Race and The Priesthood

I wonder when this was added to the web site. The thing that stood out to me was that there was no revelation that started the practice of denying the priesthood nor does it sound like there was a revelation allowing the priesthood to be given to all. It sounds like it was just impressions or a good feeling but not The Lord speaking through his prophet. The article calls it a revelation but that seems dishonest to me. If women someday get the priesthood, will there be a revelation as we are thought in SS or will it be all the outside pressure forcing the brethren to get some type of impression. I am not trying to sound snippy, but it makes me wonder what revelation really is or if BY decision to not ordain black was considered a revelation at that time. I love the fact that the church has put this up on it web page but it sure brings up more questions for me than it answers.

I was living in SLC at the time the ban was lifted. I was so happy. This had been a big problem for me. What thoroughly surprised me was how many people were really upset by the news, and said they would leave the church because of it. I’m not sure if that amounted to a large percentage or not, but it really took me by surprise.

I love this. Period.

It’s exactly what everyone here has been begging to be said ….?

Well, not exactly.

There still is no statement of validation, and an apology for the pain caused to those affected, specifically the apostates and heretics who had their lives and families torn apart for having the “moral courage” (-cough- Dallan Oaks -cough-) to speak up for what is right, regardless of what the prophet and 1st presidency were saying over the pulpit.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Oh, I think it is a big step, and I’m glad they did this…it needs to be put in manuals and GC to actually have ANY affect.

It’s just not “exactly” what I expect the church to do to right the wrong. That is all.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

For example, there have been official statements from the FP in the 1940s about the negros that the current official statement does not mention.

It doesn’t have to list everything that has been said in the past, since it lists some of the most common things and then explicitly condemns all racism of the past, regardless of the source, with the obvious and explicit inclusion of all of the racism of past church leaders and statements. Those statement from the FP in the 40’s ARE included, along with everything else any church members or leader has said.

Also, it doesn’t even try to hint that the ban was the will of God or based on revelation. In fact, the very clear implication is that it was not the product of revelation. This is a very blunt statement saying the LDS Church suffered from racism in the past and now disavows all of it – every single justification and every single racist statement.

Seriously, I like this WAY more than an attempt to list every racist statement. This says it’s not important to identify which statements are worthy of repudiation; instead, it says all of the racist ones are, no matter the source.

Thanks mom3. I got choked up while reading it.

It’s been published in the last 24 hours. I’m sure it’s been in the pipeline for a while but it’s a nice coincidence that it has come out so soon after Mandela’s death.

I think it could have gone a little further. They could have mentioned that it was probably perpetuated for longer than needed due to the unfounded assumptions that Joseph Smith introduced the doctrine (when he didn’t). I know they show that it wasn’t Joseph’s doctrine (and lay it more strongly at BY’s feet than some will feel comfortable). I believe the ban would have ended much, much earlier if the leadership had known it wasn’t a foundational doctrine.

I hope that one day there is an official policy and I hope that they also say “to the best of our knowledge this was an uninspired practice and it should have never happened and we’re sorry it ever did.”

But… in anticipation of that day I still celebrate this day.

This was important:

“Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.”

I also appreciated it quoting Elder Bruce R. McConkie who later spoke of new “light and knowledge” that had erased previously “limited understanding” as well as the historical prejudices and assumptions that lead to some of the events.

There’s nothing in the article that requires a position of believing it was introduced by divine mandate. I appreciated that too.

As Nelson Mandela said:

“Racism is a blight on the human conscience. The idea that any people can be inferior to another, to the point where those who consider themselves superior define and treat the rest as sub-human, denies the humanity even of those who elevate themselves to the status of gods.”

I have always had severe difficulty with this aspect of our past. The one thing that consoles me is that the current black members of our ward don’t experience any racism that I’ve noticed.

I’ve heard Pres McKay wanted rid of it.

I’ve also heard it was partly to do with slave and free states.

However it gets dressed up, it’s a shameful aspect of our history. Probably the worst in fact. I also have mixed feelings about the treatment of native Americans, but that is another matter.

If there’s one issue that has broken my old testimony more than any other, it’s the topic of blacks and the priesthood. The first presidencies of the past were absolutely convinced that it was God’s doctrine, revealed through Joseph Smith. It wasn’t. It made me realise that the way prophets receive guidance is massively influenced by their own opinions, lack of information and assumptions.

I can remember a post a while back, written from the top of a pagoda in the middle of a bamboo forest in China, where I’d prayerfully felt comforted to let go of my old paradigm. It’s made things more complicated in some ways, but I simply don’t have the confidence in the leaders of the church nor the doctrines they continue to support any more.