Sound of the Day: A Conversation About the LDS Priesthood Ban on Blacks

When the LDS church issued its statement a week ago on the history of its priesthood ban for black men, I posted the link on Facebook and introduced it saying:

“I have long held that you can be a fully committed and believing Mormon and still believe the reason the priesthood was denied to blacks was the racism of LDS members themselves. So it’s with that lens that I read this work and see it saying much the same thing, only in several hundred more words.”

I thought about posting a much simple intro:

“Bottom line: We were racists.”

As of this writing there are 160 comments on the entry. It seems to have died down.

Peggy Fletcher Stack at the Salt Lake Tribune wrote a pretty comprehensive story about the issue.

But I thought the conversation on KUER’s RadioWest program, posted on the Mormon Stories site, went into a lot of angles others had not.

2 thoughts on “Sound of the Day: A Conversation About the LDS Priesthood Ban on Blacks

  1. We were racist? It’s still alive and well. How many international black prophets does the church have? If it’s a world organization then why isn’t the world represented in its leadership? Heck it doesn’t stray far from Utah let alone the world.

  2. Gina,

    I look at the page with general authorities (Probably the “international black prophets” you addressed.) and it’s a lot of white guys. (Jorge Zeballos in the First Quorum of the Seventy is Chilean and was the assistant to the president when I served my mission in Chile. Just saying.) There is one guy from Zimbabwe.

    Still, I don’t think “racism,” whether the church is or isn’t, is the church’s biggest challenge at this point. It’s a challenge, sure, but it’s not the biggest one. What’s bigger? I think I can name three issues pretty easily. These are not in order.

    1. How the church views women.
    2. How the church welcomes the LGBT community.
    3. How the church addresses troubles in its history.

    This statement on the ban is seen by many as a positive step, but it creates a problem in the history department with people saying if the prophets can be wrong about this, what else are they wrong about?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *