Faces East

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

Another interesting point (maybe this should have had its own thread) is the revelation itself.

Many were happy to hear of the revelation to remove the Priesthood ban on the blacks. But was it really a revelation? They (the GA's) didn't receive any spiritual guidance on the matter, and didn't have a full agreement amongst themselves at the time, so the decision was made to go to God with the decision to remove the Ban and see how he replied. With no reply, the leadership believed that God was saying that it was the correct decision.

So was that really a revelation, or was it a decision based on the lack of revelation?

tryingtogetitright · Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 361

That isn't my recollection of what actually happened. There are several accounts of how the revelation came. All of which have all the principals testifying that they were persuaded that the change was of God. (I don' t have time to see if any of it is online, but SWK's "lengthen your stride" would be a good source.)

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

Well, SWK didn't feel good about it early on as a GA.
So maybe that was spiritual guidance there!

cojo · Joined: 30 Aug 2008 Posts: 589

We are sometimes told that no reply is no, or that no reply is just that- nothing. The conclusion that no reply is God's way of saying Yes- go ahead and do it is weird. I too think that there was a reason for the "ban lift" to take such a long time- our country has a long history of racism and maybe we weren't ready.
_________________
When you saw only one set of footprints, it was then that I carried you.

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

I can certainly understand that belief. This is a much talked about topic with my friends, and the basic belief for many of them is that we weren't ready, while others believe that the leaders weren't ready to rescend a bad revelation from a past prophet. ... You can tell by the tone of my posts which side of the fence I sit on.

I understand that BY was a product of his times and that racism and slavery existed (even in Utah) during his era. But that still doesn't make it right and it shouldn't be swept under the rug or white washed by the Church. I also don't believe that God would condone such behavior because "we weren't ready".

pinkpatent · Joined: 01 Jun 2009 Posts: 295

My opinion on the PH ban is this:

It was wrong when it was instituted. It was wrong while it was practiced. It took WAY too long to reverse. It was never doctrinal. It was a mistake, and the church leadership would do much good for us all if they would just apologize for it, rather than playing at apologetics.
_________________
My candle burns at both ends;
It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends-
It gives a lovely light!

Edna St. Vincent Millay

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

PP... You sound like John Dehlin.
I take it you've listened to his podcasts?

pinkpatent · Joined: 01 Jun 2009 Posts: 295

A few of them..... Wink

_________________
My candle burns at both ends;
It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends-
It gives a lovely light!

Edna St. Vincent Millay

domesticgoddess · Joined: 21 Dec 2007 Posts: 429

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

DG, I believe that that is the hardest thing for members to grasp. I know that we (members in general) believe that our leaders are not perfect, and we are quick to make excuses for minor shortcomings. But most of us are not willing to recognize the possibility that mistakes were made in doctrine - because of the "divine revelation" aspect.

For me it is a logical connection. If we recognize that our leaders have shortcomings and are not perfect, then we should be able to recognize the possibility that some doctrine may also have been wrong.

Orson · Joined: 20 Feb 2008 Posts: 56

JustBeingMe, you may also enjoy some of our discussions over at StayLDS.com. Some doctrinal and historical questions may be a little more appropriate over there - with a wide range of opinions in the mix.

I love Faces East and their commitment to making marriages work. In the past they were a big help navigating my marriage through a faith crisis. While they do talk about doctrinal issues here the approach should be kept in mind -- this site is designed for the "believing" half of a "mixed-faith" marriage. Not that you've been offensive in your questions, I just wanted to be sure you're aware of StayLDS if you want to get more in-depth with some of these subjects.

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

Thanks Orson, I will keep that in mind as I post here.

And I will come by and visit StayLDS. I've been there before (it's been awhile) but I have not posted there yet.

tiffrose · Joined: 21 Feb 2010 Posts: 141 Location: UT

In regard to Black history in the church and the world- I find this website very interesting/educational
http://www.blacklds.org/history

And in regards to the revelation itself this is great!
http://www.blacklds.org/declare2

the revelation to remove the ban did not come as a result of no answer.

but the "revelation of the ban" most likely was influenced by personal feelings by Brigham Young (and other leaders of the time), and other world policies, including American Mason rules. But the church, and especially JS were ahead of their time in regards to giving and enforcing civil rights for black people. And this stand they took, often caused even more trouble between them and their already hostile neighbors. and was a contributing factor in the murder of JS.

So maybe God allowed the ban because people were not ready (both in the church and out) as maybe even a way to protect the church from racists. With the all knowing understanding that ONLY God has, that the church would go to every one eventually.

Just like in our own lives we only get revelation when we really NEED the answer, and when we have something bring it up so that we ask. If no one is asking with a pure heart, and desire to do God's will, then the answer will not come.

pinkpatent · Joined: 01 Jun 2009 Posts: 295

I'm sorry, but this is one of those issues with the church where I just have to call bs.

Like I said before, it was never doctrinal. It should never have been put in place, and the only reason why it was left in place is because the white leadership in the church was very comfortable going with the status quo.

The fact is, there were many in the leadership who knew the ban was wrong and wanted it lifted. But these men were met with great opposition from others in leadership.

In my opinion, ANY other explanation points to the idea that God is a racist, a concept I flatly reject. History is riddled with UNGODLY actions taken by HUMANS in the name of GOD. Why should mormons be immuned from this behavior? I consider the PH ban to be just such behavior.

I am not trying to belabor the point, but I really can't stand any kind of apologist reasoning on this issue. It was wrong. Instead of trying to explain the behavior, let's just fess up that it was a huge mistake, say we are sorry, and make amends where ever we can. Its called repentance....its what we are supposed to do when we make a mistake!
_________________
My candle burns at both ends;
It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends-
It gives a lovely light!

Edna St. Vincent Millay

JustBeingMe · Joined: 04 Mar 2010 Posts: 143

Another one I would like to see the Church come clean and apologize for is the MMM. Now I know there is some question about where the blame really lies on that one, but I think that there has been enough research and fact-finding done on the event to at least indicate that the Church leadership knew about it and took some actions to cover it up immediately following.