Sitting here 2 hours 15 minutes as a neverMo, reflecting on how into this I am 😂 I can’t believe how many hundreds of hours and how much about Mormonism and exmormonism I have watched and learned this last year. So, so fascinating and informative and emotionally helpful, even for NeverMos. Thank you John and Margie and Patrick!
I just can’t thank you all enough for making this interview possible. I am an active member of the church but I also have many questions that unfortunately the church avoids answering. I am glad we were able to ask and to talk about theses things in a respectful way and still learn from one another. Thank you Professor Mason and John. Thank you for your time and services.
I have a lot of respect for Patrick Mason. Although I no longer believe in the Mormon church, I still respect his willingness to come on Mormon Stories and share his story.
I'm about an hour and 45 minutes in, but I need to highlight that Margi's questions and comments are absolutely golden. I love her perspective, and I love how she takes the point of view of women, minorities, LGBT and other marginalized groups. Thank you so much for having her!
Absolutely. I am grateful to her for (while kindly accepting that Mr. Mason felt comfortable in the LDS framework) consistently reminding the audience that it just wasn't possible for everyone to feel that same comfort and ease.
Thanks for bringing him on. A wide variety of voices is important. I would prefer my parents believe in his version of Mormonism than the fear of the other bent prevalent in their ward.
Love this! so impressed by Patrick Mason and his willingness to engage in this conversation without being defensive. Kudos to you and Margi for creating a space where this is possible.
John! I love this. I feel like the interview represents something way bigger than just an interview. Having the ability to respectfully converse with others with deep different beliefs is what, I think, people need. In all aspects of life. Love it!
I do hope that you, Patrick, Margie, and John understand why this interview has created some pushback from the core MSP audience though. I mean look, sure a faithful Mormon apologist can come on and push the company line (i also understand that I haven’t seen all three episodes yet) on MSP, but the church couldn’t have a fireside with John Dehlin. In order words, this ‘good will’ only extends one direction and the only person who will seriously answer the hard questions of literally millions of people holds no power in the church to affect change. No offense but this seems like an extended session of mental masturbation.
@@Mark_McC And what change is he trying to affect? Why save a Church based on lies? I don't get it. Why continue to give up your personal autonomy to an organization that is a fraud?
@@gregbates4517 Right but then why have Mason on at all? My point is that John, and possibly Patrick, seems to want a place for those who question (his comment that he thinks most excommunications are misguided). Maybe similar to Judaism, where those who feel culturally close to Judaism but who don’t fully believe, can still participate. Me, for instance. I don’t believe at all anymore but i was born in the church, spent almost 60 years in it. I feel Mormon in my soul. But in order to participate I eventually have to declare my allegiance to something that I believe is demonstrably false. It would be nice if there could be a space for me in the church without having to be ALL IN. Mason and Dehlin seem to want this as well and seem to want to work towards that. The problem, to me, is that neither Dehlin or Mason are movers or shakers in the mormon faith. Neither are GA’s or members of the 15. Hence me describing this as mental masturbation.
While I definitely didn't agree with everything Patrick said, I'm glad he came on the show! It's good to see representation from more sides. I don't know how people know this stuff and still stay but they are amazing humans.
This is fascinating. I love Margie's questions. Like Patrick, I learned about the concept of Divine Grace from Evangelicals on my mission to California in the 1970's. It informed my Mormon beliefs through the next 30 years, until my cracked shelf broke around 2010.
The leap I wish apologists could make is to advocate for the membership as well as for the institution, and realize that the institution doesn't always have to win.
Apologetics can often run into the problem of a "rock and a hard place". They don't want to appear disloyal, yet not non-critical. Bushman does a decent job of somewhere in the middle and admits flaws of the past church history, policy and doctrine.
But the institution does always have to win. At its core, it is an authority cult. Decisions, changes, initiatives, programs, organization...all have to come from the top down. The leaders can respond to passive resistance and dissatisfaction (such as changing temple rituals in response to ever declining temple attendance and/or in response to the results of polling aimed at finding out what rubs members the wrong way). But a situation can never be allowed (in an authority cult) where it becomes apparent that a person without the appropriate rank or position is publicly seen as instructing his/her "superiors" on how things are to be run. That would ruin the whole game that the leaders are playing at. They're always the ones who are supposed to be the boss of everyone because, according to their narrative, they're the special ones whom Jesus chose to be his special representatives...and no one else has the right to put themselves forward as having a superior morality, conscience or understanding of Jesus's will than the "duly anointed and appointed" leaders. The official leaders may know that they actually need to do what some regular member is saying that they need to do. But if that regular member is too publicly vocal about things, it undermines the authority of Jesus's specially appointed, specially inspired, specially anointed representatives. The only solution is to excommunicate the challenger (put him/her in his/her place)...and then later on quietly make the changes that the challenger demanded, once the controversy has quieted down and the challenger has been appropriately humiliated and then forgotten. I'm actually a bit surprised to see that some outspoken members of the church, who refuse to follow the lead of the top leaders, do not seem to realize that they are in an authority cult and therefore do not seem to be aware of the fact that the authority cult cannot continue to exist if they are free to challenge and instruct the leaders without any discipline. To the leaders, such challengers are usurpers and if the usurpers get their way, the church becomes little more than a social club. If the self-proclaimed authority figures ever let themselves be bossed around by the common people and any challengers that spring forth from the common people, their narrative about being the "special boys" who Jesus speaks through to everyone else on important things...well, that narrative goes into the dumpster forever. The leaders literally see themselves as royalty, who rule by divine right (all fake assertions about being "humble servants" notwithstanding). If a commoner steps out from a crowd and lectures King Henry on what should and should not be done, and expects King Henry to meekly agree, the commoner has lost touch with reality, but soon will be reconnected with reality in unpleasant ways. To understand the mindset of the leaders, the talk entitled "Which Way Do You Face?" by Lynn G. Robbins is a good start. In it he reveals how Boyd K. Packer expressly stated that the job of leaders and church employees is not to advocate for the membership, but is to advocate for the leaders AGAINST the membership.
It's fun listening to Dr. Mason. I took a class from his brother, Dr. Matt, at BYU, and almost did an internship with his other BYU brother. I was well on my way into Mormon history scholarship and was looking forward to meeting Patrick Mason one day, but then I finally "chose" to date men and had to reroute my occupational direction, haha.
Thanks so much to both of you for doing this interview. I actually can relate very well to Patrick.. I loved being raised in the church, to me, it was something I am endlessly gratefull for. I loved the people, I loved how church was here in Europe, I loved going on a Mission, and no matter how much anti-mormon literature I came across, it never took away my testimony.. Rather the opposite, I did go into all the literature and heard all the claims, but it never effected my conviction. Til this day do I believe that Jopseh really experienced his first vision, and I still believe to this day that the church itselfe, for many people, is a wonderful place to be.. I guess my path may be a bit different than the path of many who eventuelle left mormonism.. I still long for and wished that the issues I came acrross, could be solved, and all would be well.. but, my struggle with the church actually goes beyond all things pertaining to certain people and what they did, but rather has to do with the spiritual force behind it. It would take to much time to go into all the details, and apart from that, it is probably not even of interest to most people, but the basic line is that I always had a very specific conviction about God, and the more I grew older, the more I realized that the God that presented itselfe to Jopeph, or the God that we find in the old Testament, is not quite the God I felt is God... I guess the best way I can put it, is by something I postet on Facebook a few weeks ago: Replace your idea of God, with unconditional love Replace worship, with selfless service Replace rituals, with all-encompassing mindfulness Replace authority, with being a living example of truth Replace doctrine, with liberating knowledge Replace judgement, with loving gentleness Replace obidience, with having real Intent Replace heavenly visitation, with exploring the kingdom of heaven (finding God within) Replace feeling especially chosen by God, with having a humble heart Replace conformity, with authentic individuality Replace immitation, with realization Replace demanding, with sovereignty Replace knowing, with being Replace reacting upon, with acting on.. ...and you start to understand, what spirituality should be all about.
Patrick’s books helped me in a time when I know something was wrong with the church but didn’t know why. He creates a space for people to hold out hope for a better church but in the end I stumbled upon the truth. I have mixed feelings about what he does now. I think he is a good human. I don’t envy his position though. He knows the church isn’t what it claims but where else can he go?
Why do some find it necessary to stay? I don't get it. IMO Church history is all you need to see the Church isn't true. So why the need to continue pretending it is?
As an atheist, it is fascinating to hear him talk about his childhood in detail and then to hear him discuss what he thinks God is doing for him, or how he relates to God. It is perfectly clear to me that it is a reflection of his inner personality formulated in childhood. I'm confident that all of us have that part of ourselves but we label it and interact with it in very different ways.
There is a class at LDS Business College that thought me a lot of these things and I was shocked. It is called Foundations of the Restoration and it is a cornerstone class. I believe it is still being taught at Ensign college. That was the first time EVER I learned about Joseph Smith marrying women that was already married with other brothers and also marrying mother and daughters, and marrying minors, and marrying some for life and some just for eternity, etc… I took this class back in 2015. I was an international student and I have NEVER heard anything like this in Brazil. I also remember learning in this religious class about The Mountain Meadows Massacre and the discrepancies in the different accounts of the first vision. Once again, I was shocked to learn all of that. I wish more people could have access to it, specially in Brazil (the country that I came from). 🇧🇷 Thank you for this interview. I have learned much more.
I currently go to Ensign and it makes me really sad to see the International students be completely shocked by these things and not know how to process them. They either become in denial and overcompensate to make excuses for the church and double down on their faith or they question and become less orthodox. Obviously I don’t blame them and this happens to people regardless of where they’re from. But it’s interesting for international students whose visas are dependent on continuing on the church school path. So will they question their beliefs and risk a faith crisis which can risk their visa or will they ignore it for any number of reasons? Again, no judgment, just respect for international students who are often hard workers, good students, good people and striving to support their loved ones and community.
I find it interesting that the church warned of the "evils" of the internet early on and we as regular believing members likely thought they were referring to p*graphy when it's very possible they knew it was about information becoming available.
Obviously not a fan of the Mormon Church, but you've gotta poke your head out of your echo chamber from time to time. Listening to opposition will only strengthen your views if they are views worth keeping. I hope this brings more active believers to the channel.
Love this episode. Apart from the professional track, and being a woman raised outside Utah, my worldview, childhood, and experiences seem almost exactly the same as Patrick's. And Margi--wow--I've never caught one of her episodes before but she's an incredible contributor. 💜
I love both John and Patrick and am so grateful for everything they are doing for our people. Thank you to Patrick for coming on and helping round out what has been missing from MS in recent years. I have wondered over the years while listening to John speak reverential words about the likes of Eugene England, T.E. Lyon etc and criticizing "Neo-apologists" like Patrick and the Givenses, whether there was much difference at all between the 2 groups other than being from different generations. I've had the thought that John was helped to broaden his perspectives while inside the church by being an acolyte of the former group but has cause to criticize the latter group because he's now on the outside. My wording is a bit ham-fisted, because I understand clearly the reasons for John's frustration with the Neo-apologists (that is being remedied somewhat by Patrick's current appearance), but the point remains, at least for me, that Patrick and his cohort's current efforts are good and necessary to the goals of all, both within the church and out, who wish to simply help the Church and its members and those in its orbit be better and healthier. AND Go Irish! Golden Domer '06
I have to say, Patrick started off really endearing and nice at first and I thought I was gonna like him, but oh he's clever. Very, very good at reframing the problem in his answers and he's really reductive. He's a smooth talker. Especially when he started talking about excommunications toward the end. That was slick language. We'll see how he does tomorrow.
I noticed that, too. I can’t understand how someone can study the bare bones of the history of a belief system that scientifically blatantly proves to be based on sheer fairy tales, yet still supports the institution that represents it. I know that he said his wife supports the spiritual experiences of LD members but not the ‘other stuff’, which I presume is the manmade doctrine and rituals that surround it. I gather he means that you don’t have to agree with 100% of the packaging in order to support the underlying principles, which I concur with. However, if religious rituals and doctrine are distorted to this degree, how could they not prohibit access to the true nature of the spirituality that they claim to represent? Particularly when you have a group of self-appointed men who dictate to members based on the self-proclaimed assertion that they are mouthpieces of God, despite it being proved so many times that this is not the case? So, why would anyone want to remain a member of that organisation at all? I guess that’s me. Perhaps it just a matter of it takes all kinds to make a world.
@@lalakass9041 I can't quite work that out, or did I miss that part? I admit that I nipped off once to make a cup of tea, so perhaps he mentioned it in the interim!
I just don't understand how anyone who knows the truth of the church's deceptive history can still hold to its beliefs, and worse yet try and excuse it.
@@scottbrandon6244 but Mormon history is so much more recent and documented. Same with Scientology. They are both extremely young religions where documentation was actually pretty well kept.
The internet allowed me to contact Egyptologist Tamas Mekis and see his work on the hypocephalus which confirme that Smith's interpretations of the figures in facsimile 2 was wrong. BYU scholar Royal Skousen did the same in his research and concluded that Smith's interpretations were wrong.
The church now claims on its website under gospel topic essays the historicity of the BA is in question. It can be seen as either inspiration or a translation, but can't be verified.
I took his history of Mormonism and the American religious experience class, and it was fantastic. It was super straight forward and unbiased to the point I didn’t know he was practicing until watching this video lol
This is so painful to watch .. clearly, he has and is still living his life through a perspective of a chosen one.. the way I felt as a ten year old, living in my mostly white collar, upper middle class white neighborhood in Salt lake city. My mother explaining how we had made better choices in the pre existence than the blacks, the Jews, the Catholics etc. To get to the point, he is still at the level of depersonalization.. Such a lack of empathy and connection to any human other than his privileged club. He addresses his interest and broad study of rough unethical, abusive issues like racism and misogyny with a badge of bravery. Proud of his inability to be affected by such repulsive reality of such events and viewpoints. Proud of insensitivity…. Because of privilege. Is it just me ?
I did not get the same sense of Patrick from the interview. I don't know what is meant when you say he is at a level of depersonalization or a badge of bravery. There are different kinds of Mormon. Not all of us choose to leave the church and want to do change from within. I think John was doing a good job of that until he was excommunicated. As John says in the interview he did not want to leave the church. I see Patrick as progressive from his books. Other interviews I have seen of him he gets very emotional when discussing social problems facing the church and its members. I am looking forward to parts two and three.
It is certainly not the doctrine of the church that members were more righteous in the pre-existence than those who are not of the faith or are different race/nationality. Just because your mother taught you that false teaching and believed it herself doesn't mean it's the actual doctrine of the church. There are a lot of members who believe things that aren't church doctrine. It's important to not put all members of the church into one box or else you stoop to the level judgement and intolerance that you condemn in religion.
Great guest, respectful discussion. Just have to say “faith promoting” is “spin”. Easier said than practiced, but history, no matter who is writing it, is bias to the one writing it and the lens they write it in.
The cognitive dissidence of this guy amazes me. He is able to acknowledge that the church caters to cis white males and doesn't see how a loving god who loves all his children wouldn't do that.
Such a depressing story. I accept that he may be genetically predisposed to be faithful, but the fact that this genetic predisposition keeps him in a false religion is extremely depressing.
In my opinion people that haven’t had a faith crisis by his age are extremely close-minded, indoctrinated, and don’t have a good understanding of a logical rational skeptical epistemology.
If I could go to a church with all the depth of Catholic and Jewish theology, the community of the Mormons, Meditation practices of Buddhism, tolerance for other beliefs, minus sexual repression, misogyny. patriarchy, bigotry of any kind, or any form of coercion or gaslighting...my idea of spiritual heaven on earth.
are you aware of a "lets talk about hard things" on line class at BYU i could take or of a an internet form i could join. thank you for this interview. i am fascinated,
So was this course at BYU only for history majors, that the university knew would come access it anyway, so they better make a course to inoculate? I went to BYU and that course never even came close to being available or possible or thinkable to me.
Faith crisis is a new term in the narrative over people who leave the church. I almost never hear anymore about people "losing their testimony" of the church. The term faith crisis also has a multi-faceted meaning. It can refer to the narrative surrounding leaving the church. It has even a more important role when discussing people who have the crisis and still stay in the church. They don't totally "lose their testimony" but have questions about areas of belief, doctrine, history or other issues. I also wonder how Progressive Mormonism fits into the whole discussion. Is PM a method to stay in the church and reject or reframe controversial issues for the member?
I lost my testimony and I don't believe anything about the church and it stories, and it doctrines, i don't belive that the BOM is the revelation from God, I don't believe to Joseph Smith vision, i don't believe to the living prophet that the church claimed today now, i don't believe anything to lds church, they only human, no one see God just working with the power of mind, even harry potter stories can created to be a religion.
I like to call it waking up to reality instead of losing faith because “losing” makes it seem like we are missing out on something important or something that should be of value. But, faith crisis is actually waking up to reality and dropping the delusion.
@@ScottBub I like to call it a faith evolution. Crisis implies something negative. Though it certainly felt like a crisis at the time, hence why we use the term, I am now in the best place I’ve ever been. I now look back on that “crisis” of faith as the best thing that could have happened to me. As such I could never refer to it as a crisis.
@@tripleraze321 that’s awesome. I’m glad you’re in such a good spot. I hate the word faith in any religious context. Faith is the excuse people give when they don’t have a good reason. If they had a good reason they wouldn’t say faith, they would say the reason. I stay far away from the word faith. I like woke up or something similar.
David Whitaker was my favorite professor at BYU. I took that exact class from him in the 96-97 time period. He had a real impact on me as well. Such a great guy. I also took a class from Steven Epperson, who was also phenomenal. Too bad BYU let him go.
When Mason said he *knows* Joseph Smith was not a treasure digger and later found out Joseph indeed was, did he realize how serious of a liar he is? It's not about not knowing facts, it's about claiming knowledge he doesn't have that makes him a liar, and this scheme is a common thing in Mormonism, claiming to have knowledge which is just a bunch of emotions, while most of the facts are unknown inside the Mormon bubble.
That is why the phase, "forgive me for what I said when I was mormon", has become such a common trope among those who leave. We "knew" so many things that just weren't so. It takes a lot of humility and self reflection to admit you were wrong.
" A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you diagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point. Festinger page3
Summary of Mason's comments: I grew up completely surrounded by Mormonism, all Mormon friends and family, deep Mormon community, Mormonism was my entire existence. I've had out of the blue spiritual experiences where the spirit/God testified to me of the truthfulness of the Gospel so it must be true. That's some great logic and reasoning right there. No other possible explanation. Must have really been direct communication from God. Couldn't have been my lifetime of indoctrination. Nope
Why walk away from a system that gives you special powers, rewards you socially, and literally helps you pay the bills? I believe that it does not matter to him if it's true or not true. It matters that it serves him at every single level. He may now see that it harms and doesn't work for others so he'll call that "nuance", but he literally can not care too much because the ways that he benefits are too great.
Yeah. The only reason to do that is if you care more about truth than you do of your life, money, privilege, etc. if truth matters and you understand epistemology then the only reason to stay is to share as much truth as possible.
Generally a very interesting interview but one thing upset me: At about 1:59:30 the argument "you wouldn't put a holocaust denier in a chair of Jewish studies" for why they had to appoint a faithful Mormon to the chair of Mormon studies. This analogy doesn't make sense. For this argument to make sense, all non-Mormons would have to be on the same level of ignorance to Mormonism as holocaust deniers are to Judaism. Or, to turn the argument around, would one appoint a non-Jew to a chair of Jewish studies? I would say so, if they have the qualifications for it.
Jesus in the New Testament certainly criticized religion and had a religion crisis. Religion is not the same thing as having faith in following Jesus and paying the price to do that.
It was highly irritating listening to Mason relate the story of his grandfather who wasn't active being asked to stand in the circle to set him apart as a missionary. He was clearly glad his grandfather could do that when he probably shouldn't have (according to the Church). So now Patrick address all the people who can't see their children, siblings, relatives and friends get married? Or whose Stake Presidents aren't that inclusive? Shall we talk about that?
I read his book, “Planted” when I was still semi in the church and can see how he remains faithful. Patrick is a scholar, but he’s not an intellectual. Nothing like the Toscanos for example
Nice guy, smart guy. It feels like he’s super disconnected from reality and while some doctrine is concerning to him, his exercise and ability to disconnect is a derivative of privilege. Perhaps his conscience is eased by the fact that he married and loves a woman of color. Curious how watching this interview will impact his thoughts on the value of his written scholarship vs the value of true activism.
@@mormonstories Is it though? Pretty much seems he just wants to believe in it and finds justifications for that desire. He simply chooses to ignore or disagree with the parts he doesn't like. He has no good answers for all the obvious problems with Mormon truth claims other than to say people are human, the Church isn't perfect. Not much substance there.
Lmao. He said something like he didn’t hear anything about spin, finesse, or framing, but he says “faith promoting” instead. Okay…. So he means spin. There can be a historically accurate telling of facts without a specific bend or narrative. So the church can just give the facts, right?
Sorry Patrick...it seems that you intellectualize through a maze of academic scholarship to empathize yet lack a capacity or succumb to a willingness to identify the source of the wrongness of the toxic behavior patterns that have from the beginning and continue to cause significant personal suffering and damage to those who identify the toxic elements who are shamed and discarded for telling the truth of the realities of the past as well as the present within the corporation. Excommunicating those who speak truth is wrong.
@@mormonstories I am looking forward to this. I have had my frustrating moments with his speeches as well. I will be at the Faith Matters Restore even in Oct and need some practice on my poker face eye rolls. I believe you are very respectful and yet still can hold his fee to the fire. Spread over three days makes me think this is already recorded and done and in the can.
Granted apologists can be challenging for some of us to listen to, but this is Mormon Stories and I'm glad faithful perspectives are included. They're all Mormon Stories.
Sitting here 2 hours 15 minutes as a neverMo, reflecting on how into this I am 😂 I can’t believe how many hundreds of hours and how much about Mormonism and exmormonism I have watched and learned this last year. So, so fascinating and informative and emotionally helpful, even for NeverMos. Thank you John and Margie and Patrick!
Agreed, same here! I’m non-religious, I say “post-Catholic” and it helps me understand my own journey more but can disconnect just enough
@@kathleend8611 Same 😊
Exact same. It’s fascinating.
EXACT same!
Same
Good on Patrick Mason to do this. He is one of the brave ones! Probably because he teaches at Utah State. Go Aggies!
But he also holds a research chair in Mormon Studies. That is privately funded. He is especially brave to do the interview even though he is tenured.
@@tedgarrison8842 Watch episode two and you will see what he believes. It surprised me.
Patrick is a sincere and kind man - thanks for having him on.
I just can’t thank you all enough for making this interview possible. I am an active member of the church but I also have many questions that unfortunately the church avoids answering. I am glad we were able to ask and to talk about theses things in a respectful way and still learn from one another. Thank you Professor Mason and John. Thank you for your time and services.
I have a lot of respect for Patrick Mason. Although I no longer believe in the Mormon church, I still respect his willingness to come on Mormon Stories and share his story.
Ll9
I'm about an hour and 45 minutes in, but I need to highlight that Margi's questions and comments are absolutely golden. I love her perspective, and I love how she takes the point of view of women, minorities, LGBT and other marginalized groups. Thank you so much for having her!
I am only 30 mins in and was thinking the same thing! I really appreciated her questions as well!
Absolutely. I am grateful to her for (while kindly accepting that Mr. Mason felt comfortable in the LDS framework) consistently reminding the audience that it just wasn't possible for everyone to feel that same comfort and ease.
Totally agree, really appreciated her thoughtful questions!!
Thanks for bringing him on. A wide variety of voices is important. I would prefer my parents believe in his version of Mormonism than the fear of the other bent prevalent in their ward.
Margi's energy and overall physical presense is looking so healthy and vibrant. Just wanted to mention that, she looks so in her power.
I am super happy that Patrick Mason has come on Mormon Stories. Good on both John and Patrick.
Love this! so impressed by Patrick Mason and his willingness to engage in this conversation without being defensive. Kudos to you and Margi for creating a space where this is possible.
John! I love this. I feel like the interview represents something way bigger than just an interview. Having the ability to respectfully converse with others with deep different beliefs is what, I think, people need. In all aspects of life. Love it!
This was a main driver for both me and Patrick, Curtis. Thanks for seeing it.
I do hope that you, Patrick, Margie, and John understand why this interview has created some pushback from the core MSP audience though.
I mean look, sure a faithful Mormon apologist can come on and push the company line (i also understand that I haven’t seen all three episodes yet) on MSP, but the church couldn’t have a fireside with John Dehlin.
In order words, this ‘good will’ only extends one direction and the only person who will seriously answer the hard questions of literally millions of people holds no power in the church to affect change.
No offense but this seems like an extended session of mental masturbation.
@@Mark_McC And what change is he trying to affect? Why save a Church based on lies? I don't get it. Why continue to give up your personal autonomy to an organization that is a fraud?
@@Mark_McC Descent points. Bad analogy
@@gregbates4517 Right but then why have Mason on at all? My point is that John, and possibly Patrick, seems to want a place for those who question (his comment that he thinks most excommunications are misguided). Maybe similar to Judaism, where those who feel culturally close to Judaism but who don’t fully believe, can still participate.
Me, for instance. I don’t believe at all anymore but i was born in the church, spent almost 60 years in it. I feel Mormon in my soul. But in order to participate I eventually have to declare my allegiance to something that I believe is demonstrably false.
It would be nice if there could be a space for me in the church without having to be ALL IN. Mason and Dehlin seem to want this as well and seem to want to work towards that.
The problem, to me, is that neither Dehlin or Mason are movers or shakers in the mormon faith. Neither are GA’s or members of the 15.
Hence me describing this as mental masturbation.
Margie is amazing. Love having a strong, empathetic woman in the space.
Margie asks great and really intelligent questions!!
While I definitely didn't agree with everything Patrick said, I'm glad he came on the show! It's good to see representation from more sides. I don't know how people know this stuff and still stay but they are amazing humans.
Well, Patrick is anyway
This is one of the best Mormon Stories interviews, thank you so much Patrick and MSP for making this happen!
This is fascinating. I love Margie's questions. Like Patrick, I learned about the concept of Divine Grace from Evangelicals on my mission to California in the 1970's. It informed my Mormon beliefs through the next 30 years, until my cracked shelf broke around 2010.
it such a treat to watch Patricks whole face light up when he talks about his wife
I agree!
The leap I wish apologists could make is to advocate for the membership as well as for the institution, and realize that the institution doesn't always have to win.
Apologetics can often run into the problem of a "rock and a hard place". They don't want to appear disloyal, yet not non-critical. Bushman does a decent job of somewhere in the middle and admits flaws of the past church history, policy and doctrine.
But the institution does always have to win. At its core, it is an authority cult. Decisions, changes, initiatives, programs, organization...all have to come from the top down.
The leaders can respond to passive resistance and dissatisfaction (such as changing temple rituals in response to ever declining temple attendance and/or in response to the results of polling aimed at finding out what rubs members the wrong way). But a situation can never be allowed (in an authority cult) where it becomes apparent that a person without the appropriate rank or position is publicly seen as instructing his/her "superiors" on how things are to be run. That would ruin the whole game that the leaders are playing at. They're always the ones who are supposed to be the boss of everyone because, according to their narrative, they're the special ones whom Jesus chose to be his special representatives...and no one else has the right to put themselves forward as having a superior morality, conscience or understanding of Jesus's will than the "duly anointed and appointed" leaders.
The official leaders may know that they actually need to do what some regular member is saying that they need to do. But if that regular member is too publicly vocal about things, it undermines the authority of Jesus's specially appointed, specially inspired, specially anointed representatives. The only solution is to excommunicate the challenger (put him/her in his/her place)...and then later on quietly make the changes that the challenger demanded, once the controversy has quieted down and the challenger has been appropriately humiliated and then forgotten.
I'm actually a bit surprised to see that some outspoken members of the church, who refuse to follow the lead of the top leaders, do not seem to realize that they are in an authority cult and therefore do not seem to be aware of the fact that the authority cult cannot continue to exist if they are free to challenge and instruct the leaders without any discipline. To the leaders, such challengers are usurpers and if the usurpers get their way, the church becomes little more than a social club. If the self-proclaimed authority figures ever let themselves be bossed around by the common people and any challengers that spring forth from the common people, their narrative about being the "special boys" who Jesus speaks through to everyone else on important things...well, that narrative goes into the dumpster forever.
The leaders literally see themselves as royalty, who rule by divine right (all fake assertions about being "humble servants" notwithstanding). If a commoner steps out from a crowd and lectures King Henry on what should and should not be done, and expects King Henry to meekly agree, the commoner has lost touch with reality, but soon will be reconnected with reality in unpleasant ways.
To understand the mindset of the leaders, the talk entitled "Which Way Do You Face?" by Lynn G. Robbins is a good start. In it he reveals how Boyd K. Packer expressly stated that the job of leaders and church employees is not to advocate for the membership, but is to advocate for the leaders AGAINST the membership.
It's fun listening to Dr. Mason. I took a class from his brother, Dr. Matt, at BYU, and almost did an internship with his other BYU brother. I was well on my way into Mormon history scholarship and was looking forward to meeting Patrick Mason one day, but then I finally "chose" to date men and had to reroute my occupational direction, haha.
Thanks so much to both of you for doing this interview. I actually can relate very well to Patrick.. I loved being raised in the church, to me, it was something I am endlessly gratefull for. I loved the people, I loved how church was here in Europe, I loved going on a Mission, and no matter how much anti-mormon literature I came across, it never took away my testimony.. Rather the opposite, I did go into all the literature and heard all the claims, but it never effected my conviction. Til this day do I believe that Jopseh really experienced his first vision, and I still believe to this day that the church itselfe, for many people, is a wonderful place to be..
I guess my path may be a bit different than the path of many who eventuelle left mormonism.. I still long for and wished that the issues I came acrross, could be solved, and all would be well.. but, my struggle with the church actually goes beyond all things pertaining to certain people and what they did, but rather has to do with the spiritual force behind it.
It would take to much time to go into all the details, and apart from that, it is probably not even of interest to most people, but the basic line is that I always had a very specific conviction about God, and the more I grew older, the more I realized that the God that presented itselfe to Jopeph, or the God that we find in the old Testament, is not quite the God I felt is God...
I guess the best way I can put it, is by something I postet on Facebook a few weeks ago:
Replace your idea of God, with unconditional love
Replace worship, with selfless service
Replace rituals, with all-encompassing mindfulness
Replace authority, with being a living example of truth
Replace doctrine, with liberating knowledge
Replace judgement, with loving gentleness
Replace obidience, with having real Intent
Replace heavenly visitation, with exploring the kingdom of heaven (finding God within)
Replace feeling especially chosen by God, with having a humble heart
Replace conformity, with authentic individuality
Replace immitation, with realization
Replace demanding, with sovereignty
Replace knowing, with being
Replace reacting upon, with acting on..
...and you start to understand, what spirituality should be all about.
That's really good stuff @Simon Daum. Thank you.
Enjoyed every moment!
Much respect to Patrick for coming on. Look forward to this series
This man has more cajones than all the Fifteen combined. They are utterly terrified of speaking on anything substantial like Patrick is
Exactly 💯👏🏾
@@Resili1 yýyýyyyyýyyyyyýyyýýyyyyyyyýyyýýýyyyýyyýýýyyýyhýýý
@@_Lachoneus Yes, like using shell companies to hide tens of billions of dollars
@@_Lachoneus like creating fake companies to launder over thirty billion dollars into
@@_Lachoneus And yet it's true
So glad that Patrick came on the show, echo chambers never help to increase understanding between disparate views. Great interview!
I so enjoy listening to your podcast. I learn so much!
Patrick’s books helped me in a time when I know something was wrong with the church but didn’t know why. He creates a space for people to hold out hope for a better church but in the end I stumbled upon the truth. I have mixed feelings about what he does now. I think he is a good human. I don’t envy his position though. He knows the church isn’t what it claims but where else can he go?
“Where will you go?” He can join the rest of the 8.99999 billion that are not in a cult like mormonism
Why do some find it necessary to stay? I don't get it. IMO Church history is all you need to see the Church isn't true. So why the need to continue pretending it is?
Patrick Mason, I admire you and respect you. Keep up your good work. I say this as a non-conventional believer. Thanks Brother.
As an atheist, it is fascinating to hear him talk about his childhood in detail and then to hear him discuss what he thinks God is doing for him, or how he relates to God. It is perfectly clear to me that it is a reflection of his inner personality formulated in childhood. I'm confident that all of us have that part of ourselves but we label it and interact with it in very different ways.
There is a class at LDS Business College that thought me a lot of these things and I was shocked. It is called Foundations of the Restoration and it is a cornerstone class. I believe it is still being taught at Ensign college. That was the first time EVER I learned about Joseph Smith marrying women that was already married with other brothers and also marrying mother and daughters, and marrying minors, and marrying some for life and some just for eternity, etc… I took this class back in 2015. I was an international student and I have NEVER heard anything like this in Brazil. I also remember learning in this religious class about The Mountain Meadows Massacre and the discrepancies in the different accounts of the first vision. Once again, I was shocked to learn all of that. I wish more people could have access to it, specially in Brazil (the country that I came from). 🇧🇷
Thank you for this interview. I have learned much more.
You could see if you could get funding to translate these episodes!!!
I currently go to Ensign and it makes me really sad to see the International students be completely shocked by these things and not know how to process them. They either become in denial and overcompensate to make excuses for the church and double down on their faith or they question and become less orthodox. Obviously I don’t blame them and this happens to people regardless of where they’re from. But it’s interesting for international students whose visas are dependent on continuing on the church school path. So will they question their beliefs and risk a faith crisis which can risk their visa or will they ignore it for any number of reasons? Again, no judgment, just respect for international students who are often hard workers, good students, good people and striving to support their loved ones and community.
Great questions, Margie.
I find it interesting that the church warned of the "evils" of the internet early on and we as regular believing members likely thought they were referring to p*graphy when it's very possible they knew it was about information becoming available.
He has a religious gene, is extremely smart and thoughtful, and makes Mormonism work for him.
Obviously not a fan of the Mormon Church, but you've gotta poke your head out of your echo chamber from time to time. Listening to opposition will only strengthen your views if they are views worth keeping. I hope this brings more active believers to the channel.
Love this episode. Apart from the professional track, and being a woman raised outside Utah, my worldview, childhood, and experiences seem almost exactly the same as Patrick's. And Margi--wow--I've never caught one of her episodes before but she's an incredible contributor. 💜
Thanks!
I love both John and Patrick and am so grateful for everything they are doing for our people. Thank you to Patrick for coming on and helping round out what has been missing from MS in recent years. I have wondered over the years while listening to John speak reverential words about the likes of Eugene England, T.E. Lyon etc and criticizing "Neo-apologists" like Patrick and the Givenses, whether there was much difference at all between the 2 groups other than being from different generations. I've had the thought that John was helped to broaden his perspectives while inside the church by being an acolyte of the former group but has cause to criticize the latter group because he's now on the outside. My wording is a bit ham-fisted, because I understand clearly the reasons for John's frustration with the Neo-apologists (that is being remedied somewhat by Patrick's current appearance), but the point remains, at least for me, that Patrick and his cohort's current efforts are good and necessary to the goals of all, both within the church and out, who wish to simply help the Church and its members and those in its orbit be better and healthier.
AND Go Irish! Golden Domer '06
So happy that Margie is going to be a bigger part of MSP. Great content as always.
God bless Patrick.
I have to say, Patrick started off really endearing and nice at first and I thought I was gonna like him, but oh he's clever. Very, very good at reframing the problem in his answers and he's really reductive. He's a smooth talker. Especially when he started talking about excommunications toward the end. That was slick language. We'll see how he does tomorrow.
I noticed that, too. I can’t understand how someone can study the bare bones of the history of a belief system that scientifically blatantly proves to be based on sheer fairy tales, yet still supports the institution that represents it. I know that he said his wife supports the spiritual experiences of LD members but not the ‘other stuff’, which I presume is the manmade doctrine and rituals that surround it. I gather he means that you don’t have to agree with 100% of the packaging in order to support the underlying principles, which I concur with. However, if religious rituals and doctrine are distorted to this degree, how could they not prohibit access to the true nature of the spirituality that they claim to represent? Particularly when you have a group of self-appointed men who dictate to members based on the self-proclaimed assertion that they are mouthpieces of God, despite it being proved so many times that this is not the case? So, why would anyone want to remain a member of that organisation at all? I guess that’s me. Perhaps it just a matter of it takes all kinds to make a world.
So is he still a current member?
@@lalakass9041 I can't quite work that out, or did I miss that part? I admit that I nipped off once to make a cup of tea, so perhaps he mentioned it in the interim!
@@lalakass9041 believe so, yes
I don't know about being slick. Patrick stated he felt excommunication is too extreme in many cases. It is required in some cases.
I just don't understand how anyone who knows the truth of the church's deceptive history can still hold to its beliefs, and worse yet try and excuse it.
Same with Islam and the Catholic church. Billions of followers despite problematic history.
@@scottbrandon6244 but Mormon history is so much more recent and documented. Same with Scientology. They are both extremely young religions where documentation was actually pretty well kept.
Because his whole life would change. He’d lose the respect and power he has gained in the church! Let’s see if his children agree as they get older 🤣
Ooh I love the quote. "The internet shrinks the world".
Grew up in St Anthony and wonder who his mom was. Graduation date? That perked my ears up when he said that
I vote Patrick for next LDS apostle.
The internet allowed me to contact Egyptologist Tamas Mekis and see his work on the hypocephalus which confirme that Smith's interpretations of the figures in facsimile 2 was wrong. BYU scholar Royal Skousen did the same in his research and concluded that Smith's interpretations were wrong.
The church now claims on its website under gospel topic essays the historicity of the BA is in question. It can be seen as either inspiration or a translation, but can't be verified.
Would LOVE to hear the material he presents in his course!!
I took his history of Mormonism and the American religious experience class, and it was fantastic. It was super straight forward and unbiased to the point I didn’t know he was practicing until watching this video lol
This is so painful to watch .. clearly, he has and is still living his life through a perspective of a chosen one.. the way I felt as a ten year old, living in my mostly white collar, upper middle class white neighborhood in Salt lake city.
My mother explaining how we had made better choices in the pre existence than the blacks, the Jews, the Catholics etc.
To get to the point, he is still at the level of depersonalization..
Such a lack of empathy and connection to any human other than his privileged club.
He addresses his interest and broad study of rough unethical, abusive issues like racism and misogyny with a badge of bravery. Proud of his inability to be affected by such repulsive reality of such events and viewpoints.
Proud of insensitivity…. Because of privilege. Is it just me ?
I’m curious if you feel that way after part 2 Eileen. I experience Patrick as academic, but also as highly empathetic.
Bingo!
I did not get the same sense of Patrick from the interview. I don't know what is meant when you say he is at a level of depersonalization or a badge of bravery. There are different kinds of Mormon. Not all of us choose to leave the church and want to do change from within. I think John was doing a good job of that until he was excommunicated. As John says in the interview he did not want to leave the church. I see Patrick as progressive from his books. Other interviews I have seen of him he gets very emotional when discussing social problems facing the church and its members. I am looking forward to parts two and three.
This is exactly what I was thinking. He has deeply compartmentalized his life to protect himself.
It is certainly not the doctrine of the church that members were more righteous in the pre-existence than those who are not of the faith or are different race/nationality. Just because your mother taught you that false teaching and believed it herself doesn't mean it's the actual doctrine of the church. There are a lot of members who believe things that aren't church doctrine. It's important to not put all members of the church into one box or else you stoop to the level judgement and intolerance that you condemn in religion.
Awesome!
I hope there are some hard questions that he has to answer in the next couple episodes. I respect him for being on though.
Only 50 minutes in, but have to say this is much appreciated 👍
Great guest, respectful discussion. Just have to say “faith promoting” is “spin”. Easier said than practiced, but history, no matter who is writing it, is bias to the one writing it and the lens they write it in.
But to caveat that statement some people are less biased than others in regards to certain facts about reality.
The cognitive dissidence of this guy amazes me. He is able to acknowledge that the church caters to cis white males and doesn't see how a loving god who loves all his children wouldn't do that.
Such a depressing story. I accept that he may be genetically predisposed to be faithful, but the fact that this genetic predisposition keeps him in a false religion is extremely depressing.
Wanted to read some comments first to see if it was worth a watch.
In my opinion people that haven’t had a faith crisis by his age are extremely close-minded, indoctrinated, and don’t have a good understanding of a logical rational skeptical epistemology.
Patrick seems like a good guy with a relatively open mind. I give him 3-5 years before the faith crisis hits.
If I could go to a church with all the depth of Catholic and Jewish theology, the community of the Mormons, Meditation practices of Buddhism, tolerance for other beliefs, minus sexual repression, misogyny. patriarchy, bigotry of any kind, or any form of coercion or gaslighting...my idea of spiritual heaven on earth.
are you aware of a "lets talk about hard things" on line class at BYU i could take or of a an internet form i could join. thank you for this interview. i am fascinated,
So was this course at BYU only for history majors, that the university knew would come access it anyway, so they better make a course to inoculate? I went to BYU and that course never even came close to being available or possible or thinkable to me.
Faith crisis is a new term in the narrative over people who leave the church. I almost never hear anymore about people "losing their testimony" of the church. The term faith crisis also has a multi-faceted meaning. It can refer to the narrative surrounding leaving the church. It has even a more important role when discussing people who have the crisis and still stay in the church. They don't totally "lose their testimony" but have questions about areas of belief, doctrine, history or other issues. I also wonder how Progressive Mormonism fits into the whole discussion. Is PM a method to stay in the church and reject or reframe controversial issues for the member?
I lost my testimony and I don't believe anything about the church and it stories, and it doctrines, i don't belive that the BOM is the revelation from God, I don't believe to Joseph Smith vision, i don't believe to the living prophet that the church claimed today now, i don't believe anything to lds church, they only human, no one see God just working with the power of mind, even harry potter stories can created to be a religion.
I like to call it waking up to reality instead of losing faith because “losing” makes it seem like we are missing out on something important or something that should be of value. But, faith crisis is actually waking up to reality and dropping the delusion.
@@ScottBub I like to call it a faith evolution. Crisis implies something negative. Though it certainly felt like a crisis at the time, hence why we use the term, I am now in the best place I’ve ever been. I now look back on that “crisis” of faith as the best thing that could have happened to me. As such I could never refer to it as a crisis.
@@tripleraze321 that’s awesome. I’m glad you’re in such a good spot. I hate the word faith in any religious context. Faith is the excuse people give when they don’t have a good reason. If they had a good reason they wouldn’t say faith, they would say the reason. I stay far away from the word faith. I like woke up or something similar.
David Whitaker was my favorite professor at BYU. I took that exact class from him in the 96-97 time period. He had a real impact on me as well. Such a great guy.
I also took a class from Steven Epperson, who was also phenomenal. Too bad BYU let him go.
John-FYI “tar baby” is a pejorative term for many African America. I assume that you were meaning the modern usage, but I wanted to let you know.
Totally agree. My bad!!!
When Mason said he *knows* Joseph Smith was not a treasure digger and later found out Joseph indeed was, did he realize how serious of a liar he is? It's not about not knowing facts, it's about claiming knowledge he doesn't have that makes him a liar, and this scheme is a common thing in Mormonism, claiming to have knowledge which is just a bunch of emotions, while most of the facts are unknown inside the Mormon bubble.
That is why the phase, "forgive me for what I said when I was mormon", has become such a common trope among those who leave. We "knew" so many things that just weren't so. It takes a lot of humility and self reflection to admit you were wrong.
" A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you diagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point. Festinger page3
Summary of Mason's comments: I grew up completely surrounded by Mormonism, all Mormon friends and family, deep Mormon community, Mormonism was my entire existence. I've had out of the blue spiritual experiences where the spirit/God testified to me of the truthfulness of the Gospel so it must be true. That's some great logic and reasoning right there. No other possible explanation. Must have really been direct communication from God. Couldn't have been my lifetime of indoctrination. Nope
I mean, someone's got to do it. I'm very interested to hear what he has to say.
I would love to see Patrick talk to Anthony Magnabosco. Just saying.
Why walk away from a system that gives you special powers, rewards you socially, and literally helps you pay the bills? I believe that it does not matter to him if it's true or not true. It matters that it serves him at every single level. He may now see that it harms and doesn't work for others so he'll call that "nuance", but he literally can not care too much because the ways that he benefits are too great.
Yeah. The only reason to do that is if you care more about truth than you do of your life, money, privilege, etc. if truth matters and you understand epistemology then the only reason to stay is to share as much truth as possible.
Generally a very interesting interview but one thing upset me:
At about 1:59:30 the argument "you wouldn't put a holocaust denier in a chair of Jewish studies" for why they had to appoint a faithful Mormon to the chair of Mormon studies.
This analogy doesn't make sense.
For this argument to make sense, all non-Mormons would have to be on the same level of ignorance to Mormonism as holocaust deniers are to Judaism. Or, to turn the argument around, would one appoint a non-Jew to a chair of Jewish studies? I would say so, if they have the qualifications for it.
Jesus in the New Testament certainly criticized religion and had a religion crisis. Religion is not the same thing as having faith in following Jesus and paying the price to do that.
It was highly irritating listening to Mason relate the story of his grandfather who wasn't active being asked to stand in the circle to set him apart as a missionary. He was clearly glad his grandfather could do that when he probably shouldn't have (according to the Church). So now Patrick address all the people who can't see their children, siblings, relatives and friends get married? Or whose Stake Presidents aren't that inclusive? Shall we talk about that?
All I know is that Ted Van De Parre would approve this message.
1:35:38 she went straight for the jugular
HIT THE LIKE BUTTON, FOLKS!
Google Scholar is a handy source even copies of thesis. One can also email scholars and I have had some beautiful responsers with information.
Quite hard to understand for me as nevermormon and European.
Hopefully he is not like Meldrum
Not even in the same universe.
Good grief no, I hope Rod read Planted, but it doesn't seem so.
I read his book, “Planted” when I was still semi in the church and can see how he remains faithful. Patrick is a scholar, but he’s not an intellectual. Nothing like the Toscanos for example
Nice guy, smart guy. It feels like he’s super disconnected from reality and while some doctrine is concerning to him, his exercise and ability to disconnect is a derivative of privilege. Perhaps his conscience is eased by the fact that he married and loves a woman of color. Curious how watching this interview will impact his thoughts on the value of his written scholarship vs the value of true activism.
His life is perfect why would he question who pays his salaries.
So I’m guessing Gerardo is gone?
No @MarkM. Gerardo is not gone. Gerardo is moving though and has been in transition.
@@mormonstories thanks for responding. You probably know by now that everyone loves Gerardo, 😂
More illogical apologetic statements. The hate and purposeful antics of the Mormon church has no excuse.
I can see his garments! 😱 lol.
Patrick’s only defense is focus on the parts that make you feel good. Nothing of actual substance
It’s more than that.
The church works for people until it doesn’t. It’s still working for Patrick. He’s still youmg
@@mormonstories Is it though? Pretty much seems he just wants to believe in it and finds justifications for that desire. He simply chooses to ignore or disagree with the parts he doesn't like. He has no good answers for all the obvious problems with Mormon truth claims other than to say people are human, the Church isn't perfect. Not much substance there.
Lmao. He said something like he didn’t hear anything about spin, finesse, or framing, but he says “faith promoting” instead. Okay…. So he means spin. There can be a historically accurate telling of facts without a specific bend or narrative. So the church can just give the facts, right?
Margi, not every question needs to be about woke privilege. Downvote me to hell but there’s more to this guy and this story than his “white manness”.
Go aggies
A degree from byu in history ? Lol worthless.
Studying what? Falsehoods?!
Sorry Patrick...it seems that you intellectualize through a maze of academic scholarship to empathize yet lack a capacity or succumb to a willingness to identify the source of the wrongness of the toxic behavior patterns that have from the beginning and continue to cause significant personal suffering and damage to those who identify the toxic elements who are shamed and discarded for telling the truth of the realities of the past as well as the present within the corporation. Excommunicating those who speak truth is wrong.
Mormon scholar...there’s an oxyMORON😅
You show would be good if you let your guests speak instead of jumping in and interrupting their train of thought.
Yuk! Don’t bring him on
What the?!?!
@@mormonstories I am looking forward to this. I have had my frustrating moments with his speeches as well. I will be at the Faith Matters Restore even in Oct and need some practice on my poker face eye rolls. I believe you are very respectful and yet still can hold his fee to the fire. Spread over three days makes me think this is already recorded and done and in the can.
Play fair, just because you don't like him doesn't take away others joy of listening!!
@@mormonstories I agree. I had to shut this off. Tired of Mormon apologists.
Granted apologists can be challenging for some of us to listen to, but this is Mormon Stories and I'm glad faithful perspectives are included. They're all Mormon Stories.