Why was the Church not in the forefront of the civil rights movement?

[Paperback Writer]

Yes, apparently an angle with a sword will make things happen. Hopefully that never happened to you when you were dragging your feet on getting married and having kids.

Don't get me started on what can happen when one "drags his feet on having kids"; especially if the mother-wanna-be has hit 30.

[SoCalCoug]

I'm probably in this boat. I see TSM not as a prophet that speaks with God on issues, but just as someone that has stewardship over the church and receives revelation just like the rest of us...which means it's imperfect. It's like my bishop. I take his counsel the same way I take the counsel of my next door neighbor, because in 3 more years that's all he'll be....my neighbor (not next door). I respect his office and work with him, but when he tells me that taking our the tampon garbage from the ladies restroom is a "priesthood responsibility" I'm going to roll my eyes and push back.

The thing with your viewpoint is that the Church seems to go to great lengths to foster the belief that our prophets commune with God on a much more personal level than regular church members do. And if the Church started taking a position more in line with yours, the Church would lose a lot of its authority over the members. It is a cornerstone of our testimonies that the Church is directed by Christ, and that the Prophet is God's mouthpiece on the earth.

[SeattleUte]

I suppose a necessary premise of this question is that racial discrimination is immoral, or at least unenlightened. At the very least, treating someone as less of a person, simply because their ancestors came from Africa as slaves, is not Christlike behavior.

I know the argument that the Church leaders were products of their time. But why should we accept that? If Christ is at the head of our Church, and we are led by enlightened prophets, why did the Church lag behind the civil rights movement, which most people today would agree was a right and just cause? Should not a Church led by Christ have been enlightened enough to be in the forefront of the civil rights movement, rather than being dragged along at its tail?

Why can't pigs fly? It's just not your church to do that.

[ERCougar]

I mostly agree with you. My problem (some would call it and example of cognitive dissonance) is that I have had spiritual experiences I cannot deny. So I have to go with "the church is true but has had (and probably will again) some horribly flawed leaders. I have come to the conclusion that being Prophet is really just an issue of scope (revelation for the whole world) or stewardship. I don't think it's that much different from the rest of us. In my experience, God leaves us to our own devices 99.9999% of the time. We get some things right, we eff up others. From time to time we are blessed with some real revelation about specific big and important things. I can count on one hand the times I'd say that was the case.

Of course all of the above may be my own rationalization to try and resolve the aforementioned cognitive dissonance.

It's a chickenshit rationalization.

I just don't find this very compelling. To sum up, the prophet is receiving truly "outside himself" revelation 0.0001% of the time. Oh, and it's probably not the most important 0.0001% of issues (i.e. civil rights), and we don't really have a good way of telling which 0.0001% is this portion. Mostly, he's going to share his opinion on things, which like me, he'll eff up sometimes, although probably less than I do.

Remind me again why I should pay attention at conference?

I don't mean to be flippant (ok, maybe a little...) nor do I mean to pick on you, but you're getting a couple of "likes" on this idea, and I'm wondering if people are considering the implications of this.