So…you decided that ‘black’ meant ‘only those of negroid African descent,’ because of your own definition…and then decided that your definition is, of course, the only one available, and that nobody could possibly interpret it as it has been historically defined?
The problem with your interpretation is that your definition, obviously, is not universal. If it WERE, I would not have reacted. I’ve been here before, y’see.
I had to take Dianad off of “Ignore” just to make sure I had read her quote correctly. Did she just use the term “negroid”??? This term originated in the 1850’s and in my estimation a very derogatory remark. WOW. Negroid…well for someone trying to uphold the stand the LDS Church is no longer racist, and never really was, to refer to an African American as a Negroid…well does little to overthrow the perceptions of Racism in the LDS doctrine and by Church members.
Yes, there were some African American men who were extended the Priesthood in the early days of the church, they held Priesthood offices. These were the exception not the rule. The Fact of the matter Men of African American decent or African decent, “Black” men were denied the Priesthood. Including holding Priesthood offices, the ability to perform Priesthood ordinances, the ability to receive Priesthood ordinances. Some of those Ordinances deemed necessary for Salvation, such as the endowment, and Celestial Marriage.
In LDS doctrine you have to receive the Endowment in order to pass by the Angels in order to regain presence with God and to live with him. So if you were African American you were denied this, therefore you were denied access into Gods presence. Celestial marriage not only seals your spouse to you for time and all eternity it also seals your prosperity to you as well. Prior to 1978 people of African descent could not receive such ordinances therefore were not privy to the “blessings” they would bring.
This bigoted and racist doctrine was taught from the top down as “REVELATION” from God, if it wasn’t then it wouldn’t be implemented in ordinances performed by the Church in Temples World Wide. Mormons owned Slaves. Prophets taught they were from a cursed lineage, they were descendants of Cain. They had Black Skin because of their lineage and were not as valiant in the Pre Mortal or 1st estate. If you’re Mormon and you refute these facts, then you’re just “kicking against the pricks.” you simply don’t want to see what is there. Enough said. J.Smith was somewhat progressive in his views of Slaves and the issues surrounding the South, but he still refers to Slaves as property, to have eth Government pay for their liberation from Slave owners then ship them back to Africa, or to use them as infantrymen to fight on the front lines against America’s enemy’s implying a certain sense of expendability.
What I find old about this discussion is the ever constant refusal from Mormon posters to give clear answers without deflecting on Weak Tertiary issues such as, “that isn’t true because Samoans have black skin, and they had the Priesthood…” Really?
The LDS should just own up on their folly. It is an uninspired teaching which the LDS church wisely changed due to the political climate, now just address it as such and move on. The Church doesn’t. They just sweep it under the rug in hopes the issue would be forgotten.
Racism is a blot on our history we all share. No one, or I should say no organization is totally innocent regarding this issue however; where racism in some organizations was present due to the wickedness of Men, racism was taught in other organizations as being Doctrine From GOD. While some organizations have dealt with their errors and have sought reconciliation, others have simply swept it under the rug.
“Negroid” the simple willingness to use such a word, even if just to try and prove a point leaves me astounded…in a disgusted way.
