Is the Church sometimes influenced by the philosophies of men?

[Senator]

And that is bad?

Umm...yeh

[phaedrus ut]

Again lame. There is nothing in the manual about "Deacons, Teachers, and Priests that it's preferred that white boys choose white girls and all other racial arrangements are inferior?" You made this up out of whole cloth. it is a fabircation and nothing more.

This is presicly why I said your comments were lame. You have an agenda to show something that is not there. I hope Nak sees your comments and can now see why I posted what I did.

Actually my conclusion was based upon Spencer Kimball's actual teaching. If you read the full speech that is being quoted in the manual you'll see my conclusions are correct. President Kimball taught numerous times on the subject. Here are a few more of his quotes.

Now, the brethren feel that it is not the wisest thing to cross racial lines in dating and marrying. There is no condemnation. We have had some of our fine young people who have crossed the lines. We hope they will be very happy, but experience of the brethren through a hundred years has proved to us that marriage is a very difficult thing under any circumstances and the difficulty increases in interrace marriages

[Questing Beast]

Hi! I haven't posted much because I'm reading and studying and learning with the help of a neighbor, two missionaries, and three church members.

...

As I said, I'm new, and maybe way off the mark here, but that's how I see it now. I could be wrong.

Thanks for listening.

Blessings,

Blossom

Fascinating! An "investigator" on the Mormon Dialogue forum. You are not "way off the mark here", imho. Good ideas originate from "God"; everything does, even the bad stuff, because of our dual natures and temptations working through our free will. It's all designed to direct us through common sense (spirituality) and experience toward Joy. So a healthy lifestyle is foundational to the wellness of the physical body; which frees the spirit to pursue knowledge without distraction, etc.

Just so you know: I am a practicing Mormon, but I do not believe that any religion holds a preeminent position over another. If Mormonism works for you then that's a good enough reason to associate with it for the time being....

[David T]

Actually my conclusion was based upon Spencer Kimball's actual teaching. If you read the full speech that is being quoted in the manual you'll see my conclusions are correct. President Kimball taught numerous times on the subject. Here are a few more of his quotes.

So no. SWK didn't actually say that white boys should marry white girls he said Caucasians marry Caucasians.

No it doesn't distort it at all. The attempts at a soft interpretation of his quote are ignoring the context of the full talk and his many numerous statements, contemporary with the quote, that confirm in greater detail his teaching and apparently the teaching that is "unanimous" with all the brethren.

Phaedrus

Your "all other racial arrangements are inferior" doesn't hold up even with the context of what you presented. It doesn't say an indian-indian relationship is inferior to a caucasian-caucasian relationship. While it does present an inferiority (or rather "against counsel") for mixed racial marriages, it does not seem to state any such thing for non-mixed marriages of other races - which would make your "all other racial arrangements are inferior" than "white boys marry white girls" statement incorrect.

I do, however, still think the statement as stands in the current manual, unqualified, without further clarification or explanation, is unfortunate, and VERY easily interpreted maliciously.

[phaedrus ut]

Your "all other racial arrangements are inferior" doesn't hold up even with the context of what you presented.

Ah OK. Now I see the reason for the confusion. I wrote "it's preferred that white boys choose white girls and all other racial arrangements are inferior". I meant all non-matching race arrangements for the "white boys" not that all others were inferior.

And to clarify my criticism I don't think the LDS church is a racists institution. On the contrary I think the church works very hard for diversity and racial acceptance. The problem is the church WAS a racist institution and there remains institutional memory and beliefs that haven't completely purged them self from the system. Scott's initial question to me was a reflection of that belief with his "show me something from the past 25 years" challenge. I can infer from that request that it would be very easy to find something before that time frame but his belief was that there wasn't anything in recent teachings. The 2011 Aaronic Priesthood manual clearly shows that to be incorrect.

I have 2 sons, a Priest and a Deacon, that will be learning out of this manual this year. I find teaching them the preference for a future wife of the same race offensive. It's contrary to the ethical and moral behavior I ask them to have.

Phaedrus

[Scott Lloyd]

Actually my conclusion was based upon Spencer Kimball's actual teaching. If you read the full speech that is being quoted in the manual you'll see my conclusions are correct. President Kimball taught numerous times on the subject. Here are a few more of his quotes.

So no. SWK didn't actually say that white boys should marry white girls he said Caucasians marry Caucasians.

No it doesn't distort it at all. The attempts at a soft interpretation of his quote are ignoring the context of the full talk and his many numerous statements, contemporary with the quote, that confirm in greater detail his teaching and apparently the teaching that is "unanimous" with all the brethren.

Phaedrus

I want to avoid an endless and pointless back-and-forth on this, but you have indeed distorted this counsel, as one of your subsequent quotations from Spencer W. Kimball demonstrates. Even in the 1960s context in which the statement was made, there is no expression that interracial marriages are inherently "inferior." He clearly says there is no condemnation, that many fine young people have married interracially, and the hope is they will be very happy.

There is nothing indecent or wicked or unkind about pointing out that an interracial marriage can pose additional and unique challenges in an already challenging endeavor, and that young people contemplating marriage ought to be wise and prudent in their planning. Mate selection, of all arenas of human interaction, calls for discrimination, not because one sees other people as inferior in God's eyes, but because one, insofar as is reasonably possible, needs to form favorable conditions in advance for the marriage to succeed. In doing so, a whole host of considerations come to bear, cultural compatibility being only one.

So no, you have not as yet presented anything that indicates Spencer W. Kimball or anyone else in authority in the Church regards interracial marriage as "inferior." I doubt you can, or you surely would have posted it by now. On the contrary, the fact that interracial marriages are solemnized in temples under the same conditions of moral worthiness as other marriages is a clear indication of the Church's approbation.

[David T]

So no, you have not as yet presented anything that indicates Spencer W. Kimball or anyone else in authority in the Church regards interracial marriage as "inferior."

Just recommended against generally.

[Scott Lloyd]

Just recommended against generally.

One could perhaps frame the matter hypothetically in this way: Given two or more options, and all other things being equal, marriage within one's own race and culture so as to avoid inherent pressures on the marriage that might occur otherwise would be the preferable choice.

That said, I could conceive of many, many things that would be far worse than marrying interracially. Marriage to someone hostile to the LDS faith springs readily to mind. On that I am discriminatory, and highly so.

[Zakuska]

We are unanimous, all of the Brethren, in feeling and recommending that Indians marry Indians, and Mexicans marry Mexicans; the Chinese marry Chinese and the Japanese marry Japanese; that the Caucasians marry the Caucasians, and the Arabs marry Arabs. (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball,p. 303)

I don't see why people should have a problem with this council beings how some of Pauls poor marriage council made it into cannonized Scripture. The scriptures are chuck full of stories about all the problems and issues people faced when they married interacially, interfaith, inter-polical boundary, and the difficulties are numerous. But at the same time the Sciptures are also full of success stories of this nature as well. (Pauls parents, Timothy's parents, Ruth)

But I agree, with the Church becoming Globalized this has become more and more antiquated. For example... I know many missionaries coming home (I one of them) who married spouses from the cultures where they served. Yes there are problems and issues with this. For example, my wife (of 17 glorious years) is now a US citizen and is the only of her family here. It causes issues because my family are our only support frame work we have where as all my siblings have support from both sides of their families. Also, when the Inlaws come to visit they live with us for several months at a time. So it does complicate some things.

At the same time I also know of some failed marriages of Missionaries who married spouses from where they served and they failed for some of the same reasons. (eg. Two of my friends got used so the "spouses" could gain US citizenship.)

[Calm]

Just recommended against generally.

Recognizing something is more difficult (and recommending against adding difficulty upon difficulty) is not the same thing as saying it is inferior (I'm not saying nack is saying this, just using his quote as a springboard). Sometimes the difficult thing can be the superior prize, sometimes not, sometimes it has nothing to do with what is superior or inferior but just with probabilities of success.

I counseled my not so social son before his mission and after his mission to date more than one girl due to the results I had seen among my friends of those men who had chosen to marry to their high school sweethearts with no other experience and then had midlife crises with regrets of wondering what else was out there. Several of these marriages did not survive. He agreed completely every time this subject came up and then went out and got engaged to the first young woman he dated postmission without other experience. He delayed for several weeks in telling us of his engagement because he thought we would disapprove. He was wrong, it was his choice and if he was willing to take the risk, then so be it, at least he understood that the risk was there and therefore he and his wife could prepare for it and hopefully thus avoid the problems that those who hadn't been aware of the risk had run into.

From my personal experience I would say there is a difference between being cautious about something and being against it.

add-on: it is possible that when originally given this counsel had an element of racism motivating it (it may not have been having seen President Kimball in action though); this does not mean that those who have adopted just the limited quotation in the manual do so out of racist motivations in any amount as people adapt what others say to their own purposes all the time.

I know the manuals like to quote prophets and other church leaders to provide support for the instructions given within and the quote may be used because of lack of more recent comments (or just laziness or a particular fondness for President Kimball or perhaps a desire to have a variety of sources, who knows...). I am hoping that they will use a more precisely worded one in the future so that the religious discrimination is front and center in the kids' minds with cautions that will help them recognize that more commonalities make for less complications in an inherently complicated process where even trivial issues can end up being the deal breaker in my experience.

[todd520]

I think it was a recommendation to marry within your culture

At the time it was easy to use race to deliniate cultures.

I think the advice is still good, but one can't use race anymore to easily define culture

Religion is also a good deliniator of culture, with cross religion marriages proven to be more challenging and less enduring.

I think a common religion is more valuable than a common race.

[keithb]

I think it was a recommendation to marry within your culture

At the time it was easy to use race to deliniate cultures.

I think the advice is still good, but one can't use race anymore to easily define culture

Religion is also a good deliniator of culture, with cross religion marriages proven to be more challenging and less enduring.

I think a common religion is more valuable than a common race.

So, basically, if a return missionary who served in South America wanted to marry a girl outside of his culture, you would consider "good" advice that he should marry a girl from the U.S. instead? Why? Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior? Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

It's nice to see that racism/ bias against "non-white" cultures still exists in some members of the church.

[David T]

So, basically, if a return missionary who served in South America wanted to marry a girl outside of his culture, you would consider "good" advice that he should marry a girl from the U.S. instead? Why? Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior? Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

It's nice to see that racism/ bias against "non-white" cultures still exists in some members of the church.

In fairness, what was said was that difference in culture also often means difference in how things are understood, and additional layers of difficulty in communication, additional economic or practical issues, etc. Additional elements that can add additional friction to a marriage. I don't think anyone here in this thread has advocated a belief that other races are inferior (well, one did present that they did strongly affirm that at a time before 1978 all Africans really were cursed by God - but that was a single abberation).

[Deborah]

Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior? Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

It has nothing to do with inferior vs superior but with cultural differences. Marriage is hard enough when you have most things in common and such things as cultural expectations can cause conflict. That doesn't mean such marriages don't work, and I know many of them, but it does mean there are additional challenges to overcome.

[Calm]

So, basically, if a return missionary who served in South America wanted to marry a girl outside of his culture, you would consider "good" advice that he should marry a girl from the U.S. instead? Why? Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior? Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

It's nice to see that racism/ bias against "non-white" cultures still exists in some members of the church.

Seriously? You don't see any other possible reason for telling someone to marry within their own culture besides racism?

Let me help.....What about if someone were to recommend a Russian girl pass up that clean cut American young man? Or even counsel that a Canadian might not want to marry an American (seen that for good reason too)? What is the justification in the cases where the only race involved is identical?

[Zakuska]

Seriously? You don't see any other possible reason for telling someone to marry within their own culture besides racism?

Let me help.....What about if someone were to recommend a Russian girl pass up that clean cut American young man? Or even counsel that a Canadian might not want to marry an American (seen that for good reason too)? What is the justification in the cases where the only race involved is identical?

Well everybody knows better than to marry one of those filthy Frenchies!

[Duncan]

Well everybody knows better than to marry one of those filthy Frenchies!

Oh that is rich, The one blessing a Canadian could get by marrying a Yank is two Thanksgivings!

[Zakuska]

Oh that is rich, The one blessing a Canadian could get by marrying a Yank is two Thanksgivings!

One with Stuffed Turkey and another with stuffed Texas Toad.

Yum! I get the drum stick!

[todd520]

So, basically, if a return missionary who served in South America wanted to marry a girl outside of his culture, you would consider "good" advice that he should marry a girl from the U.S. instead? Why? Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior? Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

It's nice to see that racism/ bias against "non-white" cultures still exists in some members of the church.

You completely missed my point (I bet on purpose)

- it's about culture not color

- religion is a big part of culture

So,

A Utah mishie marrying someone from South American, who was raised LDS, would have a strong shared culture to work with.

The same mishie would not have much in common with a white atheist, raised in LA by ex-flower children, who smoked pot daily for relaxation

The culture of alcohol or drugs has a huge impact, and must be shared by a couple.

Historically, color did imply culture, now it doesn't,

Now, color is irrelevant.

[urbanaut]

Is it just me, or does anyone else feel that the Sacrament Meeting talks are comprised of the speaker's philosophies mingled with occasional scripture references? Not that I don't enjoy the talks or find them spiritually uplifting, but they still appear to be the "philosophies of men (and women), mingled with scripture."

[Daniel Peterson]

As long as humans are involved with the Church, there will be human influences in and on the Church.

Is anybody really surprised by this?

[elguanteloko]

As long as humans are involved with the Church, there will be human influences in and on the Church.

Is anybody really surprised by this?

The believer should.

[volgadon]

The believer should.

Why?

[volgadon]

So, basically, if a return missionary who served in South America wanted to marry a girl outside of his culture, you would consider "good" advice that he should marry a girl from the U.S. instead? Why? Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior? Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

It's nice to see that racism/ bias against "non-white" cultures still exists in some members of the church.

It is good advice, just not applicable to each and every individual situation. My wife and I are from different countries and different cultures (though my ancestors come from the same country but a different culture). I'm Israeli, she is Ukrainian. If I hadn't been exposed to Slavic people and culture from childhood, or served a mission in a heavily Ukrainian part of Russia, I might not have married here. here is a small example of the friction caused by differing cultures. One of our Russian friends married an American. They love each other a lot, great marriage, but he put down New Year's, "just another food holiday, no reason to celebrate it." Whereas for a Russian, New Year's is THE holiday, as dear as Christmas and Thanksgiving rolled together. His dismissive attitude hurt her, of course. They still have a great marriage, though.

[Pahoran]

So, basically, if a return missionary who served in South America wanted to marry a girl outside of his culture, you would consider "good" advice that he should marry a girl from the U.S. instead?

Generally speaking, yes.

Why? Because you basically feel the other culture (and the associated "race") are inferior?

No.

Because it is the experience of the Brethren -- and it is borne out by my own experience -- that different cultural backgrounds create different and sometimes conflicting expectations in marriage. These differences can manifest themselves in quite unexpected ways, even to someone who speaks the language and who has lived within the culture for a time, such as a returned Missionary.

This is a completely pragmatic observation that has nothing to do with "inferiority," only difference. As every intelligent participant realises, it does not mean that any culture is "inferior" to any other. That is an asinine assumption for which you must take the entire responsbility.

Your assumption relates to nothing that has actually been posted in this thread. IOW, you've leaped to the conclusion predetermined for you by your prejudices. As such, you've proudly provided the only actual expression of bigotry to be seen so far.

Congratulations.

Otherwise, how on earth could you justify this statement?

See above.

It's nice to see that racism/ bias against "non-white" cultures still exists in some members of the church.

You "see" what you expect and want to see, not what is there.

Regards,

Pahoran