Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Spencer W. Kimball's View on American Indians

Here is a great view of Kimball's "Inspired Racism" and what Kimball really thought of "The Lamanites/American Indians" in this October 1960 Conference talk:

"The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as AngIos; five were darker but equally delightsome. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.

At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl-sixteen-sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parents-on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.


[Anyone still think he is a prophet of God? Let's see what another one of the "Lord's Anointed" had to say about blacks:]


Elder MARK E. PETERSON

Race Problems -- As They Affect The Church
Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College Level,
Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, August 27, 1954.

God has commanded Israel not to intermarry. To go against this commandment of God would be in sin. Those who willfully sin with their eyes open to this wrong will not be surprised to find that they will be separated from the presence of God in the world to come. This is spiritual death....

The reason that one would lose his blessings by marrying a Negro is due to the restriction placed upon them. "No person having the least particle of Negro blood can hold the Priesthood" (Brigham Young). It does not matter if they are one-sixth Negro or one-hundred and sixth, the curse of no Priesthood is the same. If an individual who is entitled to the Priesthood marries a Negro, the Lord has decreed that only spirits who are not eligible for the Priesthood will come to that marriage as children. To intermarry with a Negro is to forfeit a "Nation of Priesthood holders"....

The discussion on civil rights, especially over the last 20 years, has drawn some very sharp lines. It has blinded the thinking of some of our own people, I believe. They have allowed their political affiliations to color their thinking to some extent, and then, of course, they have been persuaded by some of the arguments that have been put forth....We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not to be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject....

I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn't just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. It isn't that he just desires to go to the same theater as the white people. From this, and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, "First we pity, then endure, then embrace"....

Now let's talk about segregation again for a few moments. Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation....

When he told Enoch not preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation....

Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them....

The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence. At least in the cases of the Lamanites and the Negro we have the definite word of the Lord Himself that he placed a dark skin upon them as a curse -- as a punishment and as a sign to all others. He forbade intermarriage with them under threat of extension of the curse. And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an Iron curtain there....

Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it. I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world. But let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, "what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Only here we have the reverse of the thing -- what God hath separated, let not man bring together again."

Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood.... This Negro, who, in the pre-existence lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in their lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa--if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory.

[If this isn't enough to turn your stomach, try this one:]


BRUCE R. MCCONKIE
Mormon Doctrine, p. 114

In a broad general sense, caste systems have their root and origin in the gospel itself, and when they operate according to the divine decree, the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the Lord. To illustrate: Cain, Ham, and the whole Negro race have been cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry. (Gen. 4; Moses 5.) The whole house of Israel was chosen as a peculiar people, one set apart from all other nations (Ex. 19:5-6; Deut. 7:6; 14:2); and they were forbidden to marry outside their own caste. (Ex. 34:10-17; Deut. 7:1-5.) In effect the Lamanites belonged to one caste and the Nephites to another, and a mark was put upon the Lamanites to keep the Nephites from intermixing with and marrying them. (Alma 3:6-11.) All this is not to say that any race, creed, or caste should be denied any inalienable rights. But it is to say that Deity in his infinite wisdom, to carry out his inscrutable purposes, has a caste system of his own, a system of segregation of races and peoples. The justice of such a system is evident when life is considered in its true eternal perspective. It is only by a knowledge of pre-existence that it can be known why some persons are born in one race or caste and some in another. "However, in a broad general sense, caste systems have their origin in the gospel itself, and when they operate according to the divine decree, the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the lord.

pp. 102.

Tough he was rebel and an associate of Lucifer in pre-existence, and though he was a liar from the beginning whose name was Perdition, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the Negroes, and those sprits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born though his lineage. He became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition. As a result of his mortal birth he is assured of a tangible body of flesh and bones in eternity, a fact which will enable him to rule over Satan.

pg. 343

Through Ham (a name meaning black) the blood of the Canaanites was preserved through the flood, he having married Egyptus, a descendent of Cain.

Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them... Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned....

[And the saga continues...]

JOSPEH FIELDING SMITH
Doctrines of Salvation, pp. 65-66.

There were no neutrals in the war in heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits.

pg. 61.

There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient, more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less.

Juvenile Instructor, vol. 26, p. 635

It is very clear that the mark which was set upon the descendants of Cain was a skin of blackness...It has been noticed in our day that men who have lost the spirit of the Lord, and from whom His blessings have been withdrawn, have turned dark to such an extent as to excite the comments of all who have known them.

[Wow, these guys COULDN'T HAVE BEEN WRONG ABOUT THIS, could they?]

BRIGHAM YOUNG
Journal of Discourses

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African Race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.

Vol. 7, pg. 290-291

Cain slew his brother. . . and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.

You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race--that they should be the "servant of servants;" and they will be, until that curse is removed.

JOHN TAYLOR
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 22, pg. 304.

And after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Hams' wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have a representative upon the earth as well as God.

Millennial Star, Vol. 14, pg. 418.

For instance, the descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent,....Cain and his posterity must wear the mark which God put upon them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash away God's mark.

[think we have outgrown this teaching, and we've put it behind us? Wrong...]

Year 2001 update

"Racial degeneration, resulting in differences in appearance and spiritual aptitude, has arisen since the fall. We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were born with the characteristics of the black race. (Moses 5:16-41; 7:8,12,22; Abra. 1:20-27.) The Book of Mormon explains why the Lamanites received dark skins and a degenerate status. (2 Ne. 5:21-23.) If we had a full and true history of all races and nations, we would know the origins of all their distinctive characteristics. In the absence of such detailed information, however, we know only the general principle that all these changes from the physical and spiritual perfections of our common parents have been brought about by departure from the gospel truths. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp. 148-151; vol. 3, pp. 313-326.)" (Mormon Doctrine 1999 printing, p. 616)


*My Thoughts*

This racist attitude is not tolerated in any AMERICAN social clubs, business and professional organizations, public gathering places, or schools. They would be boycotted, picketed, demonstrated against, and on the front pages of the news for their racist policies. Yet we are supposed to turn a blind eye to Mormonism's past, and pretend that they have put it all behind them. They have never once refuted these teachings, made any apologies for their obvious racism and segregation practices, or denied that these teachings came from their prophets 'called of God'. The best excuse I have heard is, "we don't know why God taught us these things."


HELLO!!! GOD DID NOT TEACH YOU TO THINK THAT BLACKS ARE INFERIOR!!!

White men in positions of power and authority, calling themselves prophets and apostles of God made these into 'teachings from God'. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ACCEPT THEM! They are obviously false, slanderous, and full of hate towards men and women of races other than the 'white and delightsome' kind. IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT THEY DON'T ACTIVELY PROMOTE THESE IDEAS ANYMORE. The fact that they have NEVER denied these as "coming from God" shows that they do still believe in the curse of Cain, that the black man and the Lamanite (American Indian for those of us who believe in DNA) are 'mentally and spiritually INFERIOR to the white man'.

There is NO WAY I will ever go back to an organization that teaches you that as long as you have white skin, you were born pure, and were the most valiant of the pre-existant spirits, and those who are born with dark skin are loathsome and cursed, bearing the mark of their ancestors and doomed to eternal servitude in the Celestial Kingdom.


GIVE ME OUTER DARKNESS rather than make me live eternally with a bunch of RACIST, HOLIER-THAN-THOU, WHITE AND DELIGHTSOME MORMONS!!!

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I can't believe that you would go to such lengths to find out what the Mormons believed 100 years ago. Even 50 years ago. Even 10 years ago.

What does it have to do with today?

The church I go to has pictures of Jesus on every wall, and we have black members, they seem to be happy enough to be there. I'm sure somewhere there must have been an apology for this, you just didn't print it in your blog.

I don't know why you like to stir up trouble and make people think the church is still promoting this. I've never heard from any of my local stake leaders that blacks are "inferior" to whites, so EVEN IF past prophets taught it, and members believed it, it's not being taught and believed today, so why bring it up?

Just trying to figure out why you're so offended...

Astarte Moonsilver said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Astarte Moonsilver said...

Wow, you are just the opportunity I was hoping for. I have been accused of blocking comments on my site because I don't want to defend my claims. Then you come along and jump right into my boat willingly! Ok, anonymous, if that's really your name, we'll take it from the top...

OBVIOUSLY you didn't read the whole post. In my post, I stated that the church has never officially apologized for promoting these teachings as "from God". See, it DOES MATTER that the early prophets and the earlier members actively taught and believed and passed down through the generations that the Lamanites were American Indians, and the blacks were the 'seed of Cain'. It matters because this elevated anyone with white skin as being a 'chosen race'. This kind of thought has been projected throughout their teachings and their values throughout the history of the church. It's already there, ingrained upon the hearts and minds of the white people.

The Book of Mormon was supposedly for the benefit of the Lamanite people. It was widely taught that the Lamanite ancestors were of Jewish descent, that the Book of Mormon would be brought forth to help accomplish the goal of saving them from sin, and help turn them from 'dark and loathsome' to 'white and delightsome'. THERE ARE MEMBERS WHO STILL BELIEVE THIS! Even if you yourself have never been taught this, it does not mean that others have not been. And they wholeheartedly believe that this teaching is ordained of God. Why do they believe this? Because a PROPHET said so.

The curse of Cain doctrine is being actively denied and called a false teaching. But the books that promote the idea are STILL available in print, and the church has NEVER publicly denounced this belief and teaching. They are just letting it die out after a generation or two, saying well, we don't teach that anymore. Denying a teaching ever existed, or changing the doctrine of God's one true church is called apostacy, Mr. Anonymous. They can't teach something as definitive as racial segregation is "ordained of God" and "God's plan for his children" and then pretend it's not a big deal when confronted by the masses, or deny that it ever existed.

Mr. Anonymous, I posted your comment to prove a point here. And that point is: Many people lived and died following the prophet, keeping the ordinances and believing the teachings as 'from God'. How would you feel if you knew that 150 years from now, having a temple recommend to watch your son or daughter be married will no longer be required, and the church will try to deny that they ever separated families in this way? Of course, you'll be dead and unable to speak for yourself. That's why people like me try to make a difference in the here and now, so people won't waste their lives believing in false, UNCHRISTIAN doctrine, donating time and money to an organization that preached hate, division, and superiority of the white race. This is not their only doctrinal change, Mr. Anonymous. They also actively denounce MANY of Brigham Young's teachings as "opinions of one man", things that the members who followed him West to Utah lived and believed all their lives. Among these teachings are blood atonement, plural marriage, Adam was our Father God, he took up his physical form and 'beget' Jesus with Mary in the natural way, Men inhabited the Moon and the Sun, and a host of other bogus lies that the church would rather let the members never discover, or at least put as much distance between them and present day by saying, "well we don't teach that anymore..."

I would be willing to bet that the black members of your ward have NO IDEA that the membership they enjoy would have been denied to them less than 30 years ago. They wouldn't have been able to hold the same priesthood authority that whites have always had, they wouldn't have been able to attend the temple, get the same promises, have their families sealed together, or been accepted into the Celestial Kingdom as anything but Ministering Angels, and this was within OUR GENERATION. It's not so far in the past that you would like to think. Take a look at some of the old, lifelong members you have in your ward, and realize that at one time, they were taught to think Blacks were inferior to whites, Lamanites were going to turn to white skinned people if they believed the teachings of their church, and that the prophets actually speak for God when they taught all of this.

While we are on the subject of Lamanites, for example, do you realize that there is absolutely no supporting evidence to the claim that American Indians are descendant from Jews? In fact, DNA evidence conclusively proves that there is no percentage of Jewish ancestry to be found.(or any other people in North/Central/South America for that matter) They are, quite obviously of Asian descent, and have all the markers for Asian ancestry. This blows the theory of the Book of Mormon completely out of the water. Lamanites ARE NOT American Indians, yet the church claims they were, and still does, even in the face of DNA evidence.

Mr. Anonymous, if you could find one reference to an apology from the church I will guarantee that I will print it in my blog. Not just a "we don't teach it anymore" PR move either. A real, heartfelt apology, an acknowledgment that this teaching was in fact, NOT OF GOD. You will not catch the Mormon church denying that all the prophets up until 30 years ago claimed, taught, and believed that blacks would never attain the priesthood in this life, solely due to the color of the skin.

While I'm on that subject, what proof do they have that Cain's curse was black skin and a flat nose, as Brigham Young claimed? Where's the evidence for that? And, here's a real question for you:
The 2nd article of faith states:

"We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression",

Why did the church teach that blacks are being punished for Cain's transgression? Whites get a free pass, but blacks have to suffer for the sins of their ancestors? Is that not OBVIOUSLY racist to you?

I am offended, dear Mr. Anonymous, because the church pretends to be shocked when confronted with this history of blatant racism. They don't come clean, they haven't set the record straight, and they won't refute that the teachings are "from God". The best excuse I have heard is, 'we don't know why God commanded this in the past'. Well I know the answer to this: GOD DIDN'T COMMAND IT, MAN ORDERED IT.

Men, in positions of authority, and promoting their own agendas of segregation and hate, promoted this idea and passed it off as 'ordained of God'...the fact that people believed it does not make it true. The real truth has come out, but not from within the church. And as long as people are not willing to look outside their 'circle of protection' and really check into the history, the doctrines, and the underlying story, they will always believe what they are told, from generation to generation, without questioning the basis for it, or really thinking it through. It comes from the prophet, so it must be true, end of story.

This is what makes up a cult, not a church. A church is a gathering of people with LIKE MINDS, who worship together. They should also be free to change their mind and attend a different church when they discover that they aren't really agreeing on matters of doctrine or teachings of the leaders. Instead, the LDS church insists on conformity of the mind, making the members mold to the beliefs of the church, and claiming to be the only right choice in order to gain exaltation. They don't allow members to drift away and find their own church, and follow their own conscience. They preach loyalty above your own thoughts, and create fear of abandonment should you decide that you can't agree with their philosophies or conform to their standards. They let members believe that Satan lurks around every corner, trying to make sure that their families don't make it to the Celestial Kingdom and it all hinges on how strong their testimonies are, how much tithing they pay, how often they attend the temple, whether they wear their garments in the correct manner, how many callings they fulfill, how much work and sacrifice they can demonstrate, and how LOYAL they can be to the church. They are stuck in a cycle of fear and guilt, Mr. Anonymous. They don't want to question, because they don't want to see any other possibility. They are afraid of Satan's power, so they cling ever tighter to the philosophies of man. I'm offended because men in charge of this church actually believe they can speak for God. It's arrogant and prideful, and NOT CHRISTIAN.