hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 16 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: "Spend a year", that would only make matters worse. A simple apology, or an acknowledgment will do, and the members will follow suit. But spending a year teaching a negative will not have positive results. Two reasons, its part of our atonement for the mistakes of the past (repentance as an institution.) Its also would help with understanding how racism is still present in the church today and help towards changing the culture to be more inclusive. A simple apology doesn't cut it.
Tacenda Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 I watched a news clip the other day with Bro. Gray, so was looking for that, but these popped up so until I find the recent news interview I think these videos are pertinent to Papa's thread here.
CV75 Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 9 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said: The Church is going to celebrate the lifting of the Priesthood Ban, for African men and women, which allowed them and their spouses to enter into the Temple, and receive their ordinances. Some years back the Church issue a letter that listed a number of issues as to why there was such a ban. In the letter it spoke of a few things, but also commented "social issues of that time" as one factor. I joined the Church less than a year after the ban was lifted. I fear that if that had still been policy, I might have never joined. My wish list for this upcoming celebration, is that the joy will also include another letter. A letter that reminds all people everywhere that the pigment of a man or woman's skin, is not the pigment of their soul. Let me explain, "God looks upon the inner man or woman, and upon their hearts. His gaze upon this world, and his ability to see love and purity, is not blocked by someone's race. I hope there will be a letter, noting that the policy was wrong, and had more to do with man's limitations to see beyond, and not our God. May God give to our leaders to strength of mind, body and soul, and grant them the wisdom to know what to say. Thoughts? I think there is a difference in tone and content between cerebrating "lifting the ban" and celebrating "the 1978 revelation of priesthood". https://www.lds.org/church/events/worldwide-priesthood-celebration?lang=eng Or between the 30th year celebration: http://www.ldschurchnewsarchive.com/articles/52093/1978-revelation-commemorated.html The 20th: https://www.deseretnews.com/article/634722/Group-marks-20-years-of-black-priesthood.amp?pg=all and the 10th? https://www.deseretnews.com/article/6966/KBYU-DOCUMENTS-10TH-ANNIVERSARY-OF-PRIESTHOOD-REVELATION.html ...(not secure): https://www.ldschurchnewsarchive.com/articles/17823/Year-in-review--1988.html
CV75 Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 42 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: I would go further, they need to apologize explicitly *** How can a group that perpetuated these practices for so long and even resisted the social change happening, turn around and celebrate ending this evil practice? Is that really a celebration? Should we celebrate the end of polygamy? Should groups that used to practice abuse celebrate the end of their abusive practices? I'm not sure this should be a celebration considering the baggage that the church has on this subject, it seems problematic from my perspective, but honestly I'd like to know how people of color view this celebration because I'm a privileged white guy. As we can see, some will not accept an apology as sincere. Which is why I think the celebration focuses on the revelation, not the lifting of the ban. LDS people of all colors recognize the actual revelation as the work of God. 1
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 9 minutes ago, Tacenda said: I watched a news clip the other day with Bro. Gray, so was looking for that, but these popped up so until I find the recent news interview I think these videos are pertinent to Papa's thread here. Thanks for sharing, Darius Gray is so great.
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, CV75 said: As we can see, some will not accept an apology as sincere. Which is why I think the celebration focuses on the revelation, not the lifting of the ban. LDS people of all colors recognize the actual revelation as the work of God. If someone who was wronged doesn't accept an apology, then the person who wronged them needs to continue to apologize. The burden is on the person or institution to continue to apologize where wrongs were done. Its not a simple check-mark of a box, its a continuing process of atonement. It was a revelation in the sense that church leaders finally realized that God was not backing up their racism. God was not behind it, and they needed to change this policy. Revelation is often a realization of past misunderstandings. But this doesn't make it any less problematic from my perspective. Edited April 19, 2018 by hope_for_things
Marginal Gains Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 20 minutes ago, CV75 said: As we can see, some will not accept an apology as sincere. Which is why I think the celebration focuses on the revelation, not the lifting of the ban. LDS people of all colors recognize the actual revelation as the work of God. I have a problem with the term “celebrate” in relation to this. “My neighbour is celebrating the five year anniversary of him stopping beating his wife” Is it really something to celebrate? I think Papa Bill is right - it should be acknowledged, the mistake of 100 years of racism which God was blamed for, should be apologised for. There should be a commitment to learn from it. But there isn’t going to be any apology, and the Church certainly hasn’t learned from it. The mistakes it made, and which it forced members to make, is being replayed out in the exact same manner with gay people.
Alan Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 1 hour ago, hope_for_things said: I would go further, they need to apologize explicitly for the wrongs of the past There will be no apology because it wasn't wrong.
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 1 minute ago, Alan said: 2 hours ago, hope_for_things said: I would go further, they need to apologize explicitly for the wrongs of the past There will be no apology because it wasn't wrong. Thank you for supporting my point about how the church needs to be more explicitly clear about their past mistakes in order to correct misunderstandings. 2
The Nehor Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 I think we should accept that turnabout is fair play and pick some other ethnicity to deny the Priesthood for a while. I volunteer caucasians. I could use a break from callings for a while. Then we can cycle in a couple of decades to someone else. 1
MiserereNobis Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 On July 15, we are going to celebrate 184 years since the end of the Spanish Inquisition! (not really, but I can imagine a good satirical article on this in the Eye of the Tiber news site) 1
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 7 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I think we should accept that turnabout is fair play and pick some other ethnicity to deny the Priesthood for a while. I volunteer caucasians. I could use a break from callings for a while. Then we can cycle in a couple of decades to someone else. This might be funny except for how prevalent racism is today in the church and the broader society. In light of all that, your comment comes across as insensitive to a serious issue.
Tacenda Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 I still can't find the interview from the news a few days ago, but found this article that is recent on LDS.org. https://www.lds.org/blog/healing-the-wounds-of-racism?lang=eng
The Nehor Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: This might be funny except for how prevalent racism is today in the church and the broader society. In light of all that, your comment comes across as insensitive to a serious issue. Quite right. I would like to apologize to all the racists I have offended. I hope we can put this behind us. More seriously (but not too serious) racism has always been prevalent. It is pretty much the default human state. Virtually everyone is racist to some extent. Now, obviously we should do our best to fight that impulse, to damp it down, to question our actions as to whether we are being fair, etc. I do not believe that racism has to always be discussed in serious tones and with deep sensitivity. We have been trying that approach for a long time and it hasn’t worked yet. It helped solve the legal problem (our laws are not explicitly racist anymore) but now we are left with the social problem which I believe needs some good light-hearted mockery to move it along. Except for Nazis and Nazi sympathizers. That calls for cruel humor and social ostracism.
Alan Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 32 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Thank you for supporting my point about how the church needs to be more explicitly clear about their past mistakes in order to correct misunderstandings. Negroes were not permitted to hold the priesthood at one time, now they are. Gentiles were not permitted to hold the priesthood at one time, now they are. Non-Levites were not permitted to hold the priesthood at one time, now they are. How far back do you want this apology to go?
Jeanne Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 31 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I think we should accept that turnabout is fair play and pick some other ethnicity to deny the Priesthood for a while. I volunteer caucasians. I could use a break from callings for a while. Then we can cycle in a couple of decades to someone else. Okay...even as awful as this sounds...I will agree...take it away God..the Priesthood from all Caucasians...good luck with that.
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 8 minutes ago, Alan said: Negroes were not permitted to hold the priesthood at one time, now they are. Gentiles were not permitted to hold the priesthood at one time, now they are. Non-Levites were not permitted to hold the priesthood at one time, now they are. How far back do you want this apology to go? As I mentioned earlier, a onetime statement to check an item off a to do list, is not a sufficient apology. It requires ongoing atonement that will continue into the future for a long time. Past wrongs don't just get erased with a one apology.
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 20 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Quite right. I would like to apologize to all the racists I have offended. I hope we can put this behind us. More seriously (but not too serious) racism has always been prevalent. It is pretty much the default human state. Virtually everyone is racist to some extent. Now, obviously we should do our best to fight that impulse, to damp it down, to question our actions as to whether we are being fair, etc. I do not believe that racism has to always be discussed in serious tones and with deep sensitivity. We have been trying that approach for a long time and it hasn’t worked yet. It helped solve the legal problem (our laws are not explicitly racist anymore) but now we are left with the social problem which I believe needs some good light-hearted mockery to move it along. Except for Nazis and Nazi sympathizers. That calls for cruel humor and social ostracism. While I agree that humor can be appropriate at times, there are other times where it isn't and where the content or delivery or timing of the humor can make all the difference with respect to how it is received. Saying that racism is a default human state seems inappropriately positioned in a discussion about a very specifically egregious racist practice in the church. I don't think its the lack of humor that has contributed to a serious problem in society, I think its primarily driven by tribalism and an inability for people to seriously consider other humans to be of equal worth and value.
ksfisher Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 (edited) 51 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said: On July 15, we are going to celebrate 184 years since the end of the Spanish Inquisition! (not really, but I can imagine a good satirical article on this in the Eye of the Tiber news site) I didn't expect a celebration of the end of the Spanish Inquisition! Edited April 19, 2018 by ksfisher 1
Maestrophil Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 5 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said: I disagree. I also really like the document, purportedly written by Elder Bruce R. McConkie, recently published by Mormon Leaks. Will you please share your video in a nutshell of the policy and your examples of African black priesthood holders pre-1978. Inquiring minds want to know. :-)
CV75 Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 2 hours ago, hope_for_things said: If someone who was wronged doesn't accept an apology, then the person who wronged them needs to continue to apologize. The burden is on the person or institution to continue to apologize where wrongs were done. Its not a simple check-mark of a box, its a continuing process of atonement. It was a revelation in the sense that church leaders finally realized that God was not backing up their racism. God was not behind it, and they needed to change this policy. Revelation is often a realization of past misunderstandings. But this doesn't make it any less problematic from my perspective. Those who choose to celebrate (whether as sponsors or participants; publicly or privately; whether “black and white, bond and free, male and female; …the heathen …Jew and Gentile) the 40th anniversary of the revelation on priesthood are not making it about heavily contextual past grievances and wrongs. Church leaders have commented on the big picture related to the revelation and racism https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng , rendering your perspective quite problematic—only a biased interpretation of what they have said portrays such things they have not said. 2 hours ago, Marginal Gains said: I have a problem with the term “celebrate” in relation to this. “My neighbour is celebrating the five year anniversary of him stopping beating his wife” Is it really something to celebrate? I think Papa Bill is right - it should be acknowledged, the mistake of 100 years of racism which God was blamed for, should be apologised for. There should be a commitment to learn from it. But there isn’t going to be any apology, and the Church certainly hasn’t learned from it. The mistakes it made, and which it forced members to make, is being replayed out in the exact same manner with gay people. Which is why the celebration focuses on the revelation, not the lifting of the ban or the settling of grievances. Raise your sights!
MiserereNobis Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 45 minutes ago, The Nehor said: but now we are left with the social problem which I believe needs some good light-hearted mockery to move it along. For which satire is always up to the job. Here is Ambrose Bierce's definition of satire from "The Devil's Dictionary": SATIRE, n. An obsolete kind of literary composition in which the vices and follies of the author's enemies were expounded with imperfect tenderness. In this country satire never had more than a sickly and uncertain existence, for the soul of it is wit, wherein we are dolefully deficient, the humor that we mistake for it, like all humor, being tolerant and sympathetic. Moreover, although Americans are "endowed by their Creator" with abundant vice and folly, it is not generally known that these are reprehensible qualities, wherefore the satirist is popularly regarded as a sour-spirited knave, and his every victim's outcry for co-defendants evokes a national assent. 1
Alan Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 35 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: As I mentioned earlier, a onetime statement to check an item off a to do list, is not a sufficient apology. It requires ongoing atonement that will continue into the future for a long time. Past wrongs don't just get erased with a one apology. As I said before, no apology is necessary, neither will it be forthcoming. I suggest you take it up with God. It is, after all, his priesthood and he can share and withhold it from whoever he jolly well pleases. 1
hope_for_things Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 28 minutes ago, CV75 said: Those who choose to celebrate (whether as sponsors or participants; publicly or privately; whether “black and white, bond and free, male and female; …the heathen …Jew and Gentile) the 40th anniversary of the revelation on priesthood are not making it about heavily contextual past grievances and wrongs. Church leaders have commented on the big picture related to the revelation and racism https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng , rendering your perspective quite problematic—only a biased interpretation of what they have said portrays such things they have not said. You sound like you believe the church essay is enough of an apology and that nothing else needs to be said or done, I disagree and explained reasons why this is problematic from my perspective. I'm not sure what your last line about bias and what they've said or not said means.
CV75 Posted April 19, 2018 Posted April 19, 2018 44 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Saying that racism is a default human state seems inappropriately positioned in a discussion about a very specifically egregious racist practice in the church. Not so. It perfectly frames and supports the Church’s position, which fully and objectively recognizes social human context on past teachings and the ban: https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
Recommended Posts