Reader comments
LDS marking 30-year milestone

Page:
< Previous
1
2

RE: Cotton | 4:01 p.m. June 7, 2008

Maybe the article came out because tomorrow will be the 30th anniversary of the Revelation and there is a special meeting marking the event. Did you read the article at all?

Convenient time? | 4:16 p.m. June 7, 2008

I think that the Lord often gives Revelation because we ASK. President Kimball felt it was time to ask the Lord allow blacks the Priesthood because the issue was more prevalent. HE was the Prophet who approached the Lord. I was with my mom when they announced the Revelation over the radio. I was 10 years old. What a wonderful experience. Anyone who wants to discredit the Church and the Prophet will find any thing they can. Being hateful and negative doesn't serve any purpose. It cannot possibly make you feel any better. it just increases contention and anger. When responding to Aaron et al., don't use anger or sarcasm. it only makes you feel worse inside. Explain how you feel, don't argue.

To be honest. | 5:00 p.m. June 7, 2008

Thirty years ago there was not a revelation, there was a management decision. The same with the other many changes in church policies and practices.

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 5:14 p.m. June 7, 2008

Wouldn't it be wonderful if some of the women who have supported the church their entire lives and whose ancestors have gone back to the time of Joseph Smith in upstate NY could have the ban against them lifted.

awesomeron | 5:40 p.m. June 7, 2008

My just High School Grad 17 year old daughter, questions my use of this board. My reasoning is I like to Post on Mormon Stuff to Mormons, I spell check and save everything and it can always go other places. Also being forced to paint between the lines it sometimes fun. It was Wednesday Evening June 8, 1978, about 5:30PM Arizona Time. I came off the Freeway on to Dunlap and Turned right on Central a couple of miles to home. I was on KTAR, and they broke in. They said the Mormon Church had just Announced that "Blacks could now hold the Priesthood" I had not joined in 68 mostly over this issue. Members then told me it would never happen. I in part believed that. I became a good Fundamentalist. In my shock I pulled over and for some reason I cried and Tears flowed freely for a time. I just had this Picture of Zion shaking and shouting both with Joy and Disgust. I prayed for those who had been sitting on the Bench Waiting . I knew Zion had been rocked to the core. I also knew that Zion would now Grow. I believe in Revelation.

Ronald A. Young | 6:06 p.m. June 7, 2008

Last Week was Stake Conference, the Temple President came over from Laie. This week will be F&T meeting. We will speak on this great subject. So great a subject that it made it to Scripture. Mitt's Granddaddy signed the Document. I believe the Document, I believe in Revelation. It can sometimes be the daughter of necessity. Many people where waiting on the Bench. Many people where able to join who other wise would not have, vastly not always Black. The Church was more free to move about the Earth and we have seen the Growth World Wide. Blacks have their own Church Sponsored Web Sight,(Genesis Group.com), and that group has Monthly Meetings in Salt Lake. and Priesthood all of whom hold callings in their own Wards and Stakes. No Blacks in the 12 yet but that is not how that works. Black Bishops and Black Stake Presidents. Black Males and Females on Mission. Black Temple Marriage some not interracial. Black Converts and Black Children born in the Covenant. Black Priesthood Holders being Buried in full Temple Clothing. Worthy Blacks, Active Blacks, Eagle Scout Blacks. Black Women Educated, Empowered, and who love the Lord. Things are coming along nicely, Amen.

M D G | 6:20 p.m. June 7, 2008

It was never doctrine? It was folklore? Is this what he expects normally intelligent people to swallow? Does he think church members have forgotten? Or can't read? Come on, at least be honest. Can't we be honest? I know it isn't pretty but shouldn't the "one true church" speak truth?

I only believe in "Realization" | 6:23 p.m. June 7, 2008

It's too bad when people hang so much on what any organization has to say. People can think for themselves! It only makes sense that God loves all the same. Sometimes it takes quite a while for that to be understood, but it shouldn't ever have been said that "God" didn't or did want it.

Line upon line | 8:01 p.m. June 7, 2008

To Awesomeron and Ronald A. Young: Thank you for your positive and uplifting comments.

To "I only believe in Realization": As can be seen in some of these comments, not all Church members have the same opinions,in other words, we don't follow blindly. Some are unfortunately thoughtless or bigoted in their ideas about why blacks weren't allowed to receive the Priesthood. Many of their ideas of why are what is considered folklore. The only thing that is true is that there weren't allowed to hold the Priesthood for whatever the reason. The Lord gives line upon line, precept upon precept, those things that the Church as a whole, (discounting some individuals) is ready to accept. God does love us perfectly, but we as yet haven't learned to love perfectly, so He gives us Revelation sometimes a line at a time as we grow and are ready to receive higher laws and commandments. The fact that we were ready to receive more from our Father in Heaven is something so celebrate, not condemn and find fault with.
As and active LDS woman, I am glad for the freedom and moral agency I have withing the Church.

Jammie | 8:16 p.m. June 7, 2008

Sad sad little people who will attack the church and furthermoe in the lords paper. There are other forums for this type of debate. Leave us alone as, I do not want to hear the comments of evil!

Dr . B | 8:30 p.m. June 7, 2008

I love how people, especially atheists, attack the LDS church on the revelations that are not scientifically verifiable. But the ones like the prophesy of the Civil War decades before it happened and the Word of Wisdom are not. Explain those two revelations away. Prophets are either Prophets or frauds, not both.

Lillian | 9:08 p.m. June 7, 2008

Funny, I would have thought that a man of color would speak on this topic. I truly doubt that the church leadership has any perspective on this topic other the liily white view that is dictated from temple square. Diversity in the church? Well I would not agree as it is just token and superficial and just as racist as back in the day.

Sad | 10:36 p.m. June 7, 2008

Why is it wrong to question this issue or think it needs to be more honestly addressed? It has been the source of confusion and pain for many. I've fasted and prayed repeatedly, but I haven't found peace. Did the Lord give me a faulty conscience for feeling sad about the priesthood ban and thinking it might have been a mistake? I don't want to be negative, but I'd be more excited to celebrate if this had been addressed in depth - folklore, misconceptions, etc. Some church members are still in pain and with questions and it makes me sad to have to try and explain that our church was not and is not racist. Why can't we have more openness? Our history isn't spotless, we aren't totally perfect, but we do our best. Why can't we address the things that are problematic while still celebrating all the good? I don't think the good would or could be overshadowed. I think we'd be even happier if we had the integrity to be more open and be able to talk about things like this.

re:lillian | 3:33 a.m. June 8, 2008

Why does it have to be a man of color?

To speak about the holocaust, does one need to be a Jewish Survivor? Why the racist statement "lilly white". Can a white teacher teach about slavery and racism if they have been properly instructed?

To Sad:I appreciate your efforts, but many time sfasting, prayers, pondering only get us started to a true understanding. What about works? Why not join the African American group "Genesis", and sit in on a few of their testimonies, talk to some converts.

If all you see here is people with varying skin pigmentation, you are missing the weaknesses of the whole human race, not just in the LDS Church.

People who look, think, have different religious beliefs have had problems throughout all History. See this for what it is. Over the past thirty years a glorious thing has been happening in the LDS Church?

Guess the color of MY skin...

Does it make a difference?

Does the color of the skin, or the accents of the twelve called of God make their words any less true.

Like Dr. King said, judge people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

arc | 8:22 a.m. June 8, 2008

I was driving from High School to work when I heard the announcement on the radio of my car. I was very happy with the announcement. I can remember what street I was on and what direction I was driving. I had believed that everyone would eventually be allowed full access to the gospel.

Through out the old testament, the Lord has targeted certain groups to have or not have the gospel, or the priesthood. After Jacob, the Lord specifically concentrated on Israel. Did he care about other people, of course he did. It was clear that after Adam's time, and especially during and after Noah, that targeting a group was used. Between Moses and John the Baptist, the Aaronic priesthood was limited to the Levites. Did the Lord not care about others?

We don't always know why the Lord causes, or allows things to happen. Sometimes we try to guess. We may or may not be correct. That is what happened with the Blacks and the priesthood.

The best way to look at why the Lord targets groups is Jacob chapter 5. He wants us all back.

Not the first commemoration | 12:10 p.m. June 8, 2008

As was mentioned in the article, five years ago, 2003, we celebrated -- in the Tabernacle -- the 25th Anniversary.

The only difference was that it was the monthly Genesis meeting.
A General Authority (Merrill Bateman, I believe) was among the speakers. Three choirs, including our local Genesis choir, and Sister Knight's Saints Unified Voices, sang. Sorry I don't remember the name of the 3rd one.

We rocked the Tabernacle. The Lord's spirit was truly there. 70% of the crowded attendance was white.

My family is white, sang in the choir, are part of Genesis, and struggle to understand why so many, (especially the Anti's) still hold on to their mortal/political interpretations of the Lord's work.

Many of you | 12:22 p.m. June 8, 2008

You need a disclaimer on your posts. All are anti-Utah, Anti LDS, and have "selective evidence or facts) to back up your statements.

It is what it is.

Believe or not, but keep your selective beliefs and halftruths where, they belong.

Hi Bruce | 12:32 p.m. June 8, 2008

Any branch off of the LDS church (ie FLDS) hast these same issues in their histories (much is the same history).
Go out and find a "true church" in the world that does not have a part of their history they are tryig to hide.

That would be a fun search to try.

Joseph Smith allowed it | 12:53 p.m. June 8, 2008

I'm glad that Joseph Smith allowed blacks to have the priesthood and to go to the temple.

You're invited | 9:06 p.m. June 8, 2008

Come to Genesis!
The Genesis Group has been meeting since before the "Long-Promised Day".
We meet every first Sunday, at 7pm. We attend our own wards earlier, then get together, black and white and more, every month, to support and love one another, and learn and celebrate the gospel that doesn't discriminate.
We're mortals and sometimes have different ways of saying things, but the spirit and enthusiasm in our very LDS meeting is enough to hold me, against the prejudices of the world for another month.
We meet at the stake center on 13th East just south of I-215. Every month, even days of April and October conferences.

Bob | 10:15 p.m. June 8, 2008

Isn't that 40 years after segregation? So the US government got it right 40 years before the LDS church?

Be humble! | 10:31 p.m. June 8, 2008

The weak minded tend to misunderstood many teachings of the savior,and the sad thing is .. that they will continue to dwell in their own stuborness of thought!and will never come to know the truth unless they humble themselves.
The head of this church(kingdom)will not change anything to satisfy anyone but will stay with the time table until all things will come to pass and prophecy fulfill as has been set before the foundation of this world..again listen to the still small voice.

We can celebrate all | 11:56 a.m. June 9, 2008

That is good, but we can also learn from past mistakes. We teach our children honesty and we should be ourselves.

John Lambert | 12:31 p.m. June 9, 2008

At least Bruce admits that he has turned against the church because he thinks the revelation allowing blacks to hold the priesthood is false.
I am waiting for the people who claim the church is still racist to give a good reply to why if it is so racists and blacks are really so marginalized are people leaving the church because they do not like blacks in the priesthood.
Maybe it is because more and more if you go to a temple you see black men officiating, not overwhelmingly but it does happen. If you watch General Conference you see black men singing in the choir.
Change is slow, but it is occuring.

UtahRez | 5:45 p.m. June 9, 2008

A huge milestone for black members and all the church can send is a Seventy? It seems the words of Joseph Fielding Smith still haunt the corridors of Church headquarters: ï¿½Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race... Moreover, they have been made to feel their inferiority and have been separated from the rest of mankind from the beginningï¿½ (The Way to Perfection, p.101).

Snubbed again.

Like it's been said.... | 7:55 a.m. June 10, 2008

Go back in history and see what was said about this. Honestly evaluate...

To Aaron S: | 9:53 a.m. June 10, 2008

Back on the first page, you quoted this statement: "The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the pre-mortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality..."

Nowhere in that statement does it say that their prior conduct was wrong or bad. What makes you think it's about assigning blame? We were ALL given particular circumstances, particular talents, and particular blessings because of our conduct in the pre-mortal existence, regardless of our skin color. Skin color is not a punishment. How do you know that members weren't sent to colored families because they were so righteous and faithful that the Lord knew that they could recognze and accept the truthfulness of the Gospel, regardless of what others think of them and their decision?

Bubba | 5:20 p.m. June 10, 2008

It's pretty sad that allowing blacks into the preisthood had to come from a "revelation" and not just common sense. Koodos to you lds church.

Vernon | 9:17 p.m. June 10, 2008

Judge people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

Judge Churches on the content of their doctrine, and if their doctrine claims to be from a God who loves ALL His children, but then denies full priesthood and temple blessings from some of them based on the color of their skin... well, seems pretty straightforward to me. That Church must not be of God! It must NEVER have been of God! Simple. You don't need a degree in theology (or to have graduated from Mormon seminary) to figure that out.

Very nice post | 12:05 p.m. June 11, 2008

"Does God love blacks"! Yes "God" does and always has. It's just people that have had the prejudices.

Page:
< Previous
1
2

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.