felt. It's like the race and the priesthood. I've always felt deeply uncomfortable with the racism of the church. And when I read that race and the priesthood and then I stood up and spoke to the entire priesthood, expecting, it was like, what's that movie? Maybe this is not the best analogy. Jerry Maguire, where he said, I'm leaving and I'm starting a new company.

Who's with me?

And no one was with him, apart from one individual. That was my experience.

I said, hey, look at this.

This is amazing. It's in, you know, the essay. Wow, this is huge. And it's a big change. What do you— and I'm talking about, and I'm in charge, I'm presiding at the meeting. I'm like representing the state presidency and they're like, uh, you know, you can't shut me down because I'm kind of presiding and I would never like that anyhow. But, and I was like, what do you think? It's in there like, and it was absolutely silent. And I'm like, and it was like Jeremy McGuire. I'm like, what the hell have I done? I've just, I've just spoken this. This, um, what's that, uh, memorandum, is it? Um, in the movie, you know, this vision statement. Vision statement, that's right. I've just had this vision of the church acknowledging this was a mistake in this essay, and this is huge. It's, it's from God and it's official and wow. And absolute silence. And I, I just— but it's one thing coming from Ian Wilkes, right? Somebody who might speak, you know, the same kind of truths as the apostles, but doesn't have the same clout. It's quite another from President Oaks saying it, isn't it? Leading from the top.

Yeah, no, absolutely. Well, I'm just trying to process. So did you say this in a, like a stake conference?

No, it was a ward conference. Ward Well, we came out in October 2000, uh, sorry. Yeah, 2013. The essay, the first, The Illusion of the Priesthood. I think it was a month after Eldon Clark gave his, uh, talk, Come Join Us. I, I think it's within a month or two of that at General Conference. So it came out in October, didn't it? And it was just, for me, it was just, it was just a revelation for me. I'm like, wow. Especially, you know, just, you know, kind of deal, at least trying to deal with it. And it was the, I think it was, it might have been a joint religious site of priesthood meeting or just priesthood meeting at the ward, at a ward meeting. I'm not sure if it was conference or not, but yeah. So anyway, no, all we can do is do, do our little bit and, and try to, you know, um, facilitate change in, in the very limited way on inside out. Right.

Well, um, Jeff Strong, and I, I, I really hope we can have him back because I, I was not there for that discussion, which you handled absolutely brilliantly. Uh, but one of the things that you, that you get from Jeff Strong, uh, not just from his conversation with you, but also, and I, I've been listening to a lot of the things that he's been saying, it's, it's a reinforcement of the fact that people are leaving. Because they don't trust the church. It's not a faith crisis so much as a trust crisis. When you find out something that is unsettling, what erodes the trust is that the church didn't have enough confidence in you to tell you that themselves. And that's where— so all of this, this whole idea that the church is scared of, oh geez, if we admit error, if we admit these things, people will leave. People are leaving now, and that's why they are leaving. And I really think it will be a net positive if the church does acknowledge error. And yes, some people will leave, but many, many more who would have left will stay.

And some might come back.

Some people might come back. Yeah, I mean, I think, I think if the church— and you can tell me if I'm wrong because I am making a prophecy about Ian Wilkes— but I think if the church were to own up to all of these kinds of mistakes, apologize for the damage that they have done with a lot of these mistakes, and say that all people are welcome, and if you don't believe the Book of Mormon is historical, You're still welcome if you don't, you know, all of that kind of thing. I think, uh, it's, it's very likely that Ian Wilkes would at least consider returning.

Yes.

I noticed you were diluting.

I backed off.

My expression on my face was directly correlated to your dilution of the words that I, oh boy.

What do we say on a mission? It's like, instead of just saying, will you be baptized? It was like, if you find out these things are true, will you be baptized?

You started off really bold and confident and you kind of like, as you saw my expression around, you're like, my revelations just aren't as strong as yours are. So that's a tough one. I wouldn't say no. I wouldn't say no. Um, there's been so much hurt and pain, Jim. I mean, but then again, doesn't Christ require us to forgive, right? And, you know, and to rebuild. And yeah, I mean, if I'm going to practice what I preach, you know, and all this stuff that I talk about, then that's on me as well. I think there's a big change on both sides, right? But as I said, often there are many things I miss about church and I defend it where I, you know, it's doing right and teaching right. And those qualities in the church are unique and distinct. There's no other organization like it. You know, we talked about that. Uh, so, and I miss that. Um, so perhaps, uh, perhaps there's a very small flicker. Who knows? Um, so I'm glad we've done this, uh, piece, uh, to finish off the John Sweeney. Uh, it was quite tough getting him on, you know. Tried months, weeks, months to—

was that you? I mean, you, you are, you are the doggedly persistent one that has gotten all of these great people to come talk to.

When I get my mind on something, I don't stop. And I'm like, you know, you're saying, eh, well, no, no, like, well, let's get him on. And, and, and I met with him and, and he was, uh, you know, he was a tough one, but I'm grateful, John, you're watching this. I'm very grateful that you took the time to, to come on. He was very patient with my persistent but kind emails, I think. Well, hopefully, uh, he felt the same way. And I think he's probably open to coming on again, uh, because I'd love to have more conversation. I think, I think you're up for that as well. So, um, yeah, I, um, I appreciate this. Do you want to, uh, finish us off here? I'll finish it off.

Well, you open this up. Well, sure. Um, yeah, we, so we've gone about a half hour. So when we stitch this together with the Sweeney interview, it'll be about an hour 15. Or so, which is respectable, I suppose. But Ian, thank you so much for getting John Sweeney to talk to us, because I think that there's just so much there that is of value to the church. The lessons to learn from that, I think, just are absolutely invaluable. I think so. So I just am really grateful for you for for being so doggedly persistent. And, uh, I just think it's wonderful. So, uh, do you have any final words before we sign off?

No, I, I, well, just to say I'm, uh, really grateful to be doing this podcast with you. I think it's changed us, Jim, in some ways, hasn't it? We've been doing it over 3 years. Um, it certainly changed my life. I didn't anticipate the experience of Inside Out being as big as it as it is in my life personally. Often when we're having these conversations, even you and I, uh, and some of our guests, I forget we have an audience because the stuff that I'm listening to is for me, right? It's like, you know, it's like for me in my life and it helps me so much on a personal level. That was one of the things I was hoping to get when I came to you with the idea and, and, uh, talked about how it might be therapeutic for me and it has been and way, way, way, way more. As we, as just a quick question before we close it, has it, has Inside Out Experience benefited you? Has it changed you in some ways?

It absolutely has. It absolutely has.

Can you tell me how?

Well, um, it's given me an understanding and a confidence, um, of where I stand, not just with the church, but with the Lord, really, in that, in that, as I said earlier in this conversation, there's a great deal of fear, I think, that is holding the church back and holding individual members back. And I think that was holding me back. And I thought, and I was sort of afraid, geez, if I start talking to all of these people who have left the church, and if I'm spending all this time with Ian Wilkes, I never really felt this way about Ian Wilkes. I know you and I know, you know, that it's not like, okay, our conversations are going to drive me out of the church. But I have a confidence now that what we are doing is, to get a little religious here, I think it's pleasing to the Lord. I think I had one conversation at one point with, with somebody in church bureaucracy who said, we love your podcast, the church loves your podcast. And I said, well, how is that possible? Because we talk to people like Sandra Tanner, we talk to, you know, And he said, because you're having conversations that need to be had and we're not allowed to have them. And I think they are allowed to have them. The only reason they're not is because they won't allow themselves to have them. But this has changed me in that it has given me confidence in my own spiritual autonomy, if that makes any sense.

It does make sense.

I mean, I get criticized by people saying, well, you're not really a believing Mormon because you're so different in so many different ways. This is just Jim Bennett Mormonism. That's Jeremy Runnels's accusation, the author of the CES Letter. And I absolutely own that. Yes, this is Jim Bennett Mormonism. Everybody's Mormonism— everybody who believes or practices Mormonism is doing so in a way that is unique to them. And claiming that spiritual autonomy, I think, is a very powerful thing. And I think that this podcast and my conversations with you and my conversations with the great people that you primarily have brought on here have reinforced that, have strengthened that, have given me confidence, and have pretty much eliminated any sort of fear. There's nobody I'm afraid to talk to about the church. There's nobody I'm afraid, oh geez, what if they say something?, that might drive me out. It's like, it's like, I know where I am. I know where I'm planted. Uh, and I think that this podcast has given me, um, the ability to understand that and appreciate that.

So you actually really believe it's the truest podcast then upon the earth?

It is by far. Well, fake AI slop Bruce R. McConkie is pleased with us collectively as well as individually.

I can live with that. I can live with that. I wonder what Bruce thinks of that video.

Bruce is watching from on high.

He's furious. Oh, he's gonna kick her ass in the next life. He'll be like, what did you do with that video? You ruined me. You ruined me.

So back in the day, just very quickly, completely, um, uh, Joseph Fielding McConkie had a very distinctive way of talking. I used to do a flawless imitation of him, and I would do it for other missionaries. And word got back to me that he had found out and was very impressed.

Oh, good, good.

So, so that suggests that maybe— well, one of the things also is that Joseph McConkie, Bruce's son, had a wonderfully warm sense of humor. He was very funny and he insisted that he got that from his father. So I am hoping that maybe Bruce R., now with the perspective that comes from dying, uh, might have a little more of a sense of humor about that.

Well, Bruce, if you like our podcast, uh, subscribe, please give us, give us a like and, uh, make a spiritual donation. I don't know what that is. Anyway, no idea what I just said there, but, uh, Jim, go ahead. You, uh, you—

well, we're kind of— let's just thank everybody for listening and tell them that we'll see them next time on Inside Out.