FAIR

Racial Issues

Race and the LDS Church – What do we know, and how do we teach it?

by

Podcast: Download (67.3MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Russell Stevenson Mormon Scholar
Russell Stevenson – Author of “For The Cause of Righteousness: A Global History of Blacks and Mormonism, 1830-2013

The LDS MissionCast is a podcast designed to educate and inspire in the great cause of Missionary Work. This episode is all about Race and the LDS Church. Some of the episodes of the LDS MissionCast feature content for those preparing to serve a full-time mission, some episodes are directed towards those that have returned home, or are wanting to be more inspired in member-missionary work. Episodes like this one are unique in that we occasionally need to take the time to learn the gospel, to learn our history better, so that we can better members of the church, and better ministers to those around us.

On June 1st, 2018 there will be a celebration in the conference center in Salt Lake City, to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the 1978 revelation on the Priesthood, or Official Declaration #2. This topic is often referred to as being the “Priesthood Ban.” In an effort to explain or even justify this policy, it is common for members of the church to say things about this issue that are either wrong, possibly hurtful, incorrect, you name it. So we will spend some time in this episode learning the history, and coming to some understanding of this often controversial topic.

The scholar for this episode, Russell Stevenson, has dedicated years of his life to the study and understanding of the issues surrounding Race and the LDS Church. He talks about how his mission experience inspired this work, and informs much of what he does in his academic studies.

For further reference, please refer to the Race and the Priesthood essay at LDS.org


LDS MissionCast Podcast for Mormon Missionaries

Book Review: The Melchizedek Priesthood: Understanding the Doctrine, Living the Principles

by

Available from the FairMormon Bookstore at 10% off

There have been some General Conference talks in recent years about the priesthood that have really stuck out for me, such as “Healing the Sick” by Dallin H. Oaks in April 2010, and “The Price of Priesthood Power” by Russell M. Nelson in April 2016. As an elder in the Melchizedek Priesthood, they have been very instructional but have also left me wanting to know more about the priesthood and how to better exercise priesthood power. This book, by apostle Dale G. Renlund and his wife, Ruth Lybbert Renlund, goes a long way towards doing that.

It consists of two parts, titled “Foundations of the Priesthood” and “Doctrine of the Priesthood.” In the first part, it explains what priesthood is, its purpose, the offices and keys, and the oaths and covenants associated with it. The second part talks about putting the priesthood into action and becoming better priesthood holders. At the end of the book there is also a small section of “Chapter Summaries” that can serve as a review of the material contained in the book.

It begins by talking about what the priesthood is. “The offices of the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthood do not constitute all of God’s priesthood, His total power and authority. Brigham Young taught that there are many aspects of God’s total priesthood power and authority that are not delegated to men on earth… the authority and power to produce bodies and spirits, create kingdoms, and organize matter.” (pages 12-13) It talks about God’s priesthood power and authority being used on the earth even between New Testament times and the restoration of the priesthood through Joseph Smith. It also addresses the issues of people of African descent being denied priesthood blessings for a time, and priesthood offices only being open to males. “Women in the Church frequently exercise priesthood power and authority, though they are not ordained to priesthood offices.” (page 18) [Read more…] about Book Review: The Melchizedek Priesthood: Understanding the Doctrine, Living the Principles

What Can We Learn About Patriarchal Blessings from a Congolese Patriarch? (Old Testament Gospel Doctrine Lesson 12B)

by

Laurent Clément Shambuyi Biaya Katembwe, patriarch in DR Congo

 Photo Essay and Video Shorts for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 12:“Fruitful in the Land of My Affliction”(Genesis 40-45) (JBOTL12B)

Summary: This photo essay with accompanying video shorts are intended to supplement the study of Jacob’s blessings to his twelve sons as recorded in Genesis 49. As part of an assignment to gather oral histories for the Church History Library in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), I was accompanied by Brother Daniel Tusey Kola on a visit to Laurent Clément Shambuyi Biaya Katembwe, one of the first members of the Church in the DRC. Brother Shambuyi has served diligently in many leadership assignments and has now been called as a stake patriarch. The video shorts, subtitled in English, Brother Shambuyi’s answers to three questions: “What is a patriarchal blessing?” “What is the significance of the declaration of lineage?” And “What is the role of revelation in patriarchal blessings?”

The photo essay and video shorts may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL12B — What Can We Learn About Patriarchal Blessings from a Congolese Patriarch?

How Should We Understand the Rich Symbolism in Jacob’s Blessings of Judah and Joseph? (Old Testament Gospel Doctrine Lesson 12A)

by

Harry Anderson: Jacob Blesses His Twelve Sons

An Old Testament KnoWhy for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 12: “Fruitful in the Land of My Affliction” (Genesis 40-45) (JBOTL012A)

Question: Some of the most significant prophecies in scripture regarding the posterity of Jacob are found in the blessings of Judah and Joseph in Genesis 49. However much of the poetry in the blessings is difficult to understand. How should we understand the rich symbolism of these verses?

Summary: The Hebrew manuscripts of Jacob’s blessings of Judah and Joseph present difficult problems in translation, since they contain several obscure and archaic terms and phrases. Some important passages (e.g., “until Shiloh comes” [49:10]; “Joseph is a fruitful branch” [49:22]) have been particularly troublesome, leaving translators with few options outside of “conjectural emendation” to reconstruct the text. This approach may result in translations of key phrases that differ significantly from what is contained in the LDS edition of the Bible. Adding to the difficulties of interpretation of these blessings is that we have no direct help from modern scripture. Surprisingly, while Joseph Smith made substantive changes in the wording of the blessings of Ephraim and Manasseh in Genesis 48 and in the testament of Joseph in chapter 50, he made no significant changes to Genesis 49. And, apart from brief restatements of a few lines from Jacob’s words to Joseph in an 1833 blessing of Joseph Smith’s father, we have no other known allusions to the specific content of Genesis 49 in the teachings and history of the Prophet. The intent of this article is to make this chapter — arguably “the most difficult segment of the Book of Genesis” — more understandable for LDS readers. More importantly, it is hoped that this understanding will lead us to a greater dedication to our own responsibilities as the posterity of Israel.

The full article may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL12A — How Should We Understand the Rich Symbolism in Jacob’s Blessings of Judah and Joseph?

If “All Are Alike Unto God,” Why Were Special Promises Reserved for Abraham’s Seed? (Gospel Doctrine Old Testament Lesson 7A)

by

Howard Lyon: I Am a Child of God. Children from many cultures “stand with Christ, bearing witness with him that they are children of God. [The children] look directly at the viewer confident in the joy they feel in the presence of their Savior.”
An Old Testament KnoWhy for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 7: The Abrahamic Covenant (Abraham 1:1-4; 2:1–11; Genesis 12:1-8; 17:1-9) (JBOTL07A).

Question: The Book of Mormon teaches that “all are alike unto God.” Yet “Abraham received promises concerning his seed” that continue to this day. How do we reconcile the idea of the “chosenness” of the family of Abraham with the idea that “God is no respecter of persons”?

Summary: There is no conflict between the “chosenness” of Abraham’s family and the universality of the Father’s love. Every one who receives the Gospel becomes Abraham’s seed and will bless him as their father. In the beginning, God organized the human family according to a divine plan and timetable. “All … alike” would have the opportunity to “come unto him and partake of his goodness,” but to achieve that end God invited each willing soul to participate with Him in the effort. We made premortal covenants that put us in a partnership with our Heavenly Father. Individuals were to play their unique parts faithfully at the appointed time. Jesus Christ was chosen to become our Savior. Abraham and others — both men and women — also received specific assignments. Abraham’s seed was given the responsibility to bear a “ministry and Priesthood unto all nations.” Through the ministry and Priesthood of Abraham’s seed, “all mankind may be saved,” “through the Atonement of Christ” and “by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.” The disorganization and confusion of the human family will come to an end; “it must be joined together, so that there [will] be a perfect chain from Father Adam to his latest posterity.”

The full article may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL07A — If “All Are Alike Unto God,” Why Were Special Promises Reserved for Abraham’s Seed?

For a video supplement to this lesson explaining, among other interesting topics, why virtually everyone in our day is a descendant of Abraham, see the presentation by Ugo A. Perego “All Abraham’s Children: A Genetic Perspective,” given at the 2016 Science & Mormonism Symposium: Body, Brain, Mind & Spirit, which took place on 12 March 2016 in Orem, Utah. (http://interpreterfoundation.org/ugo-a-perego-all-abrahams-children-a-genetic-perspective-2/).

Was Noah Drunk or in a Vision? (Old Testament Gospel Doctrine 6B)

by

Noah in His Vineyard, Holkham Bible, ca. 1325-1350. Here we see an industrious Noah diligently tending his vineyard, in striking contrast to a later depiction in the same Bible chapter that features him in an inebriated stupor. Scholars have noted the odd inconsistency between these two scenes.

An Old Testament KnoWhy for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 6: “Noah … Prepared an Ark to the Saving of His House” (Moses 8:19-30; Genesis 6-9; 11:1-9) (JBOTL06B)

Question: In Genesis 6:9, Noah is described as “a just man and perfect in his generations,” a noble patriarch who, like Enoch, “walked with God.” However, the story of Noah finishes in a puzzling way. Immediately after Noah makes his covenant with God, his sons find him “drunken” and “uncovered within his tent.” Can these two opposing pictures of Noah be reconciled?

Summary: It is difficult to know whether this contradiction is the result of different traditions, textual misunderstanding, or the abbreviated nature of the biblical account. Some scholars even wonder whether there was a deliberate effort to defame or belittle the character of Noah. What seems certain is that the biblical author deliberately framed this sequel to Noah’s Creation and Garden story as a replay of the scene of the Adam and Eve’s Fall and consequent judgment in Eden. Most often the instigator of this “Fall” is seen to be Noah, who, it is reported, succumbed to the intoxicating influence of wine from his vineyard. However, it is significant that the scriptures omit any hint of wrongdoing by Noah and put all the blame on Ham and his son Canaan. In the admittedly tentative interpretation given in this article, I will discuss the possibility that Ham’s wrongdoing consisted in his having approached, without authorization, the inner curtains of the sacred tent where Noah was enwrapped in vision. Some ancient traditions viewed Ham’s actions as part of an effort to steal Noah’s priesthood garment and undermine his authority.

 

The full article may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL06B — Was Noah Drunk or in a Vision?

As a video supplement to this lesson with additional details and artwork not included in this article, see Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, “The Ark and the Tent: Temple Symbolism in the Story of Noah” on the YouTube Interpreter Foundation channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIfArfB54Mk ).

Book Review: An Introduction to the Book of Abraham

by

10% off at the FairMormon Bookstore

Publisher: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book
Author: John Gee
Number of Pages: 197
Binding: Hardcover
ISBN-13: 978-1-9443-9406-6
Price: $19.99
Click to purchase the book.

The Book of Abraham is my favorite book of scripture. Mostly it is because of chapter 3, which contains information that is not found anywhere else in LDS scripture. I also remember discovering the facsimiles as a child and thinking that they were really neat. Unfortunately, the Book of Abraham has also become a favorite for critics to attack, as it is the only book of scripture that Joseph Smith translated for which there appears to be any extant source material, and that material does not seem to match what is in the Book of Abraham. But it’s really much more complicated than that.

This book explains what is currently known about the Book of Abraham and its associated artifacts and documents, and why the critics are wrong. It is written by John Gee, who is a professor of Egyptology at BYU. He got his PhD in Egyptology at Yale and has written many research publications for professional journals as well as writing for LDS audiences. The book is written to be understandable by any reader (although an LDS background is very helpful) in a straightforward manner that actually makes for a fairly quick read.

The book contains 17 chapters, most of them fairly short, that build on each other. At the end is a series of questions and answers that basically provides a summary of the book. It also has photos of the extant papyri, maps, charts, diagrams, and other helpful or interesting illustrations scattered throughout. At the end of most chapters is a list of “Further Reading” with notes about each item. Unfortunately, there are not many footnotes in the book; they only exist to provide sources for quotes. So you have to refer to the notes in the “Further Reading” section to deduce where some of the information came from. This did lead me to find one inconsistency – on page 97, it says “The Book of Abraham begins much like other autobiographies from Abraham’s time and place.” However, on page 103 in “Further Reading,” there is an entry that says, “This essay is a comparison of the Book of Abraham with the only other autobiographical inscription to survive from the approximate time and place of Abraham.”

After the introduction, the book begins with a historical overview which explains how Joseph Smith got the papyri and then what happened to them after his death, with the church finally receiving surviving fragments in 1967 (most of what Joseph had in his possession ended up burning in the Chicago Fire of 1871). “To the disappointment of many, although these remaining fragments contained the illustration that served as the basis for Facsimile 1, they were not the portion of the papyri that contained the text of the Book of Abraham” (page 9).
The next chapter is about the translation. Some have thought that Joseph may have used a seer stone (see my review of Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones), but Gee says that “Some thirdhand accounts claim he did, but those accounts do not come from anyone who actually observed the translation” and that “By the time that Joseph finished translating the Book of Mormon in 1829, he no longer needed to use the Urim and Thummim to receive revelation” (page 20.) What is known is that much more was translated than what ended up being published (the rest has been lost), and that it was done without using a dictionary or grammar as a conventional translation normally would. It does appear that W. W. Phelps attempted to compile an Egyptian grammar after the translation, but the extent of Joseph’s involvement in that is unknown. [Read more…] about Book Review: An Introduction to the Book of Abraham

What if People with Red Hair Were Denied the Priesthood?

by

Scott Gordon as a red-haired boy
Scott Gordon as a red-haired boy

Note – From the mid-1840s until 1978 people of African descent were generally not allowed to have the priesthood or attend the temple in the LDS Church. (Attending the temple is different from going to Church in the LDS faith.) This is in spite of prior practices and temple rules that said they could. Since the primary difference between people with African roots and people with northern European roots is skin color, what if the situation were reversed? This post tries to use humor to address this serious issue. This should not be taken as evidence that the author considers anything about the topic of racism or priesthood to be less than serious. This role reversal is designed to make us think about the issue in a different light.

I was born a redhead. Yes, I’ve “blonded” out a bit as I’ve aged, but both of my daughters were born with deep red hair. So, I know all about red heads. Sometimes we are also known as “gingers.”

While the red hair can attract attention, it isn’t the red hair that is the issue for me. It is the redheads’ skin color. Let me explain.

People with red hair have very fair skin coloring. We have almost no melanin in our skin.  Melanin is the substance that makes skin darker. I joke with my kids that our skin is so transparent that we can see the blood rushing beneath it.  I often look with jealously at my Hispanic or black friends who have such beautiful, uniform skin tones. My skin is reddish and blotchy with a few dots called freckles. In high school I was constantly asked, “Are you blushing?” “No, I just walked up a few stairs, thank you very much.”

A redhead’s skin is very sensitive to sunlight. You may notice if you go walking with a redhead, they sometimes seem to jump from shadow to shadow. We all avoid sunlight. When we read a Twilight novel, we understand how the vampires feel—the sun is not our friend! I often take out my SPF 50 sunscreen and slather it on before I will go out into the sun. It is supposed to allow me to stay in the sun 50 times longer than usual. For me – let’s see now — 50 times what I can usually stay in the sun for without getting a sunburn…that would be……ummm, doing the math here…carry the one…….Hmmm……about 7 and a half minutes before I start to burn.

“But, you are just ‘white’!” you may say. No, my wife is white. Her family comes from Norway and Sweden. She is white. Blindingly white. Her skin looks different than mine. She is white with white and yellow undertones. My ‘white’ is blotchy reddish-white, just like most other redheads. She can go out in the sun. She can lie on the beach. She can go swimming. If I go out in the sun, I will burn. If I lie on the beach, I will burn.  If I go swimming, I will burn.  I tell my students my goal in life is to walk from my office to my car without getting a sunburn.

That said, it isn’t all bad having redhead skin. My skin tone is GREAT for collecting vitamin D in a fogbank. And when I visit Scotland, I have to wear my coat anyway – so it’s not a liability.

My daughter teaches in first grade. She has very red hair. One of her students, whose family came from Africa, was having difficulties with one teacher. We will call this six-year-old student Jamal (not his real name). When asked about it, he said, “She just don’t like me. She’s white and white people don’t like black people like me.” My daughter responded, “That’s not true, Jamal. I’m white and I like you.” “No, Miss Gordon. You’re not white,” responded Jamal. “You’re PINK!” Even a six-year-old can see the difference.

The difference between people we label as “black” and people like me is how much melanin is in our skin. The more melanin, the darker the skin tone. I don’t have very much melanin, so that is why I am the color I am. Some of you may say, “But there are other differences besides skin color!” Yeah, that’s true – my hair is red and theirs is black. But again, that is simply caused by the amount of melanin. My hair is straight and theirs is curly. True. But, my wife’s hair is very curly, and she has family members whose hair would look right at home on someone of African descent (except that they are blond). As for other traits, you can find a wide variety of looks throughout both the white and black communities. In other words, there is as much diversity within each community as there is between the two communities.

So, here’s a thought exercise: What would happen if The Church announced that there was a ban on redheads having the priesthood?

What if it was melanin-deficient people who couldn’t get the priesthood, while melanin-rich people could? What if Gingers went thought a period of slavery because of our skin color? What if we were discriminated against during the 1950s and not allowed to eat in certain places, get certain jobs, use certain bathrooms, or ride in a taxi with someone who had more melanin then we do?

I can just image the conversations in the ward.

“Oh look, a red-haired girl just moved into the ward. Finally, someone you can date!”

“Can you help me with my Northern European History class? You know all that stuff, right?”

“Can I touch your hair? I’ve never seen red hair before. Does it feel different?”

“I was doing family history work last week and was horrified to find out that some red-haired genes got in there somehow. Old great-grandad or grandma must have been cavorting with the field help!”

Yeah, those would be terrible conversations. And yet, I have heard all of those comments from church members.

“But, it isn’t skin color. It’s lineage!” you cry.  So let’s talk about lineage a bit. There are those who believe there is a tie between redheads and Neanderthals.[1] Neanderthals are in the redhead’s linage. Apparently, Neanderthals had red hair, and some Neanderthal genes are found in northern Europeans. They know there was interbreeding between Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals.[2] They just are not sure if the red hair trait came from the Neanderthal, or if it developed independently. If Neanderthal man had red hair along with the red-hair skin tones, it would explain one of the great scientific mysteries of why the Neanderthals died out: obviously, the sun came out!

More evidence of having a different lineage is studies that show “people with red hair need larger doses of anesthesia and are often resistant to local pain blockers.”[3]  My first response to this information is “Well, duh! We are used to pain because we walk around sunburned all the time.” But, it turns out it has more to do with our genes.[4] Just ask any operating room nurse or OB nurse how comfortable they feel when a redhead comes in. I have been told by several nurses that if there is going to be a problem, it will probably be with the redhead. So, we are a bit different from other people. Whether this comes from our homegrown genes, or from Neanderthal genes, it certainly shows that our lineage might be different from others—we are demonstrably different than other people. If something is to be restricted based on lineage, it could just as easily be restricted against us redheads.

It’s important to think about what it would be like if the shoe were on the other foot. I often hear the refrain, “The Levites were the only ones who had the priesthood at the time of Jesus. So that was a priesthood restriction just like the blacks being restricted in modern times.”

That situation is totally different. With the Levites, only one group held the priesthood and nobody else did. With the modern priesthood restriction, everybody had the priesthood except for one group.

Think of it this way. Everyone understands that in sports there needs to be a team captain to communicate effectively. But, that is totally different than everyone being allowed to play the game except for one player who is forced to sit on the bench. Our brothers and sisters of African descent were forced to sit on the bench. How would that make you feel?

“But, the priesthood ban was a long time ago. What do you want me to do about it?”

I first recommend reading this short article on LDS.org on Race and the Priesthood. https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng

Secondly, if someone asks if Mormon were racists, the correct answer – the only possible answer — is yes. There is no need to get defensive about it. Of course they were! By modern standards, everyone who came through that period would be considered racist today. It is, however, unfair to judge them harshly for their views. It was what they were taught. It was the norm. They did the best they could. Using modern standards, even Abraham Lincoln would be considered racist by many. Additionally, racism doesn’t only exist in the United States. It is a world-wide issue of us vs. them. Skin color has simply been used as an easy identifier of “them.”

Racism has always been with us. Our better selves understand that we need to move beyond that. If someone asks if there was racism in the church, simply say “Sure, and we are trying to repent!”

Third, if someone then asks, how could we have had a prophet if we had such a racist policy? Think about this: if you think that prophets don’t work in a world filled with prejudice and racism, you need to go back and reread the Bible and Book of Mormon. Think of the Samaritans, the Lamanites, the people of Nineveh, and the Philistines. God only gives us what we are willing to accept. It is up to us to try to become more like him.

Many members of the Church believe the ban came from God, or at least that God used the ban for a wise purpose. These positions are speculative. No written revelation has been found that explains the priesthood and temple ban. Some quote scriptures to justify the ban, but historically those scriptures were pulled in as explanations after the ban was already in effect.

Why was there the ban? We don’t know. I can make an educated guess, but my guess would be as valid as your guess—and just as speculative.

Instead of guessing and speculating, let’s simply reach out to each other and embrace one another as brothers and sisters—even redheads! Let’s acknowledge that racism exists and has existed even within the Church. Let’s not nit-pick over how much melanin we have in our skin. Does it really matter? Do you differentiate between your blond children your brown-haired children and your red-haired children? Is there a difference between them?

No, I don’t think so either.

Now please hand me my hat and sunscreen. I have to go outside again.

[1] Red hair a legacy of Neanderthal man http://www.dhamurian.org.au/anthropology/neanderthal1.html

[2] http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/interbreeding

[3] https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/the-pain-of-being-a-redhead/

[4] http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/10/why-surgeons-dread-red-heads/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Book Review: A Reason for Faith: Navigating LDS Doctrine & Church History

by

Available from the FairMormon bookstore at 20% off
Available from the FairMormon bookstore at 20% off

In the prologue of A Reason for Faith, the editor, Laura Hales, lays out the purpose of the book. Members of the church sometimes come across new information in an unfriendly setting that damages their faith. This book is a compilation of articles about many of the topics that are not often discussed in a church or family setting, and can be difficult to understand. They are laid out by scholars in an honest but faithful manner, and while they can’t possibly cover the topics completely in the amount of space given, they are meant to be a springboard for further study where necessary.

The first chapter is by Richard Bushman, on “Joseph Smith and Money Digging.” He recounts the history of scholarship in this area, where it was originally denied by those inside the church due to being based on accounts thought to be unreliable published by critics of the church. As he began his own research, he found evidence that convinced him that Joseph was indeed involved with folk magic and seer stones, and that these things were too common in the 19th century to invalidate Joseph’s prophetic claims or be scandalous. [Read more…] about Book Review: A Reason for Faith: Navigating LDS Doctrine & Church History

4th Watch 19: Why are Mormons prejudiced?

by

Podcast: Download (36.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

4thWatch SmallLike all human begins we have our own personal preferences about everything in life.  There are things, people, ideas and places that we may like and prefer that others dislike that have nothing to do with being prejudiced.  When it comes to real prejudice we need to define what we are talking about.

In this podcast Brother Scarisbrick relates how our understanding of different times and cultural norms can change as we gain further light and knowledge.

As always the views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect or represent those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon.