USA Today on Mormons, Mitt, and Racism

[Moliere]

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....standards.html

Imagine further that backing this racist church was not a youthful folly on Obama's part, but a profound commitment - that he went on a mission abroad to convert Christians to a new religion based on black racial supremacy, and has often said that the most important thing in his entire life to this day is a church whose sacred scripture declares white people to be cursed by God for their past sins - and the sign of this curse is their white skin.

I'm pretty sure I don't agree with this. Was Mormonism ever based on white racial supremacy? Sure it was racist, but I'm not sure I'd ever say it was based on racism. The rest of paragraph also seems to skew things quite a bit. Maybe I'm just ignorant, but this paragraph (which is placed early in the article) has already lowered my perception of this whole thing.

Also, I leave open the option that people can evolve on issues. Obama has been anti-gay marriage his whole life, except the past couple months, and I don't hold that against him to this day.

[Northwestcoug]

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....standards.html

Ouch. I don't particularly like Andrew Sullivan's writing. But I can't argue against much in this article. Historically, race issues in Mormonism are a much bigger deal than whatever a local pastor said to his congregation. Most members have made an uneasy peace with our past. But to the outside world, I suspect our history is very unsettling to quite a few people.

Of course this doesn't invalidate Romney's fitness to be a president. But we shouldn't complain that this is being focused on now, especially after all of the ink that was spilled about Rev. Wright.

[TripletDaddy]

Time to fling the last bits of mud. The election is almost over!

[Jeff Lebowski]

especially the last line.

No kidding. Correlation strikes again.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Ouch. I don't particularly like Andrew Sullivan's writing. But I can't argue against much in this article. Historically, race issues in Mormonism are a much bigger deal than whatever a local pastor said to his congregation. Most members have made an uneasy peace with our past. But to the outside world, I suspect our history is very unsettling to quite a few people.

Of course this doesn't invalidate Romney's fitness to be a president. But we shouldn't complain that this is being focused on now, especially after all of the ink that was spilled about Rev. Wright.

Yes, it was a reasonable article. As a church we still have not faced our racist past in an honest fashion. He has every right to criticize that.

[Solon]

Yes, it was a reasonable article. As a church we still have not faced our racist past in an honest fashion. He has every right to criticize that.

If anything, I thought the article (and the American public at large) are missing a big part of the picture of what it means not to hold priesthood in the LDS church. In most churches, the majority of members don't hold priesthood. In the LDS church, you need priesthood to get to the temple, to be sealed to a spouse, to gain admission to the Celestial kingdom.

The article could very well say, "Mormons considered black Africans ineligible to gain admission to highest heaven."

[Eddie]

If anything, I thought the article (and the American public at large) are missing a big part of the picture of what it means not to hold priesthood in the LDS church. In most churches, the majority of members don't hold priesthood. In the LDS church, you need priesthood to get to the temple, to be sealed to a spouse, to gain admission to the Celestial kingdom.

The article could very well say, "Mormons considered black Africans ineligible to gain admission to highest heaven."

I'm not sure about your point. I'm not sure how it applied to Romney in particular, or to members of the church as a whole. But I'm young enough that could just be my naivete.

See - growing up in the church I never believed that Blacks couldn't be sealed or gain admission to the Celestial Kingdom. I'll admit I'm not sure how that would work without going to the temple - but I seem to recall having been taught "God will work that out in the hereafter" regarding more than one issue - and applied it to this one as well.

I see Romney's answer as being consistent with mine when he says in essence that he has always believed that Blacks were eligible for every right and benefit as anyone else. I understand that applying that to the hereafter is probably of little consolation to Blacks. But then again, I don't recall knowing anyone who was Black before 1978 - and I was young enough I wouldn't have thought about it much. By the time I did start thinking about it, it was no longer an issue.

[Sleeping in EQ]

We are reaping what we have sown.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I'm not sure about your point. I'm not sure how it applied to Romney in particular, or to members of the church as a whole. But I'm young enough that could just be my naivete.

See - growing up in the church I never believed that Blacks couldn't be sealed or gain admission to the Celestial Kingdom. I'll admit I'm not sure how that would work without going to the temple - but I seem to recall having been taught "God will work that out in the hereafter" regarding more than one issue - and applied it to this one as well.

I see Romney's answer as being consistent with mine when he says in essence that he has always believed that Blacks were eligible for every right and benefit as anyone else. I understand that applying that to the hereafter is probably of little consolation to Blacks. But then again, I don't recall knowing anyone who was Black before 1978 - and I was young enough I wouldn't have thought about it much. By the time I did start thinking about it, it was no longer an issue.

That is simply not true. It was not just a ban on priesthood, it was a ban on temple ordinances also (single black women for example). Mark E. Peterson once exclaimed how wonderful it was that blacks would get to be our servants in the Celestial Kingdom.

[Eddie]

That is simply not true. It was not just a ban on priesthood, it was a ban on temple ordinances also (single black women for example). Mark E. Peterson once exclaimed how wonderful it was that blacks would get to be our servants in the Celestial Kingdom.

So your saying it is my naivete...

I understand that a LOT of bad things were said by people in high positions in the past. Hadn't ever heard Peterson's quote before - yeah, that's bad.

I understand there was a ban on temple ordinances. What I'm saying is that I have always believed that everyone would ultimately have access to all of the blessings afforded us by the gospel. My belief was that ultimately God would figure things out, and I didn't need to worry about it. As I said - that probably wasn't much comfort to Black folks.

I find this discussion somewhat intriguing. Not from the context of Blacks and discrimination. But from the context of the humanness and fallibility of church leaders. The concept of "The Gospel" being perfect, but those on earth administering things lacking at times.

[Paperback Writer]

If anything, I thought the article (and the American public at large) are missing a big part of the picture of what it means not to hold priesthood in the LDS church. In most churches, the majority of members don't hold priesthood. In the LDS church, you need priesthood to get to the temple, to be sealed to a spouse, to gain admission to the Celestial kingdom.

The article could very well say, "Mormons considered black Africans ineligible to gain admission to highest heaven."

I could be wrong (but don't think I am) in that the priesthood is not mandatory for admission to the Celestial Kingom. The mandatory ordinance is baptism and blacks have never been denied baptism by the LDS church. Priesthood is necessary for admittance to the highest degree in the Celestial Kingdom.

Perhaps that is how it is possible in the mind of MEP (who's in my priestood line of authority) for blacks to be servents in the CK.

Otherwise, I agree with the points you raise and with the article although I think it was heavy-handed in labeling the LDS church a "white supremacist" organization. White dominated would have been more accurate and less inflaming.

[eldiente]

That is simply not true. It was not just a ban on priesthood, it was a ban on temple ordinances also (single black women for example). Mark E. Peterson once exclaimed how wonderful it was that blacks would get to be our servants in the Celestial Kingdom.

Reference?

[Stick]

Reference?

He gave a devotional at BYU called "Race Problems As They Affect the Church." It was given Aug 27, 1954. There is a statement in there where he says a black man can enter the celestial kingdom, but he will go there as a servant. I am guessing that is the statement that is being referred to.

[Jeff Lebowski]

He gave a devotional at BYU called "Race Problems As They Affect the Church." It was given Aug 27, 1954. There is a statement in there where he says a black man can enter the celestial kingdom, but he will go there as a servant. I am guessing that is the statement that is being referred to.

Yes. Here is the part in question:

Think of the Negro, cursed as to the Priesthood. Are we prejudiced,against him? Unjustly, sometimes we're accused of having such a prejudice. But what does the mercy of God have for him? This Negro, who in the pre-existence life lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the 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 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. In the great mercy of God, He allows all men to rise above themselves. Isn't this a great testimony to the principle of repentance, that if a man does the best he can to rise above conditions and if he is faithful and devoted, the Lord recognizes him and lifts him up, I think that is one of the great evidences of the mercy of God.

Not exactly what I would consider evidence of the mercy of God.

[YOhio]

We are reaping what we have sown.

Speak for yourself. I was only 16 days old when the ban was lifted. All of the old guys around here should have said something.