Let’s examine the common Mormon apologist argument that leaders are simply “men of their times” through a story of racist thoughts and practices in the church.
Priesthood Ban
The church enjoys celebrating the lifting of the priesthood ban in 1978. But we can’t give them any credit for doing it either, since it was the Lord. God apparently took it away when Spencer Kimball got the revelation in 1978. This conveniently amid all the other social pressures and reasons to lift the ban too, but we are told it was only done because the Lord told Kimball it was the right time. Not because of the publicity they were getting in lawsuits and members voting opposed in 1977. Not because the church was struggling to understand what to do with members in Brazil who were not racist and challenged the “one drop of African blood” mindset. Not because the church wanted to expand into African countries. Not because they opposed the civil rights issues and had long lost the battle as the tide of the country and public opinion was open to integration. The church wants to paint itself as never racist and always close and friendly with the NAACP, though they long opposed each other in ideas and even lawsuits. Can we dismiss the other racist things the church did because blacks are now granted the priesthood (though there are still none in the top church leadership positions)? Can those previous racist leaders be excused as simply men of their times?
Church leaders can’t be excused as “men of their times” if they also claim to be directed by God. Either men made these racist remarks, decisions, policies, and doctrines or God did. The church can’t peddle both stories depending on which one serves them at the moment (which depends on the audience).
Segregation
Even though the church today states in the race and priesthood essay, in a self-congratulatory manner, that the church has never segregated congregations (as a churchwide practice). And that Joseph Smith opposed slavery to set the narrative that from the beginning, the church has been against racism. But, as usual, they leave out key details to make the narrative work.
The Church was established in 1830, during an era of great racial division in the United States. At the time, many people of African descent lived in slavery, and racial distinctions and prejudice were not just common but customary among white Americans. Those realities, though unfamiliar and disturbing today, influenced all aspects of people’s lives, including their religion. Many Christian churches of that era, for instance, were segregated along racial lines. From the beginnings of the Church, people of every race and ethnicity could be baptized and received as members. Toward the end of his life, Church founder Joseph Smith openly opposed slavery. There has never been a Churchwide policy of segregated congregations.
LDS Gospel Topic Essay: Race and the Priesthood
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood
Though technically true, there wasn’t a churchwide segregation policy, it isn’t the full truth, because the church did segregate congregations – it was up to local leaders. They claim “there has never been a Churchwide policy of segregated congregations,” but don’t clarify that they did practice local segregation (unless you drill into the footnote which dismisses the issue that it was only when reflecting local customs and laws). It wasn’t churchwide because there were no black members in Utah! They didn’t have to make it a global policy, just policies in locales where there were black members.
Local Segregation Directed by First Presidency
As a new Stake President in the Washington DC area, Ezra Taft Benson was directed by the First Presidency, Heber J Grant, J Reuben Clark, Jr, and David O McKay, to segregate his Relief Society congregation. Apparently, a racist sister complained about a couple of black sisters attending relief society meetings. This woman complained to the Bishop, who did nothing, so she went over his head to the First Presidency! The First Presidency then contacts the Stake President, telling him that “if the colored sisters were discreetly approached, they would be happy to sit at one side in the rear or somewhere where they would not wound the sensibilities of the complaining sisters.” They want to discreetly solve the problem “so as not to hurt the feelings on the part of anyone.” Anyone here meaning the white woman, since they aren’t concerned with hurting the feelings of the black women by making them sit in the back.
President Ezra T. Benson, Washington [D.C.] Stake,
Dear President Benson:
Through the General Board of the Relief Society, who reported to the Presiding Bishopric, and they to us, it comes to us that you have in the Capitol Reef Ward in Washington two colored sisters who apparently are faithful members of the Church.
The report comes to us that prior to a meeting which was to be held between the Relief Societies of the Washington Ward and the Capitol Ward, Bishop Brossard of the Washington Ward called up the President of the Relief Society of the Capitol Ward and told her that these two colored sisters should [not] be permitted to attend because the President of the Capitol Ward Relief Society failed to carry out the request made of her by the Bishop of the other ward.
We can appreciate that the situation may present a problem in Washington, but President Clark recalls that in the Catholic churches in Washington at the time he lived there, colored and white communicants used the same church at the same time. He never entered the church to see how the matter was carried out, but he knew that the facts were as stated.
From this fact we are assuming that there is not in Washington any such feeling as exists in the South where the colored people are apparently not permitted by their white brethren and sisters to come into the meeting houses and worship with them. We feel that we cannot refuse baptism to a colored person who is otherwise worthy, and we feel that we cannot refuses to permit these people to come into our meeting houses and worship once we baptize them.
It seems to us that it ought to be possible to work this situation out without causing any feelings on the part of anybody. If the white sisters feel that they may not sit with them or near them, we feel very sure that if the colored sisters were discreetly approached, they would be happy to sit at one side in the rear or somewhere where they would not wound the sensibilities of the complaining sisters. We will rely upon your tact and discretion to work this out so as not to hurt the feelings on the part of anyone.
Of course, probably each one of the sisters who can afford it, has a colored maid in her house to do the work and to do the cooking for her, and it would seem that under these circumstances they should be willing to let them sit in Church and worship with them.
Faithfully your brethren,
Letter to President Ezra T. Benson, Washington D.C. Stake President
Heber J. Grant
J. Reuben Clark, Jr.
David O. McKay
From the First Presidency Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark, Jr., and David O. McKay
Dated 23 June 1942
https://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/LDS-First-Presidency-Directive-to-Segregate-Blacks-from-Whites-in-Relief-Society-Classes
Benson was called to be an Apostle only one year later, so we can deduce that he followed the orders from the leadership “Brethren,” as his grandson states in the article where he shared the letter. The leaders clearly wanted segregation in some locations so the white membership wouldn’t be offended. Still, today the church lauds itself that it never segregated congregations by using the churchwide qualifier in the essay.
This article shared by Steve Benson has many comments discussing these points. Here are some good points and discussions from Lost, drilldoc and Can’t Resist:
I love this little piece here:
“Attempting to downplay the condescending bigotry evidenced in the First Presidency’s orders to my grandfather, Mormon historian Lester Bush argued that “[i]t is, of course, no more justified to apply the social values of 1970 to this period than it was to impose them on the nineteenth century, and the point to be made is not that the Church had ‘racist’ ideas as recently as 1950. . . . On the other hand, from our present perspective it is impossible to mistake the role of values and concepts which have since been rejected in the formulation of many aspects of previous Church policy.” (Lester E. Bush, “Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview” [Arlington, Virginia: Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought], reprint of original article in Dialogue, Vol. 8., No. 1, Spring 1973, p. 43)”
What Lester is missing isn’t that it was socially acceptable to be a bigot in the 40’s & 50’s, so we shouldn’t judge based on later time periods this bigotry, but instead that there is NO SOCIETY. THERE IS GOD. GOD supposedly COMMANDED that blacks be discriminated against by denying them the priestood! Not society, but GOD! Our righteous priestood leaders were only following God’s will, until 1978, when he changed his mind and decided not to be a bigot anymore.
How can ANYONE believe this nonsense? The church leadership was full of bigots and they chose to discriminate. Those that weren’t bigots (few though that might be) simply went along with the program, unwilling to claim Prophet x might be wrong.
Comment by “Lost” on article
In truth though, they are all saying JS was wrong, because he gave the priestood to several blacks. I suppose those were special black, right? A little more valiant than other black?
LDS First Presidency Directive to Segregate Blacks from Whites in Relief Society Classes, Steven Benson
https://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/LDS-First-Presidency-Directive-to-Segregate-Blacks-from-Whites-in-Relief-Society-Classes
I like the post, but I understand that was pretty much the culture of the day. It was wrong, but to be a bit on their side, many whites were like that.
Comment by “drill doc” on article
LDS First Presidency Directive to Segregate Blacks from Whites in Relief Society Classes, Steven Benson
https://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/LDS-First-Presidency-Directive-to-Segregate-Blacks-from-Whites-in-Relief-Society-Classes
I think you miss my point. The problem though, drill doc, is that the church leaders claim they are not bigots nor were they in the past, that they were simply following God’s commandments. HE is the bigot, in other words.
That position flies directly in the face of the opinion that you can’t judge different society time periods. Bullocks. Time period had nothing to do with it because society wasn’t making the decision-GOD WAS.
The church leadership can’t have it both ways.
How was the bigotry ended? GOD took it away when SWK got the revelation in 1978.
Sorry, I’m not buying the society argument to excuse mormon bigotry. Either MAN was making the decisions or GOD was.
So their position should be that GOD made them do it. To say now it was man in the past who made that decision and its ok because that was the position of society at that time is LAUGHABLE. They just outed themselves by admiting that there is no god in their church making decisions.
Comment by “Lost” on article
LDS First Presidency Directive to Segregate Blacks from Whites in Relief Society Classes, Steven Benson
https://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/LDS-First-Presidency-Directive-to-Segregate-Blacks-from-Whites-in-Relief-Society-Classes
If the prophet is a prophet, then shouldn’t Mormons be on the cutting edge of so many socially and economically progressive issues- race, women, gays, environment, war, poverty, child-labor, human trafficking, etc.? Rather, it seems that there is a conscious decision and effort to desperately maintain the status quo of 1905.
It’s so sad that the LDS church has the money and the manpower and the good-will of the people. So many great things could come from the organization if the will was there.
Unfortunately, the Mormon prophet is ALWAYS late to the party.
Comment by “Can’t Resist” on article
LDS First Presidency Directive to Segregate Blacks from Whites in Relief Society Classes, Steven Benson
https://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/LDS-First-Presidency-Directive-to-Segregate-Blacks-from-Whites-in-Relief-Society-Classes
Compare the apologist argument to what the actual leaders say about themselves and their role as men on the watchtower.
There seems to be no end to the Savior’s desire to lead us to safety. And there is constancy in the way He shows us the path. He calls by more than one means so that it will reach those willing to accept it. And those means always include sending the message by the mouths of His prophets whenever people have qualified to have the prophets of God among them. Those authorized servants are always charged with warning the people, telling them the way to safety…
Looking for the path to safety in the counsel of prophets makes sense to those with strong faith. When a prophet speaks, those with little faith may think that they hear only a wise man giving good advice. Then if his counsel seems comfortable and reasonable, squaring with what they want to do, they take it. If it does not, they consider it either faulty advice or they see their circumstances as justifying their being an exception to the counsel. Those without faith may think that they hear only men seeking to exert influence for some selfish motive.
Finding Safety in Counsel, Elder Henry B. Eyring, April 1997 General Conference
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1997/04/finding-safety-in-counsel
Make no mistake about it: the Lord directs His Church through living prophets and apostles. This is the way He has always done His work.
God Is at the Helm, Elder M. Russell Ballard, October 2015 General Conference
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2015/10/god-is-at-the-helm
Learn to keep your eye on the prophet. He is the Lord’s mouthpiece and the only man who can speak for the Lord today. Let his inspired counsel take precedence. Let his inspired words be a basis for evaluating the counsel of all lesser authorities. Then live close to the Spirit so you may know the truth of all things.
The Lord’s mouthpiece and prophet on the face of the earth today received his authority through a line of prophets going back to Joseph Smith, who was ordained by Peter, James, and John, who were ordained by Christ, who was and is the head of the Church, the Creator of this earth, and the God before whom all men must stand accountable.
This Church is not being directed by the wisdom of men. I know that. The power and influence of Almighty God are directing His Church.
Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Ezra Taft Benson: Chapter 11, Follow the Living Prophet
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-ezra-taft-benson/chapter-11-follow-the-living-prophet
If they are simply “men of their times,” they can’t also be the Lord’s mouthpiece with “inspired counsel” that should “take precedence” over all “lesser authorities”. Either the leaders are led by revelation as the “prophets, seers and revelators” they claim to be, or they are “men of their times” doing their best. Isn’t the entire point of having a prophet so that God can speak through him? Dismissing their mistakes and errors because they are men of their times defeats the purpose of a prophet.
Do you excuse these leaders for being “men of their times”? Do you also believe that they act for God? How can we reconcile this? How do we know when they are men and when they are prophets? Please share your thoughts in the comments or in your very own I was a Mormon story.
More reading:
- Men Of Their Times
- Church Leaders Make Mistakes
- The Lord Is At The Helm?
- Will God Permit Church President to Lead Mormons Astray?
- Elder Ballard Claims Church Leaders Can Not Lead You Astray
- Does President Nelson Talk With God? Do Any Church Leaders?
- The Lowry Nelson Letters and Racist Mormon Doctrine
- Byron Marchant, Dissident Excommunicated in 1977 for Opposing Priesthood Ban
- https://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon451.htm
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/video/2011-03-110-watchman-on-the-tower
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2015/10/god-is-at-the-helm
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-ezra-taft-benson/chapter-11-follow-the-living-prophet