Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex
4. Or, if it's too uncomfortable to call 11 of 15 latter day prophets racists, you assert that the church wasn't ready to follow the prophet down a color-neutral priesthood path. Maybe the prophets weren't racists, you think. It was just the body of the church who would not be ready to follow the prophet. This, despite the fact that they seemed to be willing to follow the prophet anywhere else.
|
After 3 >15 page threads on the topic I'm more than weary. All of the points you listed have been thoroughly addressed, and I'm not going to waste any more time (today at least) typing the same thing again and again. However, I found your point number 4 here to be humorous. Why? Well, it appears that this was one of the greatest worries of the brethren as they were working this whole thing out. McKay commissioned a committee from the 12 to study the matter and they apparently came to the conclusion that there was no scriptural evidence for the ban but that the membership was not ready for a change (McKay book chapter 4).
I think the membership
would have followed McKay had he made the decision to drop the ban. But McKay and the brethren had to get there in their own time. God allows his leaders to get things right in their own time. History is full of examples showing that this is the norm and not the exception.
Oh, and as an aside, I'd like to go on record stating that I don't believe that Tex or Indy are racists. Nor do I believe that somebody who takes their position is necessarily racist. I do however think that it takes a considerable amount of imagination and denial to ignore the piles of evidence available regarding the blacks and the priesthood issue and decide that the ban was that God intended all along.