C
Chris-Wa1
Guest
This past week, the Mormon church celebrated the 40th anniversary of the lifting of the ban against black members holding the priesthood. The ban was first instituted in 1852 when Brigham Young announced that black men of African descent could no longer receive the priesthood or attend the temple. This ban lasted for 156 years until 1978 when the church leadership claimed to receive a revelation from God removing the ban.
No one seems to really know why Brigham Young instituted the ban in the first place. The official church essay on the subject ( Race and the Priesthood) never explains why. It does not mention whether or not Brigham Young received a revelation from God instituting the ban in 1852. Given that this policy was instituted by the leader of the Mormon Church, lasted for over 150 years, and was taught to the membership for all that time, one would have to reasonably assume that Brigham Young did this not just on a whim but by what he would have called revelation. To say otherwise would mean that Young possibly made a huge mistake, which the LDS church would never be willing to concede.
Since that time LDS were taught several reasons why the ban existed. One was that black skin was the mark of Cain and a curse on people of African descent. Another was that people who are born with black skin were born that way because they were less valiant in the pre-existence during the war in heaven when 1/3 of the angles rebelled against God and were cast out. These reasons have been commonly taught to the membership for decades. The Book of Mormon talks about how the Lamanites received a curse of black skin because of their wickedness. There is no question that within LDS history, black skin was seen as a curse.
Nowadays some LDS apologists dance around the issue by trying to write revisionist history on the subject, basically completely contradicting the teaching of the church for over 150 years. This recent article
by noted LDS speaker Marvin Perkins (http://www.ldsliving.com/How-We-Mis...iptures-Insights-from-a-Black-Convert/s/88562), though seemingly well-intentioned, clearly contradicts the teaching of the LDS church. He re-interprets LDS scripture to say something in stark contrast to what has been taught since at least the time of Brigham Young. Without coming right out and saying it, Perkins basically asserts that Brigham Young was wrong because there was/is no basis, scriptural or otherwise, for restricting LDS members from the priesthood and the temple based on skin color. He can’t come out and say so directly, however, because to do so would be to say that a Mormon prophet got something so big so wrong, which could ultimately challenge the status of Young as a true prophet. Faithful Mormons don’t do that.
It should be noted that LDS Living is not an official church publication, so it would be interesting to see what the LDS leadership thinks of Perkins’ points. The history of the LDS church and its interpretations of its own scripture, however, starkly contrast with what Perkins has to say.
No one seems to really know why Brigham Young instituted the ban in the first place. The official church essay on the subject ( Race and the Priesthood) never explains why. It does not mention whether or not Brigham Young received a revelation from God instituting the ban in 1852. Given that this policy was instituted by the leader of the Mormon Church, lasted for over 150 years, and was taught to the membership for all that time, one would have to reasonably assume that Brigham Young did this not just on a whim but by what he would have called revelation. To say otherwise would mean that Young possibly made a huge mistake, which the LDS church would never be willing to concede.
Since that time LDS were taught several reasons why the ban existed. One was that black skin was the mark of Cain and a curse on people of African descent. Another was that people who are born with black skin were born that way because they were less valiant in the pre-existence during the war in heaven when 1/3 of the angles rebelled against God and were cast out. These reasons have been commonly taught to the membership for decades. The Book of Mormon talks about how the Lamanites received a curse of black skin because of their wickedness. There is no question that within LDS history, black skin was seen as a curse.
Nowadays some LDS apologists dance around the issue by trying to write revisionist history on the subject, basically completely contradicting the teaching of the church for over 150 years. This recent article
by noted LDS speaker Marvin Perkins (http://www.ldsliving.com/How-We-Mis...iptures-Insights-from-a-Black-Convert/s/88562), though seemingly well-intentioned, clearly contradicts the teaching of the LDS church. He re-interprets LDS scripture to say something in stark contrast to what has been taught since at least the time of Brigham Young. Without coming right out and saying it, Perkins basically asserts that Brigham Young was wrong because there was/is no basis, scriptural or otherwise, for restricting LDS members from the priesthood and the temple based on skin color. He can’t come out and say so directly, however, because to do so would be to say that a Mormon prophet got something so big so wrong, which could ultimately challenge the status of Young as a true prophet. Faithful Mormons don’t do that.
It should be noted that LDS Living is not an official church publication, so it would be interesting to see what the LDS leadership thinks of Perkins’ points. The history of the LDS church and its interpretations of its own scripture, however, starkly contrast with what Perkins has to say.
Last edited: