Mitt and his Mormonism
January 29th, 2008Shall we scratch the surface of Mormonism?
17. Church Prejudice Against Blacks
From the translated scroll written by Abraham comes the important doctrine that descendants of Cain (taught by Mormons to be African-Americans) are unworthy to hold the priesthood, the authority to act in God’s name. This clearly racist policy was changed in 1978 through another “revelation.” While Blacks could always be baptized into the Mormon Church, up until 1978 they could not hold the priesthood. This excluded them from the “saving ordinances” of the temple, and thus kept them from exaltation as the Mormons defined it.
Consider the following declarations by church Prophets and Apostles:
President Brigham Young:
“Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African Race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” (Journal of Discourses 10:110)
President Joseph Fielding Smith:
“There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient, more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less.” (Doctrines of Salvation, p. 61)
Apostle Bruce R. McConkie:
“Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them… Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned…” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 343)
Apostle Mark E. Petersen:
“God has commanded Israel not to intermarry. To go against this commandment of God would be in sin. Those who willfully sin with their eyes open to this wrong will not be surprised to find that they will be separated from the presence of God in the world to come. This is spiritual death…
“The reason that one would lose his blessings by marrying a Negro is due to the restriction placed upon them. “No person having the least particle of Negro blood can hold the Priesthood” (Brigham Young). It does not matter if they are one-sixth Negro or one-hundred and sixth, the curse of no Priesthood is the same. If an individual who is entitled to the Priesthood marries a Negro, the Lord has decreed that only spirits who are not eligible for the Priesthood will come to that marriage as children. To intermarry with a Negro is to forfeit a “Nation of Priesthood holders…
“The discussion on civil rights, especially over the last 20 years, has drawn some very sharp lines. It has blinded the thinking of some of our own people, I believe. They have allowed their political affiliations to color their thinking to some extent, and then, of course, they have been persuaded by some of the arguments that have been put forth…We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not to be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject…
“I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn’t just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. It isn’t that he just desires to go to the same theater as the white people. From this, and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, ‘First we pity, then endure, then embrace’…
“Now let’s talk about segregation again for a few moments. Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation…
“When he told Enoch not preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation…
“Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them…
“The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence. At least in the cases of the Lamanites and the Negro we have the definite word of the Lord Himself that he placed a dark skin upon them as a curse — as a punishment and as a sign to all others. He forbade intermarriage with them under threat of extension of the curse. And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an Iron curtain there…
“Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it. I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world. But let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, ‘what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.’ Only here we have the reverse of the thing – what God hath separated, let not man bring together again.
“Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood…This Negro, who, in the pre-existence lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in their lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa–if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory.” (Apostle Mark E. Peterson, Race Problems – As They Affect The Church, Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College Level, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, August 27, 1954)
References:
- How Obvious Would It Have To Be?
- Mormon racism in perspective: An example for possible future changes in policy relating to women and gays
Apologist Response
Apostle Bruce R. McConkie explained how earlier statements by church leaders on African-Americans and the priesthood should be disregarded because their understanding was limited at the time:
“There are statements in our literature by the early Brethren that we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, “You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?” All I can say is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.
“We get our truth and light line upon line and precept upon precept (2 Ne. 28:30; Isa. 28:9-10; D&C 98:11-12; 128:21). We have now added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter anymore.” (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, All Are Alike Unto God, pp. 1-2)
Marvin Perkins explained the Book of Mormon teaching that those “cursed” with a “skin of blackness” could remove the “curse” by coming unto God:
“There are Blacks here today who are members of the Church. Why have we not turned White? But there are Blacks who have joined the Church, married White spouse, and their children became lighter than their Black parents. Then those kids grew up to marry those that believe as they do, which most are White, so they married White, and their kids became even lighter, and so on. Makes you think a bit, doesn’t it? (Marvin Perkins, Blacks and the Priesthood, FAIR)”
President Spencer W. Kimball described the process through which the church decided to bestow all church privileges upon African-Americans:
“It went on for some time as I was searching for this, because I wanted to be sure. We held a meeting of the Council of the Twelve in the temple on the regular day. We considered this very seriously and thoughtfully and prayerfully.
“I asked the Twelve not to go home when the time came. I said, ‘now would you be willing to remain in the temple with us?’ And they were. I offered the final prayer and I told the Lord if it wasn’t right, if He didn’t want this change to come in the Church that I would he true to it all the rest of my life, and I’d fight the world against it if that’s what He wanted.“We had this special prayer circle, then I knew that the time had come. I had a great deal to fight, of course, myself largely, because I had grown up with this thought that Negroes should not have the priesthood and I was prepared to go all the rest of my life till my death and fight for it and defend it as it was. But this revelation and assurance came to me so clearly that there was no question about it.” (President Spencer W. Kimball, Deseret News, Church Section, January 6, 1979, p. 19)
According to President Gordon B. Hinckley, he simply doesn’t know why Blacks were denied the priesthood until 1978:
“HN: Until 1978 no person of color attained the priesthood in your church. Why did it take so long to overcome the racism?
“GBH: I don’t know. I don’t know. I can only say that. (long pause) But it’s here now. We’re carrying on a very substantial work on Africa for instance and in Brazil. We’re working among their people developing them. We’ve had them among the leadership of the Church and they’re able to do a great work and we love them and appreciate them and we respect them and we are trying to help them.” (Gordon B. Hinckley Interview, ZDF German Television, Salt Lake City, Utah, January 29, 2002, Conducted by Helmut Nemetschek)
1. Book of Abraham
2. Kinderhook Plates
3. Plagiarism
4. Polygamy
5. Emotionality
6. Changing Doctrine
7. False Prophecies
8. Lying for the Lord
9. Treasure Hunt
10. Blood Atonement
11. Vain Ambitions
12. Defections
13. BOM Changes
14. BOM Population
15. Lamanite DNA
16. Critics Squelched
17. Black Prejudice
18. Nephi or Moroni?
19. Archeology
20. First Vision
[…]
You can believe whatever you like, and everyone can vote for whomever they like, based on whatever they like.
People are voting for Hillary Clinton because she has breasts. No doubt, people will not vote for Mitt Romney because, amongst other things, he is a Mormon.
There are many other, more clearly objectionable things about Romney, mainly that he is an unctuous, ignorant, warmongering, dishonest, secretive man, who will do nothing but drag america and the rest of the world further into the pit of hell.
Back to Mormonism, there are many resources out there describing how people have left this organization and it reads like the sort of thing ex Scientologists write.
And we continue…
[…]
Friction between Mormons and other other Christians has been present during the entire history of the LDS Church. There were a number of reasons why most Christians rejected the Mormon movement during the 19th century:
Their religious exclusivity, communal lifestyle, and “Mormons first and for themselves” lifestyle were criticized. Joseph Smith’s visions were rejected as frauds. Some of his theological teachings about the nature of God, structure of Heaven, requirements for salvation, history of the Americas, etc. were rejected as heresy. Plural marriage in particular was considered totally unacceptable behavior. Smith’s elevation of three writings to equality with the Bible was considered offensive. Smith’s new translation of the Bible was viewed as heretical. Smith’s political goals were viewed as threatening to his neighbors. They feared that he wanted to establish a theocracy.
The movement has been growing rapidly — on the order of 10% per decade — since it was founded. This is perceived by some Christian groups as a threat.
Today, even though plural marriage has been at least temporarily suspended for over a century, many of the above points of conflict continue. During the early years, opposition by other Christians was violent. Much blood was shed. Now, the battle it is a mainly war of words: The general meetings of the United Methodist Church, and Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and Southern Baptist Convention have stated, in their opinion, the LDS is a denomination that is separate from the Christian religion:
The General Conference of the United Methodist Church approved a document on 2000-MAY-10: “Sacramental Faithfulness: Guidelines for Receiving People From the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons)” The document says, in part, that:
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, by self-definition, does not fit within the bounds of the historic, apostolic tradition of Christian faith…[Mormons’] explicitly [profess] distinction and separateness from the ecumenical community.”
The document also recommends that individual Mormons first formally remove themselves from the LDS before seeking membership in the United Methodist Church. 1
According to a pamphlet produced by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.),
“…Mormonism is a new and emerging religious tradition distinct from the historic apostolic tradition of the Christian Church, of which Presbyterians are a part…Latter-day Saints understand themselves to be separate from the continuous witness to Jesus Christ, from the apostles to the present, affirmed by churches of the “catholic” tradition. Latter-day Saints and the historic churches view the canon of scriptures and interpret shared scriptures in radically different ways. They use the same words with dissimilar meanings. When the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints speaks of the Trinity, Christ’s death and resurrection, and salvation, the theology and practices related to these set it apart from the Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant churches.”
Presbyterians do not recognize the baptism administered to Mormons. A convert must be re-baptized. Similarly Presbyterians do not allow LDS officials to administer the Lord’s Supper.
……….
LA Times, reporting on Governor Romney’s possible 2008 bid for the presidency, wrote that: “Pastor Ted Haggard, [at the time] president of the National Association of Evangelicals (NEA) in Colorado Springs, CO said:
” ‘We evangelicals view Mormons as a Christian cult group. A cult group is a group that claims exclusive revelation. And typically, it’s hard to get out of these cult groups. And so Mormonism qualifies as that’.”
“In addition, Haggard said, evangelicals do not accept Mormon Church founder Joseph Smith as a prophet. ‘And we do not believe that the Book of Mormon has the same level of authority as the Bible,’ he said.”
“When Romney says that he accepts Jesus Christ as his savior, ‘we appreciate that,’ Haggard said. ‘But very often when people like Mormons use terms that we also use, there are different meanings in the theology behind those terms’.”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_crit.htm
[…]
Hmmm “Messy” is one of the first words that comes to mind.
Once again, Romney, whatever he believes, cannot do the job because he is not a man of peace and reason. He is a man of deception, war and ignorance, with a palpable lust for power.
I would be very surprised if this doesnt become a huge issue for Mitt, even more than it has so far. Against Ron Paul it wont make a big impact, but in a theoretical contest between Romney and O-Bomb-a, the Mormon racist issue will explode.
Finally, the best description of why the Mormons accepted ‘Blacks’ is to be found here:
THE 1978 Revelation
In the early 1970s the Church was building a Temple in Sao Paulo, Brazil, only to discover that most white Brazilian men had at least one Negro ancestor. According to Church policy, white men with one Negro ancestor were under the Curse of Cain and could not hold the Priesthood. But, all of these white men had already been ordained to the Priesthood. What to do? If the priesthood-ban policy continued, it would disqualify 85% of white Brazilian Mormons from the Priesthood and the Higher Ordinances of the Temple, then being built in Sao Paulo.
President Spencer W. Kimball then spent many hours in the Upper Room (Holy of Holies) in the Salt Lake Temple, supplicating the LORD, and asking Him to remove the Curse of Cain from those with a Canaanite bloodline. The LORD accepted the supplications of his Prophet, and told Spencer W. Kimball that the curse upon the lineage was over. President Kimball decided to announce this on June 8th, 1978, seven years (to the day) that the Genesis Group of Black Latter-day Saints was founded by three black Mormons: Ruffin Bridgeforth Jr., Darius Gray, and Eugene Orr.
The Priesthood-ban Policy continued until June 8th, 1978, when it was recinded by Mormon Church President Spencer W. Kimball. Since then, black Mormons have all the same rights and blessings as any other Mormon.
June 8 1978
To all general and local priesthood officers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints throughout the world:
Dear Brethren:As we have witnessed the expansion of the work of the Lord over the earth, we have been grateful that people of many nations have responded to the message of the restored gospel, and have joined the Church in ever-increasing numbers. This, in turn, has inspired us with a desire to extend to every worthy member of the Church all the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords.
Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us that at some time, in God’s eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood, and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance.
He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple. Accordingly, all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthod without regard for race and color. Priesthood leaders are instructed to follow the policy of carefully interviewing all candidates for ordination to either the Aaronic or the Melchizedek Priesthood to insure that they meet the established standards for worthiness.
We declare with soberness that the Lord has now made known his will for the blessing of all his children throughout the earth who will hearken to the voice of his authorized servznts, and prepare themselves to receive every blessing of the gospel.
Sincerely yours,
SPENCER W. KIMBALL
N. ELDON TANNER
MARION G. ROMNEY
The First Presidency[…]
Note the last name on that list.
That site really is well worth a very close look.
The fact of the matter is that Mormons had trapped themselves by trying to expand their organization around the world. They could either cut off the Brazilians, Nigerians and all other people world wide (and all of their money) or admit their ‘religion’ is false. They took the third way; they changed the religion to suit their needs.
They are free to do so, and believe it, and act on it. Everyone else is also free to act on their beliefs and like I said above, to vote based on them, wether it be voting on breasts, skin color or against a ‘cult’.