"I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color, is ineligible?"
So that's an unambiguous statement about the church's current policy. Fair enough.
Some people are bothered because the church is unwilling to say "yes, Joseph Smith used the word 'n*ggers' in the written text; we changed it in the current printed text," or "before 1978, it wasn't really God's will that blacks not have the priesthood; it was the will of some racist men who were acting as men, not as the messengers of God," or that Apostle Mark E. Peterson was perhaps a touch ill-advised when he said "I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it" in his speech at BYU titled "Problems - As They Affect The Church," or that Brigham Young wasn't speaking for God, he was just on another one of his spittle-spewing racist tirades when he said stuff like "[i]f 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."
When questioned about it by Mike Wallace, LDS President Gordon B. Hinkley said: "It's behind us. Look. That's behind us. Don't worry about those little flicks of history." Some people would like to address it first. Then put it behind us. Address it by saying God didn't decree it. When Brigham Young and many, many others said these things, they weren't acting as prophets, seers, and revelators. They weren't speaking for God. God didn't change his mind. Address it by saying the teaching that blacks are punished for being fence-sitters in the pre-existence is manmade and wrong. Address that and then put it behind us. Not all people will be satisfied by saying "God didn't think Blacks were ready for the priesthood until 1978."
Just like saying that LDS President Ezra Taft Benson wasn't talking about God, or the Lamanites, but was just being a racist when he said:
“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."My Mormon friends? They aren't racist. Don't let lingering history leave the impression that they are.
Yes.
My Mormon friends? They aren't racist. Don't let lingering history leave the impression that they are.
And let us recognize a couple of things here...
(1) Just as the overwhelming majority of Mormons are NOT temple Mormons (80-85%) -- and therefore are NOT counting on becoming gods of their own planets -- likewise many Mormons have jettisoned the Book of Mormon as ANY reliable source of either history, ethics or theology...and therefore do NOT embrace the racist passages within the Book of Mormon.
(2) Still...MOST grassroots Mormons have
(a) not publicly objected to Book of Mormon content;
and (b) are still financially supporting Lds, Inc. -- some tithing -- and therefore are paying for the publishing and translating both the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham (PoGP)...meaning their wallets, purses & bank accounts ARE undergirding the coffers of still extant racism...
I mean, imagine you are a Mormon convert in another country and you read and embrace the racist passages in the BoM I mentioned earlier on this thread. Are we saying that no Mormon is thereby accountable for this racism-in-print paid for by their contributions when this isn't a "secret" thing known only to leaders?
So the distinction I make here -- which applies also to my Lds relatives -- is that although these Lds friends & family are not personal racists attitudinally...they are still part & parcel of being institutional racists in that they financially support "on-the-books -- on-the-'revelational'-books," that is, racism.
Yes, Virginia. Purses do have pursestrings.