Micah
12 October 2008
When discussion of the revelation on black people receiving the priesthood pops up during church meetings my mind always wanders to a different but related topic: women and the priesthood. Ever since my days as a deacon, I remember class teachers and quorum advisors commenting on the excitement and rejoicing that occurred when President Kimball announced that all worthy males could be eligible to receive the priesthood. I remember hearing one advisor share about an impassioned letter he wrote to the First Presidency pleading for a change in the church’s policy. After I became an Elder, a fellow classmate shared about spiritual moments in church meetings as members spoke in support of black members of the church receiving the priesthood. On the campaign trail Mitt Romney lauded his family’s progressive stance on civil rights and recalled pulling his car over to the side of the road and weeping the moment he heard about the change in policy. Others have recognized the importance of human initiative in moving the process of revelation forward.
I am left with the impression that the culture of the time pushed at the edges of the status quo in an acceptable and healthy manner. The revelation didn’t come out of the blue. There was a stir among the membership of the church, the details of which are very curious to me because the door opened for grassroots-like change. I acknowledge that the change ultimately came from our Heavenly Father, but it seems the encouragement from members of the church played an agenda-setting role for the new policy.
There are many things about modern revelation that I do not understand. But I believe in it. And I’m a personal witness of its power and the impact it has on members of the church. The idea of modern revelation sets the LDS church apart from many other churches, and the reality of modern revelation move the church steadily forward in an ever-changing world. The recent BYU special broadcast to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the priesthood revelation celebrated the revelation for its positive impact on the membership of the church in 1978 and the continuing joy that is experienced by members today.
But to what extent does/ should the general membership play a role in encouraging church leadership to seek out revelation? How did the movement to secure blacks priesthood privileges emerge as an appropriate expression? There are movements by members of the church that are silenced (see The Mormons Frontline Documentary; "The September Six" Wikipedia article) . What makes these expressions (manners of expression?) so different/ offensive that the members are silenced in their efforts?
Analyses
Essays
Posts
4 comments:
Micah - thanks so much for this post. You raise more than one issue here, and all deserve careful thought and lengthy commentary. I have to say that I am skeptical of whether the prevailing attitude in the late 70's was really one where members were openly pushing for blacks to get the priesthood. I don't mean to sound cynical when I say that an attitude like the one you describe seems so far removed from what I see in church today that I have difficulty imaging that it could have been commonplace just thirty years ago. Also, this strikes me as one of those issues that has the potential to surreptitiously become "mainstream" only ex post facto. In short, I find myself suspecting that that contemporary attidues about controversial topics in the church are very much the same as they ever were. I hope that you are right and I am wrong, and that we can find a way to go back to the progressive dialogue we once knew.
I think Micah has a good point about how we have created heroic tales of those pleading for change in our discourse. I personally think that those pleas did in fact have an effect in pushing for the priesthood to be extended to all blacks, if for no other reason than they were the voice of a changing church and world society.
I think a much larger question that this discussion brings up is, "what are we to expect from our leaders?" As representatives of God, do we share in their decision making process and thus in their mistaken decisions? Can we accept that denying blacks the priesthood in the first place was a mistake, as seems to be implied by the FAIR article that Micah linked to?
I know that what is popularly taught in the gospel is, "you can receive revelation for you, but not for the church." This makes sense, but can we plead for revelation and can we voice our discontent when received revelation goes against everything our conscience and hearts are telling us without incurring condemnation or excommunication?
I'm not sure these answers are in any church manual, which is why I find this forum so valuable.
I wonder about the Holy Ghost's role in changing first the members' attitudes and then the church government's. In relation to the blacks receiving the priesthood, it is my opinion that it was what the Lord wanted, and the idea was given to the church members, who then influenced the church leaders, who then turned to God for the answer.
I think if a change is needed, you will often find more and more people coming to that conclusion, and after a time, there will be a change of policy given by revelation. But you have to have the attitudes of the members change first so that such a revelation will not be met with overwhelming opposition.
(I believe there have been examples of such opposition silencing church leaders, as in President Kimball's stance on hunting. I don't have any references, so I can't be 100% sure what the result was, only that I have heard many people mentioning that there was an opposition and that Kimball never talked about it after that point.)
Michah: Thanks for forwarding this post to me. It's a good statement on what we began to scratch the surface of a few weeks ago (sorry it took so long for me to respond!). There’s a potential tension that comes up in the church which we don’t discuss much, and that the tension between following the prophet and being open to the pursuit of truth (through personal reflection, questioning, and reasoning). As President Uctdorf talked about in the recent CES fireside, we are a church founded on questions and seeking deeper understanding, but sometimes it seems we shy away from having a healthy amount of doubt/skepticism in the mix (in my opinion).
I'm also excited to read the post about meat and mormons!
Post a Comment