1978 Revelation A Result Of Government Pressure

[Daniel Peterson]

I'm just suggesting that the evidence suggests that there was a similar issue. I'm making no claims to their motivation. Are you saying you have evidence that contradicts Caplan and Lee? I've presented mine where is yours?

The evidence you've presented, to this point, appears to consist of a passing comment in which Lincoln Caplan paraphrases something he says he heard from Rex Lee about something that was similar to something else in some unspecified way, which even you don't claim to have any reason to believe was related to the case under discussion.

But the claim at issue, as you may recall, is, in the quite unambiguous words of this thread's opening post, "1978 Revelation A Result Of Government Pressure."

I repeat that there is no evidence in any scholarly treatment of the topic that I've read -- from Edward Kimball (a law professor who was exceptionally well placed to observe) or Leonard Arrington (the Church Historian at the time) or Armand Mauss (perhaps the Church's premiere authority on the racial issue) or anybody else -- to suggest that any issue related to the IRS played any role whatsoever in the deliberations of the Brethren leading up to the 1978 revelation. Such an issue isn't even mentioned, to the best of my recollection. And, since their treatments are entirely coherent and adequate as they stand, there seems little if any reason to invoke some as yet undemonstrated IRS threat to explain what their discussions already explain quite satisfactorily. (See "Ockham, William of.")

The notion that the revelation of 1978 resulted from "government pressure" is without supporting evidence, to this point, and can reasonably be dismissed as a baseless piece of anti-Mormon claptrap. QED.

[Scott Gordon]

Lets look at the time line.

[*]1970 The IRS mails a letter regarding racial discrimination to non-profit private educational institutions. Presumably this would include Bob Jones, BYU, Ricks, and many others.....

Maybe I'm just a bit slow on this, but what racial discrimination was BYU involved in? I was in attendance prior to 1978, and there were blacks at the school. They were in the same dorms, and they participated in all activities. There was no ban on interracial dating.

What am I not remembering?

[orion88]

Are there any consensus reports on how the general white membership

of the Mormon Church in the United States reacted when those of Black

African descent were granted the ability to hold the priesthood?

Please supply sources if possible.

Tony

[Zakuska]

My question would be... would it matter if the church was preasured into it?

I seem to remember considerable preasure from political entities exerting preasure on Israel from all sides, all the time.

[Zakuska]

Maybe I'm just a bit slow on this, but what racial discrimination was BYU involved in? I was in attendance prior to 1978, and there were blacks at the school. They were in the same dorms, and they participated in all activities. There was no ban on interracial dating.

What am I not remembering?

I'd like for the other side to produce these letters... or the mailing list... other wise its an argument from silence. Whats that saying.... the evidence must be presented by those asserting it.

[LeSellers]

Are there any consensus reports on how the general white membership of the Mormon Church in the United States reacted when those of Black African descent were granted the ability to hold the priesthood?

There were a few who apostatized, but, overall, the reaction was neutral-to-positive. Many of the people in our small military branch in Naples, Italy, were overjoyed, and I heard no one say anything remotely negative. Nor have I since, and I have lived in states from Virginia to California, Georgia to Washington.

The only statistics we have, as far as I know, show that there was little-to-no drop in membership numbers over the next ten months.

Lehi

[hordak]

I think it could have been a possibility. As I don't agree that the Lord had His hand in the Priesthood ban, I don't really have anything to say about it, other than He could have simply gotten tired of how the rest of society was taking huge steps to rid itself of its racist past, and said "enough is enough" and given revelation to the First Presidency and the Twelve to absolve the ban.

I do believe there was an actual revelation that ended the ban. I just don't believe the Lord Himself was behind the ban.

4 Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

5 For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

Did you hear what the Lord said about the words of the prophet? We are to "give heed unto all his words"--as if from the Lord's "own mouth." ELDER Ezra Taft Benson

Why wouldn't it have come from God?

[ttribe]

4 Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

5 For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

Did you hear what the Lord said about the words of the prophet? We are to "give heed unto all his words"--as if from the Lord's "own mouth." ELDER Ezra Taft Benson

Why wouldn't it have come from God?

Prophets make mistakes too. If you read up on later comments by McKay and others, there is clearly doubt in their mind that BY was speaking prophetically in his statements which led to the institution of the restrictions, especially in light of Joseph Smith's actions.

[phaedrus ut]

Maybe I'm just a bit slow on this, but what racial discrimination was BYU involved in? I was in attendance prior to 1978, and there were blacks at the school. They were in the same dorms, and they participated in all activities. There was no ban on interracial dating.

What am I not remembering?

The letter was mailed to all private schools not any specific schools. But the letter became the catalyst for the case against BJU and few others.

I'm sure there were blacks at the school that lived in the same dorms and participated in many activities. The reality is they could not participate in ALL activities. A black LDS student could not attend temple night with you right? Hold a leadership position in the church? Bless and pass the sacrament? Attend Elders Quorum? You may recall Stanford and San Jose State refusing to play BYU in sports. Then there was the "Black 14" at the University of Wyoming and Arizona State sending a "fact finding" group to BYU to investigate racism.

Unlike BJU, BYU didn't have any specific policies of racial discrimination. In fact I've read before they had an official anti-racial discrimination policy. But since the underlying sponsoring institution had a policy of racial discrimination it was hard for the outside world to distinguish between the two.

Phaedrus

[hordak]

Prophets make mistakes too. If you read up on later comments by McKay and others, there is clearly doubt in their mind that BY was speaking prophetically in his statements which led to the institution of the restrictions, especially in light of Joseph Smith's actions.

...It's not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do we're on our own. Some people put reasons to [the ban] and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong. There is a lesson in that.... The lesson I've drawn from that, I decided a long time ago that I had faith in the command and I had no faith in the reasons that had been suggested for it. Elder Dallin H. Oaks

Is an Apostle duped by 100 (?) year old racist policy?

In 1879, John Taylor conducted an investigation and concluded the policy had started under Joseph Smith, rather than Brigham Young, despite receiving mixed information

(Source FAIR WIKI)

I have no problem with the prophet being wrong. I think it happens more then we like to admit. Problem is the double standard we have in regards to the prophet.( Assuming it was BY)BY interpreters the Bible,BoA, BoM and proclaims that blacks aren't worthy of the priesthood. This becomes a practice for the church for years and years. Latter it is changed through revelation and people try to back pedal and explain it away. GBH says something like no more then 2 earrings and people "know" it's from God because the Prophet said it.

A) BY denied a group of Gods children the rights and blessings that come with the priesthood.This policy went unchallenged in Gods true church for 129 years.

This suggest we need to really think about what we take as doctrine or policy.

B ) God denied blacks the rights to the priesthood. (for what ever reason)

Many find this to be uncomfortable in todays PC world but given Gods track record this seems pretty tame.

[ttribe]

...It's not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do we're on our own. Some people put reasons to [the ban] and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong. There is a lesson in that.... The lesson I've drawn from that, I decided a long time ago that I had faith in the command and I had no faith in the reasons that had been suggested for it. Elder Dallin H. Oaks

Is an Apostle duped by 100 (?) year old racist policy?

In 1879, John Taylor conducted an investigation and concluded the policy had started under Joseph Smith, rather than Brigham Young, despite receiving mixed information

(Source FAIR WIKI)

I have no problem with the prophet being wrong. I think it happens more then we like to admit. Problem is the double standard we have in regards to the prophet.( Assuming it was BY)BY interpreters the Bible,BoA, BoM and proclaims that blacks aren't worthy of the priesthood. This becomes a practice for the church for years and years. Latter it is changed through revelation and people try to back pedal and explain it away. GBH says something like no more then 2 earrings and people "know" it's from God because the Prophet said it.

A) BY denied a group of Gods children the rights and blessings that come with the priesthood.This policy went unchallenged in Gods true church for 129 years.

This suggest we need to really think about what we take as doctrine or policy.

B ) God denied blacks the rights to the priesthood. (for what ever reason)

Many find this to be uncomfortable in todays PC world but given Gods track record this seems pretty tame.

Look, you can berate me all you want about the conclusions I may have reached on the issue of blacks and the priesthood, but it seems like a rather useless exercise given that it's been 30 years since the whole thing was reversed, regardless of the source of its initiation. Nevertheless, I'd suggest you read Armand Mauss' article (which is by no means an endorsement for my conclusion, but is very insightful): Link

Furthermore, I have taken to heart statements such as this from Elder McConkie when he said - "Forget everything I have said, or whatâ?¦Brigham Youngâ?¦or whomsoever has saidâ?¦that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world."

I think there's more than enough room for my conclusion in that statement.

[hordak]

, but it seems like a rather useless exercise given that it's been 30 years since the whole thing was reversed, regardless of the source of its initiation.

I would agree. Though I'm not trying to berate. Just support my opinion

I think there's more than enough room for my conclusion in that statement.

Fair enough. You could be right.

Do you find yourself more skeptical/cautious when it comes to following the Prophet?

[ttribe]

Do you find yourself more skeptical/cautious when it comes to following the Prophet?

Not at all. Ultimately, whether the priesthood ban was initiated by God Himself or not, it served as a significant trial and refiner's fire for many of His children and thousands (if not more) were likely blessed for their obedience and endurance.