BKP on the Priesthood Ban

[byu71]

I fail to see why this issue is so troublesome to those not of our faith or those who were once of our faith and now want to take continual shots at it.

For someone of our faith, it might be troubling and we have to deal with prior Prophets and their ability to receive revelation. Amongst us members we can debate if everything said from the pulpit by the GA's is doctrine.

However, to the non-believers why do they care. They have already established in their minds the GA's are not prophets, seers and revelators. Are they on some kind of holy mission to enlighten the "believers". I doubt it.

Some pain is left there that has to be worked out. I suggest they see a shrink to get the angst out of their system.

[tooblue]

You may be scratching your head but this shouldn't surprise you. It sounds totally consistent and authentic. We even see the pattern here on CUF. Certain conclusions are intolerable--LDS apostles or first presidency are or were racist, LDS belief has inherently racist strains demonstrably traceable to old world racism, Joseph Smith didn't translate the Book of Mormon from golden plates just like he didn't translate the Book of Abraham. Any conclsuion, no matter how convoluted the reasoning or how absurd, is considered rather than the inthinkable, even if an objective person unconnected with the LDS Church would consider the unthinkable to be the most likely or even self-evident conclusion.

Since you are so enlightened on issues of race as well as objective when it comes to discussions about religion, namely the Mormon church, we should take your comments seriously and laud you for your insightful conclusions!

[Jeff Lebowski]

I agree with you, but I think this may have been SteelBlue's whole point.

LDSChurchCo. has to present a united front. We will never hear public dissenting opinion on this topic any more than we will see Steve Ballmer hold a press conference to talk about all the ways in which he has disagreed with Bill Gates.

It's very Texonian, actually. Shuck and jive, shuck and jive.

But don't you find the press conference last summer (described in the link I provided) to be significant? It was a clear deviation from the old "We don't know" line.

[TripletDaddy]

It's clear that you have different viewpoints on the issue coming from different church leaders. It would interesting to hear some of the conversations that they have on the topic.

I agree with you, but I think this may have been SteelBlue's whole point.

LDSChurchCo. has to present a united front. We will never hear public dissenting opinion on this topic any more than we will see Steve Ballmer hold a press conference to talk about all the ways in which he has disagreed with Bill Gates.

It's very Texonian, actually. Shuck and jive, shuck and jive.

[Hallelujah]

We had a GA in our HPG meeting today. He said that he was in a meeting recently with Elder Packer who was addressing with a group of missionaries. Supposedly, Elder Packer said that he didn't know the reason for the priesthood ban but he thought that it might have been because the church was not ready to handle the rapid growth in Africa that is now occurring.

Wow. I am still scratching my head over that one.

David O'MacKay said it best: It was a policy, not doctrine. And he left it at that.

I believe it was a policy based on the attitude of society at that time. There is no scriptural basis for the ban. But it was rectified almost 30 years ago and time to get over it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

FM says that the GA's believe it was inspired.

As for your hearsay point, do you have reason to believe this GA who quoted BKP had reason or incentive to lie about what BKP said? This kind of "hearsay" would be admissible in a court of law.

No, I don't doubt his story at all.

[SeattleUte]

What I'm saying is that that attitude in 1960 (which is clearly racist) is not even in the same league as what BKP said in 2009. You make it sound as if they are the same.

"God didn't allow it and we don't know why" is not nearly the same as "God didn't allow it because they are inferior, descendants of Cain, etc."

You could make the argument that since God never said why, people speculated all along and that speculation was directed by the time they lived in.

"I don't know." Yeah, right. If the rationalization was racist, why not just state the obvious: the practice was racist. Boyd K. Packer isn't being honest. His dissembling is itself racist. The institution can't absolve iteself of the racism until it comes clean about the racism. CONFESS, LDS CHURCH; repent of your racism.

[FMCoug]

My mother learned what she told me from apostles such as Bruce R. McConkie, Mark E. Peterson, and Alvin R. Dyer. That's the source of her ignorance. I don't know where Pac's mother got her information.

What I'm saying is that that attitude in 1960 (which is clearly racist) is not even in the same league as what BKP said in 2009. You make it sound as if they are the same.

"God didn't allow it and we don't know why" is not nearly the same as "God didn't allow it because they are inferior, descendants of Cain, etc."

You could make the argument that since God never said why, people speculated all along and that speculation was directed by the time they lived in.

[SeattleUte]

I don't know that you can categorize it as ignorance on the part of BKP. The party line (which he clearly believes) is that the ban was inspired. We don't know why as that hasn't been revealed but the orthodox view is that it was inspired. So BKP is like any orthodox member, speculating on reasons why "God wanted it that way." That is hardly equivalent to either of your mothers' attitudes in 1960.

My mother learned what she told me from apostles such as Bruce R. McConkie, Mark E. Peterson, and Alvin R. Dyer. That's the source of her ignorance. I don't know where Pac's mother got her information.

[SeattleUte]

I don't think so. Recall this article from last summer:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700232679,00.html

Some excerpts:





It's clear that you have different viewpoints on the issue coming from different church leaders. It would interesting to hear some of the conversations that they have on the topic.

What I found jarring about the BKP story is that it is one of the most bizarre rationalizations I have heard. And perhaps the least believable. But it was just hearsay so take it for what it's worth.

FM says that the GA's believe it was inspired.

As for your hearsay point, do you have reason to believe this GA who quoted BKP had reason or incentive to lie about what BKP said? This kind of "hearsay" would be admissible in a court of law.

[Jeff Lebowski]

We'll be hearing "I don't know why" for the rest of our lives.

I don't think so. Recall this article from last summer:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700232679,00.html

Some excerpts:

"When you think about it, that's just what it is — folklore. It's never really been official doctrine. I know there have been some misconceptions and some statements made by people in the past, but as Elder (Bruce R.) McConkie said, we've received new and additional light and knowledge through revelation, and even the folklore is obsolete now because of the fact that we have the revelation."

"We have to keep in mind that it's folklore and not doctrine," Elder Child said. "It's never been recorded as such. Many opinions, personal opinions, were spoken. I'm just so grateful for this revelation," he said, adding he can recall exactly where he was and what he was doing when he heard the news 30 years ago.

It's clear that you have different viewpoints on the issue coming from different church leaders. It would interesting to hear some of the conversations that they have on the topic.

What I found jarring about the BKP story is that it is one of the most bizarre rationalizations I have heard. And perhaps the least believable. But it was just hearsay so take it for what it's worth.

[FMCoug]

My mother said that they were fense sitters and descendants of Cain. But does our mothers' ignorance in the 1960's exculpate Boyd K. Packer's ignorance in 2009? Packer an apostle. Where do you draw the line? You will overlook a venal, dissembling, racist apostle, even president of the 12 but not a member of the First Presiency who has those characteristics?

I don't know that you can categorize it as ignorance on the part of BKP. The party line (which he clearly believes) is that the ban was inspired. We don't know why as that hasn't been revealed but the orthodox view is that it was inspired. So BKP is like any orthodox member, speculating on reasons why "God wanted it that way." That is hardly equivalent to either of your mothers' attitudes in 1960.

[SeattleUte]

Back in the '60s, my mother, who was a wonderful person but harbored some strongly bigoted ideas due to her upbringing, said that the Church couldn't extend the priesthood to those of African descent because the inevitably huge increase in welfare cases would bankrupt the Church. I remember thinking, at age 11 or 12, this made sense. By the time I was 16 or 17 this reasoning was quite depressing to me.

My mother said that they were fense sitters and descendants of Cain. But does our mothers' ignorance in the 1960's exculpate Boyd K. Packer's ignorance in 2009? Packer an apostle. Where do you draw the line? You will overlook a venal, dissembling, racist apostle, even president of the 12 but not a member of the First Presiency who has those characteristics?

[SeattleUte]

We had a GA in our HPG meeting today. He said that he was in a meeting recently with Elder Packer who was addressing with a group of missionaries. Supposedly, Elder Packer said that he didn't know the reason for the priesthood ban but he thought that it might have been because the church was not ready to handle the rapid growth in Africa that is now occurring.

Wow. I am still scratching my head over that one.

You may be scratching your head but this shouldn't surprise you. It sounds totally consistent and authentic. We even see the pattern here on CUF. Certain conclusions are intolerable--LDS apostles or first presidency are or were racist, LDS belief has inherently racist strains demonstrably traceable to old world racism, Joseph Smith didn't translate the Book of Mormon from golden plates just like he didn't translate the Book of Abraham. Any conclsuion, no matter how convoluted the reasoning or how absurd, is considered rather than the inthinkable, even if an objective person unconnected with the LDS Church would consider the unthinkable to be the most likely or even self-evident conclusion.

[BlueHair]

Back in the '60s, my mother, who was a wonderful person but harbored some strongly bigoted ideas due to her upbringing, said that the Church couldn't extend the priesthood to those of African descent because the inevitably huge increase in welfare cases would bankrupt the Church. I remember thinking, at age 11 or 12, this made sense. By the time I was 16 or 17 this reasoning was quite depressing to me.

Your mother sounds like my grandpa. When I was about 10 I told him that BYU needed a black quarterback. He told me black people weren't smart enough to play quarterback.