Black Women And The Endowment

[cinepro]

You'd be better off to just ignore everything BRM said, unless our Father said the same thing either personally or through our Lord and the Holy Spirit. Those are the 3 I rely on to know what the truth is and anything else is just another person's opinion.

 

That's a nice sentiment (and an eminently practical one), but totally at odds with the foundational claims of the LDS Church regarding the role of Apostles and Prophets.

 

 

 

We can always trust the living prophets. Their teachings reflect the will of the Lord, who declared: “What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same” (D&C 1:38).

Edited August 4, 2014 by cinepro

[thesometimesaint]

That's a nice sentiment (and an eminently practical one), but totally at odds with the foundational claims of the LDS Church regarding the role of Apostles and Prophets.

 

We can always trust the living prophets. Their teachings reflect the will of the Lord, who declared: “What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same” (D&C 1:38).

 

 I'm not willing to go that far either. As I will be the only person held responsible for my actions. I reserve the right to disagree with anything not confirmed to me by the Holy Ghost. As JS said "A prophet is only a prophet when acting as such".

[Guest]

I've not heard this, Pa Pa. CFR, please? Or is this your interpretation of what the Church actually said?

Admitting it was cultural is not the same thing? Maybe it is in my mind that this is an admission that it was wrong...if so I like it here in my mind. I pray you are not going to defend the practice? Edited August 4, 2014 by Pa Pa

[Bikeemikey]

Well, then, what do you do about the entirely relativistic dilemma which this may entail? Should we adopt the existentialist conclusion that there is "no exit," or is there a way out? Please advise us.

There are so many things we want the concept of truth to apply to, however, we should really try to grow up and realize that truth applies to a very small subset of things. Stuff like Priesthood bans and other hocus-pocus just are not in the same sphere as the principles to which the word truth can rightfully be applied.

[rameumptom]

While women do not receive priesthood office, in the temple they DO receive priesthood power and authority.

 

With the 1978 revelation, this discussion has become a moot point. 

[rameumptom]

Pa Pa, what the Church stated is we do not know the reason for the ban.  It may have been required of the Lord, but we do not know why.  What we do know is that folklore such as the curse of Cain/Canaan and fence sitters in the premortal world are false doctrine.

[Tacenda]

Pa Pa, what the Church stated is we do not know the reason for the ban. It may have been required of the Lord, but we do not know why. What we do know is that folklore such as the curse of Cain/Canaan and fence sitters in the premortal world are false doctrine.

False doctrine from so many prophets through the years? No wonder that church essay is tough to swallow, and have led some out of the church.

[bjw]

False doctrine from so many prophets through the years? No wonder that church essay is tough to swallow, and have led some out of the church.

I agree. It's too late for the church to back down on the doctrines taught for many years, and there's no reason too. I like the timeline article in the current Ensign, where it ties the prophecy about blessings being available to all with OD2. I think the ban was released at the right time, since now people are more comfortable with equality, especially in the south.

However, my father visited an EV church in a southern state that to this day will not allow blacks to be voted in as elders or sit as pastors. I don't think it's an official thing but is just the racist attitude of the congregation.

[USU78]

It was the post-WWII era that saw the European powers retreat from both Mediterranean and Subsaharan Africa:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization_of_Africa

 

Here is a list of countries, in historical order, and the dates of their respective independence:

 

1951:  Libya

1952:  Egypt

1956:  Morocco; Sudan; Tunisia

1957:  Ghana

1958:  Guinea

1960:  Benin; Burkina-Faso; Cameroon; Central Africa; Chad; Congo; Cote d'Ivoire; Gabon; Madagascar; Mali; Mauritania; Niger; Nigeria; Somalia; Togo

1961:  Sierra Leon; South Africa; Tanzania

1962:  Algeria; Burundi; Rwanda; Uganda

1963:  Kenya

1964:  Malawi; Zambia

1965:  Gambia

1966:  Botswana; Lesotho; Namibia*

1968:  Equatorial Guinea; Mauritius; Swaziland

1973:  Guinea-Bissau

1975:  Angola; Cape Verde; Comoros; Mozambique; Sao Tome

1976:  Sahwari; Seychelles

1977:  Djibouti

1978:  OD2

1980:  Zimbabwe

 

I find this timeline significant:  Only upon the freeing of Africa from European domination was OD2 received. 

 

Just because the Twelve and the First Presidency were united in their concern over the Brazilian Saints and the Temple work there does not mean that G-d's reasons were not somewhat different, though not inconsistent with those concerns.

 

Why the wait?  Who knows?  All I know is, with only Zimbabwe's independence coming after OD2, and the rest of the Continent being finally both economically, culturally and politically present in the world G-d chose to open up the continent to His Gospel.

[Guest]

False doctrine from so many prophets through the years? No wonder that church essay is tough to swallow, and have led some out of the church.

This is the curse of any Church, none need cast stones. I was raised on a steady diet of such things growing up in the Southern Baptist Church...I guess it is why I have had my fill.

[bjw]

This is the curse of any Church, none need cast stones. I was raised on a steady diet of such things growing up in the Southern Baptist Church...I guess it is why I have had my fill.

The Christian high school I attended taught the curse of cain doctrine regarding blacks, so it is by no means an exclusively Mormon doctrine.

[Guest]

The Christian high school I attended taught the curse of cain doctrine regarding blacks, so it is by no means an exclusively Mormon doctrine.

It was taught in Church, in school, at the dinner table Evernote sometimes. Then books were required to read....again had my fill. I would not have joined if still in force in 1979.

[Guest]

The Christian high school I attended taught the curse of cain doctrine regarding blacks, so it is by no means an exclusively Mormon doctrine.

Makes it no less awful that we did.

[Robert F. Smith]

Makes it no less awful that we did.

Speak for yourself, Pa Pa.  A lot of us had no truck with that sort of undoctrinal nonsense, and we rejoiced when it was overthrown.  The Mormon people had finally grown up enough to merit clarification -- a return to Joseph Smith's own way of doing things, which included no such priesthood ban.

[Carebear0411]

Fine, then I choose to forget everything that President Monson says because I think I'm going to like the ideas of the next prophet better. And I think I'll quit studying Joseph Smith's teachings and only read things published since 2013.

So much for eternal truths...I completely disagree with BRM that current truth is always more correct than past truth. Truth is truth, and we are just as likely to get something wrong today as we were 50 years ago, 100 years ago, or at the beginning of the dispensation. Truth doesn't change and it's arrogance to assume that we are more correct now than then. All we know when there is disagreement is someone is probably wrong. Could be the old guys, could be the new guys.

God made this world for mortal, sinful, error prone humans to learn to be like Him. Unfortunately, God must pull from among those sinful, error prone mortals his leaders. There has never been a prophet or apostle without fault (Jonah comes to mind). God has made it clear that He will not interfere with the affairs of men unless He is called upon to do so. Thus, human error has always played a part in the leadership of His people. But, He always corrects errors if those errors interfere with the proclamation of His gospel.

The PH was taken from the earth because of error and conscious acting against God's desires. It took God 1700 years before He restored the gospel in its fullness. Brigham Young and other leaders, through a failure of understanding concerning black lineage, banned them from the PH and the temple. It took 138 to correct this blunder, but that hardly breaks God's record.

If you notice David Or. McKay, who was in support of the ban, served from 1951 - 1970. He was taken home as civil rights pressure on the church was at its height. In quick succession, J.F. Smith and Harold B. Lee, both who adhered to the ban, served and passed on within three years. I believe this occurred because the time had come to correct the mistake made by Brother Brigham and God knew that Spencer W. Kimble was the one to make it happen.

If women are ever to have the PH, the means to have in place a prophet who will make that happen will be arranged much the same way.

There are people who seem to think political pressure is what brings changes about in the church. That would mean God was not at the helm, but rather man. If that is true than everything about the church is false, and I know for myself that is simply not the case. It is the

hand of God correcting human error (in His own good time) not public opinion dictating church policy.

Edited August 13, 2014 by Carebear0411