Patrick Mason on Mormon Stories

[Rain]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

I have heard a few exceptions being made for engaged couples where one unexpectedly dies before the wedding, but a divorce couple being sealed seems inappropriate to me as could be used as a threat if allowed. I think of both are dead and their kids seal them, that would be very different, but all the children should agree before it was done.  It can always be done later if meant to be. 
 

Since it would only be confirmed by the Spirit if both were happy about it and wanted it, it is the effect on the living I am concerned about.

 

I know my grandma was sealed after death to her biological parents who married and divorced after she was conceived, her adopted parents and her biological mom and step dad so I'm assuming that her biological parents were sealed to each other as well (I would have to look it up).  But they do more of that after death I think than with one spouse living.

[Duncan]

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

I have heard a few exceptions being made for engaged couples where one unexpectedly dies before the wedding, but a divorce couple being sealed seems inappropriate to me as could be used as a threat if allowed. I think of both are dead and their kids seal them, that would be very different, but all the children should agree before it was done.  It can always be done later if meant to be. 
 

Since it would only be confirmed by the Spirit if both were happy about it and wanted it, it is the effect on the living I am concerned about.

 

I was confused too when she told us she had it done, I mean they got divorced in life, clearly something went katywampus and death wouldn't change anything. he passed away and so he couldn't agree to it anyway. I figure maybe they did it to get her off their backs! Their daughters aren't members so I doubt they'd care, but who knows

[Calm]

47 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I was confused too when she told us she had it done, I mean they got divorced in life, clearly something went katywampus and death wouldn't change anything. he passed away and so he couldn't agree to it anyway. I figure maybe they did it to get her off their backs! Their daughters aren't members so I doubt they'd care, but who knows

She might have taken in her marriage certificate and his death certificate and claimed she was a widow. Maybe that is how she thought of herself. Do they check databases or trust certificates?  Or would her divorce status be on her membership record?

[Duncan]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

She might have taken in her marriage certificate and his death certificate and claimed she was a widow. Maybe that is how she thought of herself. Do they check databases or trust certificates?  Or would her divorce status be on her membership record?

I dunno-this was maybe 2016ish

[Kenngo1969]

On 9/20/2022 at 11:38 PM, Tacenda said:

Listening to apostle Joseph B Wirthlin's grandson on the recent MS podcast, he has nothing but wonderful things to say about his granddad, his word.

If he didn't use his granddad as a brickbat to beat up the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I might be more inclined to listen, Alas!   Read the summary, that was more than enough for me.  Although reading the summary required 1:47 of my life that I will never, ever get back, certainly, that's better than spending six hours of my life that I'll never get back.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

If he didn't use his granddad as a brickbat to beat up the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I might be more inclined to listen, Alas!   Read the summary, that was more than enough for me.  Although reading the summary required 1:47 of my life that I will never, ever get back, certainly, that's better than spending six hours of my life that I'll never get back.

To each their own, he does share some interesting fun stories though. Like how when he went on his mission and it was told to the companion and maybe others missionaries at the MTC in England that he was an apostle's grandson which turned his companion into a big tattle tale. First for falling asleep during a meeting the first night (he hadn't slept for 36 hours), to speaking to another missionary past bedtime and silly things almost twice a day he was called in to speak with the MTC president and the president apologized for having to call him in after being tattled on once again. Then got revenge when his companion was in the shower and was able to swipe his clothes so he had to wear his birthday suit back to the dorm. Then begged to get a companion that didn't know he was an apostle's grandson. So got a transfer with a trio and when another apostle came to speak the apostle called him out amongst a huge group of missionaries at a meeting so it started all over again and his companions thought he was a spy because they may have broken some minor missionary rules.

[Hamba Tuhan]

40 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

To each their own, he does share some interesting fun stories though.

I’m sure you loved those stories!

Pres Hinckley’s grandson served in my mission and was my district leader. He was a nice bloke. The end.

For some reason, I prefer that story …

[Tacenda]

24 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I’m sure you loved those stories!

Pres Hinckley’s grandson served in my mission and was my district leader. He was a nice bloke. The end.

For some reason, I prefer that story …

Really wasn't saying it was a fantastic, can't miss story just making conversation. The jist of the experience of being Elder Worthlin's grandson was not enough time with his granddad. But really, don't listen, either of you. He never tears the church down, but maybe to those members/leaders that can't handle some advice it's a bit difficult to listen to. The guy is a good person but maybe any body on the podcast lessens your trust I guess.

[Tacenda]

36 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I’m sure you loved those stories!

Pres Hinckley’s grandson served in my mission and was my district leader. He was a nice bloke. The end.

For some reason, I prefer that story …

Maybe I didn't make it clearer the apostle that attended the large missionary meeting introduced him as Elder Worthlin's grandson because he was an admirer of his grandfather. And it once again made his mission very difficult. If you could empathize with that possibly. And he said he was put on a higher plane where everyone expected him to be better than he was. And a better student or someone that was more knowledgeable and more spiritual. How would you like that? 

[Duncan]

Many years ago a grandson of Elder Wirthlin would post on here, I don't think his name was Greg though, his handle was St. Balthasar-something like that. I think that Thomas Wirthlin McConkie is also a grandson of Elder Wirthlin

[Tacenda]

16 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Many years ago a grandson of Elder Wirthlin would post on here, I don't think his name was Greg though, his handle was St. Balthasar-something like that. I think that Thomas Wirthlin McConkie is also a grandson of Elder Wirthlin

Hum, that's interesting that it wasn't mentioned because Thomas McConkie has been on the MS's podcast awhile back, that's odd unless I missed it.  

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

She might have taken in her marriage certificate and his death certificate and claimed she was a widow. Maybe that is how she thought of herself. Do they check databases or trust certificates?  Or would her divorce status be on her membership record?

I was wondering this too. 

[Duncan]

26 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I was wondering this too. 

honestly, I wouldn't put it past her. I doubt anyone even knew her husband, they divorced in the 80's sometime. 

[Calm]

On 9/22/2022 at 7:12 PM, Duncan said:

Many years ago a grandson of Elder Wirthlin would post on here, I don't think his name was Greg though, his handle was St. Balthasar-something like that. I think that Thomas Wirthlin McConkie is also a grandson of Elder Wirthlin

Your memory is much better than mine.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/profile/1191-stbalthasar/

Google only came up with this from him, good chance other posts were deleted (for those not around back then, this was not because of nastiness; for many years, the board could hold only so many threads and periodically most were deleted besides a chosen few, so much fewer earlier posts are still around)

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/6896-priestcraft/?do=findComment&comment=173620

 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Calm

[Duncan]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

Your memory is much better than mine.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/profile/1191-stbalthasar/

Google only came up with this from him, good chance other posts were deleted.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/6896-priestcraft/?do=findComment&comment=173620

 

I have a hazy recollection he was, or at the time, a lawyer

[Kenngo1969]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Really wasn't saying it was a fantastic, can't miss story just making conversation. The jist of the experience of being Elder Worthlin's grandson was not enough time with his granddad. But really, don't listen, either of you. He never tears the church down, but maybe to those members/leaders that can't handle some advice it's a bit difficult to listen to. The guy is a good person but maybe any body on the podcast lessens your trust I guess.

Oh, please!    

Way to go all Jack Nicholson, Colonel Jessup from A Few Good Men on us, Tacenda!  You got us!  The only reason we don't care to listen to John Dehlin is ...

There are only 24 hours in a day, Tacenda, for any of us!  Everybody has to set priorities!  Everybody!  And you probably would disagree with 99 percent of those priorities if you knew any of our daily itineraries in detail!  Big whoop!  Oh, noes!   Tacenda disagrees with my priorities!   Whatever shall I dooooooo????!!!  If you want to listen to John Dehlin, wall to wall, every waking moment of every day, knock yourself out!  But we heard it all already, long before Mr. Dehlin became "podcast and anti-Mormon famous" and long before you got here!

Geez!

[Tacenda]

13 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Oh, please!    

Way to go all Jack Nicholson, Colonel Jessup from A Few Good Men on us, Tacenda!  You got us!  The only reason we don't care to listen to John Dehlin is ...

There are only 24 hours in a day, Tacenda, for any of us!  Everybody has to set priorities!  Everybody!  And you probably would disagree with 99 percent of those priorities if you knew any of our daily itineraries in detail!  Big whoop!  Oh, noes!   Tacenda disagrees with my priorities!   Whatever shall I dooooooo????!!!  If you want to listen to John Dehlin, wall to wall, every waking moment of every day, knock yourself out!  But we heard it all already, long before Mr. Dehlin became "podcast and anti-Mormon famous" and long before you got here!

Geez!

I think I have an aneurysm after reading this post, lol! No, please don't waste your time watching JD crap! haha!

[Tacenda]

I am a FB dummy here, hopefully by my sharing this Watch/Facebook you can't see my identity, if anyone can do you mind letting me know. I love what Patrick says here! He's no fundamentalist when it comes to scripture, yessss! ETA: chickened out in case my identity shows up. Love that he feels he'll pick and choose which scriptures to believe. 

 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Tacenda

[Tacenda]

On 9/23/2022 at 7:12 AM, Kenngo1969 said:

Oh, please!    

Way to go all Jack Nicholson, Colonel Jessup from A Few Good Men on us, Tacenda!  You got us!  The only reason we don't care to listen to John Dehlin is ...

There are only 24 hours in a day, Tacenda, for any of us!  Everybody has to set priorities!  Everybody!  And you probably would disagree with 99 percent of those priorities if you knew any of our daily itineraries in detail!  Big whoop!  Oh, noes!   Tacenda disagrees with my priorities!   Whatever shall I dooooooo????!!!  If you want to listen to John Dehlin, wall to wall, every waking moment of every day, knock yourself out!  But we heard it all already, long before Mr. Dehlin became "podcast and anti-Mormon famous" and long before you got here!

Geez!

Quoting you twice in a row here, sorry. Just want you to know I don't enjoy Mormon Stories as much as you might think. And will pick and choose with care what I listen to. But my very favorite is these two women that are active believing members' podcast. And the one about women prophetesses is something that I hope all, especially women, listen to. The power of women has been stripped from them, even a prophetess in the Bible was changed to be a man! And if this power weren't stripped long ago then and now, I wonder how this world could have been. And they mention that Christ was a huge proponent of women and then these so called kings/prophets etc. didn't want them to have any power, they wanted to rule over women. And it's too bad the church couldn't have broke out of that mold and concentrate more on these women spoken of in the podcast. https://atlastshesaidit.org/episode-097-christ-chose-women/

And if any women on this board care to share it more widely on the board, it's never too late for our daughters, granddaughters, nieces....

Edited September 24, 2022 by Tacenda

[Kenngo1969]

18 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I think I have an aneurysm after reading this post, lol! No, please don't waste your time watching JD crap! haha!

I'm sorry about your aneurism.  I hope you heal well.

[Teancum]

I finished the three episodes of the Dehlin interview of Patrick Mason.  I mostly enjoyed them.  Patrick seems like a great fellow, genuine, sincere and an all around nice and decent person.  I may get a book or two that he has written.  For those who have read his books which two would you recommend first?

On another note, while I enjoyed the podcasts I do feel that Patrick has molded Mormonism in many ways to is own personal views in order to make it work for him.  Maybe that is fine for him. And maybe it bugs me to much because I did try to do that for quite sometime but for me it did not seem honest. I also wonder how many believers here would agree with his nuanced views.  Here is a list with time stamps.  Not all are his beliefs.  Some are just things going on with him.  I would appreciate it if some of the believer could opine on some of these positions.  Are they tenable?  Do you agree with them personally, etc. 

1. General authorities know what Mason does. (1:29)

2. Mason says that banning Blacks from the priesthood was a sin on Brigham Young’s part. (1:30)

3. Unnamed high-ranking general authority tells Mason that Mason will not be stopped from giving firesides declaring that banning Blacks was a sin. (1:31)

4. Deseret Book published Mason’s book “Planted” in which Mason says that Brigham Young sinned with the priesthood ban. (1:33)

5. Mason says that the Church should apologize (for racism, sexism, etcetera). (1:44)

6. Mason says that members should be allowed to criticize the leaders (though it shouldn’t be personal and should be done with a spirit of love and by giving the benefit of the doubt). (1:51)

7. Mason says that Elder Holland was wrong to give his talk at BYU encouraging faculty to take up metaphysical muskets to defend the Church. (1:54)

8. Mason says that the work of addressing difficult specific problems in Church doctrine and history has not been sufficient. (2:03)

9. Mason says that the first nine chapters of Genesis are not literal history. He points to fact that Brigham Young thought Genesis contained “baby stories.” (2:12)

10. Mason says that the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith treat Genesis as literal. [For example, the Book of Mormon mentions allegedly literal people who allegedly migrated to America from the Tower of Babel.] Either Joseph Smith or Nephite prophets assumed literalness incorrectly or they were writing metaphorically. (2:15)

11. Mason is comfortable with the idea that Joseph Smith at least partially created the Book of Mormon from his own mind, even though Mason cannot say which parts of the Book of Mormon are from Joseph Smith’s mind and which are not. (2:18)

12. Mason says that there are lots of “19th-century-isms” in the Book of Mormon. (2:25)

13. The 19th century influences of the Book of Mormon causes Mason to accept the idea that Joseph Smith was an active participant in the creation of the Book of Mormon, either consciously or subconsciously. (2:26)

14. Mason says that Joseph was not translating. The Book of Mormon was a product of revelation. (2:27)

15. Mason thinks that God is doing a work through people who don’t understand their role in that work, so Joseph Smith could easily think that he was translating, when he wasn’t. (2:28)

16. Mason thinks that scripture has errors and contradictions. The Book of Abraham isn’t a one-to-one correspondence with an ancient text. (2:30)

17. Mason says that the jury is out whether the Book of Mormon is history and whether the characters in the Book of Mormon were historical people. But Mason talks like they were historical characters in the same way that you talk about any fictional character doing or saying things. (2:32)

18. Mason does not like polygamy. (2:34)

19. Mason does not think that he has to believe in polygamy because he thinks that scripture, including D&C 132, can be in error. (2:35)

20. Mason hopes that he would have rejected any advance Joseph Smith made to marry his twelve-year-old daughter. He doesn’t want to call any of Joseph’s behavior in regard to polygamy sacred. (2:41)

21. Mason doesn’t “want to put lip stick on a pig” in regard to Joseph’s polygamy. (2:42)

22. A lot of Joseph’s polygamy looks like sin to Mason. But Mason still believes the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. God can work through morally revolting people. (2:44)

23. Mason believes that Mother Theresa was closer in moral living to Jesus that Joseph Smith was. But Mason thinks that Joseph was a prophet because God “mysteriously and inextricably” revealed truths to him. Being a moral exemplar is not required to be a prophet. (2:45)

24. Mason thinks that while the Church heals some people it also hurts people, and he wants the Church to be better. Mason thinks that God works through the LDS Church, but not only through the LDS Church. (2:56)

25. Sniffling and wiping tears from his eyes, Mason says that he is so sad that the Church has hurt people. (2:57)

26. Still sniffling, Mason says that sometimes the Church goes backwards. (2:58)

27. Mason says, “We can’t even see Zion yet. It’s not even on the horizon. We have a long way to go.” (2:59)

28. Mason says that Christ is not a capitalist. (3:01)

29. Mason says that it’s time to put the Church’s wealth to use helping people. (3:02)

30. Mason hopes that there is pressure on the Church to do more with its wealth. (3:03)

31. Mason says that the Church should have a policy of reporting sexual predators when it is legal to do so. (3:05)

32. Mason says that Mormon scripture has racist passages, and that God doesn’t inspire racism. (3:12)

33. Mason rejects all scripture and all prophetic teachings that conflict with the life of Jesus. (3:14)

34. Mason says that prophets don’t have a good track record of foretelling the future, but that’s ok because the main jobs of a prophet are to show God’s fundamental relationship with the world, call people to repentance, and witness the name of Jesus. (3:15)

35. Mason says that racism in the Church is a failure of prophetic witness. (3:17)

36. Mason says that the Church needs to figure out its theology of gender and sexuality. (3:19)

37. Mason says that the Church needs to figure out what it means to have a prophet, and what the role of a prophet is. (3:20)

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Mason rejects all scripture and all prophetic teachings that conflict with the life of Jesus.

I have no issue with anything he says except for the above..  I see no reason to assume that the scripture describing the life of Christ is any safer from error than other scripture.  Does he explain why we should assume it is the correct version?

Overall,  I think the above description is well within the boundaries of faithful devotion

[MrShorty]

I'm not quite sure how to feel about it, but I recently realized that "apostles" (though he would never accept the title) like Mason are more relevant to my faith and spiritual journey than the officially ordained apostles and prophets. There is something about Mason's approach to so many of these issues that feels more true to my heterodox heart than the orthodox preachers speaking to us today and tomorrow. As I said, I'm not sure how to feel about that. Highlights from @Teancum's summary (because I'm too lazy or too busy to do 3.5 hours of my own listening):

I think it is interesting that Mason seems assured that he is "safe" in declaring the priesthood ban and not just the justifications for the ban as uninspired.

His views on polygamy -- especially being willing to call some of the practices "sin" -- seems very interesting.

I sometimes think some of the most frustrating discussions with some orthodox members is whether or not the Church can "hurt" people and whether or not it can do better. Some, it seems to me, believe the Church cannot hurt people and never needs to look for improvement in its practices -- that anyone who is "hurt" by the church is really hurt by their own choices (or the choices of those near them).

I would say that almost all of my own faith "crisis" hinges on point 37 -- figuring out what the place, meaning, and role of a prophet is (and what to do when prophets are in error).

I'm sure there's more, and, thanks again to Teancum's outline, I may go through and pick the segments that I am interested in and listen to them.

[Teancum]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

I have no issue with anything he says except for the above..  I see no reason to assume that the scripture describing the life of Christ is any safer from error than other scripture.  Does he explain why we should assume it is the correct version?

Overall,  I think the above description is well within the boundaries of faithful devotion

How about the idea that the BoM may be fiction, that JS inserted his own ideas into it, that while he may have thought he was translating plates he may not have been translating plates.  God is such a trickster.  How about BY sinning regarding race issues?   That one can reject D&C 132 and plural marriage, etc.  One might hold such ideas and I guess be faithful but that ain't the Mormonism I was taught nor are many of these thing taught now.

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I'm not quite sure how to feel about it, but I recently realized that "apostles" (though he would never accept the title) like Mason are more relevant to my faith and spiritual journey than the officially ordained apostles and prophets. There is something about Mason's approach to so many of these issues that feels more true to my heterodox heart than the orthodox preachers speaking to us today and tomorrow. As I said, I'm not sure how to feel about that. Highlights from @Teancum's summary (because I'm too lazy or too busy to do 3.5 hours of my own listening):

I think it is interesting that Mason seems assured that he is "safe" in declaring the priesthood ban and not just the justifications for the ban as uninspired.

His views on polygamy -- especially being willing to call some of the practices "sin" -- seems very interesting.

I sometimes think some of the most frustrating discussions with some orthodox members is whether or not the Church can "hurt" people and whether or not it can do better. Some, it seems to me, believe the Church cannot hurt people and never needs to look for improvement in its practices -- that anyone who is "hurt" by the church is really hurt by their own choices (or the choices of those near them).

I would say that almost all of my own faith "crisis" hinges on point 37 -- figuring out what the place, meaning, and role of a prophet is (and what to do when prophets are in error).

I'm sure there's more, and, thanks again to Teancum's outline, I may go through and pick the segments that I am interested in and listen to them.

Well his flavor of Mormonism certainly is more appealing to me. And his approach.  But it just does not seem what Mormonism really is and what the doctrine being taught is.

Edited October 1, 2022 by Teancum