Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex
It seems more like such a list is kept in case one wants to remind fellow Mormons just how imperfect their church really is. To that motivation, I agree with Gordon, "It's behind us."
|
I don't think that the point is that much of the membership is satisfied not knowing the answer and feels that it is "behind us". Clearly it does, by and large. The point is that whether you personally feel like it is behind us or not, this issue is an impediment to blacks joining the church and is a stumbling block to some members or potential members.
MMM is behind us too, and yet GBH goes personally to the dedication of a monument at that site, a huge act of consiliation and an acknowledgement that we don't defend what happened there and that we are sorry that it did.
The issue of blacks and the priesthood is thornier becasue there was so much thought process on record by leaders of the church justifying it. But BRM had it right when he said "forget what I said, I was wrong."
People frequently infer a great deal from the silence of the brethren on a multitude of issues, including that they have considered it and chosen not to do anything. The brethren were not focused on the issue of blacks and the priesthood until the culture changed and they were prompted to inquire internally and with the Lord as to whether it was right. We all know what the answer to that was. A generation had to pass away before this could take place.
Similarly, that the roots of this have not been addressed doesn't mean that it might not be nor that it is improper for one to desire that it be addressed. I see nothing wrong with simply saying "we were wrong" or "those leaders were wrong." There is ample precedent for it. MMM as indicated above. Adam-God theory which has (as I recall) been declared not to be the doctrine of the church. Some day a prophet of a different generation may well do that, based in part on the thoughts that were provoked by articles and discussions such as these.
Why would you impute what I percieve to be a selfish or arrogant motivation to SIEQ rather than the one I'm suggesting? Is there a basis for it or is it knee-jerk defensiveness over feeling like the church is under attack?