The Bravery and Honesty of Elder Jeffrey Holland
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:33 pm
This story was told to me by John L. Lund, at the Seattle Washington Institute of Religion, back in 1988:
John L. Lund first taught at the Seattle Institute in 1969-1973. In 1971, I believe, many universities were refusing to play sports with BYU, because the Church was considered "racist" for denying blacks the priesthood. At this time, the Institute Director in Seattle was Jeffrey Holland (now Elder Holland of the Quorum of Twelve).
John Lund heard that that University of Washington was going to hold a "round-table discussion" on whether it should continue to play sports with BYU or not (yes, apparently, at that time the UW played BYU). The UW asked the Seattle Institute if they wanted a representative there, and John Lund said he would go, because he was the author of "The Church and the Negro". So, he went.
The "discussion" was held in a large auditorium and had perhaps 3,000 in the audience. When Brother LUnd was introduced, the audience booed him. At the table were Trustees at the UW, the President or VP, dean of students, and several black professors. Several of them spoke, saying that UW should not play sports with BYU because "of the racism of the Mormon Church". Finally, the moderator said, "John Lund is here to represent the Mormon Church's view, and I suppose also that of BYU, could you address these concerns Mr. Lund?"
John Lund started to speak when one the black professors shot up out of his chair and screams, "WHY ARE WE LISTENING TO THIS MAN? WHY ARE WE LISTENING TO HIM? WE MUST BE INSANE TO INVITE HIM HERE! WE MUST BE INSANE!" and the crowd started clapping. And when Lund tried to speak again he was booed and shouted down. The moderator would quiet the audience down, and John Lund started to speak again and the black professor would shoot up out of his chair again and scream: "WE MUST BE INSANE TO LISTEN TO THIS MAN! WE MUST BE INSANE!" and the audience would scream and clap and go wild. Finally, after this happened about five times. Again, John Lund tried to speak, and the black professor would SHOOT up out of his chair saying: "WE ARE INSANE TO WANT TO LISTEN TO THIS MAN. WE MUST BE INSANE!"
At that point, John Lund shot up from his chair saying: "WELL, YOU ALL MUST BE INSANE, SO I'm LEAVING!" and walked away, and the audicence clapped and booed, and several tried to spit upon him as he walked out.
Unknown to John Lund, there was a reporter for a newspaper (Times or Post-Intelligencer, forgot which) who was there, and he wrote a story the next day with the headline: "Mormon leader calls black professor 'insane' at UW"
A few days later, two car loads of black men carrying base-ball bats and tire-irons pulled in front of the Seattle Institute of Religion, which is just across the street from the University of Washington. The Seattle Institute has very large "bay" windows in front, so everybody in the reception area and hall and foyer would see this. John Lund ran to Jeffrey Holland's office and told him "There's two car loads of black men with baseball bats who just drove up and they're coming to the door!" Jeffrey Holland yelled: "You keep them from coming in, and I'll take the students out the back". So, Holland rounded up all the students and secretaries and headed out the back, while John Lund held the front doors closed.
As several of the black men were trying to pull the doors open, John Lund held firm and prayed: "Heavenly Father please help me!" Immediately, he heard one of the black men say: "Hey man, this ain't no Mormon Church. This is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! We got the wrong Church!" He heard several other black men say: "crap man, let's get out of here!" And they all quickly loaded back up in their two cars and sped away.
So, you have Institute Director Jeffrey Holland, the "Captain of the Ship", deciding he's not going down with the ship...he's heading out the back with the students while John Lund faces 10 angry black men with baseball bats and tire-irons.
In 2007, after becoming and Apostle, Elder Jeffrey Holland, who taught in Seminaries and Institutes for 30 years, who taught the Curse of Cain Doctrine to thousands of LDS students, that Negroes were the children of Cain, and spirits "less valiant" in the War in Heaven, was asked by an PBS interviewer why the Church banned blacks and if blacks were the children of Cain. Jeffrey replied that "he did not know the reason why" blacks were banned from the temples and priesthood, and said the Curse of Cain teaching was "folklore" and never a doctrine of the Church. Holland said he "didn't know much abou the details of the folklore" because it was not taught during "my time".
Here is an excerpt from the PBS interview with Elder Holland:
PBS:
I've talked to many blacks and many whites as well about the lingering folklore [about why blacks couldn't have the priesthood]. These are faithful Mormons who are delighted about this revelation, and yet who feel something more should be said about the folklore and even possibly about the mysterious reasons for the ban itself, which was not a revelation; it was a practice. So if you could, briefly address the concerns Mormons have about this folklore and what should be done.
HOLLAND:
One clear-cut position is that the folklore must never be perpetuated. ... I have to concede to my earlier colleagues. ... They, 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. ...
It probably would have been advantageous to say nothing, to say we just don't know, and, [as] with many religious matters, whatever was being done was done on the basis of faith at that time. 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. I think, to the extent that I know anything about it, as one of the newer and younger ones to come along, ... we simply do not know why that practice, that policy, that doctrine was in place.
PBS: What is the folklore, quite specifically?
HOLLAND:
Well, some of the folklore that you must be referring to are suggestions that there were decisions made in the pre-mortal councils where someone had not been as decisive in their loyalty to a Gospel plan or the procedures on earth or what was to unfold in mortality, and that therefore that opportunity and mortality was compromised. I really don't know a lot of the details of those, because fortunately I've been able to live in the period where we're not expressing or teaching them, but I think that's the one I grew up hearing the most, was that it was something to do with the pre-mortal councils. ... But I think that's the part that must never be taught until anybody knows a lot more than I know. ... We just don't know, in the historical context of the time, why it was practiced. ... That's my principal [concern], is that we don't perpetuate explanations about things we don't know. ...
We don't pretend that something wasn't taught or practice wasn't pursued for whatever reason. But I think we can be unequivocal and we can be declarative in our current literature, in books that we reproduce, in teachings that go forward, whatever, that from this time forward, from 1978 forward, we can make sure that nothing of that is declared. That may be where we still need to make sure that we're absolutely dutiful, that we put [a] careful eye of scrutiny on anything from earlier writings and teachings, just [to] make sure that that's not perpetuated in the present. That's the least, I think, of our current responsibilities on that topic. ...
John L. Lund first taught at the Seattle Institute in 1969-1973. In 1971, I believe, many universities were refusing to play sports with BYU, because the Church was considered "racist" for denying blacks the priesthood. At this time, the Institute Director in Seattle was Jeffrey Holland (now Elder Holland of the Quorum of Twelve).
John Lund heard that that University of Washington was going to hold a "round-table discussion" on whether it should continue to play sports with BYU or not (yes, apparently, at that time the UW played BYU). The UW asked the Seattle Institute if they wanted a representative there, and John Lund said he would go, because he was the author of "The Church and the Negro". So, he went.
The "discussion" was held in a large auditorium and had perhaps 3,000 in the audience. When Brother LUnd was introduced, the audience booed him. At the table were Trustees at the UW, the President or VP, dean of students, and several black professors. Several of them spoke, saying that UW should not play sports with BYU because "of the racism of the Mormon Church". Finally, the moderator said, "John Lund is here to represent the Mormon Church's view, and I suppose also that of BYU, could you address these concerns Mr. Lund?"
John Lund started to speak when one the black professors shot up out of his chair and screams, "WHY ARE WE LISTENING TO THIS MAN? WHY ARE WE LISTENING TO HIM? WE MUST BE INSANE TO INVITE HIM HERE! WE MUST BE INSANE!" and the crowd started clapping. And when Lund tried to speak again he was booed and shouted down. The moderator would quiet the audience down, and John Lund started to speak again and the black professor would shoot up out of his chair again and scream: "WE MUST BE INSANE TO LISTEN TO THIS MAN! WE MUST BE INSANE!" and the audience would scream and clap and go wild. Finally, after this happened about five times. Again, John Lund tried to speak, and the black professor would SHOOT up out of his chair saying: "WE ARE INSANE TO WANT TO LISTEN TO THIS MAN. WE MUST BE INSANE!"
At that point, John Lund shot up from his chair saying: "WELL, YOU ALL MUST BE INSANE, SO I'm LEAVING!" and walked away, and the audicence clapped and booed, and several tried to spit upon him as he walked out.
Unknown to John Lund, there was a reporter for a newspaper (Times or Post-Intelligencer, forgot which) who was there, and he wrote a story the next day with the headline: "Mormon leader calls black professor 'insane' at UW"
A few days later, two car loads of black men carrying base-ball bats and tire-irons pulled in front of the Seattle Institute of Religion, which is just across the street from the University of Washington. The Seattle Institute has very large "bay" windows in front, so everybody in the reception area and hall and foyer would see this. John Lund ran to Jeffrey Holland's office and told him "There's two car loads of black men with baseball bats who just drove up and they're coming to the door!" Jeffrey Holland yelled: "You keep them from coming in, and I'll take the students out the back". So, Holland rounded up all the students and secretaries and headed out the back, while John Lund held the front doors closed.
As several of the black men were trying to pull the doors open, John Lund held firm and prayed: "Heavenly Father please help me!" Immediately, he heard one of the black men say: "Hey man, this ain't no Mormon Church. This is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! We got the wrong Church!" He heard several other black men say: "crap man, let's get out of here!" And they all quickly loaded back up in their two cars and sped away.
So, you have Institute Director Jeffrey Holland, the "Captain of the Ship", deciding he's not going down with the ship...he's heading out the back with the students while John Lund faces 10 angry black men with baseball bats and tire-irons.
In 2007, after becoming and Apostle, Elder Jeffrey Holland, who taught in Seminaries and Institutes for 30 years, who taught the Curse of Cain Doctrine to thousands of LDS students, that Negroes were the children of Cain, and spirits "less valiant" in the War in Heaven, was asked by an PBS interviewer why the Church banned blacks and if blacks were the children of Cain. Jeffrey replied that "he did not know the reason why" blacks were banned from the temples and priesthood, and said the Curse of Cain teaching was "folklore" and never a doctrine of the Church. Holland said he "didn't know much abou the details of the folklore" because it was not taught during "my time".
Here is an excerpt from the PBS interview with Elder Holland:
PBS:
I've talked to many blacks and many whites as well about the lingering folklore [about why blacks couldn't have the priesthood]. These are faithful Mormons who are delighted about this revelation, and yet who feel something more should be said about the folklore and even possibly about the mysterious reasons for the ban itself, which was not a revelation; it was a practice. So if you could, briefly address the concerns Mormons have about this folklore and what should be done.
HOLLAND:
One clear-cut position is that the folklore must never be perpetuated. ... I have to concede to my earlier colleagues. ... They, 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. ...
It probably would have been advantageous to say nothing, to say we just don't know, and, [as] with many religious matters, whatever was being done was done on the basis of faith at that time. 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. I think, to the extent that I know anything about it, as one of the newer and younger ones to come along, ... we simply do not know why that practice, that policy, that doctrine was in place.
PBS: What is the folklore, quite specifically?
HOLLAND:
Well, some of the folklore that you must be referring to are suggestions that there were decisions made in the pre-mortal councils where someone had not been as decisive in their loyalty to a Gospel plan or the procedures on earth or what was to unfold in mortality, and that therefore that opportunity and mortality was compromised. I really don't know a lot of the details of those, because fortunately I've been able to live in the period where we're not expressing or teaching them, but I think that's the one I grew up hearing the most, was that it was something to do with the pre-mortal councils. ... But I think that's the part that must never be taught until anybody knows a lot more than I know. ... We just don't know, in the historical context of the time, why it was practiced. ... That's my principal [concern], is that we don't perpetuate explanations about things we don't know. ...
We don't pretend that something wasn't taught or practice wasn't pursued for whatever reason. But I think we can be unequivocal and we can be declarative in our current literature, in books that we reproduce, in teachings that go forward, whatever, that from this time forward, from 1978 forward, we can make sure that nothing of that is declared. That may be where we still need to make sure that we're absolutely dutiful, that we put [a] careful eye of scrutiny on anything from earlier writings and teachings, just [to] make sure that that's not perpetuated in the present. That's the least, I think, of our current responsibilities on that topic. ...