LDS Church urges members to call out racism in their congregations

[I Have Questions]

In a classic…lack of self awareness, do as we say not as we do, blame the members, speaking out of both sides of its mouth…kind of way, the Church now gives us…

Tucked under the section titled “Topics and Questions,” the webpage comes more than a decade after the church’s publication of the landmark “Race and the Priesthood” Gospel Topics essay addressing, among other points, the faith’s former racist practices.

As you can imagine, such a myopic and pompous attempt at distancing itself from the past without owning the past, it’s gone down like a fart in a cramped elevator.

“There is no documented revelation related to the origin of the priesthood and temple restriction,” the new article states. It was instituted under then-church leader Brigham Young in 1852 and removed by a successor, Spencer W. Kimball, in 1978.

“It does not own,” Black Latter-day Saint Markeeda Elliott of Lehi lamented, “the fact that Blacks were denied entrance to the temple due to racism.”

The piece gives very direct answers to things like white supremacism etc. but when it comes to the racism in the Book of Mormon we get…

Book of Mormon verses referring to God cursing the unrighteous with “a skin of blackness”: “The nature and appearance of this mark are not fully understood. … Latter-day Saints are blessed as they heed the Book of Mormon’s repeated warnings against pride and embrace its teaching that ‘all are alike unto God.’”

Utter, mealy-mouthed, hypocrisy. The nature of the mark was an unambiguous “skin of blackness”. It’s written write there in 2nd Nephi in, appropriately enough, black and white.

Unless, and until, the racist passages in the scriptures are acknowledged for what they are, apologised for, and removed completely, the Church (the First Presidency and Q12) should stop trying to hold the members to a higher standard than they are prepared to hold themselves. Apologise for it, remove it, or STFU and accept they you are to blame for thinking racist attitudes are okay.

[Philo Sofee]

I wonder how DCP will try and wiggle out of this. What do you think "Isaac"?

[Moksha]

I wonder how DCP will try and wiggle out of this. What do you think "Isaac"?

He could begin by denying there was any racism in the past.

[I Have Questions]

In a classic…lack of self awareness, do as we say not as we do, blame the members, speaking out of both sides of its mouth…kind of way, the Church now gives us…As you can imagine, such a myopic and pompous attempt at distancing itself from the past without owning the past, it’s gone down like a fart in a cramped elevator. The piece gives very direct answers to things like white supremacism etc. but when it comes to the racism in the Book of Mormon we get…Utter, mealy-mouthed, hypocrisy. The nature of the mark was an unambiguous “skin of blackness”. It’s written write there in 2nd Nephi in, appropriately enough, black and white.

Unless, and until, the racist passages in the scriptures are acknowledged for what they are, apologised for, and removed completely, the Church (the First Presidency and Q12) should stop trying to hold the members to a higher standard than they are prepared to hold themselves. Apologise for it, remove it, or STFU and accept they you are to blame for thinking racist attitudes are okay.

I wonder how DCP will try and wiggle out of this. What do you think "Isaac"?

I’d think he would probably opt for the loose translation defence, and try to hint (without actually saying so) that the racism is a reflection of Smith’s worldview in clumsily expressing a higher point about righteousness. He will seek to move readers away from the racism and towards a discussion about people being separated from fellowship etc. It’s disingenuous of course, and isn’t a consistent take that Peterson expresses, but then consistency across arguments isn’t his objective.

If it was simply a case of Smith making a bad stab at expressing a rhetorical point about righteousness, then the current Prophet could simply reword it to remove the influence of 19th Century racism from it. But the Church refuses to do so. Why is that?

[slskipper]

Call me when they send out a letter to be read over the pulpit in Sacrament Meeting.

[Moksha]

He could begin by denying there was any racism in the past.

Sounds like you have listened to past apologetics and have seen a pattern.

[Dr. Shades]

He could begin by denying there was any racism in the past.

Sounds like you have listened to past apologetics and have seen a pattern.

You're replying to yourself now??

[IWMP]

I wonder how DCP will try and wiggle out of this. What do you think "Isaac"?

I’d think he would probably opt for the loose translation defence, and try to hint (without actually saying so) that the racism is a reflection of Smith’s worldview in clumsily expressing a higher point about righteousness. He will seek to move readers away from the racism and towards a discussion about people being separated from fellowship etc. It’s disingenuous of course, and isn’t a consistent take that Peterson expresses, but then consistency across arguments isn’t his objective.

If it was simply a case of Smith making a bad stab at expressing a rhetorical point about righteousness, then the current Prophet could simply reword it to remove the influence of 19th Century racism from it. But the Church refuses to do so. Why is that?

If they remove it then they won't have the whole unchanged scripture thing going for them. I was taught several times in seminary and throughout church life that the Bible has been changed and so can't be trusted and that the Bible is true as far as it is translated correctly making the Book of Mormon superior. They start changing the Book of Mormon they don't have unchanged scripture anymore and we'd have the whole, the Book of Mormon is true as far as it's translated correctly losing its power.

[I Have Questions]

I’d think he would probably opt for the loose translation defence, and try to hint (without actually saying so) that the racism is a reflection of Smith’s worldview in clumsily expressing a higher point about righteousness. He will seek to move readers away from the racism and towards a discussion about people being separated from fellowship etc. It’s disingenuous of course, and isn’t a consistent take that Peterson expresses, but then consistency across arguments isn’t his objective.

If it was simply a case of Smith making a bad stab at expressing a rhetorical point about righteousness, then the current Prophet could simply reword it to remove the influence of 19th Century racism from it. But the Church refuses to do so. Why is that?

If they remove it then they won't have the whole unchanged scripture thing going for them. I was taught several times in seminary and throughout church life that the Bible has been changed and so can't be trusted and that the Bible is true as far as it is translated correctly making the Book of Mormon superior. They start changing the Book of Mormon they don't have unchanged scripture anymore and we'd have the whole, the Book of Mormon is true as far as it's translated correctly losing its power.

I agree. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one. They've opted to lack the courage of their convictions and to put all the obligation for change onto the members. Again.

[Moksha]

Wonder what would happen if members called out the racism inherent in Mormon scriptures.