Black and Mormon

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

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?

Thanks for the post. Sounds like a fascinating read. And Marlin K. Jensen is also one of my favorites (which likely disqualifies him from consideration for the 12).

[SteelBlue]

Jeff, would you include as folklore the explanation "the membership just wasn't ready for that yet"? I think that's the most prevalent explanation today, and I'd list it as folklore right up there with Cain and the Fence Sitter doctrine. The main difference being that the latter were espoused by GA's and the former has grown out of a lack of any explanation.

[pelagius]

Guys, how do you think the typical member views or interprets Moses 7:22? I would be very pleased if most people were interpreting it in a figurative way or at least with the understanding that it doesn't apply to Africans in anyway way at all but must admit I am a little skeptical.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by pelagius

Guys, how do you think the typical member views or interprets Moses 7:22? I would be very pleased if most people were interpreting it in a figurative way or at least with the understanding that it doesn't apply to Africans in anyway way at all but must admit I am a little skeptical.

A good example of the first question the media might ask following such a clarifying press release.

[pelagius]

I should be clear; I am not accusing the typical member of racism. At least not more racist than most groups. Jeff correct me if I am wrong, but I think the Mauss article found that Mormons were less likely to be racist using standard sociological survey questions.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

A good example of the first question the media might ask following such a clarifying press release.

I am guessing that won't be the first question the media would ask, since I doubt very much they have any clue what Moses 7 says.

More likely than not, their first question will be, "If the folklore wasn't the reason for the priesthood ban, what was?"

My guess is that the response is "racism," which probably wouldn't be a particularly helpful response.

[jay santos]

Jeff, an important point on this is that I believe a minority group gets to decide what is offensive or hurtful to them. The majority group doesn't get to tell the minority group to shut up and stop complaining about petty things. So if this was deemed very important by a group of LDS then I would be inclined to agree and to give them what they want. That would probably override my comment earlier that by apologizing formally you could bring more attention to the issue and make things worse.

[Solon]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

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?

Thanks for typing this up.

My wife's uncle died recently and over the holidays her aunt invited me to raid his bookshelves. He was a scientist and served a mission in Africa before the 1978 decision. The choicest score I landed from his shelf was Mormonism and the Negro by John J. Stewart (ninth [!] printing). [http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listi...810158&sr=1-4]

While many of Stewart's ideas were evidently proven incorrect when the ban was lifted, his ideas and William Berrett's supplement (Berrett was VP of the BYU) bespeak a carefully constructed rationale for the systematic denial of the priesthood to black members. This rationale isn't just going to disappear, IMO.

[SeattleUte]

The notion that "God" allowed blacks to finally receive the priesthood per a revelation he gave to SWK ensures that most LDS will continue to regard blacks the same as they did before 1978. The first order of business is to renounce any claim to revelation.

[MikeWaters]

Dare I say, the reason they don't explain it, because they believe the average member will lose respect for general authorities as a result.

And nothing could be more dangerous, they believe.

A chink in their armor is much worse than millions dwindling in unbelief. That is the calculus. And it pisses me off.