LDS

[Janadele]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

 

[SezMe]

This thread is like a cross between performance art and a parlour game. One player has to try to sustain the illusion of a discussion, but may only use quotations and can express no opinions of their own. Could perhaps be fun if done well, but inevitably gets dull in the end.

Janadele is neither brainwashed, nor robotic. She's just a troll, who's worked out a good formula for getting replies.

I am reminded of Christofora's C4 thread (can't remember the name). He kept repeating the same-o, same-o for countless pages. It finally ground down because nobody bothered to reply any more.

Same thing should happen here. We KNOW Janadele is not going to engage so our disengagement seems fair play.

Sez Me in my last post in this thread.

 

[jsfisher]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

Interesting use of idioms. So, in Mormonese, withheld the responsibility of something means cursed.

I'm learning so much from you, Janadele. Please continue.

 

[RandFan]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

You said that Brigham Young was a moral man and prophet of god. Why did a moral man and prophet of god say something so disgusting and hateful? Tell me, what would you think if someone had accused Mormons of being "uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in habits"?

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

Telling generations of non-white people they're cursed is no issue? Wow.

 

[Pup]

Telling generations of non-white people they're cursed is no issue? Wow.

I realize the topic here is the LDS church, but it is worth putting this in context. The Methodists, for example, ended racial segregation in their church in 1967, twelve years before the LDS church. But while Brigham Young was saying he didn't want blacks to be equal with whites, Methodist preachers in the US south (and Presbyterian and Baptist ones too) were all preaching not just inequality but that race-based slavery itself was a God-ordained institution.

The LDS church wasn't as strongly against slavery as other churches, but at least their God had supposedly said in 1833, "Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another."

So the best way to make the LDS church look bad is to see it in isolation, but in historical context, it was somewhere in the middle, not as racist as the pro-slavery churches but not as good as actively emancipationist churches like the Quakers.

It's ironic--and sad, of course--that the LDS church has a mechanism to change doctrine more easily than most, with new revelation, yet they were one of the slowest to change in the civil rights era. And that's what makes them look worse today.

 

[RandFan]

I realize the topic here is the LDS church, but it is worth putting this in context. The Methodists, for example, ended racial segregation in their church in 1967, twelve years before the LDS church. But while Brigham Young was saying he didn't want blacks to be equal with whites, Methodist preachers in the US south (and Presbyterian and Baptist ones too) were all preaching not just inequality but that race-based slavery itself was a God-ordained institution.

The LDS church wasn't as strongly against slavery as other churches, but at least their God had supposedly said in 1833, "Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another."

So the best way to make the LDS church look bad is to see it in isolation, but in historical context, it was somewhere in the middle, not as racist as the pro-slavery churches but not as good as actively emancipationist churches like the Quakers.

It's ironic--and sad, of course--that the LDS church has a mechanism to change doctrine more easily than most, with new revelation, yet they were one of the slowest to change in the civil rights era. And that's what makes them look worse today.

These are all fair points. As I told my children's school teachers, I don't mind you informing my children that Columbus did bad things, I mind that you don't put his actions in context of the light of the times.

I'm willing to judge Young and everyone else by the light of their times. Here's the thing, don't tell me that such a person is a mouthpiece of god. That's also some pretty important context.

 

[jsfisher]

Janadele 13:1-11

1 And the Lord speaketh: "Cain, who sleweth thy sibling and spilleth thy sibling's blood upon the earth, making it all gooey and stickieth, I marketh thee with the Sharpie of damnation."
2 "Yea, whilst lesser gods may hath marketh thee in tints unto that of the high-lighter, I, thy Lord and God, discolor thee to the darkest of dark."
3 "And not in washable darkest of dark, either."
4 "For thou art cursed and unsightly before mine presence."
5 And so it came to pass that Cain, and all the sons and daughters of Cain, and so too their sons and daughters, and so on throughout all Eternity, bore the curse and the mark of the Lord's darkest, most permanent of permanent Sharpies.
6 And the years past, for an Eternity art a considerable span.
7 Then, it came to pass that the missions of the faithful unto the Lord spread to all the lands, and in those lands dwelt the tribes of Cain, in all their cursed Sharpieness.
8 And the Lord speaketh to the Prophet, and the Prophet speaketh to the faithful thus,
9 "The Lord has blest our missions to spread His word and increase His following."
10 "And the Lord hath spake unto me to go amongst the Sharpie cursed tribe of Cain and speaketh these words of the Lord: Kidding, just kidding."
11 And so it came to past that the Lord was kidding, just kidding, and all was forgotten of the Sharpie curse.

 

[Foster Zygote]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

For a "short time"? It was about 130 years. I don't care how "worthy" you say they were. Any policy that says, "You can't do this because of the amount of melanin in your skin, no matter what other qualifications you have", is racist.

"The Lord had cursed Cain’s seed with blackness and prohibited them the Priesthood."

[The] "true eternal principals[sic] [of God are that] a man who has the African blood in him cannot hold one jot nor tittle of Priesthood."

"In the Kingdom of God on the Earth the Africans cannot hold one particle of power in Government."

"Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a sin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the Holy Priesthood, and the law of God."

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind...Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race—that they should be the ‘servant of servants’; and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree."

By the way, the term "negro" is generally regarded as offensive by the majority of African Americans. It may not be your intent to derogate, but you should probably avoid using the term lest you give the wrong impression.

 

[Cleon]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

Brigham Young's hatred of everyone who wasn't white went far, far, far beyond "withholding the responsibility of priesthood." We know it, you know it. Pretending that RandFan and others haven't shown you Young's own words illustrating his racist hatred does nothing but make you and your Church look dishonest.

Say what you will about Cat, but she tries to confront these issues rather than ignore them. Agree or disagree with her, you have to respect that.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I appreciate that the racist attitudes expressed were entirely mainstream views in their time. The problem is of course that having declared them not merely to be policy but actually to be the will of God, it becomes impossible to admit such vile notions were ever wrong, even when they're rescinded.

 

[Empress]

Janadele 13:1-11

1 And the Lord speaketh: "Cain, who sleweth thy sibling and spilleth thy sibling's blood upon the earth, making it all gooey and stickieth, I marketh thee with the Sharpie of damnation."
2 "Yea, whilst lesser gods may hath marketh thee in tints unto that of the high-lighter, I, thy Lord and God, discolor thee to the darkest of dark."
3 "And not in washable darkest of dark, either."
4 "For thou art cursed and unsightly before mine presence."
5 And so it came to pass that Cain, and all the sons and daughters of Cain, and so too their sons and daughters, and so on throughout all Eternity, bore the curse and the mark of the Lord's darkest, most permanent of permanent Sharpies.
6 And the years past, for an Eternity art a considerable span.
7 Then, it came to pass that the missions of the faithful unto the Lord spread to all the lands, and in those lands dwelt the tribes of Cain, in all their cursed Sharpieness.
8 And the Lord speaketh to the Prophet, and the Prophet speaketh to the faithful thus,
9 "The Lord has blest our missions to spread His word and increase His following."
10 "And the Lord hath spake unto me to go amongst the Sharpie cursed tribe of Cain and speaketh these words of the Lord: Kidding, just kidding."
11 And so it came to past that the Lord was kidding, just kidding, and all was forgotten of the Sharpie curse.

Nom'ed

 

[Pup]

I'm willing to judge Young and everyone else by the light of their times. Here's the thing, don't tell me that such a person is a mouthpiece of god. That's also some pretty important context.

That's where I think the Protestants are winning the PR war. If a Protestant preacher advocated something immoral which was considered acceptable by society at large, we tend to cut him some slack for being a man of his times. Yet Protestant morals were pretty much dominating society, so such preachers were able to both create and follow social trends.

On the one hand, Protestant preachers do deserve a pass because we're all subject to social pressure, but on the other hand, they were also claiming to explain what God wanted, and the passages they referenced are still in their Bible today.

I think there's a mindset that little offshoot religions--because they're an offshoot--should be held to a higher standard, because if they're starting fresh and are putting up with persecutation anyway, they can break any norms they want. And that's true.

But, still, the norms they were breaking were the ones generally established by Protestants. It seems unfair not to require the Protestants to take equal responsibility for that. (And also Catholics and Jews and other religions as their influence grew and their own persecution problems decreased, of course.)

 

[jsfisher]

That's where I think the Protestants are winning the PR war. If a Protestant preacher advocated something immoral which was considered acceptable by society at large, we tend to cut him some slack for being a man of his times. Yet Protestant morals were pretty much dominating society, so such preachers were able to both create and follow social trends.

Remember, too, that the LDS Prophet claims to have an intimate and exclusive relationship with God which the Protestant minister does not. Nor is the proclamations of the minister carry any pretext of being holy scripture.

The LDS Prophet is alleged to be delivering the word of God, and the word of God should align with something approaching an absolute morality, not the shifting ethics of an evolving society.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Remember, too, that the LDS Prophet claims to have an intimate and exclusive relationship with God which the Protestant minister does not. Nor is the proclamations of the minister carry any pretext of being holy scripture.

The LDS Prophet is alleged to be delivering the word of God, and the word of God should align with something approaching an absolute morality, not the shifting ethics of an evolving society.

So long as the LDS prophet sincerely believes himself to be channeling God's will, he's no more culpable than the protestant minister for preaching that the way things are is the way things ought to be. But it does create a massive hostage to fortune for future generations to deal with. At least the Protestant minister's descendants can admit he was wrong about stuff.

For a true believer it must be a strikingly curious coincidence that, in an era when society was profoundly racist, God's will appeared to be completely in alignment with that, while now that society generally abhors racism, what do you know - so does God! Quite the coincidence. Just one of those mysteries, I suppose.

 

[tsig]

That for a short time, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent, had no effect on those who were not worthy, and those who were would have accepted the Lord's decree and have been blessed for it. No issue.

So the Priesthood isn't really a big deal?

 

[RandFan]

So the Priesthood isn't really a big deal?

The Priesthood is very important to Mormons for many reasons. One of the most important reasons is that without the priesthood a man cannot get married in the Temple. Temple marriage is requisite to receiving the greatest blessings of god.

But don't you worry. The Mormon Church has a plan for blacks.

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 earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin.... 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 a celestial resurrection. He will get a place in the celestial glory. He will not go then even with the honorable men of the earth to the Terrestrial glory, nor with the ones spoken of as being without law.

"Race Problems—As They Affect The Church," address at Brigham Young University, 27 August 1954.

They will be servants.

 

[Janadele]

By the way, the term "negro" is generally regarded as offensive by the majority of African Americans. It may not be your intent to derogate, but you should probably avoid using the term lest you give the wrong impression.

It was the Negro male... whether from America, the Congo, or Tim Buck Too. It was not the Maori, the Koori, the Samoan...
What is offensive about Negro? It is the name of the race. As is Asian etc

 

[Pup]

But it does create a massive hostage to fortune for future generations to deal with. At least the Protestant minister's descendants can admit he was wrong about stuff.

I think what it does is move the same problem closer to the present. Even Protestant religions pretty clearly believe that the Old Testament God (i.e. their same God) was okay with all that Old Testament stuff, so they have the same problem with an eternal God at one time ordering his people to do what seem like horrible things today.

But for them, that was 2,000 years ago, when times were different, before Christ came, and they can claim that their preachers should have realized things were different by the 19th century. They can just sort of skip over the fact that an eternal God should still have to stand by what he did 3,000 years ago even if he changed his mind two thousand years ago. For Mormons, God was still explicitly speaking in the 19th century, so he changed his mind more recently.

 

[RandFan]

It was the Negro male... whether from America, the Congo, or Tim Buck Too. It was not the Maori, the Koori, the Samoan...

Most of us think of them as people. Human beings.

What is offensive about Negro? It is the name of the race. As is Asian etc

Ignorance is curable but you have to be willing to take the cure.

During the American Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, some black American leaders in the United States, notably Malcolm X, objected to the word, preferring Black,[4] because they associated the word Negro with the long history of slavery, segregation, and discrimination that treated African Americans as second class citizens, or worse.

I'm not sure why you would care but there are many blacks that find the term pejorative.