On Apostasy...

[ChinoCoug]

And I need to stop mocking people who are struggling with this.

[MikeWaters]

people on cougarboard had a problem that a disavowal was made, or they had a problem with the idea of there having been a ban in the first place?

Many (most? vast majority?) of Mormons were happy when the ban was removed in 1978. But I understand that some (many?) were not. I was told (not sure if true) that a full page ad was taken in one of the Salt Lake papers opposing it.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

people on cougarboard had a problem that a disavowal was made, or they had a problem with the idea of there having been a ban in the first place?

Many (most? vast majority?) of Mormons were happy when the ban was removed in 1978. But I understand that some (many?) were not. I was told (not sure if true) that a full page ad was taken in one of the Salt Lake papers opposing it.

They had a problem that a disavowal was made because they've been taught the racist reasons for the ban for a long time.

President Hinckley said the Church had no official reason for the ban. It's been like 20 years now. I don't know why people are so perplexed.

[MikeWaters]

I wish the church would come out with something more definitive. Something along the lines that says history indicates Joseph Smith was not opposed to blacks receiving the priesthood, but Brigham Young was. And this was most likely due to racism. This persisted as tradition for many years until there was inspired consensus among the first presidency and the Q12 that the policy should be gotten rid of. President Kimball was able to unite all the apostles in ending the policy.

This is essentially what I believe. The problem is that for some people this makes the "house of cards" come tumbling down. "How could they be so wrong?" Human hands lead to human errors and foibles. It also changes, perhaps, the perception of how the apostles are inspired. Maybe they rely on process much similar to what the average member relies on--prayer and inspiration. Versus sitting with Jesus in the temple every week, as some might believe.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I wish the church would come out with something more definitive. Something along the lines that says history indicates Joseph Smith was not opposed to blacks receiving the priesthood, but Brigham Young was. And this was most likely due to racism. This persisted as tradition for many years until there was inspired consensus among the first presidency and the Q12 that the policy should be gotten rid of. President Kimball was able to unite all the apostles in ending the policy.

This is essentially what I believe. The problem is that for some people this makes the "house of cards" come tumbling down. "How could they be so wrong?" Human hands lead to human errors and foibles. It also changes, perhaps, the perception of how the apostles are inspired. Maybe they rely on process much similar to what the average member relies on--prayer and inspiration. Versus sitting with Jesus in the temple every week, as some might believe.

You mean something like this?

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/...he-priesthood/

[MikeWaters]

Here's the full Reuters article.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...9BA03I20131211

The actual essay cannot be reached. Probably overwhelmed with clicks.

https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood

Cool.

[Archaea]

It went back up.

https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-...thood?lang=eng