White Mormon Bishops: No racism in the Church!

[_Yoda]

Quotation and discussion
Compare the results of the vote with the following statement by President Spencer W. Kimball. Have a young man read it.

“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).

• Why is it so important for a couple to be worthy members of the Church? Ensure that the following points are discussed:
1. Exaltation cannot be attained without celestial marriage.
2. Religious values are powerful, and conflicting values can cause continual stress.
3. President Kimball quoted a survey showing that “only about one out of seven non-member spouses would be converted and baptized into the Church” (“Marriage and Divorce,” p. 152).
4. When one spouse is not converted to the gospel, the children are caught between the differing values of the parents.
• Why is it important for a couple to have a similar economic, educational, and cultural background?

Bold emphasis mine. "Recommend" is different from "command". This means, it's a good idea...not a "make or break" deal.

Also, let's evaluate the last question for a moment.

Why is it important for a couple to have similar economic, educational, and cultural background?

I agree that the more things you have in common, the greater chance there is that you, as a couple, will be able to relate to each other on common ground.

Now, this can be done, even if cultural and economic backgrounds are different...but it is more difficult.

I really think that is all they were trying to say here.

It still does not stipulate that you can't marry someone of a different race. The brethren simply have no ground to stand on if they do that now that the priesthood ban has been lifted.

[_Drifting]

Quotation and discussion
Compare the results of the vote with the following statement by President Spencer W. Kimball. Have a young man read it.

“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).

• Why is it so important for a couple to be worthy members of the Church? Ensure that the following points are discussed:
1. Exaltation cannot be attained without celestial marriage.
2. Religious values are powerful, and conflicting values can cause continual stress.
3. President Kimball quoted a survey showing that “only about one out of seven non-member spouses would be converted and baptized into the Church” (“Marriage and Divorce,” p. 152).
4. When one spouse is not converted to the gospel, the children are caught between the differing values of the parents.
• Why is it important for a couple to have a similar economic, educational, and cultural background?

Bold emphasis mine. "Recommend" is different from "command". This means, it's a good idea...not a "make or break" deal.

Also, let's evaluate the last question for a moment.

Why is it important for a couple to have similar economic, educational, and cultural background?

I agree that the more things you have in common, the greater chance there is that you, as a couple, will be able to relate to each other on common ground.

Now, this can be done, even if cultural and economic backgrounds are different...but it is more difficult.

I really think that is all they were trying to say here.

It still does not stipulate that you can't marry someone of a different race. The brethren simply have no ground to stand on if they do that now that the priesthood ban has been lifted.

Liz,

I was privy to a telephone conversation between an Apostle and a Stake President (albeit only one side so bits of this are verbatim and bits are what was said to be verbatim). The Apostle was gently recommending a course of action to the Stake President and the Stake President was gently responding that he would consider the advice. The Apostle repeated again the course of action that he was recommending, less gently this time. The Stake President, slightly more forcibly, said that he understood and would give it due consideration.

A slightly exasperated Apostle then sighed and said "Look Brother <Stake President> when an Apostle recommends something to you, you shouldn't really take it as only a recommendation". The Stake President paused and you could literally see the penny drop. "Oh, okay. i'll do what you recommended". The conversation lightened and ended shortly after.

[_Yoda]

Liz,

I was privy to a telephone conversation between an Apostle and a Stake President (albeit only one side so bits of this are verbatim and bits are what was said to be verbatim). The Apostle was gently recommending a course of action to the Stake President and the Stake President was gently responding that he would consider the advice. The Apostle repeated again the course of action that he was recommending, less gently this time. The Stake President, slightly more forcibly, said that he understood and would give it due consideration.

A slightly exasperated Apostle then sighed and said "Look Brother <Stake President> when an Apostle recommends something to you, you shouldn't really take it as only a recommendation". The Stake President paused and you could literally see the penny drop. "Oh, okay. i'll do what you recommended". The conversation lightened and ended shortly after.

I appreciate what you are saying here. However, if we are using personal experience for reference, I think mine Trump's yours.

I am related to an apostle, and he would advise, and has advised a recommendation as just that.

Also, it completely depends on context.

I have absolutely no problems with how we are handling the situation with my daughter, and I would lay odds that my relative who is an apostle would be supportive as well.

[_Drifting]

Liz,

I was privy to a telephone conversation between an Apostle and a Stake President (albeit only one side so bits of this are verbatim and bits are what was said to be verbatim). The Apostle was gently recommending a course of action to the Stake President and the Stake President was gently responding that he would consider the advice. The Apostle repeated again the course of action that he was recommending, less gently this time. The Stake President, slightly more forcibly, said that he understood and would give it due consideration.

A slightly exasperated Apostle then sighed and said "Look Brother <Stake President> when an Apostle recommends something to you, you shouldn't really take it as only a recommendation". The Stake President paused and you could literally see the penny drop. "Oh, okay. i'll do what you recommended". The conversation lightened and ended shortly after.

I appreciate what you are saying here. However, if we are using personal experience for reference, I think mine Trump's yours.

I accept your trumping as superior. ;-)

I am related to an apostle, and he would advise, and has advised a recommendation as just that.

Also, it completely depends on context.

I have absolutely no problems with how we are handling the situation with my daughter, and I would lay odds that my relative who is an apostle would be supportive as well.

I in no way disagree with anything you have said.

However,
How many Aaronic youth teachers portray it as a recommendation in which you are free to choose and if you choose not to follow the recommendation that's fine with the Church and it's leaders?

[_Yoda]

However,
How many Aaronic youth teachers portray it as a recommendation in which you are free to choose and if you choose not to follow the recommendation that's fine with the Church and it's leaders?

That is where active parenting comes in.

At our house, we regularly discuss lessons that are taught in Sunday School, YM/YW. That way, if there is anything that they have a question about, or there is something that we feel is amiss, we can address it.

It is no different than school. If you are actively discussing what is being taught in school, then you, as a parent, are on top of conflicting situations which may arise.

[_Drifting]

However,
How many Aaronic youth teachers portray it as a recommendation in which you are free to choose and if you choose not to follow the recommendation that's fine with the Church and it's leaders?

That is where active parenting comes in.

At our house, we regularly discuss lessons that are taught in Sunday School, YM/YW. That way, if there is anything that they have a question about, or there is something that we feel is amiss, we can address it.

It is no different than school. If you are actively discussing what is being taught in school, then you, as a parent, are on top of conflicting situations which may arise.

You are a good parent (despite the trumping).

[_Yoda]

You are a good parent (despite the trumping).

Thanks! :-)

It sounds like you are, too!

[_KevinSim]

I appreciate what you are saying here. However, if we are using personal experience for reference, I think mine Trump's yours.

I am related to an apostle, and he would advise, and has advised a recommendation as just that.

Also, it completely depends on context.

I have absolutely no problems with how we are handling the situation with my daughter, and I would lay odds that my relative who is an apostle would be supportive as well.

I have a mild case of Asperger Syndrome, and I have in spades the AS symptom in which I generally take things literally. If my church leaders say "recommend," then I conclude they mean "recommend," so I tend to agree with Liz3564.

I didn't always think that way. I remember in June 1978 the LDS Church leadership emphasizing that the priesthood revelation did not mean the Church was encouraging interracial marriage; in fact it strongly discouraged interracial marriage. So I was surprised to open up the little newspaper "Church News" one day, read about the new mission presidents, and find among the mission presidents sent to African missions a picture of a black mission president and his very Caucasian wife. My conclusion was that although the Church doesn't encourage interracial marriages, it certainly doesn't see them as a barrier to being called as a mission president.

Although I'll say in my defense that the very first woman I ever wanted to marry was black. I decided at the time that I was willing to do the interracial thing, but she was not. She's currently married to a great black man, and I'm married to an equally great Caucasian woman.

I see the Church's advice against interracial marriage not as a command to be followed to avoid the wrath of God (or even the disapproval of the Church), but rather as the very logical point that marriage doesn't need cultural differences between the spouses, and I think people who actually choose to marry across racial boundaries had better be aware of those cultural differences and take action to bridge the gaps or else they run the risk that their marriages will fail. The advice is for our benefit, not for the Church's.

[_RayAgostini]

I've asked many white Mormon bishops over the years if racism exists in the Church. They told me, "No, I've never seen it".

There you go! If a white Mormon has not "seen" racism in the Church, then no racism exists in the Church. If you can't see something with your own eyes....it does not exist.

How many is "many"? One? Two? Six?

[_Drifting]

I've asked many white Mormon bishops over the years if racism exists in the Church. They told me, "No, I've never seen it".

There you go! If a white Mormon has not "seen" racism in the Church, then no racism exists in the Church. If you can't see something with your own eyes....it does not exist.

How many is "many"? One? Two? Six?

Good morning Ray, hope you're well.

I had a debate with stemelbow (remember him?) once about this. He had used the word 'many' and when we finally got down to the number he actually meant, it was best described as 'hardly any'.

I'm sure there have been Mormon Bishops who have been racists.
Fortunately I have not met any. Most Bishops I have interacted with are extremely uncomfortable with the Priesthood ban and what the Church has taught on this type of thing in the past. They have no answer for it that fits with being a Christ like Church.

In the light of today's society the language of the Book of Mormon etc and the Priesthood Ban and the comments of some senior Church leaders, including Prophets, can be classed as racist - even if society didn't see it that way back then.