Recorded interview with top LDS history department & GA

[Anonymous]

There is a new mormon stories (actually a set of 4) that have a guy that his former mission president, now a GA, setup a meeting with Matthew Grow of the LDS history department. Right now I only find it on youtube and I assume it will show up on the website and podcast feeds shortly.

I have only listened to a portion, but I am really interested. One of my main issues is that I don’t see upper church leaders even giving much of the apologist work. I hear Elder Ballard SAY he has the answers, but never passes them on (from what I can see).

I am interested in hearing this.

[Anonymous]

I know some of the people who work in the Church’s History Department and am a BIG fan of what they are doing.

Also, fwiw, I don’t want the top leadership getting involved in apologetics. I want them to focus on core Gospel principles. I would far rather have actual historians and theologians address historical and theological issues. I would love to see the leadership move away from the 14 Fundamentals stance of commenting on anything and everything.

[Anonymous]

I am fully with you on wanting a statement from the top leaders like, “Some in the past have said, ‘that once the prophet speaks, the thinking is over’, but I don’t fully agree with that.”

I can’t say I agree on church leadership not weighing in on big issues that are causing lots of folks to leave. Even from a believers perspective I would think they would want to be helping these folks. As of now it seems the response goes between, “don’t be a taffy pulling quitter” to “pray more and you will come to the same conclusion that I have.” The quitter comments don’t help someone in a faith crisis and the “pray more” may occasionally work, but empirically I don’t see that it does. Many are like myself that I had been praying 10+x more fervently for an answer as I was emotionally distraught. I was PLEADING like never before for help from above.

I am fine to disagree on this latter part.

[Anonymous]

Old Timer wrote:

I know some of the people who work in the Church’s History Department and am a BIG fan of what they are doing.

Also, fwiw, I don’t want the top leadership getting involved in apologetics. I want them to focus on core Gospel principles. I would far rather have actual historians and theologians address historical and theological issues. I would love to see the leadership move away from the 14 Fundamentals stance of commenting on anything and everything.

In general I agree that it’s not productive – much less possible – for them to be apologists or historians, but I also don’t think it’s working to say, “Sisters, we love you. God loves you.” And then leave all the incongruities between that and history or scripture unaddressed.

We don’t really talk about having theologians. I wish we did!

[Anonymous]

I’m not disagreeing with the gist of the last two comments. I just don’t want the Q12 and FP acting as apologists. That’s all.

[Anonymous]

I don’t want GA’s being apologists for the religion either. Actually I don’t want any apologists for my religion. Supporters great. Even people who see things differently – wonderful. But I don’t want someone fixing the message.

My brother has a masters in history, so I get where history alone is not a clear fact or truth to rely on. It can be very nuanced and fractal-ed, so apologists of history make sense.

I am with Ann though on the never discussing things or addressing them doesn’t help. It hurts more.

I haven’t listened to the Podcast but the idea of it is problematic to me.

#1- If the interviewee didn’t know it was being prepped for Mormon Stories that doesn’t make Mormon Stories look any better in the transparency department.

#2 – If you already know you are getting an apologist response, what’s the point? Post Mo’s and Faith Crisis struggler’s already rage at apologist’s. This isn’t going to heal anything. In my experience every time a pebble is hurled at the church, the church retrenches. If you want growth and healing, don’t keep picking at the wound.

#3 – Why does Mormon Stories care anyway. John has given plenty of “I am glad they kicked me out” talks and posts. Get over it. Bolstering his opinion really isn’t “fair and balanced” coverage.

#4 – I have been on this side of the street long enough to believe that plenty of non-believers, but necessary practitioners work for the COB in every department. This really isn’t big news.

Most likely if the interviewee thought he was doing a favor to the Mormon Stories community, he will likely get his last paycheck soon. Every way around this sounds like a dead end to me.

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

I don’t want GA’s being apologists for the religion either. Actually I don’t want any apologists for my religion. Supporters great. Even people who see things differently – wonderful. But I don’t want someone fixing the message.

I am not sure if this is what you thought, but your thought did make me think, “Yes – no apologists are needed if we had the top saying ‘yep, that is a bit messy and I understand why it bothers you’ “. Wouldn’t that be different than being called a “taffy puller” (not sure what that is, but “the little taffy puller factory keeps coming to mind).

mom3 wrote:

I haven’t listened to the Podcast but the idea of it is problematic to me.

#1- If the interviewee didn’t know it was being prepped for Mormon Stories that doesn’t make Mormon Stories look any better in the transparency department.

#2 – If you already know you are getting an apologist response, what’s the point? Post Mo’s and Faith Crisis struggler’s already rage at apologist’s. This isn’t going to heal anything. In my experience every time a pebble is hurled at the church, the church retrenches. If you want growth and healing, don’t keep picking at the wound.

#3 – Why does Mormon Stories care anyway. John has given plenty of “I am glad they kicked me out” talks and posts. Get over it. Bolstering his opinion really isn’t “fair and balanced” coverage.

#4 – I have been on this side of the street long enough to believe that plenty of non-believers, but necessary practitioners work for the COB in every department. This really isn’t big news.

There were 3 sections. One segment on the guy’s history. The second was the recording, then finally a panel discussion (2 hour-ish long segments).

They actually talked a bit about the legality and ethics of the individual and then Mormon Stories releasing it. There was no real bombshells at all. It was almost predictable. In fact I actually found the last segment more enlightening. It was not a bunch of finger pointing and mocking. In fact the panel was quite insightful (most of the time). But the point on the ethics is valid. I am sure he has burned a bridge. To put a silver lining, this may keep others from burning bridges realizing they are not going to get anything else out of leaders, so don’t bother them. I do wonder how the GA will take the release and comments made about them (if he can even listen to them).

The only thing that I actually was a bit surprised with was that the GA seemed to not really know the issues – or really even seem to care (IMHO). I would assume, “This doesn’t bother me, so it shouldn’t bother you.”

All of our journeys are different. So I can validate Mom’s point of view on this, and even the 3 people in the recording. I will ask if me posting things like this is stepping over the line for this site. I personally don’t see this post as being “against” the church, but maybe it is over too many people’s “line” and I need to watch what I post a bit closer. I have had some mention that they don’t follow the blogosphere and like to hear of the big events to keep apprised at a high level. So I am not thin skinned. Let me know if you disliked that I posted this.

[Anonymous]

LH – I don’t think posting or discussing it here is out of line. If anyone overstepped, it may have been me by responding without having listened. My weariness is showing through today in multiple posts. No one has over stepped anywhere. We are here for these discussions. I am glad you bring it up.

Thanks for sharing some of what I didn’t know. It looks like my heart is leaning a little more toward the right than it usually does. Thanks for the catch.

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

I am with Ann though on the never discussing things or addressing them doesn’t help. It hurts more.

I agree. I think the relative silence creates divisions in wards and in families. I don’t want lessons or messages from the 12 to be apologetic (our HC rep covers that base during SM and it’s annoying) but I wouldn’t complain if some of the [more accurate historic narrative] vs. [that’s an anti-Mormon lie] stuff was settled. Avoiding having an open discussion only extends the hurt.

I haven’t watched any podcasts but I imagine some of the excitement and the “gotcha!” attitude is the result of finally having someone with a little authority make comments on this stuff… and someone felt the only way to get a voice of authority on the matter was via a secret recording. What does that say?

Maybe someone that’s listened to the podcast can comment on that.

You make the bed you lie in. I always complain about how it feels like the unstated goal of the bulk of our meetings at church is to prove that the church is True. The “gospel” takes a distant second. Church lessons are already rooted in apologetics. Swapping one set of apologetics out for another isn’t moving forward.

mom3 wrote:

#2 – If you already know you are getting an apologist response, what’s the point? Post Mo’s and Faith Crisis struggler’s already rage at apologist’s. This isn’t going to heal anything. In my experience every time a pebble is hurled at the church, the church retrenches. If you want growth and healing, don’t keep picking at the wound.

I imagine most of the target audience for the podcast have already arrived at that conclusion. Leaders don’t have answers… but maybe it’s fun to watch them sweat.

[Anonymous]

Don Clarke is… connected to my family. I understand that he’s a good man – like most of our GAs. He’s also just a regular person, and in most respects like every other active member who has leadership talent. It’s not at all surprising that (as I’ve read) he didn’t have a lot of answers.

I’m a little upset on his behalf that he’s been put out in public like this. I’m also surprised to feel that way, given that I don’t really know him.

Family connections aside, I consider this as being similar to most of the recent leaks: somewhat interesting because they confirm what we already suspect. I don’t know why John thinks it’s so important.

[Anonymous]

John has pulled the podcast, citing ethical and constructiveness concerns raised by others. His announcement of “eating crow” is currently only on the ex-Mormon subreddit, so I can’t link to it here. Because a lot of readers here avoid that site, here’s the entire text of his post:

Quote:

Just made a tough decision tonight. Received some feedback from trusted family, friends, and supporters. Spoke with Trevor Haugen….and we decided for now to pull his recent Mormon Stories Podcast episode, which included an audio recording of his private conversation with Elder Don R. Clarke and Matthew J. Grow.

The logic for me in sharing was simple: Every day I speak with doubting and LGBT Mormons who face depression, anxiety, family strife, divorce, and (in some cases) suicide over divisive and in some cases inhumane LDS policies, doctrines, and/or culture. Yes there is much that is good within Mormonism. But there is much pain and suffering caused by the church as well, and because I’m on the front lines of this battle every day as a psychologist, no one can tell me otherwise.

For so many, the stakes are super high….and because the Mormon church claims to be directed by God Himself, and because people follow the church due to this claim – I believe that the Mormon church should be held to the highest levels of accountability and transparency in all it says and does.

I also found Elder Clarke’s character assassination of Jeremy Runnells during their meeting to be deeply disturbing, along with his fear-based claims that you cannot raise healthy children outside of Mormonism. I also found some of Matthew Grow’s apologetics to be very disappointing, though I know he is in a very tough position – defending what is in many cases utterly indefensible.

On the other hand, my main commitment with Mormon Stories Podcast and the Open Stories Foundation has always been to maximize our effectiveness in the cause of promoting health and well-being for all (post-Mormons and Mormons alike) – and if many of the people I love and trust feel like this was not the most constructive way to achieve our goals…then I am willing to eat crow. I certainly do not believe in a “By any means necessary” approach to achieving our goals, and have tried to walk the line of pushing for positive change, without crossing ethical lines.

I still don’t know what was “right” here. I certainly respect and admire Trevor for his courage and integrity. I will be speaking with Trevor and our other panelists (Lindsay Hansen Park, John Hamer, and Glenn Ostlund) as well as my colleague Amy Shoemaker Grubbs about what to do next (release parts of the interview/discussion, re-record some parts, etc.) – but for now, please know that I/we are trying our best to do what is right here…and sometimes…that is a messy process.

[Anonymous]

Reuben wrote:

Don Clarke is… connected to my family. I understand that he’s a good man – like most of our GAs. He’s also just a regular person, and in most respects like every other active member who has leadership talent. It’s not at all surprising that (as I’ve read) he didn’t have a lot of answers.

I’m a little upset on his behalf that he’s been put out in public like this. I’m also surprised to feel that way, given that I don’t really know him.

Family connections aside, I consider this as being similar to most of the recent leaks: somewhat interesting because they confirm what we already suspect. I don’t know why John thinks it’s so important.

I know at this time it is apparent where I am on my faith journey and if I had no family ties Mormonism would be in my past.

I hope I also don’t come off as hating the church and certainly not the overwhelming majority of people in the church. In fact as I have become more emotionally calm from my faith crisis I don’t see anybody in my ward and stake that are not really great people I would love to continue having a relationship with even if I don’t attend church every week. (wait – correction – there is 1 person in our stake that chewed me out before I could finish even one sentence of a non-controversial topic and others told me “you got tore a new one from her also?” – so I do have one person in the stake I am not so hot on).

I do feel bad for Elder Clarke. I think it shows that he is a caring person in that he kept a relationship with his missionaries. I don’t feel quite so much for Brother Grow as he is a professional historian working for the church giving answers on historical issues. That is a bit of his job. Plus I don’t think he said anything out of line. Maybe not what you will hear in conference, but nothing that many others in the church history department would get on him for telling a member that is asking these questions.

BUT…

I also see a lot of members really going through unnecessary emotional turmoil that the church could help with. Given how many apparently are questioning these days, should it always be the questioning member in turmoil that won’t get any validation from church leaders and instead let the TBM’s sit content as they pass judgement on those that question? I am thinking a bit of a dose of “Comforting the afflicted & afflicting the comfortable” is due. I guess I see a bit of John Dehlin’s point of the pain inflicted is his motivation.

Maybe why I am hot on this topic is I feel I have reached a place of relative peace with where I am at spiritually. But now I even have kids questioning things that make me think they are curious about the rabbit hole and they are standing on the wet muddy side of the hole looking in. My wife has huge issues with my lack of belief but we are slowly working on it. I fear if I extend much of any “non-faithful” branch to my kids, that might be it with my wife as I suspect she will not tolerate me “taking one of the kids out of the church.” So do I appear to my struggling daughter that I am a TBM and not be there for her in her time of distress? Wife? Kid? Wife? Kid? which one do I hurt the most? So I am looking at this at a bit of a lens right now as something that could be ripping my family apart. So I am probably a bit too sensitive right at this moment to be fully objective and logical.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

But now I even have kids questioning things that make me think they are curious about the rabbit hole and they are standing on the wet muddy side of the hole looking in. My wife has huge issues with my lack of belief but we are slowly working on it. I fear if I extend much of any “non-faithful” branch to my kids, that might be it with my wife as I suspect she will not tolerate me “taking one of the kids out of the church.” So do I appear to my struggling daughter that I am a TBM and not be there for her in her time of distress? Wife? Kid? Wife? Kid? which one do I hurt the most?

This dilemma tugs at me, too. I’ve found no perfect solution or path, so I just try to stay open and available to everyone.

[Anonymous]

Lh, thanks for sharing more of your situation. That’s not an easy position to be in. And it seems your relative peace likely comes from not rocking the boat and holding your tongue to keep the peace, though I’m sure that is a bit of a burden for you personally.

I wonder if there are times the kids would like a sounding board, and to tell you their struggles, without it having to be “talking them out of church”. In other words, can you validate their feelings, show support, and love them and give them hope that life goes on, that we are in the middle and many go through these doubting stages, and yet we can find relative peace through it?

Is it possible to support and listen to your kids who doubt and not have to share your own doubts or thoughts?

I just wonder if they would appreciate your experience and perspective, having been down the rabbit hole, even if you never tell them what you saw or what you think to persuade them. Only tell them…there is a rabbit hole. You can choose to go down it or not. Whatever choice they make…you love and support them.

Love is the motivation for all you do. They need to know that more than whether church history makes sense or not.

Do you fear someday they will ask “you knew these things all along and never said anything to me? You knew i struggled. Why didn’t you tell me?”

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

Lh, thanks for sharing more of your situation. That’s not an easy position to be in. And it seems your relative peace likely comes from not rocking the boat and holding your tongue to keep the peace, though I’m sure that is a bit of a burden for you personally.

I wonder if there are times the kids would like a sounding board, and to tell you their struggles, without it having to be “talking them out of church”. In other words, can you validate their feelings, show support, and love them and give them hope that life goes on, that we are in the middle and many go through these doubting stages, and yet we can find relative peace through it?

Is it possible to support and listen to your kids who doubt and not have to share your own doubts or thoughts?

Of course this is what I want to (and probably will do). But even now if I try not to push either way I suspect my wife would look at me as not supporting the church’s side adequately.

Heber13 wrote:

I just wonder if they would appreciate your experience and perspective, having been down the rabbit hole, even if you never tell them what you saw or what you think to persuade them. Only tell them…there is a rabbit hole. You can choose to go down it or not. Whatever choice they make…you love and support them.

Love is the motivation for all you do. They need to know that more than whether church history makes sense or not.

Do you fear someday they will ask “you knew these things all along and never said anything to me? You knew i struggled. Why didn’t you tell me?”

Oh yes I worry about that a lot.

Thanks for the good advice – much of which I already knew. I just had a bit of steam buildup between the ears that needed to be release. I do still feel that those that have questions are not spared much emotional suffering while those that are fully believing are propped up and (generally) taught to have disdain for those that doubt.

Reuben – I hope I have not offended you in your defense of Elder Clarke.

[Author]

Posts