Black and Mormon
 

Thoughts from the book:

One of the main topics of discussion in the essays in the book is the folklore that evolved in the church to explain the priesthood ban (descendants of Cain, less valiant in the pre-existence, etc.). While the revelation of 1978 would seem to refute this folklore, it still persists within the church. In fact, a strong case is made that the persistance of the folklore is a hindrance for the church's efforts to gain black converts. Perhaps more significantly, it is a hindrance for black converts to stay active in the church. Once they try to fully integrate into the LDS society, they are met at every front by clueless members informing them that they were less valiant in the pre-existence. This is a huge hurdle for many of them to overcome.

Interestingly, the book recounts how a few years ago a group of people including Elder Marlin K. Jensen (I have always admired him) petitioned the church leadership to make a full and explicit denunciation of the folklore in an attempt to support black converts and put the issue to rest. An official committee was formed that included Elder Jensen and at least one non-GA (black, as I recall). One of the members of the committee was so excited that he leaked word to the LA Times, who ended up running a story about it. Reportedly, this infuriated top LDS leadership and they disbanded the committee. When pressed on the issue, GBH responded that in his travels through the world, people he meets don't seem to be upset about it, so he believed that no action was necessary. He felt that the 1978 proclamation stands on its own. Thus, the quasi-official strategy in the church is to not make any official statement to repudiate the folklore, and let the erroneous writings of past church officials related to the folklore fade into the oblivion of history.

A few points:

1) The book is quite convincing that the folklore is still widely believed in the church and that it is doing significant harm. And yet Pres. Hinckley perceives that it is not a big deal. Why such a disconnect? As you watch video of GBH's world tours, it appears he is wisked from venue to venue where he speaks to adoring crowds and visits with local church leadership. I wonder how much interaction is had with common members. Probably not too much and it is probably superficial at best. That's a pity.

2) Yet again, we see a case where the church distances itself from making a statement that would be perceived as an admission of weakness or error. Yet the cost of this silence is significant.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if Elder Jensen were called to quorum of the twelve?

Historians (and bloggers and internet riff-raff) have usurped the prophets. How many times do I have to say it?

Who still believes that. I was at a large family gathering around Christmas and the subject came up. No one believes the Cain thing. At least no one in our family and my family has some folks in it that would make Tex look like a liberal.

I kinda agree with 71 here. I don't think many believe that anymore. And addressing it might actually legitimatize it for some. I would like to see a public announcement on that, but it doesn't bother me too much. I do love MKJ and would love to see him as an apostle.

I think all kinds of old folklore are alive and well in the church.

I've heard some of the folklore.

"Let's just hope people forget about this."

Very nice.

Seems to me there's likely more to the story here. Barring full Church disclosure--which I'm sure many of you would love--it's hard to get an unbiased view of how events unfold.

I'm not sure there isn't some wisdom in letting 30-year-old sleeping dogs lie.

That's pretty tough for us white Mormons to gauge don't you think? Our retention rates for black converts are abysmal. Many point to this issue as one of the causes. I see no reason to disbelieve them.

Interestingly, an essay in the book by Mauss shows the results from surveys that indicate that LDS people are less racist than the US population at large using standard measures ("Do you believe neighborhoods should be segregated..?", etc.). And yet the folklore persists.

The anecdotal stories provided in the book indicate that the folklore is often related more out of ignorance than malice. This is exactly why many are pushing for an explicit statement from church leadership.

I got the impression (I could be wrong) reading the book that it was more of an issue in the southern states. Whether white members there are more racist or whether there are simply more black converts in those areas, I am not sure.

I dare bet that if you polled a typical LDS ward, there would be quite a few people that still believe the folklore. And it only takes a few to cause some damage. And often the biggest dumbasses in the ward are the most anxious to share their opinions.

I think you're really underestimating the potential for unintended consequences. Bringing a fresh public light on to all those statements over all those decades, despite a current and re-emphasized denial, could have a backlash effect. To say nothing of the opportunism it would smack of in the current political environment.

And then it puts the church in the dicey position of explaining the difference between prophetic doctrinal pronouncements, and prophets' opinions--a debate we can find NO resolution to here on Cougarguard. You think the media will be more forgiving than SeattleUte? Or you, for that matter?

Agree.

I do see some merit to Tex's point on unintended consequences. Everyone remembers Danny Ainge as a biter, even though it was Tree Rollins that bit him, not vice versa. If Danny Ainge called a press conference to tell his side of the story, I'm sure a year later even more people would remember Ainge as a biter.