Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

AddamS

When The 1978 Revelation Took Place...

Recommended Posts

I donâ??t think that the Priesthood issue was about racism, on a similar note, the Church never had an official or unofficial policy about inter-racial marriages.

I thought there was sort of an unofficial policy on this one or at the very least it was said that it would make life much harder and was discouraged.

Share this post


Link to post
I donâ??t think that the Priesthood issue was about racism, on a similar note, the Church never had an official or unofficial policy about inter-racial marriages.

Except that since the black person in the relationship couldn't enter the temple, they could not be sealed (in life at least).

Share this post


Link to post
Thanks for all of the responses, I was really curious what thinsg were like then.

I was in my mid teens living in South Africa at the time. I don't recall hearing about any one leaving the church because of the revelation. I do remember feeling great excitement about how the gospel in South Africa could now be actively taken to the Black people and the effect it would have.

Share this post


Link to post

Expositor:

I was 27. It was a great time. Every Saint I knew rejoiced, some even jumped up and down with joy. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like the overwhelming majority is that no one knows anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
I thought there was sort of an unofficial policy on this one or at the very least it was said that it would make life much harder and was discouraged.

I don't know about 'policy', but my parents didn't want me to date blacks, and felt as you describe. President Lee, Elder Peterson, BYU president Wilkinson, etc. all didn't like the idea of interracial marriage, according to a presentation I saw a couple of years ago at the annual FAIR conference.

HiJolly

Share this post


Link to post
1. One guy left because JS misspelled his name in a revelation

2. A married couple left because JS was rolling around on the floor with some kids playing...they felt that was undignified.

Those seem like odd reasons to leave a faith you otherwise believe in.

Share this post


Link to post
Those seem like odd reasons to leave a faith you otherwise believe in.

The point is those who want to leave will find a reason to give for leaving which leaves them blameless.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know anyone personally who left the Church over the 1978 revelation. I had a friend from high school serve a mission in Mississippi a couple of years after the revelation and he noted there were some racists in the Church that he came across. Of course, he noticed it more since he is of African descent.

Overall, we were all elated about the revelation as we had a couple of African-American members in our ward who were quickly ordained Elders and took their families to the temple.

I lived in Los Angeles at the time.

Share this post


Link to post

If there was a "revelation" today granting women to be ordained to the priesthood....would there be a similiar membership outcome among the LDS in leaving?

This type of thing occurred among RLDS in 1984 and the 1980s in general. The late 1970s had articles in the 'Saints Herald' magazine that were supportive toward that direction as well that was causing tension. Community of Christ D&C 156 later led to other theological departures in beliefs for the RLDS until the leadership went so far as to change their name to Community of Christ.

Regards,

Bradley.

Share this post


Link to post
If there was a "revelation" today granting women to be ordained to the priesthood....would there be a similiar membership outcome among the LDS in leaving?

This type of thing occurred among RLDS in 1984 and the 1980s in general. The late 1970s had articles in the 'Saints Herald' magazine that were supportive toward that direction as well that was causing tension. Community of Christ D&C 156 later led to other theological departures in beliefs for the RLDS until the leadership went so far as to change their name to Community of Christ.

Regards,

Bradley.

How did the RLDS/CoC approach the change? Is it considered a revelation from God?

Share this post


Link to post
Thanks for all of the responses, I was really curious what thinsg were like then.

I never felt old until I read this thread....

There was a lot of talk about people leaving but I never heard of anyone who did. The overwhelming reaction was tears of relief. It was becoming increasingly uncomfortable to be in a church with such a policy. Most people can tell you where they were when they heard the news...just as we can when JFK was shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Most people can tell you where they were when they heard the news...just as we can when JFK was shot.

What??! John Kerry's been shot?

:P

Share this post


Link to post

My BoM prof at BYU years back told us that there was a full-page ad in one of the SLC newspapers (presumably the Trib), declaring President Kimball a false prophet, on the basis of scripture (interpretation) and past GA statements on the ban. It had been signed by a few hundred LDS.

Can anyone confirm this? I've never gone back through the microfilm...

Share this post


Link to post
My BoM prof at BYU years back told us that there was a full-page ad in one of the SLC newspapers (presumably the Trib), declaring President Kimball a false prophet, on the basis of scripture (interpretation) and past GA statements on the ban. It had been signed by a few hundred LDS.

Can anyone confirm this? I've never gone back through the microfilm...

According to the UTLM site, this ad in the Tribune on July 23, 1978 was put out by a fundamentalist group. Do a search on "president kimball" ban "full page ad" and several cites come up. The first two look like the only relevant ones.

Lester Bush makes a comment about the ad here: http://www.sunstoneonline.com/magazine/sea.../mag-text15.asp

Share this post


Link to post

In Southern California at that time there was nothing but universal joy at the revelation. No one was upset that I can remember.

Share this post


Link to post
I was in my mid teens living in South Africa at the time. I don't recall hearing about any one leaving the church because of the revelation. I do remember feeling great excitement about how the gospel in South Africa could now be actively taken to the Black people and the effect it would have.

It was the same reception here in Brazil! Indeed the number of converts in Brazil "exploded" after this revelation. In some Missions the average number of converts per coulple was 20 to 30 baptisms/ per month!

I've heard some old members complaining about the poor black ones coming to church with their slippers and worn out pants, but never saw or heard about of anyone who had left the church because of this specific issue.

Bye!

Share this post


Link to post

I never have met anyone who says they left the Church for this reason. I suspect that anyone who does say they left the Church for this reason probably really left because of something else.

Share this post


Link to post

Community of Christ D&C 156 was considered an inspired document when it was presented to the 1984 conference for inclusion in the D&C. It then took on the status as a revelation. It contained a call for building of the Independence, MO temple, which seemed to sugar-coat it for some to swallow the ordaining of women part more easily. There was a conference resolution on the books for decades that forbid the ordaining of women to the priesthood and it was removed in 1970s, which allowed the possibility of it happening at a future date. ERA movement during that decade had some bearing on the policy. Feb. 1984 'Saints Herald' magazine (just prior to the April conference), Wallace B. Smith wrote an article on disjunctive revelation. It was the belief that new revelation doesn't have to be in harmony with the scriptures or past revelation to be true. I simply disagree.

After 156 came out and the more traditional or conservative members realized things were changed for good, they began to resist the change in their individual branches/congregations/districts/stakes until being forced out through priesthood 'silencings' and removal of voice/vote in business meetings of the church. These Reorganized saints then formed Independent Restoration Branches outside leadership control to worship as RLDS. Some officially withdrew membership in the RLDS church, while most still have their names on the rolls (which are maintained by the Community of Christ) Of course any ordainances thus performed over the years among RLDS Restorationists are not recorded or recognized by the Community of Christ even if some priesthood were never 'silenced' from office.

Regards,

Bradley

Share this post


Link to post
Amen...two quick stories of such individuals

1. One guy left because JS misspelled his name in a revelation

2. A married couple left because JS was rolling around on the floor with some kids playing...they felt that was undignified.

Wow. Have you considered writing Mormon history professionally? You have a gift with words, and your research is second to none. When I read your accounts of the events, I feel like I am actually there. The names, the places...it all becomes so real. :P

But your first comment gives all those who might leave the Church something to think about: in future tellings of the story by the faithful, what's the one-line summary for their crisis of faith that will be used to explain the entire process? Is it always the most trivial factor? Or is the complexity of faith doubt ever acknowledged? Or, heaven forbid, the idea that someone might be intellectually honest (if not justified) by their exit?

No, it's always the milk strippings.

Share this post


Link to post
I'm asking this without an agenda, I'm really just curious.

There are some older people here who were members at the time of the 1978 revelation that allowed Black men to become priesthood holders. Do you know of any people that left the church because of this revelation?

The thought occurred to me because it was a fairly dramatic change and I figure there must have been some people who thought the church was going down an incorrect road. For instance, if the church brought back polygamy today (assuming it was legalized in the U.S.) I would imagine there would be some people that would leave over it, just as there were in Joseph Smith's time.

I have no doubt that there would be people who would leave if the Church brought back polygamy, just as there were people who left because they couldn't deal with the idea of the priesthood being extended to all worthy male members, though I'm sure polygamy would be a much bigger issue among many more LDS, with far more of us personally knowing those who couldn't handle the idea that would leave over it.

As far as the revelation on the priesthood goes though, I only heard that there were some who left the Church over it, but I never personally knew anyone who did. I, for one, will never forget that day. When I heard the news, I was overwhelmed with joy that the time had finally come that all our worthy brethren would be able to hold the priesthood, and to this day I don't personally know anyone who did not feel the same. If there are any that felt otherwise, none have ever spoken a word in my presence suggesting it, so I personally don't know of any.

Share this post


Link to post
I don't think that the Priesthood issue was about racism, on a similar note, the Church never had an official or unofficial policy about inter-racial marriages.

I am not sure about this. I was warned about coming back to Japan and marrying outside my culture due to the nature and difficulty of intercultural marriages. This is purely anecdotal so I cannot say with any great authority.

I do remember going to the temple after the announcement and seeing a black man there. Everyone got a bit quiet and then we went and shook his hand. A very tingling moment.

Share this post


Link to post
I donâ??t think that the Priesthood issue was about racism, on a similar note, the Church never had an official or unofficial policy about inter-racial marriages.

In what way can a policy based on race not be about "racism"? Do you mean it was based on race, but there were no hard feelings?

And there was definitely an unofficial policy on inter-racial marriages. The policy was "don't do it."

To the degree that BYU's rules may reflect on the feelings of the Church in general, it should be noted that BYU didn't allow inter-racial dating as recently as 1970.

As late as 1969, Brigham Young University administrators discouraged blacks from attending the university. A letter sent to black applicants for admissions advised them that there were few blacks enrolled at the school, and "no families of your race" in the surrounding community. Blacks were informed that "as an institution, [bYU] does not look with favor upon marriages of any individuals outside their own race, whatever that race might be, and hence frowns upon mixed courtships, which might result in such marriages." The letter explained that this was "not a matter of race prejudice, . . .but [rather] the out-growth of observations relative to such relationships and the difficulties encountered by individuals participating in such courtships and marriages when attempting to adjust differences in family and cultural backgrounds" (in Bush).52

Until the 1970s, less than one black each year had opted to enroll at BYU. Only four had ever graduated. Football coach Tommy Hudspeth echoed the sentiment expressed by administrators in letters to potential black students when he explained that the school "discourage[d] the Negroes because [it was felt] they would not be happy in the social situation here. We have certain rules and regulations which we won't change; we will not allow inter-racial dating" (Daily Herald, 16 Feb. 1970).

Brigham Young University: A House of Faith, Ch.7, p.298-p.299

It should be noted that almost any reference to inter-racial marriage being discouraged was made with the justification that people from two different cultures would have a more difficult marriage than those from similar cultures.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×