Lds Blacks And Women…Not He Same Thing In The Priesthood.

[Calm]

That would not excuse it, we were not being persecuted by Southern Churches.

White Protestant America was hardly limited to Southern Churches, nor was the South the only seat of racism against blacks in the US.

[KevinG]

i am all for not making up reasons. The worst things I heard as a missionary, were other missionaries telling investigators made up reasons for this or that. We loose the divinity of the Gospel when we make up reasons for why things happen as things happen within the Church.

One thing, we do know for a Doctrinal fact, is why the ban was rescinded, Official Declaration 2 gives us those reasons and there are 3 reasons the ban was rescinded:

1. Past prophets spoke of the day when the ban would be rescinded.

2. In 1978, the current prophets sought the will of the Lord concerning the ban.

3. The promised day of permitting all worthy males to be ordained to the Priesthood had arrived.

anything beyond these 3 reasons is a man made and is not supported by the Official Doctrine of the LDS Church.

Agreed.

Speculating to defend ourselves from charges by critics over things we no longer do is just playing into their hands.

Name another church with a foundational doctrine that says we should never discriminate and an organizational structure that requires us to work with our immediate geographic neighbors regardless of race, culture or income.

[thesometimesaint]

calmoriah:

True enough, but the South made it De Jure and started a Civil War over it, in addition to forming the Southern Baptist Convention. The North while just as bigotted in many ways remained De Facto.

http://www.google.co...iw=1366&bih=587

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

White Protestant America was hardly limited to Southern Churches, nor was the South the only seat of racism against blacks in the US.

It was close...I grew up in it.

[KevinG]

The center of race wars in the US was Kansas in the 1850s.

[Calm]

Agreed.

Speculating to defend ourselves from charges by critics over things we no longer do is just playing into their hands.

Name another church with a foundational doctrine that says we should never discriminate and an organizational structure that requires us to work with our immediate geographic neighbors regardless of race, culture or income.

I don't know about doctrinal...I think there has been doctrinal statements to that effect, but isn't the Catholic church structured on geographical congregations as well (people are assigned to attend the parish they live in). I don't know if they are as strict about it as we are, that you are strongly encouraged to attend all meetings and volunteer/participate in your assigned ward and not ward-shop.

[Calm]

It was close...I grew up in it.

I grew up outside of the South. There was plenty of racism up north and out west to be found unfortunately. The South likely had the strongest concentration, but it hardly was so strong as to diminish the racism elsewhere to almost nothing in comparison.

[Calm]

calmoriah:

True enough, but the South made it De Jure and started a Civil War over it, in addition to forming the Southern Baptist Convention. The North while just as bigotted in many ways remained De Facto.

http://www.google.co...iw=1366&bih=587

I am not disagreeing here. I am pointing out that even if the claim that LDS weren't being persecuted at the time by southern churches (since much of the persecution came from the federal government and the South had influence on that even if one ignores persecution occurring outside of the South itself, I don't think one can eliminate the influence of southern churches on federal policy or the attitude towards LDS in general), that this would imply that LDS would have been safe from significant persecution over interracial issues by those holding what we view as racist views today as Pa Pa seems to be implying.

[thesometimesaint]

calmoriah:

I'm sorry if I can across as argueing I'm not.

[Bob Oliverio]

I have to disagree with you there. We are to change the church into Zion...and that requires a lot of change. We do that by seeking after good things and desiring righteousness. That, incidently, was the reason the ban was rescinded because there has been no evidence that it was instituted by God and every indication it was not.

I have to whole heartily agree with this statement.  This is an area I really wish the Church would come out and admit it was a mistake of men and apologize for the past treatment.

And if you read today's explainations by the GA's, notice how careful they are not to imply that the ban was a mistake or that the GA's and prophets of that time were in error

This is, with all due respect a rather silly defense.  Of course they wouldn't say that - it would have destroyed membership in those years.  But Ms Juliann is correct, there is no evidence to support the withdrawal of the priesthood from blacks was ever a revelation or direction of God.  And Church doctrine/scriptures surely don't support the withdrawal.

This is one issue where it makes complete sense for the Church to apologize and get rid of this image.  Is it any wonder why we have less than 1 percent African American membership in our US Church today?  An apology would be such a blessing for our members and do such great things for our image.

[BlueDreams]

This is one issue where it makes complete sense for the Church to apologize and get rid of this image. Is it any wonder why we have less than 1 percent African American membership in our US Church today? An apology would be such a blessing for our members and do such great things for our image.

I don't know if apologizing would actually help. I got curious about the stats and did a quick googled search and the U.S. mormon population in general is lacking in all minority populations, other non-hispanic minorities being the closest to being representative to the total u.s. population. Black saints made up 3%. And overall, according to this site we have an 86% white population, compared to 71% of the total u.s. population. So not great...but sadly not the worse either. Mainline protestants were 91% white. Jewish pop was 95% white. And orthodox christians were 87%. From what I've seen, it isn't really the church's stance, but the church's reputation and culture is that of being a white church. That, to me was a big detriment that an apology isn't likely to fix.

With luv,

Bd

[KevinG]

The culture is a hard one to integrate into for anyone. For many blacks there is added pressure not to "act white" or "join a white church". I have several freinds who struggle to reconcile our history with their family's opinions of them for being Mormon.

It takes several decades for a cultural transition to occur. We are seeing much more integration in the LDS church now thirty years after the priesthood restriction was lifted. This is primarily a North American issue as LDS in other regions tend to be local with a few US expats mixed in.

The US is also segragated and geographic wards and stakes reflect that. Here in Atlanta the decision was made a decade ago to add some affluent suburban wards to the city stakes (I suspect) in order to integrate the economic and racial profiles of the Saints. When you go to the Temple the diversity of the surrounding area is reflected in the worhsippers.

A few years ago our BSA Troop attended with an innercity and mostly black Scout Troop that happened to be LDS. Our boys and their boys noticed the Moroni patch on their uniforms and after an initial surprise at finding another LDS troop that looked very different- the boys were suddenly each others best pals - having the priesthood and common beliefs between them.

It takes time. I have a cynical suspicion that the people rubbing others noses in the priesthood ban of 30 years ago are bigots who cannot be rightly considered Saints (according to the Prophet Hinkley) or they are more interested in creating divisions between the Saints and potential converts to the Gospel. A strong accusation I know but after 5 minutes of finding what they have in common even 12 year old boys quickly move past skin color and different personal circumstances.

[why me]

That would not excuse it, we were not being persecuted by Southern Churches.

The frontier was an intolerant place and difference or diversity was not appreciated. The Indians can verify the intolerance. And white america was extremely intolerant of difference as the mormons were to discover. I don't think that having a black man being able to marry 4 white women would have established a fan club among the nonmormons. But there certainly would be rath against the church, especially from the missouri crowd. Would the church have survived such a practice? Polygamy was a hot potato as is without that complication.

And it seems that when Black Pete took upon himself to be a polygamist and attach himself to a few white women, the leadership got scared and action was taken. Was it fear? Perhaps. But I don't think that the church would have survived the onslaught.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

The frontier was an intolerant place and difference or diversity was not appreciated.

True, not in any form. Mob rule was the order of that day. Especially in June of 1844.

[why me]

True, not in any form. Mob rule was the order of that day. Especially in June of 1844.

I think that people can forget just what it meant to be a mormon back then. I think that Black Pete gave the leadership a shock and awe experience when he began to practice unauthorized polygamy by taking a few white wives. Back then even if a black person married just one white woman was one too many for most white americans. Never mind polygamy. I think that the reaction to Black Pete and the fear that this may have caused the leadership led to what came to be known as the ban. It was church preservation.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I think that people can forget just what it meant to be a mormon back then. I think that Black Pete gave the leadership a shock and awe experience when he began to practice unauthorized polygamy by taking a few white wives.

This is what i think fueled the ban to a large degree.

[Calm]

Can someone please explain to me why this couldn't have just been handled with the laws against interracial marriage?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Can someone please explain to me why this couldn't have just been handled with the laws against interracial marriage?

Are you arguing for this or asking about it? It was on the frontier where this occurred; Winter Quarters...very little law, if any.

[why me]

Are you arguing for this or asking about it? It was on the frontier where this occurred; Winter Quarters...very little law, if any.

If one listens to the podcast, it will be clear that this is what sparked the restrictions which eventually led to the ban. However, I do believe that if the mormons were free to practice their faith and did not have the experience that they had, it would have been different. If one thinks of the negative publicity that the lds church would have gotten if the newspapers picked up on the fact that polygamy was being practiced in the frontier and in utah and black men were being married to several white women in polygamous marriages, the result would have been swift and furious among the white population.

It was frowned upon in the 20th century for the first 8 decades if a person was in a white-black relationship never mind a polygamous relationship with 15 white wives being married to one black male. .

[Calm]

If one listens to the podcast, it will be clear that this is what sparked the restrictions which eventually led to the ban. However, I do believe that if the mormons were free to practice their faith and did not have the experience that they had, it would have been different. If one thinks of the negative publicity that the lds church would have gotten if the newspapers picked up on the fact that polygamy was being practiced in the frontier and in utah and black men were being married to several white women in polygamous marriages, the result would have been swift and furious among the white population.

It was frowned upon in the 20th century for the first 8 decades if a person was in a white-black relationship never mind a polygamous relationship with 15 white wives being married to one black male. .

I am not asking how it 'sparked' the restrictions, I am asking why the restrictions would have to go so far as to exclude the Priesthood from all rather than just establishing a policy of no interracial temple or nontemple marriages among members?

[Calm]

Are you arguing for this or asking about it? It was on the frontier where this occurred; Winter Quarters...very little law, if any.

And how would having a ban on Priesthood be any more effective in preventing the relationships than having a law against interracial marriages and a policy against any interracial temple marriages?

What I am saying and is being ignored is the ban on the priesthood for the primary reason to prevent interracial marriages is overkill. Laws against interracial marriages were a dime a dozen back then besides being a cultural taboo that would only need a little publicizing from church leadership to be sufficient to discourage as much as placing a ban on AA blacks having the priesthood.

Would it be rational to forbid all your children no matter what age from even getting into a car in order to prevent your youngest child who was only 12 from driving a car when all you had to do was point out that it was illegal for her to drive?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

And how would having a ban on Priesthood be any more effective in preventing the relationships than having a law against interracial marriages and a policy against any interracial temple marriages?

What I am saying and is being ignored is the ban on the priesthood for the primary reason to prevent interracial marriages is overkill. Laws against interracial marriages were a dime a dozen back then besides being a cultural taboo that would only need a little publicizing from church leadership to be sufficient to discourage as much as placing a ban on AA blacks having the priesthood.

Would it be rational to forbid all your children no matter what age from even getting into a car in order to prevent your youngest child who was only 12 from driving a car when all you had to do was point out that it was illegal for her to drive?

Men are not separated from the times in which they live, and despite “our’ best efforts we are to a degree held hostage to them. Maybe the Lord had a reason, but I think that it had to do more with the times in which people lived. It did serve a purpose in discouraging such unions…simply put laws did not stop the actions some would take to impose their prejudices. As far as I know the ban only concerned black people marrying whites. Also interracial marriage among whites and Indians was more common, and no such ban existed that I know of within the Church. Also, white men marrying black women was less frowned upon that black men marrying white women; sexual politics being what it was.

[why me]

I am not asking how it 'sparked' the restrictions, I am asking why the restrictions would have to go so far as to exclude the Priesthood from all rather than just establishing a policy of no interracial temple or nontemple marriages among members?

I think that Orson Hyde and Brigham Young were shocked and awed by the black pete experience. I dont think that it occured to the leaders at that time that a member who was african american would take it upon himself to practice polygamy with white women. I think that if no action was taken a precedence would have been set and it would not have been a good one for that time frame. Now was god behind the ban? I could see why he would be if it meant preserving his church on the earth. We need to face the fact that america was an intolerant nation not just against all those who were not white skin but also when it came to religion. The catholics were also not doing that well. But for the mormons, the idea that a black man would be permitted to marry 3 or 4 white women, all heck would have been ignited. It would have been bad enough for the mobs if they discovered that polygamy was practiced but a mixed race polygamous relationship, would have brought human hatred and violence upon the saints.

[Calm]

I think that if no action was taken a precedence would have been set and it would not have been a good one for that time frame.

So excommunicate the guy and put him in prison for breaking the law and ban any interracial temple marriages.

Taking the move to not even allow black men to marry black women in the temple makes no sense.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

So excommunicate the guy and put him in prison for breaking the law and ban any interracial temple marriages.

Taking the move to not even allow black men to marry black women in the temple makes no sense.

Agreed.