cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board - View Single Post

SteelBlue · 06-22-2006, 11:55 PM

My take on blacks and the priesthood:

I don't pretend to know what exactly went on. But based on some very solid evidence put forth in the David O. McKay bio I've come to the conclusion that the ban was a matter of policy and not doctrine.

First, blacks and the priesthood was not an issue between the time of Brigham Young and David O. McKay. There were few if any blacks wanting to join the church and there were no members asking them to join. The country as a whole was racist during that time. Our church membership included on the whole.

When a group of (Ghanan's or Nigerians I can't remember) found a religious tract they wrote church leadership and wanted to join. Their numbers began to swell and blacks and the priesthood became an issue. The church in South Africa wanted no part of blacks holding the priesthood. Members of the 12 worried what would happen to the church there if they granted the priesthood to blacks. The leadership struggled with changing a policy/doctrine (the 12 disagreed amongst each other) established by so great a man as BY. McKay didn't feel he could pull the trigger without a revelation that he apparently never got. We don't know exactly why. All-American attributes it to the membership of the church. I'd attribute it to both the membership and the leadership.

Both Joseph Fielding and Harold B. Lee fell into the doctrine camp. Lee was on record for saying that blacks would never hold the priesthood while he was prophet. As the years passed, the issue became an ISSUE. When Kimball took the reins the issue could not be ignored. A revelation was the only way to bring them all into agreement. The Lord finally gave it. Why so late? I'm of the opinion that after McKay, Kimball may have been the first one to ask.

My point I guess is that it was only an issue for about 15 or 16 years. Prior to that nobody cared. Not whites, not blacks. Nobody had to spend time explaining why.

There were theories put forth as to why BY had instituted the policy. All of these theories have been disavowed by today's church/brethren.

06-22-2006, 11:55 PM	#26
SteelBlue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Norcal Posts: 5,821	My take on blacks and the priesthood: I don't pretend to know what exactly went on. But based on some very solid evidence put forth in the David O. McKay bio I've come to the conclusion that the ban was a matter of policy and not doctrine. First, blacks and the priesthood was not an issue between the time of Brigham Young and David O. McKay. There were few if any blacks wanting to join the church and there were no members asking them to join. The country as a whole was racist during that time. Our church membership included on the whole. When a group of (Ghanan's or Nigerians I can't remember) found a religious tract they wrote church leadership and wanted to join. Their numbers began to swell and blacks and the priesthood became an issue. The church in South Africa wanted no part of blacks holding the priesthood. Members of the 12 worried what would happen to the church there if they granted the priesthood to blacks. The leadership struggled with changing a policy/doctrine (the 12 disagreed amongst each other) established by so great a man as BY. McKay didn't feel he could pull the trigger without a revelation that he apparently never got. We don't know exactly why. All-American attributes it to the membership of the church. I'd attribute it to both the membership and the leadership. Both Joseph Fielding and Harold B. Lee fell into the doctrine camp. Lee was on record for saying that blacks would never hold the priesthood while he was prophet. As the years passed, the issue became an ISSUE. When Kimball took the reins the issue could not be ignored. A revelation was the only way to bring them all into agreement. The Lord finally gave it. Why so late? I'm of the opinion that after McKay, Kimball may have been the first one to ask. My point I guess is that it was only an issue for about 15 or 16 years. Prior to that nobody cared. Not whites, not blacks. Nobody had to spend time explaining why. There were theories put forth as to why BY had instituted the policy. All of these theories have been disavowed by today's church/brethren.