The Long Promised Day

Doctrine & Covenants

Official Declaration 2

Racism and Western Civilization

• The misinterpretation of Genesis 9:18-27– “Canaan” as the father of “Africans”

• The theory of “Ham” has justified slavery since the 4th Century

• Ham was racialized in the 7th century by Muslims conquering Northern Africa, and it then spread into Judaism and Christianity

• By the 19th Century, it was fully assumed that the black skin was a curse stemming from Ham

Before the Restriction• Early Saints were raised in an inherently racist culture• Joseph Smith was remarkably progressive• Elijah Abel• Walker Lewis

– Brigham Young, 1847: “its nothing to do with the blood for of one blood has God made all flesh, we have to repent (and) regain what we av [sic] lost–we av [sic] one of the best Elders an African in Lowell [i.e., Walker Lewis.].” Brigham Young Papers, March 26, 1847, LDS Church History Library

• Debate over interracial marriage in late 1847– “The curse remained upon them because Cain cut off the lives of Abel. . . . The Lord

had cursed Cain’s seed with blackness and prohibited them the Priesthood.” Journal History of the Church, February 13, 1849

• Brigham Young declares support for the priesthood ban and slavery in 1852 (though is very ambivalent about the latter)– “Any man having one drop of the seed of Cane [sic] in him Cannot hold the priesthood

& if no other Prophet ever spake it Before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ. I know it is true & they know it.” Wilford Woodruff Diary, January 4, 1852

Attempted Explanations• No one called for an explanation• Brigham Young’s Cain vs. Abel

– Never caught on• “Fence-sitters” in the Pre-mortal Existence

– Joseph Fielding Smith: “There is nothing in our standard works, nor any authoritative statement to the effect that one third of the hosts of heaven remained neutral in the great conflict and that the colored races are of that neutral class. The statement has been put forth at various times until ‘the belief’ it has become quite general that the Negro race has been cursed for taking a neutral position in that great contest. But this is not the official position of the Church, merely the opinion of men.”

• Cursed race in the Book of Abraham– Founded on a (very) dated understanding of lineage and race

• Mostly, they rarely thought about it

President David O. McKay• A world-wide tour in 1921 exposed him to more foreign cultures than any

apostle before him• Visit to Hawaii, 1921 (as recollected in 1954): “I first met this problem in

Hawaii in 1921. A worthy [black] man had married a Polynesian woman. She was faithful in the Church. They had a large family everyone of whom was active and worthy. My sympathies were so aroused that I wrote home to President Grant asking if we would please make an exception so we could ordain that man to the Priesthood. He wrote back saying, ‘David, I am as sympathetic as you are, but until the Lord gives us a revelation regarding that matter, we shall have to maintain the policy of the Church.”– “Minutes of a Special Meeting by President David O. McKay, 17th January, 1754,”

David O. McKay Papers, UofU Library• Rise of Civil Rights Movement

The Africa Question• Problems in South Africa• Evan P. Wright, President of South Africa Mission: “In the South African

Mission we are badly in need of leadership through the priesthood, and I am most anxious to ordain men as fast as we possibly can. If we could have another fifty or hundred priesthood bearers in the mission our work would move forward more rapidly and successfully…Apparently this is the only mission in the Church where it is necessary for a man to trace his genealogy to establish his eligibility for the priesthood. As a result, the members of the Church in this country feel that they are penalized…In my time I have had native chiefs and officials ask me to come and baptize two or three thousand of their people. I always try to explain that the priesthood isn’t conferred upon [black] Africans and at the present time we aren’t laboring among them.” – Evan P. Wright to First Presidency, June 17, 1952, in Evan P. Wright, A History of the

South African Mission, 419-420.

President David O. McKay• President McKay makes a monumental trip to South Africa• “Now I am impressed that there are worthy men in the South African Mission who

are being deprived of the Priesthood simply because they are unable to trace their genealogy out of this country. I am impressed that an injustice is being done to them. Why should every man be required to prove that his lineage is free from negro strain especially when there is no evidence of his having Negro blood in his veins? I should rather, much rather, make a mistake in one case and if it be found out afterwards suspend his activity in the Priesthood than to deprive to worthy men of the Priesthood..And so, if a man I worthy, is faithful in the Church and lives up to the principles of the Gospel, who has no outward evidence of a Negro strain, even though he might not be able to trace his genealogy out of the country, the President of the Mission is hereby authorised to confer upon him the Priesthood.” – “Minutes of a Special Meeting by President David O. McKay, 17th January, 1854,” in David

O. McKay Diary, UofU Library• Same practice spread to temple ordinances• Scope of the restriction grew more and more narrow

President David O. McKay• Private Discussion in 1954, shortly after trip to Africa:

“[President McKay] said, ‘There is not now, and there never has been a doctrine in this Church that the Negroes are under a divine curse.’ He insisted that there is no doctrine in the Church of any kind pertaining to the Negro. ‘We believe,’ he said, ‘that we have scriptural precedent for witholding the priesthood from the Negro. It is a practice, not a doctrine, and the practice will some day be changed. And that’s all there is to it.”– Sterling M. McMurrin, affidavit, March 6, 1979

• First Presidency Statement in 1969

The Role of Nigeria

• Proselyting Mission announced in 1960• N. Elden Tanner sent in 1962• Prospects looked bright• 1963 Nigerian Outlook editorial halted

progress• 1966-1975: war and unrest• Increase in interest following war

The Role of Brazil

• Explosion of Converts• Assumed that up to 80% of Brazil residents

had negro blood• Announcement of Temple to be built in Sao

Paolo in 1975

The Role of Scholarship

• Armand Mauss’s “Mormonism and the Negro,” published in 1967, explored the folkloric nature of the ban

• 1970 book by Steven Taggart presents the “Missouri Thesis”

• 1973 article by Lester Bush, “Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine,” identifies the policy’s origins to Brigham Young and “foments the pot”

Developments in the 1970s

• Presidents Smith and Lee publically stated that the policy would never change

• Organization of the “Genesis Group” in 1970, met often with Elders Hinckley, Monson, and Packer

• President Kimball was raised in an environment with close proximity to minorities, especially Mexican and Native Americans

• “Admittedly our direct and positive information is limited. I have wished the Lord had given us a little more clarity on the matter.” Elder Kimball did not know whether to characterize the decision as a “doctrine or policy,” but acknowledged that it “has not varied in my memory.” He continued, “I know it could. I know the Lord could change his policy and release the ban and forgive the possible error which brought about the deprivation. If the time comes, that he will do, I am sure.”– Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 448-49 (1963)

• “[I have given it] a great deal of thought, a great deal of prayer. The day might come when they would be given the priesthood, but that day has not come yet. Should the day come it will be a matter of revelation. Before changing any important policy, it has to be through a revelation from the Lord. But we believe in revelation. We believe there are yet many more things to be revealed from the Lord. . . . We are open to the Father on every suggestion that he gives us, to every direction he gives us, to every revelation of desire for change.”– Opening Press Conference, as recorded in

Charles J. Seldin, “Priesthood of LDS Opened to Blacks,” Salt Lake Tribune, June 10, 1978, 1A;

Pressing issues in the mid-late 70s

• Increase in requests from Africa• Greater consciousness of civil rights issues• Issues of global missionary work• Research, both inside and outside Church

hierarchy, weakened the traditional idea of Joseph Smith beginning the ban

The Questioner• President Kimball often asked people their views on the Restriction• Organized a committee to explore the doctrinal basis• Constantly prayed about the issue• Wrote to his son: “Revelations will probably never come unless

they are desired. I think few people receive revelations while lounging on the couch or while playing cards or while relaxing. I believe most revelations would come when a man is on his tip toes, reaching as high as he can for something which he knows he needs, and then there bursts upon him the answer to his problems.” Edward Kimball, “Spencer W. Kimball and the Priesthood Ban,” 46.

• Came to the conclusion to expand the priesthood by March 1978, but wanted full agreement within the Quorum before moving on

• I went into the temple alone, day after day, and especially on Sundays and Saturdays when there were no organizations in the temple, when I could have it alone. This went on for some time as I was searching, because I wanted to be sure.

• I had a great deal to fight, of course, myself largely, because I had grown up with the thought that Negroes should not have the priesthood, and I was prepared to go all the rest of my life till my death and defend it as it was. But this revelation and assurance came to me so clearly that there was no question about it.– President Spencer W. Kimball, quoted by Edward L.

Kimball, This People (Summer 1988), 22

Unknown to anyone except the First Presidency and the Twelve, President Kimball had asked each of them to carefully research the scriptures and statements of the earlier brethren, to make an exhaustive study of all that had been recorded concerning this issue. For months before the revelation, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve discussed these sacred matters at length in their temple meetings. He also met privately with each of the brethren to learn their feelings on the matter.On Thursday, 1 June 1978, the general authorities held their regular monthly fast and testimony meeting. The members of the Seventy and the Presiding Bishopric were then excused, and President Kimball, his two counselors, and ten of the apostles remained (Elder Mark E. Peterson was in South America, and Elder Delbert L. Stapley was in the hospital).Before offering the prayer that brought the revelation, President Kimball asked each of the brethren to express their feelings and views on this important issue. For more than two hours they talked freely and openly. Elder David B. Haight, the newest member of the Twelve, observed: “As each responded, we witnessed an outpouring of the Spirit which bonded our souls together in perfect unity—a glorious experience. In that bond of unity we felt our total dependence upon heavenly direction if we were to more effectively accomplish the Lord’s charge to carry the message of hope and salvation to all the world.”

President Kimball then suggested that we have our prayer at the altar. Usually he asked one of us to lead the prayer; however, on this day he asked, ‘Would you mind if I be the voice at the altar today?’ This was the Lord’s prophet asking us. Such humility! Such meekness! So typical of this special servant of all…

The prophet of God pour[ed] out his heart, pleading eloquently for the Lord to make his mind and will known to his servant, Spencer W. Kimball. The prophet pleaded that he would be given the necessary direction which could expand the Church throughout the world by offering the fullness of the everlasting gospel to all men, based solely upon their personal worthiness without reference to race or color.”

In response to a prophet’s humble prayer of faith, united with those of the twelve other prophets, seers, and revelators, the Lord poured out his Spirit—and his answer—in a most powerful way.

Dale LaBaron. “That Every Man…” p. 50

• We had a glorious experience of having the Lord indicate clearly that the time had come when all worthy men and women everywhere can be fellow heirs and partakers of the full blessings of the gospel. I want you to know, as a special witness of the Savior, how close I have felt to him and to our Heavenly Father as I have made numerous visits to the upper rooms in the temple, going on some days several times by myself. The Lord made it very clear to me what was to be done. We do not expect the people of the world to understand such things, for they will always be quick to assign their own reasons or to discount the divine process of revelation.– President Spencer W. Kimball, New Era (April

1980), 36

Elder Bruce R. McConkie, Priesthood (1981), 128

• The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon us all; we felt something akin to what happened on the day of Pentecost and at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. From the midst of eternity, the voice of God, conveyed by the power of the Spirit, spoke to his prophet. The message was that the time had now come to offer the fulness of the everlasting gospel, including celestial marriage, and the priesthood, and the blessings of the temple, to all men, without reference to race or color, solely on the basis of personal worthiness. And we heard the same voice, received the same message, and became personal witnesses that the word received was the mind and will and voice of the Lord.

• There was a hallowed and sanctified atmosphere in the room. For me, it felt as if a conduit opened between the heavenly throne and the kneeling, pleading prophet of God who was joined by his Brethren.

• There was a Pentecostal spirit, for the Holy Ghost was there.

• Not one of us who was present on that occasion was ever quite the same after that. Nor has the Church been quite the same.

There was perfect unity among us in our experience and in our understanding.

– President Gordon B. Hinckley, “Priesthood Restoration,” Ensign, October 1988, 70

• For all of us old enough to remember the June 9 announcement that year, it will always remain a joyous moment frozen in time. From then on for the first time it could truly be said that “every man might speak in the name of God the Lord” (D&C 1:20).– Elder Marlin K. Jensen, Out

of Obscurity, 11Confirmation in Sierra Lione, Museum of Church History and Art (Emile Wilson, 1992)

• There are statements in our literature by the early brethren that we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, ‘You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?’ And all I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whosoever has said in days past, that is contrary to the present revelation.

• We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.

• We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter any more.

• It doesn’t make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June 1978. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject– Elder Bruce R. McConkie, Priesthood (1981), 131-32

• One clear-cut position is that the folklore must never be perpetuated. …[M]y earlier colleagues.., I’m sure, in their own way, were doing the best they knew to give shape to [the policy], to give context for it, to give even history to it. All I can say is however well intended the explanations were, I think almost all of them were inadequate and/or wrong. …But some explanations were given and had been given for a lot of years. … At the very least, there should be no effort to perpetuate those efforts to explain why that doctrine existed.

• Now I am told that racial slurs and denigrating remarks are sometimes heard among us. I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. Nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the teachings of the Church of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color is ineligible?