What is "doctrine" or not by nitpicking over contrived definitions is irrelavent. What matters is that past generations of Prophets, Seers, and Revelators pronounced, taught, pontificated, opined, held forth, and even bloviated on the reasons for the ban, pronounced that it was the result of divine command, and so forth, and they have all officially been thrown under the bus, the bus impounded and sent by flatbed to Mt. Doom, and then Mt. Doom dropped under the continental plates.
Nope. The doctrine of the ban may have been explained by other doctrine but nowhere has doctrine EVER stated exactly why this particular lineage was singled out or why it lasted as long/short as it did or when.
bcspace wrote:nowhere has doctrine EVER stated exactly why this particular lineage was singled out
The First Presidency August 17, 1949 The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Finally, we discuss the process through which Spencer W. Kimball received an answer—searching, seeking, praying, fasting, hoping, waiting. He wanted to be sure he was following the Lord’s will, not his own. He explained, “Admittedly our direct and positive information is limited. I have wished the Lord had given us a little more clarity on the matter.” Kimball did not know whether to characterize the decision as a “doctrine or policy,” but acknowledged that it “has not varied in my memory.” He continued, quite powerfully, “I know it could. I know the Lord could change his policy and release the ban and forgive the possible error which brought about the deprivation. If the time comes, that he will do, I am sure” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 448-49 (1963).
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.
This merely shows and proves my point that the reason for the ban is not known. There are many others who've rejected "the power of the holy priesthood" and the ban has not applied to their lineages. Again, speculation might be that this is a temporal metaphor of spiritual consequences for so rejecting and only one such example need be given, but then again, that's only speculation, not the reason.
The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.
This merely shows and proves my point that the reason for the ban is not known. There are many others who've rejected "the power of the holy priesthood" and the ban has not applied to their lineages. Again, speculation might be that this is a temporal metaphor of spiritual consequences for so rejecting and only one such example need be given, but then again, that's only speculation, not the reason.
Now they don't even know that God implemented it. Official doctrine!
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
The Prophet just needs to take the private elevator from his Penthouse down to ground level; get his chauffeur to drive him in his armoured A8 across to the Temple; wander upstairs to the inner sanctum; ask the Big Man just what was He thinking when He instigated the ban; and then relay the answer via the PR spokesperson.
End of debate, end of confusion, end of PR disaster.
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator