A large part of this op-ed is liberal spin however the Church has seemingly been
infiltrated by a 'few' 'progressive' political activists.
The Charlottesville debacle was provably conjured by leftist forces including
those in government as a strategy to divert the publics attention away from the
failing Russia collusion narrative. The actual percentage of 'white
supremacists' active in national politics is quite low no matter how the
southern poverty law center spins it. The much more glaring problem is coming
from leftists who are successfully using racial fear mongering to divide and
conquer from within a nation they view as evil. For the Church to chase a
political red herring and not even acknowledge or recognize the real problem is
concerning to say the least. Respectfully, why are they on the sidelines while
patriots of every race and religion are coming together and desperately
struggling to save the Nation from marxist insurgents?
I am glad church was quick to respond racism events. But at the same time,
church needs to look within their establishment about racism. For example, if
you look deeply church owned entities like BYU, LDS family services, Deseret
Industries and Deseret Manufacturing how many minorities are in management
positions????. To my knowledge only handful of them. More than 90% of management
is white. Even though there are many qualified minorities are working above
mentioned industries, but for them to get promoted is nil to nothing. As a
church, they need to look into these in their own back yard and rectify these
issues before its too late.
It is encouraging to have the DN publish an Op Ed acknowledging that the LDS
doctrine and policy of denying black people the priesthood was both non-divine
and supported by racist leaders (note: this racism was prominent among many/most
US religious institutions - so, please don't interpret that statement as
implying LDS leaders were any worse than other leaders). The Church's
statement therefore, is probably necessary. However, does the Church now need to
become engaged in full-time virtue signaling? Hopefully not. If a church needs
to virtue signal to every cause du jour, perhaps that's an indication that
church has strayed from what should be it's core focus.
great article and great comments. But the real issue is the failure of the
media and republicans to denounce the use of violence by democrat affiliated
terror groups like antifa.Many media are intentionally spreading the
lie that it is acceptable to violently attack people exercising their First
Amendment rights if their ideas are "socially unacceptable".All media must take this pledge: Any person who uses, or
encourages the use of, bricks, bats, acid bombs, aids urine, feces or any other
object to disrupt a lawfully permitted and assembled group of U.S. citizens
seeking redress of grievances should be sent to prison as a dangerous criminal
and civil rights violator.
The church's statements are fine and helpful but they would have been much
more relevant 50 years ago. The MUCH bigger problem than racism (which everyone
in mainstream society rejects) is free speech and freedom of religion and
expression.When lightning strikes, watch out for snakes. The church is so
fascinated with the bright flashes they have not commented on the real problems.
"The Book of Mormon opens with racialized identities..." While this
statement appears to be trues (the Lord cursed the Lamanites with a skin of
blackness), all through the Book of Mormon, the Nephites considered the
Lamanites to be their "brethren." This denotes not a racial divide, but
a political or a cultural divide ("the traditions of their fathers were not
correct").I grew up in a community that had little ethnic
diversity and many of the sentiments of "white superiority" were
present. I never understood it. It didn't sit well with me. So when June
1978 announcement was made, I thought "it's about time."
The HuffingtonPost just ran back to back headlines that were extremely racist.
Anyone want to comment on that?is it racist to have a BYU-Hawaii and
accompanying Polynesian Cultural Center if we don't have a BYU-Africa
(where the church is really growing) and an accompanying African Cultural
Center? The latter makes a much bigger statement that we are all children of
God than the former.Meanwhile, the alt-left communists are trying to
destroy the first amendment and use violence to advance their political aims -
Berkeley, Hamburg, Washington DC, Boston, Philadelphia, Portland and Seattle
among others. President Benson was prophetic and it would be nice to see the
Church issuing a statement on the accuracy of his prophecies.
re:eastcoastcoug - Danbury, CTAug. 18, 2017 12:22 p.m.@3rd
Try"First of all, the Confederacy WAS. No eraser can wipe it
from existence." So was Nazi Germany. The Germans have learned how to erase
it AND not memorialize its heroes. So if the Germans have done such
a great job of "erasing" their Nazi past, how come any tourist who
travels to Germany can visit any one of the POW/concentration camps where tens
of thousands of people were slaughtered? If I am following your logic correctly,
shouldn't the Germans have completely demolished those buildings instead of
profiting off of them by charging admission?
* More than one group of people were involved with the riot.*
Shouldn't we tear down the pyramids of Egypt, and European castles? They
represent slavery.* People should be arrested for buying store
products made in countries using slaves.Where do you draw the line?
I've always had a problem with the concept of continuing revelation. When
it comes to revelation, especially that which overturns or contradicts earlier
revelation, how does that square? It's the work and word of the
omniscient, omnipotent divine being, isn't it? Shouldn't they get it
right the first time, and flesh out the entire concept from the get go? If
god knew 5000 years ago where we needed to be today on race and bigotry, he
should have stepped in and saved us a lot of trouble.
Dear Local Fan -- In the beginning the article says ---it was an opinion series
--- and the church has never said the reason for withholding the priesthood was
because of opinions of the leaders..To assume such is to also assume you are
privy to all of the inspiration the prophets receive that may or may not be
published. If it was the Lord's will that the priesthood be extended to all
worthy members at the time of the restoration He would have so directed it, and
the prophets would have followed that direction despite their personal or
political views or the Lord would have removed them from their office. I do not
know the reason for the priesthood ban but I do know that the Lord is in charge
and not the political or personal views of the leaders or the views of the
world. The prophets would have willingly give the priesthood to all worthy males
if the Lord would had so directed in 1830 or 1977. -----" Your ways are not
my ways saith the Lord, for as the heaven are higher than the earth so are my
ways higher than your ways "
The comparison of the priesthood restriction to the limiting of the oriesthood
from those of African descent just does not work. One is a case of letting only
a very few have it, the other case at keast initially letting the vast majirity
have it and just a few not.I do not claim to know why the Lord
allowed the priesthood restriction to exist but comparing it to the Old
Testament situation does not work.
The Brethren felt racism is continuing problem with some in the Church as is
indicated in an article elsewhere in this online DesNews website. Other sins are
still sins. As for some other topics addressed in this comment section, the
Church has been following a learning curve since its restoration. The Lord
reveals a principle, and it takes us time to more fully understand it. So, the
Lord gives us more as we prepare ourselves to receive more. Occasionally, He
gives a little nudge to speed things up.
Dear deseret Pete,I can see where you're coming from -- and a
revelation was required to overturn the ban on blacks holding the priesthood.
But the Church's article on this makes it very clear that there was never a
doctrinal reason for this ban -- rather, it was a reflection of the highly
racist divisions in our country that have existed from the beginning because of
America's practice of slavery and our slow rise out of that horrible
morass. You might want to re-read the article -- which is modern revelation.
I've read the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Doctrine and Covenants,
and the Pearl of Great Price, and there is nothing in any of those books that
justifies the ban on blacks holding the priesthood that existed for more than
100 years in our modern church. Here's a link to the article on the church
"The Book of Mormon opens with racialized identities, but its prophetic
narrative pushes toward a beautiful climax in which those separations
cease." Um yeah... I'd say it ceased! A whole civilization was
destroyed! Evil conquered and utterly wiped out the "good guys". That
is what you call a beautiful climax? Your idea of a "beautiful climax in
which those separations cease" has a lot to be desired... IMO.
It all comes down to the golden rule. To the extent you don't love your
neighboor as yourself and you don't treat them as you would be treated you
are off the mark.While one own effort is required to become the type
of person who reflexively lives the golden rule, this is not enough.We are told by God to pray for the love required to do this.If it
we're easy, little personal growth would be required to become a loving
person. God gives us opportunities to achieve this growth in part by putting
different races of people on the earth, and more specifically in our own
country. We are in a school with greater opportunity.
local fan -- your assumption that the church with held the priesthood from
blacks for the reason you stated are completely false. The Lord made that
decision through the Prophet.This is not the only time the priesthood has been
with held from people. You ought to read the Old Testament. The reasons for the
Lord withholding the priesthood in our time has not been reveled to my
knowledge. As the Prophet Joseph Smith said " What is wrong in one instance
may be right in another instance " . As an example the Lord said " do
not Kill " and in another instance he said to the Israelite's Go out
and utterly destroy a group of people and their cattle and herds --- The
difference --- God commanded it through a prophet. --- Polygamy is another
example -- At times he has commanded polygamy to some of his people and revoked
it at other times --- The difference --- God commanded it through a Prophet. As
Amos 3:5 says " surely the Lord will do nothing except He reveal his secrets
through his servant the Prophet" .For members of the church don't be
mislead by what the prophets do or say pertaining to the church. He is
following the revelations given to him. ----
@mal, you list a number of things which could be used as weapons. [But
"aids urine"??? Where did that allegation come from]But you
didn't list guns. Why not? Are they less dangerous than bricks or bats?
Some commenters live in a parallel universe. The war against northern agreesion
was much more than about slavery. Uninformed continue to stay that way. Libs and
lefties continue to promote bigotry and yet the press, media and even the DN
allows that to happens under the guise of political correctness. A sad day for
sure when truth is twisted and lies promoted.
I can't put much stock in gods that didn't think it necessary to
enlighten us about racism and slavery until very recently. Also, from where I
sit, it looks suspiciously like gods following culture, not the other way
around.@ VermonterHave enjoyed reading your thoughts.I keep waiting for the firm and absolute condemnation of the violence
perpetrated from the left. Also the intolerance of free speech rights (even
when the speech is odious). There is some, but it's tepid IMO.I think the reluctance of both sides to admit and call out "wrong"
isn't because it isn't recognized, but because we've so demonized
each other that we don't want to grant the other any legitimacy. In doing
so, IMO, we do harm to our own integrity.Monuments: Since learning
of the context within which most of them went up, I have a hard time giving the
heritage argument any credence. They went up in defiance and/or to remind black
people of their place. That IS the history and this can't be changed.
What can be changed is whether or not this is celebrated.
Though I'm happy the church clarified its statement, and I believe it is a
reaffirmation of correct gospel doctrine, I'm interested to see if the
church will change the monochromatic look of the church employee and church
leadership to reflect this statement on the evils of white supremacy.
And did the Church condemn black nationalists? They are there. They are every
bit as racist as white nationalists or white supremacists. If the Church did not
call out black nationalists, why not? Their first statement was apolitical (a
call to end racism). The second (calling out white supremacists) was due solely
because of the politics of the day.
The majority of LDS church members live outside the United States and spanish
is the majority language spoken by church members. Church demographics have
changed. There is no place in the church for any form of racism and bigotry.
I am 63 years old. I grew up in the church in California, and marched around
for civil rights, but always had this truth hanging over me -- my faith denied
the priesthood to blacks. It was awful sometimes to come up with an excuse for
this -- there wasn't one -- and such a wonderful relief that the priesthood
was finally given to all people, regardless of race or ethnicity in 1978. What
a relief!!! Then, finally, the church posted its article admitting that some of
the early church leaders had racist ideas (as did everyone else during that
century), and that led to the prohibition of blacks holding the priesthood.
What a relief again!!! Now, I'm seeing the church outreach deliberately to
communities of color all over the world, to LGBTQ communities, to the disabled,
to refugees -- and my heart swells when I realize that no person can stand in
the way of the Lord's love for all his children. Hearts can change,
attitudes can be swayed back to the side of good and right -- the Lord's
@RichardB.Haven't you heard? There is no such things as the
"radical left" or "alt-left." There is only "liberal"
and "left." Liberals and those on the left, and the Democratic Party
are much more united and loyal to each other than at any time in my memory.
Look at how quickly the Sanders people and Hillary's people kissed and made
up. And this, with the Sanders people knowing the Democratic nomination was
rigged (and entirely undemocratic) from the start.
@Vin: Like you, I also wish our society had higher information literacy. I found these articles enlightening: by the BBC ("Antifa: Left-wing
militants on the rise") and by the Atlantic ("The Rise of the Violent
The Church never condoned the other groups there. The last statement was in
response to accusations that the Church supported the Klan, which they denied.
I'm confused by all the politics in here. The Church's statement was
in no way political. It was a doctrinal clarification - thoughts of white
supremacy or striving for a white supremacist culture is sinful. There was no
political statement - just a clarification of doctrine as some had apparently
misunderstood their first declaration of doctrine on the issue.
Boomerjeff - You make a good point. I thought the same thing.Vermonter - Thanks for your comment. I agree. My thoughts:1)
If it helps to alleviate some people's emotions regarding these statues
then leave their subsequent removal up to the individual states themselves. Keep
the federal government out of all this. 2) Don't remove any statues
from the Capital building.3) Leave Gettysburg alone.4) Leave the
National Mall alone.The good and the bad of our country's
history is what it is. We can't erase the bad, but we can learn from it, as
we can also learn from the good. Both existed, and will continue to exist.
@marxist - Salt Lake City, UTWhy did six states in the North have
slavery? Our county has existed for over 200 years because the
radical left and the radical right have canceled each other out. What happens if
we remove the radical right, and allow the radical left to continue growing.My God hates all hate groups, he quite clearing pointed that out in his
@Third Try "Some activists have asserted that Henry Ford was the evil
source of pollution and energy depletion, and are determined to destroy the
Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village."Your silly example
shows you do not want to deal with slavery and its accompanying racism and/or
that you don't understand slavery at all.
@Marxist.I appreciate your response. I understand you are not
trying to blot out all positive mention about people like Robert E. Lee from
history books. But, some are. Chief among them are the modern media and the
vast majority of public school and public university educators.But,
virtual ignorance of history is perhaps the greatest problem facing the next
generation of Americans. Most of them think that Lee was just a white dude that
wanted to keep slavery alive in America. They could learn a lot by studying his
life, learning to avoid his mistakes, and learning to emulate his best
qualities. But, in 2017 America, 99% of Americans couldn't care less.
I was happy to hear such a powerful repudiation of white supremacy by the Church
and found this article a well reasoned rendition of where we are or should be
heading.Too bad most political leaders somehow can not find the
courage to do the same. Sad indeed. Time to elect folks with courage who are
not making politics a career but a service with an inherent responsibility to
always doe the right thing.
It's kind of amazing to me how so many people live in an alternate reality
that is populated with people who have purported to "rip pages out of the
history books" and who are left-wing insurgents that parade around en masse
threatening violence.I wish our society had a higher information
literacy and people could more accurately discern the quality of the information
they are consuming. We're paying a high price for ignorance.
@Vermonter "However, to wipe the memory of Robert E. Lee and others from
the pages of American history would be a tragedy as well."That
is certainly not my intention. As for slavery I recommend Robert Fogel's
"Time on the Cross." It provides a nuanced view of that institution in
the South, but he does establish it was almost entirely motivated by the
economics of the plantation/slave system. It is not something to be venerated.
Also, slavery and "free" wage labor had and have more in
common than we would like to admit. Fogel makes this point as well.
Let's try a less emotional hypothetical example.Fast forward 50
years. The Flux Capacitor engine has been perfected and it is now against the
law to own a car with an internal combustion engine.Some activists
have asserted that Henry Ford was the evil source of pollution and energy
depletion, and are determined to destroy the Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield
Village.Others are equally determined to preserve this history.Would you agree that there are "two sides" to this issue?We agree that using cars and bats and bricks and fire as weapons to make
your point are completely unacceptable.Are there still two sides?
@Marxist.I appreciate your perspective.In essence you right.
Slavery was the pretty much the only issue that led to the creation of the
Confederacy. But, to say that every person, in any way whatsoever
associated with the Confederacy forever has a permanent stain on their character
is quite a different thing.The men and women associated with the
Confederacy were not monolithic.Robert E. Lee is the best example of
this. He did not believe the institution of slavery was good in any way. He
refused to wear his gray uniform after war and refused to be buried in it. Lee
pledged full allegiance to the United States after the war, and encouraged all
former soldiers of his army to do the same. After the war, Lee exemplified
everything Lincoln talked about in an effort the heal the nation.But, Lee's statue, to most Americans in 2017, represents defiance, the
rebellion of the South, and the institution of slavery. I think Lee, himself,
would advocate for removal of his statue from the public square, if it would
help unify Americans.However, to wipe the memory of Robert E. Lee
and others from the pages of American history would be a tragedy as well.
@Third try: I look forward to clarification at conference, because the
church's statements are likely to cause confusion. The
media/entertainment/Democrat complex will choose to misinterpret the second
statement as an endorsement of antifa, BLM, "the resistance," and other
violent, anti-free-speech authoritarian movements.It is difficult to
understand why the church would choose to embolden the left who will continue to
tear at the fabric of western civilization that created the very conditions for
the Gospel to be restored. As I said, I look forward to clarification.
I wish these gentleman could have included one simple sentence: A
person who uses, or encourages the use of, bricks, bats, acid bombs, aids urine
or any other object to disrupt a lawfully permitted and assembled group of U.S.
citizens seeking redress of grievances (of whatever stripe) should be sent to
prison as a dangerous criminal and civil rights violator.
@3rd Try"First of all, the Confederacy WAS. No eraser can wipe
it from existence." So was Nazi Germany. The Germans have learned how to
erase it AND not memorialize its heroes. Weirdly some Americans think
that's not good. As a result, we are losing moral high ground to dictators
in China and Iran of all places. "Second, it was not "ALL
about slavery," as you suggest." It was about leadership (traitors),
economics (built on slave labor), states rights (right to own another human) and
self-determination (to own another human). "It was an answer to the
irrepressible conflict." Yep - Good v. Evil and Evil lost."The revisionists have done a number on us, and their process is nearly
complete."I would say that massive revisionism is taking place
on the Right: the altRight wants us to believe that both
expansionist/chaos-causing Russia and now Nazi Germany are great ideologies and
not to be fought against. To do so is to have 'Evil on all sides'.
That any of us could fall for that is beyond crazy, but we're being asked
to buy into that these days. Don't drink the Kool-aid.The
Church is right - how sad that some choose politics over their Faith.
No one's erasing the Confederacy by removing monuments. We know it
happened; there are whole libraries of books about it. Some of the best, like
Catton's series or McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom," treat
"both sides." But to say that the Civil War was about "leadership,
economics, states rights and self-determination" is to try to obfuscate that
Confederate leadership meant seceding from the Union, Confederate economics were
founded on slave labor, Confederate states' rights were centered on the
right to own other humans as cattle, and Confederate self-determination was to
continue their system of leadership and economics on the backs of men and women
stolen from their homes.By the way, most monuments to the Confederacy have
their origins far from the actual events of the Civil War. The majority were
erected in the 20s and 30s in the height of the Jim Crow era. Many more were
erected just after the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision.
They're not monuments to great men--they're billboards for the Klan.
@marxistFirst of all, the Confederacy WAS. No eraser can wipe it from
existence.Second, it was not "ALL about slavery," as you
suggest. It was about leadership, economics, states rights and
self-determination. It was an answer to the irrepressible conflict.The revisionists have done a number on us, and their process is nearly
complete.Is Brigham Young on your list, as well?
Kinda took the church a while into the 70's after desegregation to treat
people with darker skin color equally.
The author says: "The Book of Mormon opens with racialized identities, but
its prophetic narrative pushes toward a beautiful climax in which those
separations cease." Huh? In the book I read, people eventually become
wicked after Christ's visit, all the righteous are murdered and killed, and
only the Lamanites remain living. And we are given a warning to not let the
secret combinations rise above us or we are in for the same fate.
There are things we need to be intolerant of, and there are things we not only
should be tolerant of, but should learn to appreciate. For example, I will
never be tolerant of rapists, nor am I particularly tolerant of violent people.
On the other hand, I have neighbors who are not members of my religion or race,
but they are fine people who have my friendship whenever they want it. I have also learned that violence only begets violence. Hate only
begets hate. Intolerance only magnifies intolerance. Hitler proved the power
of hate, a lesson we should all never forget.
@Third Try "Media and the left have manipulated institutions into endorsing
the removal of Confederate historical and cultural images. "The
Confederacy was ALL about black slavery. Those states left the union because
they were afraid they would lose their very profitable slave system if they
remained in the union. Why should we have monuments to slavery? Answer me.
Beautifully written. This transcends political motives that seem to pollute most
interactions today.Thanks to the authors for a strong message of hope and
Media and the left have manipulated institutions into endorsing the removal of
Confederate historical and cultural images. It is not enough to decry white
supremacists and their violence. Trump did that.You must decry any
person or group who would stand in the way of the removal of Confederate icons.
Anyone who even delays their denouncement of of the "both sides" comment
is suspect.By removing history we are acting out the 1984 scene,
"Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia." Only a de facto
endorsement of Antifa and Black Lives Matter will suffice.Of
course, this is a social justice manipulation, and the LDS church has fallen for
it. It is the responsible globalist position. This is not a time for heroics, or
(as it turns out) silence.Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A have shown
that being a peculiar people will not do. A successful global organization will
follow the EU and UN charters on issues such as climate change, alternative
marriage, open borders, feminism, abortion, resettlement and other social
issues.If you want to teach ALL nations, keep in mind that there are
two billion people in China and Islamic nations. This is no time to be
This is a stunningly clear and hopeful statement.