Skip to comments.Will Mormonsí racial history be a problem for Mitt Romney?
Posted on 02/01/2012 4:11:43 AM PST by Colofornian
Until 1978, the LDS church banned men of African descent from its priesthood...
The LDS church has neither formally apologized for the priesthood ban nor publicly repudiated many of the theories used to justify it for more than 125 years.
...many blacks perceive the LDS church as racist...
...Rev. ONeal Dozier told The Palm Beach Post...The Book of Mormon says the Negro skin is cursed.
...another Mormon scripture, The Pearl of Great Price, says, blackness came upon Cains descendants, who were despised among all people.
...Tim Russert noted that Romney was 31 when the priesthood ban was lifted in 1978. Didnt you think, What am I doing part of an organization that is viewed by many as a racist organization? Russert asked.
Im very proud of my faith, and its the faith of my fathers, Romney answered. And Im not going to distance myself from my faith in any way.
The issue hurt him and it hurt the image of Mormon church, said Newell Bringhurst, a historian...
...Hell face more and more scrutiny on the Mormon-black issue..."
Smith was more blunt.
The church has never done its due diligence, and guess what? Mitt Romney is taking hell for it.
In 1949, the LDS churchs First Presidency...had said the priesthood ban was a direct commandment from the Lord. And some LDS leaders regarded as prophets taught that black skin was punishment for souls that lacked valor in a pre-earthly existence.
Even under intense pressure from black Mormons, the church has refused to formally repudiate past interpretations of doctrine or scripture that tie spiritual worthiness to race.
If the LDS church were to apologize, that would be casting aspersions on Gods prophets.., said Richard Ostling...
I dont think the Mormon soul could countenance it....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Yup...The LDS church CONSTANTLY says that the Lord would NEVER let his church go astray (the so-called "universal apostasy")...even though they preach that the Lord Jesus supposedly let His ENTIRE church go astray a few centuries after ascending.
Look for this theme to be hit upon again & again all thru 2012 if Romney gets the nomination.
Just last week: ...for the most recent -- and best -- MSM article on this Romney link to racism, see Robyn Blumner: Romney's 'Mormon question' should have more to do with LDS church's past racism
From the article: ...Tim Russert noted that Romney was 31 when the priesthood ban was lifted in 1978. Didnt you think, What am I doing part of an organization that is viewed by many as a racist organization? Russert asked. Im very proud of my faith, and its the faith of my fathers, Romney answered. And Im not going to distance myself from my faith in any way....The church has never done its due diligence, and guess what? Mitt Romney is taking hell for it.
Good. He's financially supported this racist org with 10% of his very wealthy income.
Racism's in the Book of Mormon -- and the Pearl of Great Price!
Here's five Book of Mormon verses below talking about how the "skin of blackness" is a "cursing" based upon their "iniquity" (2 Nephi 5:21; Alma 3:6; Jacob 3:5) and how when the curse would be removed, they would again become "white" (3 Nephi 2:15), which the Book of Mormon says is a "delightsome" color (2 Nephi 5:21; cf. older version of 2 Nephi 30:6):
The Mormon "prophets" Nephi, Alma and the Mormon Jacob are racists!
* "And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceeding fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them." (2 Nephi 5:21)
* "...many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people." (2 Nephi 30:6, pre-1981 versions...changed from unknown reasons in 1981 to "fair and delightsome"...It's not like the Mormon church has the supposed gold plates to go back and look to interpret a word differently)
* "And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against the their brethren..." (Alma 3:6)
* "Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins..." (Jacob 3:5) [Note: The "Lamanites" per Mormonism are Native Americans...so their skin color, says Mormon "scripture" is based upon a supposed curse]
* "And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites." (3 Nephi 2:15) [Note: So...to be "uncursed" is to have your skin turn white...per Romney's Mormonism, that is!]
The Book of Abraham verses are 1:24-27..."and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land." (v. 24)...Pharaoh was then supposedly "cursed...as pertaining to the Priesthood. Now, Pharaoh, being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood..." (v. 26-27)
Some Mormons talk as if a darker skin color as-a-supposed-curse was just ONLY some talk in the past. Uh, no! Look at the verses above -- Alma 3:6 and Jacob 3:5, for example. They also talk as if the "curse of Ham" being a darker skin color was also just some teaching that's been jettisoned. Well, then why is the Book of Abraham phrasing still there in their Mormon "scripture" -- the Pearl of Great Price?
Well how many black leaders have endorsed Romney so far ???
Lets name them
lets hate Romney for his own putrid band of RINO politics.
I am not a Morman....but please...get off of this.
Well how many black leaders have endorsed Romney so far ???
In short, yes it will because the Stalinist Mitt will be running against will make sure it's an issue.
Blacks will not desert 0bama no matter what, but they may not be so excited about running to the polls, unless he can play the race card
This will be a source of distraction because mission #1 for Hussein is to keep the election focused AWAY FROM HIS RECORD. If the election turns on the economy Barry's toast. This kind of story is the perfect distraction.
And that's just the way it is!
And so the Rats and media will almost certainly give him a pass if he gets the nomination.
Without the guidance of a true believer, the LDS story is so fantastic and unbelievable that the average person will think Mitt Romney either a gullible dunce or a sinister cultist.
Now some may say the history of the traditional Christian church is a bit far-fetched as well—except that history has been accepted and integrated into Western Civilization for centuries—long enough so as to be a given—not so with Joe Smith's creation.
Hey, you don’t like the discussion how about you get off the religion forum, just saying.
The way mormonISM teaches about “the cursed” black skin, is a religious discussion.
So...we have 0bama from a hate-filled church presided over by Jeremiah Wright...and that’s okay. And now we have a candidate running for office from a church that saw black skin as inferior. Some choice...but you can bet your bippy, the latter will get a colonscopy, while the former has already gotten a pass.
I’m so disgusted with the whole process this morning, I may go Galt before the election.
now your repeating yourself...I read it the first time.
it is irrelevant. they use to say a RC could never be elected president...now we have 2 running...Go Newt/Go Santorum.
If the LDS church were to apologize, that would be casting aspersions on Gods prophets.., said Richard Ostling...
I dont think the Mormon soul could countenance it....
what are they ???
Klu Klux Klan ???
As I’ve said, the racial issue is one of the reasons Romney cannot win against Obammie and his Commies. He and the GOP will not engage in the tactics of political warfare that will be necessary to defeat Obammie the Commie. They will use those tactics relentlessly.
The DemocRats will use the race issue like never before, and Robamney will grimace and look down and say, “Yes, we have been an evil nation in that regard and we are sorry.”
He may as well say, “Yes, because of the mythical past you leftists have created and brainwashed Americans with, go ahead and take the presidency for another four years. You deserve it. And I know you’ve said you are against reparations because they don’t go far enough. Let me know what I can do to help you mug America to pay for this mythical past you keep lying about.”
I never thought I’d see the GOP as my enemy. But after McCain and now Romney (who I saw as the establishment pick and the one who would emerge as the candidate several months ago, even before Cain was forced out), I now see the GOP as the enemy of the America that our Founding Fathers created for us.
What exactly is a black leader? You mean a race based leader? Yet this thread and article are whining about race? Talk about Orwellian...
Well, that didn’t take long. Be assured, we will be awash in MSM “Special Reports” on the Mormon church in the days to come: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2840964/posts
Not a Romney fan, but I think this is relevant in a way that could actually help Romney. If/when this is raised he uses it as an opportunity to bring Rev. Wright and Obama’s radical associates into the spotlight it will work in his favor. I highly doubt someone will produce a tape of a Mormon religious service in which someone is saying ‘God**** America’, or any of the anti-white rhetoric that you can show from pastors and associates of Obama.
Whoever the candidate is they need to paint Obama as a radical. “Our nation is sinking into debt, the economies of the free-world are sinking into debt, and Mr. Obama didn't make a course correction. He followed his ideology and spent us into the highest level of debt, and the steepest rise in debt in American history, weakening our nation at a time when the world needs the beacon of hope and opportunity that America has always been.” etc.
Just the start to helping Obummer to win it again. But wait, it’s going to get a lot worse than this!
You dont regard Herman Cain as a leader ???
You dont regard Allen West as a leader ???
I do...I would vote for either...
Both have endorsed Newt...
Whit a minute so you are saying that race matters? Why does it matter if they are black or not?
How did this thread get to be about me ???
I’m not a Mormon...
I’m a Christian...
This is about racist Mormon doctrine...
It will not hurt Mittens—No blacks would vote for him anyway—they will all vote for their own man Obama.
“Im so disgusted with the whole process this morning, I may go Galt before the election.”
I find myself starting to dream of living somewhere where so-called leaders don’t spout nonsense every day. This time is like living in Wonderland, I keep expecting to see the white rabbit and the mad hatter and the red queen screaming, “Off with their heads”...wait a minute, red queen, isn’t it president now?
If Mitt is savaged with this issue, then the elephant in the room will become “why weren’t the teachings of Obama’s church similarly scrutinized?”
Or at least it would provide an opening wide enough to drive a semi through for Mitt to take on the issue of Rev. Wright and liberation theology himself or have his surrogates do it.
I’m not sure Obama wants to go down this path and will probably call the dogs off before it gets too heated. But I might be wrong.
Why SHOULD it?
"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.
The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings.
This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race--that they should be the 'servant of servants', and they will be, until that curse is removed."
Brigham Young-President and second 'Prophet' of the Mormon Church, 1844-1877- Extract from Journal of Discourses.
Here are two examples from their 'other testament', the Book of Mormon.
2 Nephi 5: 21 'And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.'
Alma 3: 6 'And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.'
August 27, 1954 in an address at Brigham Young University (BYU), Mormon Elder, Mark E Peterson, in speaking to a convention of teachers of religion at the college level, said:
(Rosa Parks would have probably told Petersen under which wheel of the bus he should go sit.)
1967, (then) Mormon President Ezra Taft Benson said,
"The Communist program for revolution in America has been in progress for many years and is far advanced. First of all, we must not place the blame upon Negroes. They are merely the unfortunate group that has been selected by professional Communist agitators to be used as the primary source of cannon fodder."
We are told that on June 8, 1978, it was 'revealed' to the then president, Spencer Kimball, that people of color could now gain entry into the priesthood.
According to the church, Kimball spent many long hours petitioning God, begging him to give worthy black people the priesthood. God finally relented.
Sometime before the 'revelation' came to chief 'Prophet' Spencer Kimball in June 1978, General Authority, Bruce R McConkie had said:
"The Blacks are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty.
The Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow there from, but this inequality is not of man's origin, it is the Lord's doings."
(Mormon Doctrine, pp. 526-527).
When Mormon 'Apostle' Mark E Petersen spoke on 'Race Problems- As they affect the Church' at the BYU campus in 1954, the following was also said:
"...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, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory."
When Mormon 'Prophet' and second President of the Church, Brigham Young, spoke in 1863 the following was also said:
"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God is death on the spot. This will always be so."
(Journal of Discourses, Vo. 10, p. 110)
Yeah; Native Americans are althroughout the Book of MORMON; too.
I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today ... they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people.... For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised.... The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.
At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl-sixteen-sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parentson the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather.... These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness.
One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.
(Improvement Era, December 1960, pp.922-23). (p. 209)
Maybe; but THIS sure will!
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;
and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,
and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.
Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)
Party ownership of the print media
made it easy to manipulate public opinion,
and the film and radio carried the process further.
The Ministry of Truth, Winston's place of work, contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below.
The Ministry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further.
The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels - with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary.
Winston worked in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT (a single branch of the Ministry of Truth) editing and writing for The Times. He dictated into a machine called a speakwrite. Winston would receive articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, in Newspeak, rectify. If, for example, the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus, and in reality the result was grossly less, Winston's job was to change previous versions so the old version would agree with the new one. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs - to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance.
When his day's work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. He dialed 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to rectify.
In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages; to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and on the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.
As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of The Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames.
What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead.
In the cubicle next to him the little woman with sandy hair toiled day in day out, simply at tracking down and deleting from the Press the names of people who had been vaporized and were therefore considered never to have existed. And this hall, with its fifty workers or thereabouts, was only one-sub-section, a single cell, as it were, in the huge complexity of the Records Department. Beyond, above, below, were other swarms of workers engaged in an unimaginable multitude of jobs.
There were huge printing-shops and their sub editors, their typography experts, and their elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs. There was the tele-programmes section with its engineers, its producers and its teams of actors specially chosen for their skill in imitating voices; clerks whose job was simply to draw up lists of books and periodicals which were due for recall; vast repositories where the corrected documents were stored; and the hidden furnaces where the original copies were destroyed.
And somewhere or other, quite anonymous, there were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, and the other rubbed out of existence.
ping to the Incredible Vanishing MORMON links...
We’ve been killing the innocent since 1973.
What ELSE should we expect?
America needs to REPENT!
This would not hurt him a bit.
90% of blacks were going to vote for Obama anyway.
If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There's an Pro-Christian group of people here that spends a great deal of their time posting factual articles from various sources about the LDS church. Many of the articles come from the official site, LDS.org.
They have a calling to contend for Jesus Christ. You can witness many different tactics employed that you might find quite interesting. They will rebut the fallacies in the original mormon article with true Biblical facts, and provide the URLs to them so that you too may read them for yourselves. They will also present conflicting statements from different LDS leaders with the attending source to these statements, usually historical documents or scriptures.
LDS persons SAY they have no issue whatsoever having their scriptures or leaders quoted as long as it is presented fairly and accurately. This is usually not true. LDS persons, including their 52,000 missionaries, with influence from their highest leaders do not WANT their beliefs presented "fairly" and especially not "accurately". That is why they will use every tactic to prevent the pro-Christian material that rebuts claims presented by the LDS church from coming to light
Another favorite tactic of the Pro-Christian group is posting scripture or statements which on their own really present no dilemma, yet in many cases present doctrine that many LDS members are unaware of.
That's a Christlike thing to do right? It does speak volumes about them .
Some of the Pro-Christians bring special witness to you as being former Mormons. So someone who is an ex-member of any organization would be in a good position to carry the message of their own experience.
The LDS Church gains members from other denominations as well as others faiths all the time. The Pro-Christian group wishes to see that any gain in membership in the LDS church is done with the new applicant for membership having FULL KNOWLEDGE of the requirements, promises and arcane beliefs that they are becoming a part of.
After reading their posts, I invite you to seek the truth about whatever "issue" the Pro-Christians seem to be "revealing" or "exposing". I promise that if you do so with honest intent, the "ahah" moments you will have will be many and frequent. You will start to recognize the tactics employed to bring to you the difference between your original concept of mormonism and what it actually is....a fraud perpuated by a con man, adulterer and thief.
The goal of the Pro-Christian group is to provide you with tools to investigate a sect that spends millions and millions each year to spread its false message, so that you can question the clever lies and attempts to co-opt the message of real Christianity.
Read the articles posted from mormon sources, question the belief therein, ask questions of the Pro-Christians and PRAY WITH THEM FOR GUIDANCE. Do NOT fall into the trap presented by mormons to "read the Book of Mormon and pray to find if it is true". It will be presented in a way that appeals to your senses, rather than your ability to study the Bible, compare it to the Book of Mormon and use your own good common sense to decide if God did indeed yank His Gospel from the Earth, wait centuries, then choose a young man with a doubtful past to "restore" it. There is no need for a "Restoration of the Gospel". There is no need for earthly temples in which to take part in masonic rituals to gain salvation. So again, seek the truth. Use your God-given brain and discernment.
Be wary. If you "seek" on the internet, be aware that the LDS church has a very heavy presence there, and in fact one of its groups boasts of having over 300 websites filled with mormon proselytization. Unfortunately, "Jesus Christ.org" is one domain owned by the LDS church and is very misleading. If you visit there, be aware you are not seeing the true Christian message.
Here are only two links that will help you get started
Any one of the Flying Inmans will be happy to answer questions and provide links to help you along the way.
God bless you in your journey to true Salvation.
Interesting how Delightsome Mitt, until around 2007, passionately argued against Mormon teachings on abortion and homosexuality, but never challenged the LDS on its blatant racism.
What was it OBAMA said about Jereiah Wright??..."I can no more disown Jeremiah Wright, than I can my WHITE grandmother".....but he did, maybe.
It is part of who Romney is and why he is the way he is. And these threads are going to be a day at the beach compared to the MSM treatment of Romney if (God forbid) he gets the nomination.
It is interesting to note that Mormons changed their policy but never renounced the doctrine. Even the official declaration isn’t given as a revelation but as a statement (just like the 1890 ‘manifesto’ on polygamy).
You can’t protect Romney.
Exposing Bishop Romney’s politics, racist past, his abortion history, his pathological lying, his family’s unbroken record of never serving us in uniform since they arrived in 1841 to serve Joseph Smith, all of this is relevant.
I don’t want Romney elected, I want the horrible truth to come out now, not just when Obama wants it to.
Bishop Romney is not a renegade Mormon, he is a Mormon in good standing, among the most devout and true, and is respected as such by Mormons.
I'm with you....if Romney get's the nod....I'm quitting the Republican Party. It won't mean much to them...but will give me a warm feeling, for a couple minutes.
Lester Bush noted in his pivotal 1973 article, Mormonisms Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview:
An aversion to miscegenation [race-mixing] has been the single most consistent facet of Mormon attitudes towards the Negro. Though the attitudes towards the priesthood, slavery, or equal rights have fluctuated significantly, denunciations of interracial marriage can be identified in discourses in virtually every decade from the Restoration to the present day.
Indeed fear of this juxtaposition of race and sexuality is the very seed that germinated into the post-1847 ban, which prevented anyone of known black African descent from holding LDS priesthood and from participating in LDS temple endowment and sealing rituals. The latest research on this issue (including my biographies of black Elders Q. Walker Lewis and Joseph T. Ball, Stephen Flemings work on William I. Applebys journal, and Patrick Polks research on Warner “William” McCary) points conclusively to Brigham Youngs personal fear of black sexuality (and especially black male sexuality) as the reason he emphatically prohibited black-white marriage and instigated the priesthood-temple ban. Youngs resistance to black-white marriage must also be seen within the context of his own marital experimentation, which was, at that very moment in 1847, receiving national public scrutiny and condemnation, as well as legal censure by the Massachusetts State Supreme Court.
In this paper I first examine a significant LDS marriage that occurred in Massachusetts in 1846 and I place it in its historical context. Next I briefly examine inter-racial marriage in Nauvoo, beginning with Joseph Smith and then carry that topic on to Winter Quarters of 1846 and 1847, where the seeds of LDS anti-miscegenation fully germinated under Brigham Young. Next I recall Brigham Youngs emerging theology regarding black-white marriage and its significance to American society and LDS eschatology. Then I look at the chaotic consequences of letter of the law dogma conflicting with the lives of real people, who openly came to LDS leaders to ask difficult personal questions or demanded clarification and concise definitions rather than broad generalizations. Despite seemingly rigid doctrines and policies, in reality, the responses from church leadership were widely varied and often contradictory, with many more people of some African descent receiving priesthood and temple ordinances than has been acknowledged in the past.
Next I reveal previously unknown statements and ideas about black-white marriage and white racial superiority as found in the Deseret News from 1864 to 1910. And lastly, I examine how LDS doctrine influenced Utah territorial and state laws on black-white marriage, resulting in a small but influential and ultimately successful civil rights movement in Utah and within Mormonism that called on LDS leaders to abolish antiquated and unnecessary restrictions on the boundaries of love and marriage.
Ultimately this paper shows that LDS doctrine and practice maintained that civil marriages specifically between blacks and whites were categorically prohibited, were unnatural and contrary to Gods law, would never be acceptable within the LDS Church (or if so, only in some future eschatological period); they were deeply offensive to social norms and if allowed to be performed, would lead to the destruction of not just society but indeed humanity.
I shall repeat the paragraph above but slightly modify it to fit the context of Proposition 8  and leave you to your own conclusions:
LDS doctrine and practice maintains that civil marriages of same-sex couples are categorically prohibited, are unnatural and contrary to Gods law, will never be acceptable within the LDS Church; they are deeply offensive to social norms and if allowed to be performed, will lead to the destruction of not just society but indeed humanity.
Now in 1963 Utah finally accepted legalized black-white inter-marriage and then in 1978 the LDS Church accepted it doctrinally (although begrudgingly) and black-white sealings are now performed in temples across the world. And the prophesied divine retribution and utter destruction of society and humanity have not happened.
A Queer Marriage in Massachusetts
One of the most significant, and simultaneously most obscure marriages in LDS history took place on September 18, 1846. On that day, 21 year-old Enoch Lovejoy Lewis married 19 year-old Mary Matilda Webster in Cambridge, Massachusetts. At first glance, this couple and their marriage seem rather unremarkable. Both were members of the LDS Church in the Lowell MA branch. The young bride, Mary Matilda, was from Chester, MA a tiny rural village in the southwestern area of that state. Her parents did not marry until almost two years after her birth, so Mary was either illegitimate or one of her parents had a previous, unknown marriage that produced her. The importance and uniqueness of this marriage lies in the fact that Mary Matildas groom, Enoch Lovejoy Lewis, was the son of a black father and a mixed-race mother. And Matilda, the name she went by, was white. Three years after Massachusetts repealed its ban of allowing white people to marry either those of African or Native American descent, this inter-racial marriage of a white Mormon woman and a black Mormon man ignited a firestorm in the LDS Church, and its effects are still being felt to this day.
Massachusetts and Black-White Marriage
William Lloyd Garrison is credited with launching the campaign to repeal the 1705 law barring marriages between white people and those of African descent, although black abolitionists had certainly desired this long before Garrison began his campaign. The second issue in January 1831 of William Lloyd Garrisons abolitionist paper, The Liberator, included an urgent appeal for the obliteration of the 1786 law, which made performing an interracial marriage a crime punishable by a fine of 50 pounds, or roughly $7,000 today.
Garrison’s 1831 Liberator Article
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
Garrison wrote that this disgraceful and inconsistent law prohibiting such marriages was an invasion of one of the inalienable rights of every man, namely, the pursuit of happiness. Many later issues of The Liberator continued the call for repeal of such legislation. Opposition from the south, from other New England states, and within the state legislature was fierce. Some Massachusetts legislators claimed that the ban against black and white marriages was not discriminatory because it applied equally to both races and the punishment for both white and blacks was the same. People believed that this law recognized natural distinctions between the races, which nothing but the insanity of fanaticism dares to arraign. Others felt that it prevented a further deterioration of the white race; mixed-race descendants were an example of human de-evolutionary retrogression. Later LDS rhetoric would echo similar sentiments.
On February 24, 1843, the Massachusetts state legislature voted to repeal the old law. Just three and a half years later, Enoch and Matilda faced each other and under God pledged their marital vows in an extraordinary act of newly gained social and political freedom. Matilda, by the way, was two months pregnant at the time of her marriage to Enoch and some six months later, she gave birth to Enoch Lovejoy Lewis Jr. Unfortunately for them, the president of the eastern states mission, a man named William I. Appleby, was proselytizing in the Boston-Lowell area at the time of little Enochs birth.
A month after Enoch Jr. was born, Appleby visited the Lowell Branch on May 19, 1847. He was shocked to discover that not only had a black man been ordained to priesthood (Enochs father, Walker Lewis) but also that Enoch had married a white LDS woman. Two weeks later, Appleby wrote a letter to Brigham Young, informing him of this situation and wanting to know if the church indeed approved of blacks holding priesthood and marrying white women:
At Lowell I found a coloured brother by name of Lewis a barber, an Elder in the Church, ordained some years ago by William Smith. This Lewis I was informed has also a son who is married to a white girl and both members of the Church there. Now dear Br. I wish to know if this is the order of God or tolerated in this Church ie to ordain Negroes to the Priesthood and allow amalgamation [inter-racial marriage]. If it is I desire to Know, as I have Yet got to learn it.
Almost a month later, Appleby decided to investigate further and went to the Enoch Lewis home to witness their relationship:
In looking for a Br. in the Church, I called at a House, a coloured man resided there, I set myself down for a few moments presently in came quite a good looking White Woman, about 22 years old I should think, with blushing cheeks, and was introduced to me as the negros wife, an infant in a cradle near bore evidence of the fact. Oh! Woman, thought I, where is thy shame, (for indeed I felt ashamed and not only ashamed, but disgusted, when I was informed they were both members of a Church!) [Where is] Respect for thy family, thyself, for thy offspring and above all the law of God?
William I. Appleby’s Journal Entry, June 16, 1847
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
Note that in his earlier letter to Brigham Young, Appleby seemed perplexed and inquisitive. But after meeting the couple, his emotions had grown much stronger, indeed into shame and disgust. I would postulate that the significant difference between the letter and the journal entry a month later is because upon actually meeting the couple Appleby was struck by two things: 1) Matildas fair beauty and more importantly (2) the blatant and public evidence of their private sexual intercourse, which was their baby. Also note here that Appleby refers to Matildas lack of respect for her mixed-race offspring but above all to the law of God.
Inter-racial Marriage at Nauvoo
In Nauvoo, Joseph Smith reflected general lower-class white attitudes toward black-white marriage and said on January 2, 1843, Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them [sic] to their own species. As proof of that belief, year later, Joseph Smith, as Nauvoos Justice of the Peace, fined two African American men $25 and $5 respectively for trying to marry white women. Otherwise, Joseph Smiths views specific to black-white marriage have not been recorded, as far as I know.
Now Warner (aka William) McCary, a runaway slave from Natchez, Mississippi, arrived in Nauvoo at the end of 1845, claiming to be part African and part American Indian, including being the lost son of the Choctaw tribal chief, Amosholi-T-ubi (or Moshulatubbe), but his Indian ancestry was merely a scam.
Drawing of Choctaw Chief, Mosholatubbee
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
McCary was baptized and then ordained an Elder allegedly by Orson Hyde about February 1846 (as the rest of the Mormons abandoned Nauvoo and headed to points westward). About this time, Hyde is reported to have also married McCary to a white sister at Nauvoo. Robert Lang Campbell, who was at Winter Quarters, recorded in his journal on March 1, 1847, “Mr. McCarey a Choctaw Indian married to a white woman named Lucy Stanton - a sister - he being baptized in Nauvoo by O Hyde ^last year^.”
Robert Campbell Journal Entry, March 1, 1847
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
The Strangites also heard a similar rumor, and they too heard McCary was only Native American, and not part African as well. In October 1846, the Strangite newspaper, the Voree Herald, reported, We are informed that Orson Hyde, before leaving the camp near Council Bluffs has made a tool of an Indian whom he has baptized and ordained to go out among the churches, and call himself a Lamanite prophet.
Voree Herald, October 1846, vol. 1, no. 10, p. 43
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
This white sister who married the runaway slave posing as an Afro-Indian was none other than Lucile Ann Celesta Stanton Bassett, daughter of Daniel Stanton, who had been on the High Council of Adam-Ondi-Ahman Stake in 1838 and then president of the Quincy Stake from October 25, 1840 until the spring of 1841, when all stakes outside of Nauvoo, Illinois and Lee County, Iowa were discontinued. (Ezra T. Benson, whom Stanton had baptized, was his second counselor in the Quincy stake presidency.) The Stantons had been some of the first converts of the church living in the Kirtland area, being baptized on November 30, 1830. When Lucy Stanton was about 15, she had become enthralled by the very first black Mormon, Black Pete. Along with her sisters, she became caught up in Black Petes charismatic and revelatory experiences at Kirtland, such as catching letters from heaven, and being “taken by spirit” in pentecostalesque convulsions. Here in Nauvoo fifteen years later, the now divorced woman and mother of three, married another controversial black Mormon as her second husband, Warner aka William McCary - he also was known by the aliases William Chubbee, William Chubbee King, Julius McCary, William McChubby, Okah Tubee, James Warner, and War’ne’wis Ke’ho’ke Chubbee.
As I was revising this paper last week, it suddenly dawned on me that just at this very critical moment when Brigham Young was confronted with black male sexuality and seriously questioning black participation in temple and priesthood, he himself was at the very center of a very public trial over his own marital improprieties back in Massachusetts, and this can only have had an affect upon his mind as he confronted black-white marriages among the Mormons. A married Quaker woman named Augusta Adams Cobb had converted to Mormonism and fallen in love with Brigham Young while he was on one of his several missions to the Boston area. Augusta abandoned her husband and large family and moved to Nauvoo where she was married against her husband’s wishes to Brigham Young on November 2, 1843 as his second plural wife. Even by Mormon standards this was adultery and was contrary to LDS practice, in that church leaders forbade any LDS man from marrying a woman who was not single, widowed, or divorced. Augustas husband, Henry Cobb, was humiliated and deeply hurt by the actions of his wife and Brigham Young, so he began the long and expensive process of obtaining a legal divorce from Augusta, by claiming that indeed his wife and Brigham Young were living in adultery, not just polygamy. Eventually the case of Cobb v. Cobb reached the Massachusetts Supreme Court where the greatest legal minds of the United States sat. The five men of this court were great liberal progressives, abolitionists, and supporters of womens and workers rights - certainly “activist judges” of their day. Their judicial rulings were iconic and profoundly influenced American life for decades.
Below is a brief timeline of the trial and its public aftermath:
Brigham Youngs Massachusetts Supreme Court Trial for Adultery, 1846-47
November 7, 1846 Cobb v. Cobb was brought before the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in Boston, with Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw presiding. Francis A. Fabens, Esq. was the counsel for Henry Cobb.
January 13, 1847 Deputy Sheriff Erastus Rugg attested before the Supreme Court that on this date he had personally served to Augusta Adams Cobb (at Winter Quarters?) a copy of the libel suit and a notice to appear before the court on March 2, 1847.
March 2, 1847 Augusta A. Cobb and Brigham Young did not appear before the court to defend themselves. However, their counsel, Abraham Annis Dame, Esq., appeared on their behalf.
May 3, 1847 George J. Adams, ex-Mormon Elder and apostle (although not in the Quorum of the Twelve), swore out his deposition against Augusta Adams Cobb and Brigham Young before the court. Catherine Ramsdale Lewis, who had been repeatedly commanded by Brigham Young to marry Heber C. Kimball polygamously - and later wrote an exposé of the Nauvoo endowment ceremony, also testified before the court about Augusta Cobbs adulterous relationship with Brigham Young.
November 24, 1847 Judge Samuel Sumner Wilde decreed a full divorce from the bonds of matrimony to Henry Cobb on the basis of the “crim. con.” of Brigham Young with Henry’s wife, Augusta A. Cobb.
November 26, 1847, Divorced from a Woman Who Had Become the Spiritual Wife of a Mormon Leader, Boston Post
This same lengthy announcement of the divorce proceedings also appeared in the New England Ploughman of December 4, 1847, and was reprinted in the Quincy Whig of December 22, 1847 (p. 2).
December 6, 1847, Henry Cobb, of Boston, Morning News (New London CT)
December 9, 1847, Fruits of Mormonism, New York Evangelist, p. 195
Fruits of Mormonism was reprinted in the December 22, 1847 issue of the Vermont Chronicle, (Bellows Falls, VT)
Interestingly, this case was never about polgyamy per se, but strictly about adultery. Brigham Young’s “dirty laundry” became a matter of public record as the Supreme Court was given dates and places that Young had sexual relations with the married Augusta Cobb. The Supreme Court severely humiliated Young publicly for his marital deviance by finding the couple guilty of “crim. con.” (criminal conduct) in the form of adultery. Did Young then turn and take out his frustrations on a group of inferiors? When we turn to what he was consequently doing at Winter Quarters, it would certainly seem so.
Brigham Young Confronts Black-White Marriage at Winter Quarters
African American Priesthood Holders
& Wives Before 1847
Teacher/Priest (?) Black Pete no known wife; but had a following of white Mormon women in Kirtland, including the Stanton sisters
Seventy Elijah Abel married Mary Ann Adams, identified as a quadroon (LDS convert along with husband)
High Priest Joseph T. Ball never married but tried to seduce many white LDS women in Lowell and Boston
Elder Q. Walker Lewis married Elizabeth Lovejoy, the Episcopalian daughter of a black man and a white woman
Elder Warner William McCary - married Lucile Ann Celesta Stanton (Bassett), a white Mormon woman (daughter of Nauvoo Stake President, Daniel Stanton and ex-wife of Oliver Harmon Bassett); McCary was also sealed to many other white LDS women in his schismatic movement
Elder (?) Enoch Lovejoy Lewis married (1) M. Matilda Webster, a white Mormon woman; married (2) a black woman in 1852
While Brigham Youngs adulterous relationship was going public in Massachusetts and throughout the nation, we turn to Young at Winter Quarters and what happened there. Brigham Young was already long aware of black Mormons Walker Lewis and Joseph T. Ball holding priesthood, having known Lewis and Ball for many years when Young was serving missions in the Boston and Lowell area. Here in Nauvoo, Brigham Young told recently ordained Warner McCary that holding the priesthood had nothing to do with race. On March 26, 1847, Young told McCary that holding LDS priesthood had nothing to do with the blood for [from] one blood has God made all flesh, we have to repent [to] regain what we av lost” (a paraphrase of Acts 17:26). I emphasize that in March 1847, Young said that there was no priesthood ban because of race using Acts as a proof text we are all ONE BLOOD; the only stipulation is repentance. But by December 1847, this is all changed.
As I noted earlier Pres. Appleby wrote a report to Brigham Young about his discovery of Enoch Lewiss marriage to Matilda Webster. He mailed this report to Brigham Young with an address at Council Bluff, Iowa, where it was then forwarded to Winter Quarters, Nebraska, and there remained. Young, of course, was just settling in Utah at the time, so the acting Mormon president did not receive the letter for some six months. Ironically, Applebys letter, Brigham Young, and William I. Appleby himself, all converged at Winter Quarters at the beginning of December 1847. Brigham Young returned to Winter Quarters from the Salt Lake Valley, when Elder William I. Appleby arrived there on December 2 from his mission presiding over the eastern states. Young read Applebys letter regarding the marriage of Enoch and Matilda Lewis and then immediately met with Appleby in person to ensure the accuracy of the details of the inter-racial marriage of Enoch and Mary Matilda Lewis.
As shown, by December 1847, things had significantly changed for Brigham Young. Warner McCary had come out in open rebellion against the church and had started his own version of Mormonism, including a highly sexualized sealing ceremony, in which McCary was sealed to the white women of his disciples by sleeping with them. In response to all this, Young called a meeting of the members of the Twelve who were present in Winter Quarters, and had Appleby appear to personally give an account. Here are Thomas Bullocks minutes of that meeting:
December 3, 1847 Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, pp. 6-7
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
bro Appleby relates...
Wm. Smith ordained a black man Elder at Lowell & he has married a white girl & they have a child
Prest. Young If they were far away from the Gentiles they wod. [would] all on [sic - ot? ought?] to be killed - when they mingle seed it is death to all.
If a black man & white woman come to you & demand baptism can you deny them? the law is their seed shall not be amalgamated
Mulattoes r like mules they cant have children, but if they will be Eunuchs for the Kingdom of God Heaven’s sake they may have a place in the Temple
B. Y. The Lamanites r purely of the house of Israel & it is a curse that is to be removed when the fulness of the Gospel comes
O. H. Has taught that if girls marry the half breeds they r throwing themselves away & becoming as one of them
B. Y. It is wrong for them to do so.
B. Y. The Pottawatamies will not own a man who has the negro blood in him that is the reason why the Indians disown the negro prophet [Warner McCary]. 
It is here in this meeting that the Mormon theology prohibiting marriages between blacks and whites was born. Although the minutes are extremely sparse, they are densely compacted with theological themes that will be carried on into the following decades.
Black-White Marriage in Mormon Theology
With this meeting of Young and the other apostles, we have the first LDS attempts at formulating a theology that prohibited black-white marriage. Below are the seven main theological points I have found in authoritative LDS statements throughout the decades (although some slightly overlap with each other). Most of these points originated at the December 1847 meeting of Young and the Apostles with Pres. Appleby. Again I point out how similar most of these points are to current LDS theological arguments against homogamy, or same-sex marriage.
It is prohibited and contrary to church doctrine from ancient times The law is their seed shall not be amalgamated
It would lead to the annihilation of the human species, since mixed-race children cannot reproduce - Mulattoes are like mules
It and the reproduction of mixed-race children requires blood atonement for those who are Latter-day Saints this will always be so
It is a great sin
The interracial marriage of Ham & Egyptus brought tainted black blood and its priesthood/temple curse through the universal flood
Racial segregation is a necessary evil to prevent black-white marriage en masse and total genetic chaos of white and black races, leading to the complete loss of the priesthood on earth, the destruction of the LDS Church, and the loss of exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom for all humanity - When they mingle seed, it is death to all
It is a virus and will spread contagiously
Mixed-Race Children Cannot Reproduce
This idea that black and white mixed children cannot reproduce, just as mules cannot, was also brought up later in Utah. The belief that interbreeding between the races leads to degenerate and/or infertile offspring was common in the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century. For example Josiah S. Nott, an American surgeon, wrote in his 1843 essay, “The Mulatto a Hybrid - Probable Extermination of the Two Races if the Whites and Blacks are Allowed to Intermarry,” that the inbreeding of mulattoes was not very prolific and produced feeble offspring doomed to extinction within a few generations. The Juvenile Instructor echoed this when its LDS editors said in 1868, In fact we believe it to be a great sin in the eyes of our Heavenly Father for a white person to marry a black one. And further, that it is a proof of the mercy of God that no such race appear able to continue for many generations. A similar idea was iterated by Mormon bishop John M. Whitaker (a relative of mine) in his journal as late as 1913, after Booker T. Washington spoke at the University of Utah. Much of this comes from the shared etymology of the word “mulatto” (the offspring of one white parent and one black parent) with the word “mule” (the hybrid offspring of a female horse and a male donkey). All male mules and most female mules are infertile because donkeys have 62 chromosomes, whereas horses have 64; mules therefore have 63 - which cannot then divide into chromosome pairs. (Since 1527, there have only been some 60 documented cases of a female mule producing offspring with a purebred male horse - see this BBC news article.)
Blood Atonement Is Necessary
In 1847, with the Enoch and Matilda Lewis case, Young first introduced the idea that black-white marriage merited capital punishment, promising that if the Lewiss lived far away from the Gentiles they would be killed.
When Enochs father, Walker Lewis, was wintering in Salt Lake City in 1851 and 1852, Brigham Young pointedly had the legislature pass a law forbidding not marriage between blacks and whites but all sexual relations between the two races. In getting the all-LDS territorial legislature to pass this statute in February 1852, Young told them that it was such a serious crime against God that the only way to atone for it was through capital punishment:
And if any man mingles his seed with the seed of Cane the ownly way he Could get rid of it or have salvation would be to Come forward & have his head Cut off & spill his Blood upon the ground. It would also take the life of his Children.
Eleven years later, in the midst of the Civil War, Brigham Young again affirmed blood atonement for black-white marriage on March 8, 1863:
Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.
In 1897 George Q. Cannon of the First Presidency, said in a meeting of the Quorum of the Twelve:
he had understood President Taylor to say that a man who had the priesthood who would marry a woman of the accursed seed that if the law of the Lord were administered upon him, he would be killed, and his offspring, for the reason that the Lord had determined that the seed of Cain should not receive the priesthood in the flesh; and this was the penalty put upon Cain, because if he had received the priesthood the seed of the murderer would get ahead of the seed of Abel who was murdered.
Thomas Coleman, a slave brought to Utah who then converted to Mormonism, was ritually murdered on December 10, 1866, allegedly for courting a white woman.
(Click to Enlarge Image)
After putting together all the known pieces and closely examining all the forensic evidence in this case (and there is a lot), I theorized in my biography of Thomas Coleman that I gave at the Mormon History Association in 2008, that Coleman was murdered not because of any sexual advances he made toward white women, but because he was an eyewitness to the political assassination of Dr. John King Robinson in October 1866. Non-Mormon Dr. Robinson was murdered by Mormon vigilantes led by Salt Lake police chief Andrew H. Burt and at least two of his underlings in the all-Mormon police department. When Coleman was on the verge of telling federal investigators that he had seen Burt and his men murder Robinson in the streets of Salt Lake, Burt and his men murdered the eyewitness. I believe the police used similar tactics in both murders, but were sloppy the first time by having eyewitnesses. They were more careful the second go around and then to cover up their tracks, they made Colemans murder look as if an irate white father or brother and other concerned parties had taken Brigham Youngs blood atoning justice into their own hands to keep white womanhood safe from black male sexuality.
Ham & Egyptus
The LDS archetype for black-white marriage was of course Ham and Egyptus. In Mormon mythos, a woman named Egyptus was a descendant of Cain, and bore his curse by being black. Before the flood, Noahs son Ham married Egyptus, and thus black-skinned and cursed people were preserved on Noahs ark. Their inter-racial daughter, also named Egyptus, became the wife of a man named Pharaoh and he was the first ruler of Egypt with the land named after his wife and mother-in-law. This is based on Joseph Smiths, The Book of Abraham 1:23-25, which was not canonized as LDS scripture until 1880.
As John Taylor said on August 28, 1881:
And after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham’s wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have a representation upon the earth as well as God .
Loss of Priesthood & Destruction of the Church
Just three months after Brown v. Board of Education desegregated public schools across the nation in May 1954, Apostle Mark E. Petersen gave arguably the most racist speech in LDS history at BYU to college-level religion instructors, called Race ProblemsAs They Affect the Church. In this talk he linked the priesthood ban with prohibiting intermarriage with black people in 1954:
What is our policy in regard to inter-marriage? As to the Negro, of course, there is only one possible answer. We must not inter-marry with the Negro. Why? If I were to marry a Negro woman and have children by her, my children would all be cursed as to the priesthood. Do I want my children cursed as to the priesthood? If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isnt any argument, therefore, as to the inter-marriage with the Negro, is there?
Taking his argument to the utmost extreme, Petersen reasoned:
There are 50 million Negroes in the United States. If they were to achieve complete absorption into the white race, think what that would do. With 50 million Negroes inter-married with us, where would the priesthood be? Who could hold it, in all America? Think what that would do to the work of the Church!
Petersen apparently assumed that all 50 million black US citizens in 1954 wanted to marry white people and that 50 million white US citizens wanted to marry those blacks. Earlier in his speech (p. 5) Petersen said,
[The Negro] is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a café where white people sit. He isnt just trying to ride on the same streetcar .[I]t appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is the objective and we must face it .Remember the little statement that they used to say about sin, First we pity, then endure, then embrace.
Desegregation & Social Interaction Are Slippery Slopes” to Intermarriage...and Evil
Petersen deeply feared desegregation as the top of a slippery slope that would lead to this utter absorption of black into white and white into black, a genetically chaotic mess, and leaving the world thus unworthy of priesthood and temple ordinances. Allowing blacks and white to mix socially in public, whether on the bus or in schools or at a soda pop counter could only lead America into a downward spiral. Public acts of sociality would lead to private acts of friendship, becoming then conducive to private acts of love, desire, and commitment, and culminating in public acts of marriage and private acts of black-white mingling through reproductive sexuality. It seems to me that Petersen here used the priesthood and temple ban as a justification for his own racism.
J. Reuben Clark of the First Presidency in addressing a YWMIA conference in June 1946 about inter-racial marriage, said:
We should hate nobody, and having said that, I wish to urge a word of caution, particularly to you young girls. It is sought today in certain quarters to break down all race prejudice, and at the end of the road, which they who urge this see, is intermarriage. That is what it finally comes to. Now, you should hate nobody; you should give to every man and every woman, no matter what the color of his or her skin may be, full civil rights. You should treat them as brothers and sisters, but do not ever let that wicked virus get into your systems that brotherhood either permits or entitles you to mix races which are inconsistent.
In 1947, a Mormon in California named Virgil Sponberg wrote to the First Presidency, questioning whether we as Latter-day Saints [are] required to associate with the Negroes or talk the Gospel to them. The First Presidency (then consisting of George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark, and David O. McKay) responded by warning against the slippery slope of desegregation:
No special effort has ever been made to proselyte among the Negro race, and social intercourse between the Whites and the Negroes should certainly not be encouraged because of leading to intermarriage, which the Lord has forbidden.
This move which has now received some popular approval of trying to break down social barriers between the Whites and the Blacks is one that should not be encouraged because inevitably it means the mixing of the races if carried to its logical conclusion.
Two months later they reaffirmed this in a letter to Dr. Lowry Nelson and LDS professor of sociology: the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, [is] a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs till now.
In 1954, Mark E. Petersen told CES employees, I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation?
Although the church said out one side of its mouth that African Americans deserved full civil rights, this however did not include the right to marry the person of their choice. They denied the civil right for blacks to marry whites on biological and other grounds and discouraged all social intercourse between the two races in order to prevent such marriages:
Again in 1954, the First Presidency directed their secretary, Joseph Anderson, to respond to a correspondent: [T]he Church is opposed on biological and other grounds, to intermarriage between whites and negroes, and it discourages all social relationships and associations between the races, as among its members, that might lead to such marriages. The Presidency also believed that all men, without regard to race or color were entitled to full civil rights and liberties, social, economic, and political, as provided in the Constitution and laws. . . . yet remained firmly against the right to marry the person of ones choice if of another race.
John L. Lund, an LDS author and teacher, clarified Brigham Youngs denunciations of black-white marriage in 1967. After quoting Youngs statement that the penalty under the law of God for such a marriage is death on the spot. This will always be so, Lund wrote:
The reason that one would lose his blessings by marrying a Negro is due to the restriction placed upon them. “No person having the least particle of Negro blood can hold the Priesthood.” It does not matter if they are one-sixth Negro or one-one hundred and sixth, the curse of no Priesthood is still the same. If an individual who is entitled to the Priesthood marries a Negro, the Lord has decreed that only spirits who are not eligible for the Priesthood will come to that marriage as children. To intermarry with a Negro is to forfeit a “Nation of Priesthood holders”.
Bruce R. McConkie, in Mormon Doctrine (still currently being sold), related inter-marriage to divinely decreed caste systems, keeping the races apart:
In a broad general sense, caste systems have their root and origin in the gospel itself, and when they operate according to the divine decree, the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the Lord. To illustrate; Cain, Ham, and the whole negro race have been cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry.
LDS Anti-Miscegenation Dogma Meets Reality
We now turn from what LDS leaders taught about black-white marriage to what happened in the lives of real people.During the Victorian period, several prominent LDS people married light-skinned spouses of African descent and the results were very mixed and contradictory. Most often, nothing happened and these people held priesthood or were endowed and sealed in temples. Some were not. Some were allowed to but their children were not or even vice versa.
In Salt Lake City in 1863, English convert Nathan Meads married his first wife, Rebecca Henrietta Foscue, who was one-fourth African American. At this time in Utah history, black-white marriages were not illegal, but as shown, their sexual relations were, and were punishable by severe fine and a lengthy prison sentence. However somehow this couple avoided any legal prosecution. I have not yet been able to discover if their marriage was simply a civil marriage or if it was a temple sealing. Their marriage resulted in some eight children, all of whom were reportedly very dark complexioned. Those who made it to adulthood did marry into other LDS families and as far as I can tell, none were denied priesthood ordination or temple participation, although their African ancestry was widely known. In 1885, the Nathan Meads family came to the attention of President John Taylor, when Taylors son first counselor in the Salt Lake Stake, Joseph E. Taylor, wrote to him about another case of black-white marriage.
In this second case, an LDS convert named Mary Bowdidge from the Isle of Guernsey, married an African American man named James Preston Berry in Utah around 1864. By this black man, she had two daughters, Laura Jane and Mary J. Berry. The interracial marriage ended and Mary Bowdidge then married a white husband named Smith and had one son by him.
Mary Bowdidges mixed-race daughter, Laura Jane Berry, came to President John Taylors attention when in July 1885, she was courting Hyrum B. Barton, the youngest son of a prominent LDS family in the Salt Lake 14th Ward. Barton, already married once, wished to have Laura Berry be his polygamous wife. But, as Joseph E. Taylor wrote to his father in 1885, the question of his jeopardizing his future by such an alliance has caused a halt. Joseph Taylor added that Laura Berry now desires to press her claim to privileges that others who are tainted with that blood have received. During an interview with Joseph Taylor, Laura Berry cited the example of the aforementioned Nathan Meads, with his mixed-race wife, and their children having all married into Mormon families and being endowed and receiving priesthood. Laura Berry also cited another example of the elder sister of a Mrs. Jones of Logan, but I have been unable to discover who this was due to the scant clues and common name of Jones. Apparently Mrs. Jones elder sister had married a black man but she still received her endowments. Joseph Taylor, in describing the Nathan Meads case to his father wrote, Brother Meads is a white man he married his wife many years ago; she was a quadroon and died some three years ago[;] their children (the oldest a girl, is married to a white man) are all very dark.
After citing these examples to his church president father, Joseph Taylor asked, Can you give [Laura Berry] any privileges of a like character? The girl is very pretty and quite white and would not be suspected as having tainted blood in her veins unless her parentage was known. I do not have a reply from President John Taylor, but that same month Laura Berry polygamously married Hyrum B. Barton and they had a large family together, who all apparently remained faithful Mormons, so John Taylor must have approved of the interracial marriage.
The First Presidency was confronted with another case in 1895 when a white Sister who married a negro man entreat[ed] for permission to receive her ordinances. Franklin D. Richards, who was present, wrote only in his journal, but [she was] refused. A month later, in September 1895, Richards again recorded in his journal a case so similar that it must refer to the first case. This case involved none other than Mary Bowdidge Berry herself, the white mother of Laura Berry. Now that her mixed-race daughter had married a good Mormon man and she herself had married a white man, Mary Bowdidge wished to be endowed and sealed to her new husband and their son. However, as a penalty for having previously married a black man, she was denied entrance into the temple.
Two years later, one of the most fascinating cases regarding black-white marriage and its varied, even wildly contradictory consequences, came before the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. A young Mormon named John Taylor Church, having just turned 21 on January 28, received his Patriarchal Blessing in Oasis, Millard, Utah on February 12, 1900, under the hands of Patriarch John Ashman. John Taylor Church was told in his blessing that he was of the lineage of Ephraim, would receive the priesthood and fulfill a mission for the LDS Church. There was only one small problem with all of this. John Taylor Churchs mother was mulatto. And not just mulatto, but a former Tennessee slave. Having been promised the priesthood and a mission call, neighbors of the Church family began to question the right of this party to hold the Priesthood, some holding that he might do so provided the white blood predominates. The case was then brought before Pres. Lorenzo Snow, and the Quorum of the Twelve on March 1, 1900, just two weeks after the controversial blessing was given. A letter was read to the church leaders from Ira N. Hinckley explaining the controversy brewing in Millard County. Again George Q. Cannon was the lead in the discussions of race, this time quoting things that Joseph Smith never actually said. Most were Brigham Youngs words that Cannon attributed to Smith.
John Taylor Church, despite the promise in his blessing, was denied permission to receive the priesthood, to perform temple ordinances, and to go on a mission. He apostatized from the LDS church and later became the mayor of Eureka, Utah, although years later he returned. But this story is not over. In fact, its barely begun. His mother, Harriet Elnora Birchet Church was born a slave in 1843 in Shady Grove, Tennessee. Sometime before 1850, little Harriet was purchased by Thomas H. Church, a young man who had just married and started his own family. Around 1858, when Harriet was only 15, Thomas H. Church had sexual relations with his slave, Harriet, and she became pregnant with a daughter to be named Laura. Thomass white wife, Nancy Maria Bryan Church, died three years later in 1861. During the Civil War, Thomas Church served the Confederate Army as a 2nd Lieutenant in a cavalry battalion.
Immediately upon his return to Maury County, Tennessee after the war, Thomas Church married his slave girl, Harriet Elnora Birchet, and acknowledged her daughter Laura as his own. I say married because in fact, miscegenation was illegal in Tennessee. The former slave master and slave then formally began a large mixed-race family of what would eventually be 11 children. Thomas H. Church, his slave-turned-wife, and his children converted to Mormonism in Tennessee about 1877, due to the fact that Thomas older brother had converted decades earlier, moved to Nauvoo in the 1840s and on to Utah.
I have corresponded with two LDS descendants of Thomas Church and his former slave, Harriet Birchet, and neither of them knew anything about Harriets biography prior to arriving in Utah, and had no idea she and they were of African descent and had been Thomass slave. To my utter surprise they informed me that in 1903, three years after her sons case came before the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve (and lost), Harriet Elnora Birchet herself was endowed and sealed in the temple to her husband and former slave master Thomas H. Church. I think it is significant that, as a white man and a black woman, instead of vice versa, this sealing maintains strict patriarchal notions of male masterhood and female servitude.
It is also my belief that Harriet Church is the only former slave, male or female, ever to be endowed and sealed in an LDS temple. Oddly, five of her children were allowed to participate in temple ritual as well but the other six were not. While John Taylor Church was denied the priesthood (at least initially), some of his siblings participated in the following ordinances while they were living, and eventually even John was allowed to be endowed before he died:
Temple Ordinances for Harriet Elnora Birchet Church’s children:
Mary Ann - Endowed in 1879 (Died 1925)
Robert Robins - Endowed & Sealed to Spouse in 1901 (Died 1934)
Harriet Gertrude - Endowed & Sealed to Spouse in 1904 (Died 1963)
Arizona - Endowed & Sealed to Spouse in 1909 (Died 1962)
John Taylor - Endowed in 1952 (Died 1965)[41
Again, curiously, in January 1902, a year before Thomas and Harriet Church were sealed in the temple, another case came before the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve. Rudger Clawson, in visiting the Sevier, Utah Stake had met with a woman who was about to marry into a local Richfield family. Her fiancé was one-eighth black through his mother, and this bride-to-be asked Clawson if the fact of his having inherited negro blood would be a bar to his receiving the priesthood and endowments. Although the unnamed woman did not ask, apparently she intended to be sealed interracially to him as well. Clawson did not have a response for her and took her question to his colleagues.
In response, Pres. Joseph F. Smith said presidents Young and Taylor were emphatic in denying to any person receiving the priesthood or endowments who had negro blood in their veins. John Henry Smith rebutted it seemed to him that persons in whose veins white blood predominated should not be barred from the temple. Joseph F. Smiths final opinion was in all cases where the blood of Cain showed itself, however slight, the line should be drawn there; but where children of tainted parents were found to be pure Ephraimites, they might be admitted to the temple. Rudger Clawson informed the LDS councils that this was an answer to his question and was satisfied with it.
An extreme of a sort was achieved in August 28, 1947, when the Quorum upheld a decision by John Widtsoe denying a temple recommend to a sister having one thirty-second of negro blood in her veins (one black great-great-great grandparent). Widstoe did question whether in such cases the individual . . . might be recommended to the temple for marriage, but policy prevailed, and she received no temple recommend.
Miscegenation Denounced in the Deseret News (1864-1910)
37 articles denouncing miscegenation appeared in the pages of the Deseret News from 1864-1910. Thats an article every year and three months, on the average. Here is a partial list of these articles (with some downloadable as PDFs):
Deseret Weekly News
The Presidential Campaign, May 25, 1864, p. 3
Varieties, November 23, 1864, p. 5
Senator Wilson Has Made a Speech! May 8, 1867, p. 4
A Methodist Preacher on Miscegenation, February 24, 1869, p. 3
Editorials, March 5, 1871, p. 2
Correspondence, December 9, 1874, p. 10
Black vs. White, March 3, 1875, p. 15
Editorials, July 28, 1875, p. 2
Bad Law and Good-George Christianity, November 5, 1879, p. 13
By Telegraph, August 16, 1882, p. 13
By Telegraph, February 7, 1883, p. 10
By Telegraph, September 3, 1884, p. 10
An Unsavory Affair, December 3, 1884, p. 6
Society in the South, November 18, 1885, p. 14
Mr. Jefferson, December 3, 1892, p. 20
General Items, March 4, 1893, p. 32
Deseret Evening News
Who May Vote in Alabama, June 26, 1901, p. 1
Favors Miscegenation, February 28, 1903, p. 3
The American Negroe [sic], March 28, 1904, p. 8.
Contract Marriages Now, January 5, 1907, p. 18
Eighteen Years for Miscegenation, January 21, 1909, p. 2
Local News, June 8, 1910, p. 4
These articles included cries of indignation against the whole idea, relieved reports of various states enacting laws banning miscegenation, and court case reports about inter-racial marriages happening in New England, Detroit, San Francisco, Texas, Washington DC. I also found one egregiously offensive advertisement in the Mormon-run Salt Lake Herald from 1910. Due to time constraints of this symposium, I an touch on only one of these Deseret News articles and then the ad from the Salt Lake Herald.
George Q. Cannon, counselor in the First Presidency who had already made his anti-miscegenation views quite clear in several public statements, as well as helping to establish race-based policies for the church, wrote a special editorial for the Deseret News on March 25, 1893 (p. 14), decrying miscegenation and supporting racial eugenics, white (especially Celto-Germanic) supremacy, and parental involvement in choosing spouses for LDS youth to maintain racial purity.
The following is a brief excerpt (or click here to download the whole editorial as a PDF):
AN EX-EDITORS SATURDAY TALK.
A friend who is a very prominent man in public life, remarked to me the other day that one of the great questions which was forcing itself upon the attention of thinking men concerning the future of the Republic, is the conflict of races. In the South the white and colored elements are brought in close proximity to each other, and with bad results. In the Northern States, he said, there was a great influx of low foreign element which was having a bad effect upon character of the population, and was likely to contribute to the degradation of the Caucasian type. He deplored the tendency there was in many quarters to look with toleration, and in some instances with encouragement, upon miscegenation .In the South the colored people were increasing very rapidly, and the admixture of the white blood with them was hybridizing the race and gradually destroying the higher type .The people of Utah are to be congratulated upon their position. The purity of the Caucasian race is more likely to be preserved in our Territory than in many other portions of the United States. In the first place there is a well-founded dislike to inter-marriage or intimate association with inferior races.
Salt Lake Herald, February 1, 1910, p. 6
(Click on Image to Enlarge the Ad from the Herald)
The Direct Effect of Miscegenation on Innocent Women and Babies
This is a subject about which people have thought it improper to talk, or even think. The result is shown in figures to it is due 65 per cent. of the surgical operations on good women and one-third of all blindness in babies; it is ten times as contagious as leprosy, and causes more deaths than tuberculosis and it thrives only because it is tabooed in speech. Plain and public words are necessary. The story is told in Pearsons Magazine for February. It is a revelation of the effect of the depravity of man and the thoughtlessness of youth. It will offend prudes, but right is always right. It is the most important story to young men and women that has been printed. Buy this magazine now.
Mormon Anti-Miscegenation in Utah Law
Brigham Young addressed the Utah territorial legislature on January 6, 1852 to push through a law that not only legalized slavery in the territory but also made black-white sexual relations illegal. As recorded by Wilford Woodruff in his journal, Young first explained to the legislature about Cains murder of Abel and his subsequent curse. God then marked Cain with black skin so all would see his curse, and his descendants would all be likewise cursed and marked. Young then explained, Any man having one drop of the seed of Cane in him Cannot hold the priesthood & if no other Prophet ever spake it Before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ. I know it is true & they know it. Young then addressed intermarriage with the seed of Cain:
Let me consent to day to mingle my seed with the seed of Cane[,] It would Bring the same [Priesthood] curse upon me And it would upon any man. And if any man mingles his seed with the seed of Cane the ownly way he Could get rid of it or have salvation would be to Come forward & have his head Cut off & spill his Blood upon the ground. It would also take the life of his Children .Whenever the seed of Judah mingled with the seed of Cane they lost their priesthood & all Blessings.
As an Ensample let the Presidency, Twelve Seventies High Priest[s] Bishops & all the Authorities say now we will all go & mingles with the seed of Cane and they may have all the privilege they want. We lift our hands to heaven in support of this. That moment we loose the priesthood & all Blessings & we weould not be redeemed untill Cane was. I will never admit of it for a moment.
Thus marriage, sexual intercourse, and reproduction between the chosen seed and the cursed seed bore eternal consequences of such a heinous nature that the only way to expiate for this deed, would be for the white person to voluntarily come forward and be ritually killed by his priesthood superiors in an act of blood atonement, along with his or her mixed-race children. Young ended his speech by declaring that blacks were by their very nature suited to serve, while whites were given the role of ruler. Preventing marriage between whites and blacks preserved this divine social order and prevented the Devil from ruling over the righteous by gaining power through mixed-race children. Young said, The Devil would like to rule part of the time But I am determin[ed] He shall not rule at all and Negros shall not rule us .We must guard against all Evil.
A month later, again addressing the legislature on the topic of divine slavery, Cain, the natural right of whites to rule and blacks to serve, and blood atonement for black-white marriages:
Were the children of God to mingle there seed with the seed of Cain it would not only bring the curse of being deprived of the power of the preisthood upon them[selves] but they entail it upon their children after them, and they cannot get rid of it. If a man in an ungaurded moment should commit such a transgression, if he would walk up and say cut off my head, and [we then] kill man woman and child it would do a great deal towards atoneing for the sin. Would this be to curse them? no it would be a blessing to them. it would do them good that they might be saved with their Bren [brethren]. A man would shuder should they here us take [talk] about killing folk, but it is one of the greatest blessings to some to kill them, allthough the true principles of it are not understood.
Youngs law of course unanimously passed the all GA legislature. It is one of the few state or territorial laws in the history of the US to prohibit sex, instead of marriage. Section 4 not only prohibits slave owners (male or female) from having sex with their servants but all black-white sex was made illegal:
1852 Territorial Law
(Click on Image to Enlarge)
Sec. 4. That if any master or mistress shall have sexual or carnal intercourse with his or her servant or servants of the African race, he or she shall forfeit all claim to said servant or servants to the commonwealth; and if any white person shall be guilty of sexual intercourse with any of the African race, they shall be subject, on conviction thereof to a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars, nor less than five hundred, to the use of the Territory, and imprisonment, not exceeding three years.
During John Taylor’s presidency, Utahs all non-Mormon territorial legislature passed an anti-miscegenation law on March 8, 1888 prohibiting marriages between a “negro” or “mongolian” and a “white person”. It was part of an anti-polygamy law that the mostly non-Mormon legislature passed right at the height of anti-polygamy sentiment in America, and followed closely on the heels of other western states to include the Chinese and Japanese in miscegenation laws.
In 1939 Utah extended its anti-miscegenation statute to prohibit a “white” from marrying a “Mongolian, a member of the malay race [Filipino] or a mulatto, quadroon, or octoroon . This came as a result of the United States taking over the Philippines. From 1945 to 1951, the Utah legislature voted down four bills that would enact integration of public accommodations and equal employment opportunities for African Americans. As Lester Bush noted, the ultimate argument advanced against a change in [legislative] policy was that it would lead to miscegenation.
In 1961, the Utah chapter of the ACLU, spurred on by support from an activist SL County Clerk and the County Attorneys office (who felt the laws were unjust and wanted to see them challenged in court), tried to find mixed-race couples to sue to repeal the law, but none wanted the ensuing publicity. Utahs legislature finally rescinded the states anti-miscegenation law in April 1963.
The Salt Lake NAACP chapter had intensely lobbied the state legislature for major civil rights reforms and in April Conference, Hugh B. Brown read a statement from the pulpit calling upon all men [sic] everywhere, both within and outside the Church, to commit themselves to the establishment of full civil equality for all of Gods children. Anything less than this defeats our high ideal of the brotherhood of man. Despite the NAACP lobbying and Browns unequivocal statement in support of civil rights for everyone, regardless, rescinding the anti-miscegenation law was the only bit of civil rights legislation that was passed, disappointing people of color and their allies throughout the state.
It was in this context that about a month later, Apostle Ezra Taft Benson in Logan, Utah denounced the entire civil rights movement as a Communist conspiracy. The Deseret News reported Benson as saying,
The whole slogan of civil rights as used to make trouble in the South today, is an exact parallel to the slogan of agrarian reform which they [Communists] used in China .The pending civil rights legislation is, I am convinced, about 10 per cent civil rights and 90 per cent a further extension of socialistic federal controls .It is part of the pattern for the communist take-over of America.
Benson again reiterated this in April 1965, after returning from Europe. Bensons controversial statement was subsequently deleted from the official Conference Report: What are we doing to fight it? Before I left Europe I warned how the Communists were using the civil rights movement to promote revolution and eventual takeover of this country. When are we going to wake up?
The U. S. Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia in 1967 nationally ended bans against interracial marriage. (However, Alabama kept its racist law on the books until the year 2000, the last state to do so.)
In 1978, with the removal of the priesthood ban by Spencer Kimball, any justification for banning black-white marriages within LDS temples ended, although some LDS General Authorities, such as Apostle Boyd K. Packer, reportedly continued to discourage or even prohibit them for a few years afterward.
In researching this paper, when coming across the statements and theological arguments that LDS leaders made against black-white marriage, most of the time I was reminded of just how similar, even identical, these sounded to my ears in relation to the arguments now presented by LDS leaders against homosexuality and same-sex marriage.
Currently the LDS Church fully accepts black-white civil marriages and has performed black-white sealings in temples for more than thirty years and the feared and promised destruction of humanity has not taken place. What was once a dire sin and shameful practice, utterly prohibited because of the enormous social, political, spiritual, and soteriological consequences for all of humanity, is no longer a heinous sin and has now been embraced, accepted, and celebrated by the faithful. With this clear and near-perfect precedent set, I can only demand to know how soon before LDS leaders will allow same-sex couples the free agency to marry, even civilly, those whom we love?
#1 Christians are anti-racist
#2 The school campus well-indoctrinated Multi-culturists are anti-racist
#3 (shall I go on???)
About half of the voters don't even know Romney is Mormon, let alone have a clue about Mormon teachings.
Once the MSM makes the connection for them, the broader public won't like the idea of voting for a racist, either.
Except that the official Mormon position is more "pro-abortion" than they are led to believe.
The major problem with Roe vs. Wade is that there's so many holes you can drive a truck thru it. Its biggest hole was "health" of the mom...which was defined so broadly by the court that it could mean "economic" health!
Well, the Mormon church has that same exact exception...health of the mom...
...plus two other huge exceptions...
...if the abortionist says "OK"...
...if the Mormon gods say "OK" via subjective Mormon prayer...
(Other exceptions include if the girl/woman became pregnant via incest & that crime needs to be covered up + the health of the pre-born baby)
No, it won’t.
Mitt Romney is my problem with Mitt Romney.
To Whom It May Concern:
Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy
I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.
One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.
There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:
I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.
The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.
Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.
35. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.
36. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison.
37. They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated--
38. the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground.
~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.