Dr. Mason on MoSto
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2022 2:02 am
So I have listened to the first two instalments of Patrick Mason’s interview with John Dehlin. It has been very educational thus far. I learned a few things about apologetic history I did not know. Mason comes off as a very decent fellow, as I am sure he is, and one who was serendipitously in the right place at the right time to play the role of academic defender of the faith he currently fills. Indeed, he is one of those Mormons who in many ways represents the best of Mormonism.
I can’t help but feel, when I sit and reflect on his story and views, that he is something of a unique outlier. He reminds me of other good LDS people I have known since childhood, the ones who seemed to be exceptions to the rule, too good to be true, in a sense. More than that, I often felt that there was a certain odd imperturbable quality about them. Decent folk, but you kinda wondered why certain things didn’t seem to evoke more sympathy and understanding from them, and here I mean the level of compassion that would lead a person to push back.
Back in 2016, I had lunch with my stake president. Great guy, very much like Mason. I told him that I was no longer going to church because I found the November Policy abhorrent. My stake president looked at me with watery eyes saying he did not believe the Brethren would want to hurt anyone, and I said, “But what are the results?” Intentions are one thing, it is the outcome that matters. He stuck with the Brethren. I never attended church again.
Mason was obviously against the November Policy, and he is pretty courageous in expressing disagreement with the Brethren. He does not believe that the GAs are above criticism, even the apostles. But I still find myself baffled by his patience with everything we have seen over the past thirty years. A lot of the early stuff he missed for one reason or another. Too young for ERA. Too late for September Six. The list goes on and on. Something bad happens, and he legit did not happen to be around to have to deal with the reality. And yet I am thinking, so what? You weren’t there, but this becomes your rhetorical place marker substituting for any real response to the issue itself.
He disagrees with the methods of activists such as Sam Young, even though he agrees in principle with Sam. OK. But, tell me, Patrick, what works? Prayer? Is that what Sam is supposed to do when he knows church policies will inevitably lead to more child abuse? At a certain point, I start to lose patience. At what point does the pile of problems become the mountain that really ought not to be tolerated? He would spend the 120 billion on better causes. Agreed. Should be. But what about the fact that there is nothing pointing to a change in the future on this?
I guess what I am saying is that there is a real structural problem with the LDS Church that goes beyond problems with truth claims. It is the overwhelming authority of the apostles. A group of men who are, for the most part, seemingly unresponsive to some pretty dire problems. The culture and structure of the church puts them so far above the average member, that the average member is left ideally to be a voiceless, passive enactor of whatever objectives the Brethren come up with. The thinking has been done. The Brethren have spoken.
And children continue to be molested by their bishops. And money grows in the Ensign Peak accounts. And gay children are rejected by their LDS parents. And the church haemorrhages members by the thousands.
Patrick Mason is one guy. A decent guy. And I know he has his heart in the right place. I don’t mean to be harsh on him, but there is a certain disconnect in relationship between noble feelings and actions.
Don’t get me started on his views about the Book of Mormon as an ancient text . . . .
I can’t help but feel, when I sit and reflect on his story and views, that he is something of a unique outlier. He reminds me of other good LDS people I have known since childhood, the ones who seemed to be exceptions to the rule, too good to be true, in a sense. More than that, I often felt that there was a certain odd imperturbable quality about them. Decent folk, but you kinda wondered why certain things didn’t seem to evoke more sympathy and understanding from them, and here I mean the level of compassion that would lead a person to push back.
Back in 2016, I had lunch with my stake president. Great guy, very much like Mason. I told him that I was no longer going to church because I found the November Policy abhorrent. My stake president looked at me with watery eyes saying he did not believe the Brethren would want to hurt anyone, and I said, “But what are the results?” Intentions are one thing, it is the outcome that matters. He stuck with the Brethren. I never attended church again.
Mason was obviously against the November Policy, and he is pretty courageous in expressing disagreement with the Brethren. He does not believe that the GAs are above criticism, even the apostles. But I still find myself baffled by his patience with everything we have seen over the past thirty years. A lot of the early stuff he missed for one reason or another. Too young for ERA. Too late for September Six. The list goes on and on. Something bad happens, and he legit did not happen to be around to have to deal with the reality. And yet I am thinking, so what? You weren’t there, but this becomes your rhetorical place marker substituting for any real response to the issue itself.
He disagrees with the methods of activists such as Sam Young, even though he agrees in principle with Sam. OK. But, tell me, Patrick, what works? Prayer? Is that what Sam is supposed to do when he knows church policies will inevitably lead to more child abuse? At a certain point, I start to lose patience. At what point does the pile of problems become the mountain that really ought not to be tolerated? He would spend the 120 billion on better causes. Agreed. Should be. But what about the fact that there is nothing pointing to a change in the future on this?
I guess what I am saying is that there is a real structural problem with the LDS Church that goes beyond problems with truth claims. It is the overwhelming authority of the apostles. A group of men who are, for the most part, seemingly unresponsive to some pretty dire problems. The culture and structure of the church puts them so far above the average member, that the average member is left ideally to be a voiceless, passive enactor of whatever objectives the Brethren come up with. The thinking has been done. The Brethren have spoken.
And children continue to be molested by their bishops. And money grows in the Ensign Peak accounts. And gay children are rejected by their LDS parents. And the church haemorrhages members by the thousands.
Patrick Mason is one guy. A decent guy. And I know he has his heart in the right place. I don’t mean to be harsh on him, but there is a certain disconnect in relationship between noble feelings and actions.
Don’t get me started on his views about the Book of Mormon as an ancient text . . . .