Slimy language.

First, the essay does NOT disavow the DOCTRINE that “black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse ....”

It disavows “theories.”

“I see what you did there.”

Here is the text:
“Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse ....”

Here is the doctrine:

Jacob 3:5 “Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins...”

Jacob 3:8-9 “ O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours ... Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, WHICH IS THE WORD OF GOD, that ... but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that THEIR FILTHINESS CAME BECAUSE OF THEIR FATHERS....”

Just admit Brigham was wrong and the doctrine is disavowed.

Peace

Sarony

Theory, doctrine and principle are differentiated in D&C 88:78.
Theory is different from doctrine.
Tricky, ‘eh?

Two more layers of slimey language:

The essay NEVER uses the term “doctrine.”

And the phrase starting with “disavowes”, logically, it
“disavowes ‘A’ OR ‘B’”

Where ‘A’ is the skin and sin curse, and ‘B’ is “that it [the theories] reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life....”

Strain at a gnat and swallow a camel much, ‘eh?

Another "Gray area" for Mormonism 101.

Sarony Wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------?
>
> Just admit Brigham was wrong and the doctrine is
> disavowed.
>
> Peace
>
> Sarony

Was Brigham just a man of his times when he spouted all his racist crap... or was he Gods mouthpiece on earth and the man most in touch with the will of the Lord?

Mormons shouldn't be able to have it both ways though they sure do try.

I agree the essays were a mistake. At this point for the sanity of everyone (black, white, brown) the message should be we hope that societies promote equal opportunities for success for everyone wherever possible, and everyone needs to try to do their best in their unique circumstances. And stop blaming others for our personal mistakes or disadvantages. And to stop feeling jealousy for other's success. Envy can be an ugly tendency which can stagnate progress.

I disagree. The church was wrong and they will always be seen as wrong. To gain some semblence of morality, they need to spend several paragraphs apologizing, not denying and justifying. Their past behaviors are indefensible. If the church can't own-up and apologize, the church itself is an abomination with no moral right to exist.

Apology is like confession, and confession is for the little people. Nothing to see here, move along.

Any time someone takes paragraphs of writings to answer questions that can be answered in one sentence or better yet with a yes or no, you know they're full of crap.

Q.) Did the mormon church teach or notoriously allow its leaders and members to teach on an institutional scale, that for all person's who have black skin, that their black skin is a curse from god on them and that therefore, these people were denied by the church itself because of their race, the ability to hold the mormon priesthood?

A.) Yes

See how easy that was. My answer is simple and truthful. The mormon cult could not say "yes" in response to this question, even though that answer is truthful. Everything in their essays on this topic is just bullshit, justifications, and masked denials. It takes a while and a lot of space on the page to spew that distractive and deceptive bullshit out. That's why the excessive verbiage and their desire to write essays.

Slimy is right, Sarcony. Very slimy.

Years ago, I used to take pride in being able to tell, when asked, what the Mormon Church taught and practiced about people with dark skins. Then after 1978, I took pride in being able to tell people what the Church used to practice. Now, having read the essay, I've learned that IT NEVER HAPPENED! Black people were just as valiant as white people in the preexistence, etc. etc.

So we can now just forget the whole thing.

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

Japan to US: “We could have told you not to fuck with those guys”.

Sarony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just admit Brigham was wrong and the doctrine is
> disavowed.

Didn't they do this with The Adam God Theory? IT just took them A LOT longer with the Blacks aren't worthy intrinsically theory.

Elder Berry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sarony Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Just admit Brigham was wrong and the doctrine
> is
> > disavowed.
>
> Didn't they do this with The Adam God Theory? IT
> just took them A LOT longer with the Blacks aren't
> worthy intrinsically theory.

They spilled a lot of ink claiming that BY never taught Adam-
God. When Rodney Turner did his master's thesis on the position
of Adam in the LDS church he admitted that there was no question
that BY taught Adam-God, and all the "misquoted" explanations
(which were being used by GA's, like Joseph Fielding Smith, and
Mark E. Petersen when pressed) "stretched credulity to the
breaking point" IIRC. The Church responded by putting Turner's
master's thesis in special collections and being VERY stingy on
who could look at it.

I once had an interesting discussion with a guy who really
wanted a copy of it. He had gone to BYU majoring in library
science. After graduating he went for a masters at a different
university. He requested Turner's thesis on inter-library loan.
The BYU library sent it but attached the proviso that it could
only be used inside the library building there (not checked out
like a normal ILL), and that no photocopies were to be made.

He knew the library staff well, since he was a masters student
in library science. He said, "look, I live X miles away, it's
really a hardship for me to have to come here to do my research.
Couldn't I just take it home with me overnight and bring it back
tomorrow? I promise not to make any copies." They relented,
broke the rules that BYU had sent (which, I'm sure, made no
sense to them) and let the guy take it home overnight.

He immediately ran to a photocopy store and copied every page.
When he got home he noticed that the bottom two or three lines
of each page had not been copied. This was back when copiers
couldn't resize a page--no "zoom" function. So he stayed up all
night typing the missing lines on the back of each photocopy
(He showed me his comb-bound copy with the missing lines typed
on the back of each sheet).

He got it all copied in time and returned it to the library at
the university. All this just to be able to have a copy of
someone's master's thesis. That's how paranoid, LDS inc. used
to be about letting people know the truth.

I'm reminded of this incident (and other like it) when I hear
people like Ballard and Oaks say the Church has never hidden any
information yadda yadda.

It's fundamentally dishonest to frame Mormon racial discrimination as "Race and the Priesthood" when blacks were excluded from the temple prior to 1978 for no reason, other than the color of their skin and you don't need the priesthood to enter a temple, since women don't have the priesthood and they enter daily. Always have.

My big take away is this. Before June of 1978 you HAD to be a racist to enter a Mormon temple. After 1978 you didn't have to be a racist (tacit or otherwise) to be a worthy member of their church.

Their Racist Theory like Their Adam God Theory was simply a license to believe in something that excluded others.

Just like their Godhood Theory they decided to include other beliefs (i.e. you don't have to think of yourself as a god in embryo) and be less restrictive on what one had to be to be a good Mormon.

You can still be a worthy racist in Mormonism. You just don't have to declare yourself as one.