← Church History Matters
Church History Matters
181 - Official Declaration 2 CFM - Race Controversies in the Church - E50B December 8-14
01:13:11
Loading summary
Transcript76 lines
- [00:00]
A
Why would an entire group of people be punished because of Cain's murder? Like, that doesn't make sense.
- [00:06]
B
Did Brigham Young ever say this was a revelation?
- [00:08]
A
The Church disavows any of those theories.
- [00:11]
B
The spirits of the children of men are pure and holy without transgression or any curse upon them.
- [00:16]
A
Forget everything that I have said or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation.
- [00:27]
B
All are alike unto God, black and white, bond and free, male and female.
- [00:32]
A
There's still work to do. It's time to respect all of God's children. Full stop.
- [00:38]
B
Hello, Scott.
- [00:39]
A
Hello, Casey. We're back.
- [00:41]
B
We're back. And we are dealing with. I'm going to go out on a limb and say this is maybe the most complicated issue in the history of the Church. It requires a lot of nuance, a lot of context, a lot of understanding to get. And Official Declaration 2 actually is an uplifting part of the story because this is when the policy of priesthood and temple restriction for people of African ancestry ended.
- [01:07]
A
Yeah, I think it's. It's fair to say this is probably the most controversial of all Church history issues. I know there's a lot out there, Casey, but this one is. Is very difficult because. Well, because a lot of reasons which we're going to explore. We're going to explore in this episode, some of the challenges with this, but you're right, it ends really well. A 1978 revelation extending the privileges of priesthood and temple to every member of the Church based on worthiness, not on race. And that is beautiful. It is powerful, and we're excited to dive into it.
- [01:43]
B
It's fair to say that few events in the history of the Church had greater significance than this 1978 revelation extending the blessings of the priesthood and the temple to all worthy men and women. For instance, right before we hit Record, you were on the phone with your mom and you said to do you remember where you were in 1978? And she immediately, oh, I was outside. Like, it's one of those. I remember exactly where I was when I found out this happened.
- [02:12]
A
Yeah. She called right before we pushed record to ask about Christmas presents. And I said, we're about to record our podcast about raising the priesthood. And, yeah, I just said, do you remember where you were, what happened, or when that happened? And she said, I do. Yeah, I was a girl outside. Yeah. Boom, boom, boom. Yep. Just light bulb memory.
- [02:31]
B
Classic Scott Woodward. Someone calls to talk about Christmas presents, and you're like, I wish to talk about race and the priesthood. And your mom pivoted just like that, just beautifully. What an amazing lady.
- [02:43]
A
She's marvelous. Shout out to Mom. Thanks, Mom.
- [02:47]
B
Yeah, your mom is great. We should call my mom and ask her where she was in 1978.
- [02:51]
A
There you go.
- [02:53]
B
I bring this up because it's a common thing for members of the church who were alive when this was given. And, Scott, you weren't. I mean, I think I was like a couple days old when this was received.
- [03:04]
A
What do you remember about when this was received, Casey?
- [03:06]
B
I was so excited, you know, they had to change my diaper, let's say that. But I bring that up because, I mean, Dallin H. Oaks, actually, a couple years ago in 2018, when we came to the 40th anniversary of the priesthood revelation, President Oaks actually did this. He cited how he felt the moment that the revelation was received. In fact, here's what he said. He said, I remember where I was when I heard the news. I sat down on a pile of dirt and beckoned to my boys.
- [03:38]
A
He was outside.
- [03:39]
B
He said, this is the scene etched in my memory of this unforgettable event, sitting on a pile of dirt as I told my boys that all worthy male members of the church could now be ordained to the priesthood and weeping as I spoke. So he remembers the exact moment you might have heard the phrase, stop the presses. This was a literal stop the presses moment. On June 9, 1978, Time and Newsweek magazines literally stopped the presses for their weekend editions to get stories in. And the news was actually published on the front page of the New York Times. So this was huge. Many people that heard the announcement were surprised. And the reason why is because it ended about 126 years of policy in the church where people of black African descent had essentially been banned from priesthood ordination and from receiving temple blessings. The origins of the ban go all the way back to Brigham Young in 1852. But before we talk about that, we maybe need to set the scene here. So this is something that requires a lot of context, and we do this often, but we did do, I think six, or was it seven episodes. We did a deep dive, to say the least. It's also fair to say that if we were to do that series over again, which maybe we will, we've learned a lot since then. Like, there's actually been some great research in the last year that's come out that helps us understand more about what's going on. So, Scott, let's. Let's dive into the Context of Official Declaration 2.
- [05:13]
C
Hi, I'm Dowell Wilson, CEO at Scripture Central. A couple things I want to do here for just a minute. First, I'd like to thank you for your engagement, for watching and listening to our programs. We love your feedback. We hear from so many of you literally every day. We get hundreds of comments from you. Thank you for listening and supporting our shows. Second, as you know, we're approaching Giving Tuesday. I'm sure you're aware of that. Scripture Central is a donor supported organization. We receive no revenue from any of our shows. We've resisted advertising both for our listeners and for us. We never have to worry about the purity of what we're doing and whether we have to be beholden to an advertiser or somebody who is worried about content of a show. We just do it because we think it's the right thing to do and the right support of the Savior Jesus Christ and of his mission and of his church.
- [06:05]
A
Church.
- [06:06]
C
And that's what we try to do here at Scripture Central. Which brings me last of all to the purpose of this interruption in your schedule today. Since we are donor supported, I'm here to ask for your support on Giving Tuesday. And as you contemplate your year end giving, we would love your support of our programs, of our content providers. There's information below where you can contribute and how you can contribute, but it's the lifeblood of our organization. Let me just reiterate to us, your support is the widow's mite. We take it on a very consecrated basis. We invite you to look at the methods below for how you can support Scripture Central. That we can continue our mission to bring people to Jesus Christ through faithful disciple, scholarship and the good word that is provided to us through the scriptures and our prophets. Thank you for being a faithful listener and we look forward to your ongoing support.
- [07:11]
A
So if we go way back, Even before the 1852 announcement of this, this ban, I mean let's start with 18:30. Let's start when the church was organized. Like we did a full hour episode on this. And so we're going to try to be succinct right now, but the original context of like the church's policy or whatever on race, especially black African race, is that there was no policy. Like there just wasn't. Like Joseph Smith and early saints, like ordained and endowed black men to the priesthood. They welcomed black families into full fellowship. Like we know about Elijah Abel. He was a black man who was ordained a 70 in 1836. He held a ministerial certificate signed by Joseph Smith. He received the Kirtland Temple ordinances. Q. Walker Lewis, described by Wilford Woodruff as, quote, a colored brother who was an elder. Brigham Young called him one of the best elders that we have in the church. Q. Walker Lewis. He was ordained by Apostle William Smith in Massachusetts. That's Joseph Smith's brother, William Smith. We discussed Jane Manning James and her family, who were personally received and employed by Joseph and Emma Smith, which is, I think, a tangible demonstration that the prophet was very inclusive. When the Nauvoo Temple was being announced, of course, Joseph Smith dies before the temple is completed. But an announcement in 1840, talking about the anticipated building of that temple, announced that they anticipated people of all races, colors, to come and join with us and to worship our God in the holy temple. And so there was no priesthood or temple ban or restriction on anyone of any race, let alone black African in Joseph Smith's day. Now, when you zoom out and you see the context of America at that time, and we're talking pre Civil War here. Cayce. Right. We're talking about a very racially fraught context that the church was organized into. And so the more you understand about the context of the time, I think the more remarkable it is that there was no racial ban or policy in Joseph Smith's time period. It was very progressive. It was. It was pushing against some of the external pressures. There was a lot of Protestant talk and thought about black Africans as being, you know, the cursed seed of Cain or descendants of Ham in the Bible who was cursed, you know, and if you actually go, and we did this in our episodes, but if you actually go and read the Cane curse, or you go and read the Ham curse or whatever, like, there is zero, zero, like indication that this is about black Africans. It is wholly a reading into the text of the Bible in order probably to justify African slavery at the time so that Christians could have a clear conscience about also being slave owners. Right? Because the B authorizes slavery and that black Africans must be somehow the descendants of Cain and Ham. And therefore, so that's all in the air. Even though it's, you know, it's not biblical, but people are reading it into biblical stories. And so that's all part of it. There's even, like, scientists who are. Who are saying things like a scientist named Josiah Knott who's saying things like that black Africans are biologically inferior to whites. You know, we're talking about really, like, respectable people in society, like, you know, the Supreme Court and like, some of the leaders of our nation. Are buying into this kind of rhetoric about black inferiority. And that is just like the air that the people were breathing at that time. Not everybody agreed the church was organized and restored, like, in that fraught environment, racial environment. And the fact that there wasn't, like, full inclusion in the church during Joseph Smith's time period, I think is pretty remarkable.
- [10:48]
B
And let me add to this. When we say views were extreme, we don't mean, like, extreme people in society held these views. These were mainstream views. I mean, the prevailing scientific and religious thought of the day was that black people were descended from Cain and that they were biologically and mentally inferior. And it was just sort of an assumption made in the early American republic. Like Thomas Jefferson wrote scientific treatises on how people of African ancestry were different than people of European ancestry. So the church is born into this extremely tempestuous environment and on several occasions is forced to confront it directly. God asked us to build the city of Zion in a slave state, for instance. Just maybe. One anecdote. When Joseph Smith wrote his history, it seems like the vision he had of the city of Zion was a multiracial city, like a plural society. For instance, the first Sabbath that he attends in Jackson County, Missouri, he actually writes this. This is from his history. He said, brother William W. Phelps preached to a. An audience over the boundary of the United States, wherein were present all the families of the earth. There were several of the Indians, a respectable number of Negroes, and the balance was made up of citizens of the surrounding country who fully represented themselves as pioneers of the West. At this meeting, two were baptized who had previously believed in the fullness of the gospel. So Joseph Smith, when he's writing about the first Sabbath in Zion, says, I was thrilled to see that there were Europeans, there were black people, and there were Native Americans all present there, like, it seems like, was to have a society that would overcome these racial differences. But as we've noticed, as we noted in the past, Jackson county was a really difficult place to try and execute that vision. And what happens to the saints in Jackson county, in turn, causes them to have to seriously consider this question of race.
- [12:50]
A
Are we being too inclusive here? Right.
- [12:52]
B
And one other thing that you do such a good job noting when I've seen you teach this is that belief, when it came to slavery in particular, was on a spectrum during this time. At one end of the spectrum was people who supported slavery, thought that it was God ordained, and their economic livelihood was based on it. And at the other end were abolitionists who believed that slavery should be ended but most people were in the middle, which is a group that historians typically call anti slavery, which is that they were generally opposed to slavery, but they wanted to phase it out gradually. They didn't want to use violence to end it, for instance. And in the church you could have people, people who were pro slavery, you could have people who were abolitionists, like W.W. phelps. And then you could have people that were kind of in the middle that saw it as morally wrong, but didn't want war to break out over slavery, that didn't want to shed blood in order to end it. And all those people are found amongst the members of the church.
- [13:52]
A
And there were even slaveholders, Right. That are members of the church from the south and they're respectable church members in society. Obviously there's going to be some differences of opinion amongst those who are from the north and the south on that issue, but they're all members of the church in good standing.
- [14:08]
B
And I mean, we had to deal with this a couple weeks ago when we did doctrine and covenants 134. But the church adopted a neutral position on slavery where they essentially said, we're not going to interfere with slavery and on a practical level instructed its missionaries to not teach slaves unless they had permission from their owners, which man they had to do for the literal safety of the missionaries. Like sometimes the missionaries were threatened with lynching if they were seen as doing anything that could be construed as inciting a slave uprising. So it's a pot boiler situation that they enter into, to say the least.
- [14:45]
A
Yeah. So I guess the summary for this particular period, we would just say that the racial restriction for priesthood or temple privileges was not part of the Restoration's founding revelations. In fact, the founding revelations of the church, like Doctrine of Covenants, talking about taking the gospel to every nation, kindred tongue, people, we're ordaining blacks, we're inviting all to come to the temple. And so there is not a whiff of any sort of racial restriction. So that's, that's kind of Joseph Smith time period up until about 1847. So let's, let's kind of switch the gears then to talk about when this starts to come into the church. And I have to put a plug in for this amazing book by Paul Reeve. You can pick up a copy at Deseret Book. It's called let's Talk About Race and Priesthood. It's just a little over a hundred pages. And Paul Reeve, he doesn't pull punches. He's very thoughtful, very respected scholar on this one. Of the best scholars, honestly, in the church on this. We interviewed him when we did our series on this a couple years ago. He's so good. And he, I thought he did a good job being concise in this book of saying, here's how the racial ban began under the leadership of Brigham Young. It happened in a three step process. Step one, there was a really strong fear of race mixing generally in the United States of America. That starts to become an issue in the church. The catalyst is in 1847 at winter quarters when Brigham Young learned from a church member named William Appleby that Q. Walker Lewis, that black elder we referenced earlier, he had a son named Enoch who had married a white girl. And Brigham Young learned that they had a baby together. And that to us today, does not even move the needle at all in terms of, like, concern. But in the 1840s, the idea of, they called it amalgamation, this idea of blacks and whites intermarrying and having children, some were saying that would lead to the destruction of the human race. There's a strong fear mongering over this amalgamation, race mixing. And to the point that even like respectable medical doctors of the time were saying, like, yeah, you know, if, if a black and a white have a baby, the baby will be sterile. It'll be like a mule. This is the air that they're breathing. So when Brigham Young heard that a black member had married a white member and they're having a baby, he said some things in that context that did not age well. Elder Quentin L. Cook recently said about this. He said Brigham Young said things about race that fall short of our standards today. Some of his beliefs and words reflected the culture of his time. That's again, Elder Quintnell Cook, and, and what I'm about to share with you is an example of this. So he insisted that interracial couples, if they, if they mingled seed, he said that means, like had babies, then that would be death to all. Like everyone would. It's. It would be better to die. We think that was hyperbolic. We think that he's, he's just kind of reacting because then he, the next thing he says is, look, the law of God is that their seed shall not be mixed. No amalgamation of blacks and whites. All right? And then he said, but if they want to be eunuchs for the kingdom of God's sake, they can still have a place in the temple. So that's interesting, right? By 1847, there's still no ban. But Brigham Young is reacting to some, some sour news in his estimation of this race mixing that's happening in the church. And he's saying they could be married, but if they're willing to commit to not having babies, then they can still be in the temple. Right. So that's interesting. That's something that's happening in the background. We do have some records of that winter quarter's reaction by Brigham Young, but at that point, still no ban. Right. The ban is going to first be articulated in 1852, which, by the way, when he articulates it there, he does forefront fear of race mixing in the church. This is still his concern, which comes out.
- [18:42]
B
This is very much par for the course for the time. We're not that far removed from this history. There were state laws, for instance, that forbade interracial marriage going into the 1960s and 70s. And it was just a really common belief that the races should not intermingle or marry with each other. And that's a concern that exists throughout America. Like, sometimes from our 21st century vantage point. We just don't appreciate how strong these feelings were in the 19th century. Every once in a while, they show up again. But I don't think Brigham Young was outside of the mainstream in his views here. Let's talk about 1852, then. So in 1852, Brigham Young publicly articulated the ban as church policy and provided a theological justification tied to priesthood authority and civil rule. And so this is what Paul Reeve calls phase two. Generally articulated the policy as being tied back to the curse of Cain. This is how complicated the context is. This didn't happen in a general conference or even in a council meeting of the church. It happened in the legislature of the territory of Utah. So Brigham Young is wearing multiple hats here. He's the president of the church, and he's the governor of Utah, and he's the superintendent of Indian affairs. And they're debating back and forth what the laws should be. And in the middle of this discussion, in fact, it's during a debate with Orson Pratt, who's arguing against what Brigham Young is saying. Brigham Young announces that they can't hold the priesthood because of the curse of Cain. This is challenging because we have earlier records from Brigham Young, specifically the Council of 50 Minutes, where it seems like he argues the opposite of this. For instance, in April 1845, this is from the Council of Fifty Minutes, Brigham Young declared, the spirits of the children of men are pure and holy without transgression or any curse upon them. The differences you see around you is on account of the circumstances that surround them. So at one point, he had argued against this, but you're right that at some point before 1852, he had come to be convinced that there was some kind of curse upon the seed of Cain and that for that reason, people of Africa, African ancestry, who he asserted were descendants of Cain, couldn't hold the priesthood and couldn't rule in church government, essentially.
- [21:10]
A
And it's interesting that he's debating Orson Pratt, as you said. And Orson Pratt's not going to let this one go. Like, even a couple Years later in 1856, he says this at the, at the second convention for Utah's application for statehood. He puts in some. He puts in some jabs. He says. He says, quote, we have no proof that the Africans are the descendants of old Cain who was cursed. And even if we had that evidence, we have not been ordered to inflict that curse upon that race, that source of pride. Like, he continues to push on this and Brigham Young continues to push back. Brigham ultimately wins the argument, doesn't he, in terms of getting some legislation passed. It would legalize servitude in Utah and kind of create a. A place where church members who owned slaves, who came from the south could continue to own them. But it was kind of a phased out slavery that Brigham Young was arguing for and Orson Pratt is arguing against anyway. Yeah, it's in that context where he literally says they are descendants of Cain and they have no right to hold the priesthood. Not one jot nor tittle of priesthood, he says. Close quote. So that's new stuff.
- [22:27]
B
A big question here that maybe we need to answer is, did Brigham Young ever say this was a revelation that was given to him? From the records that we have right now, it doesn't seem like he did. He asserts this as his own personal knowledge. He even at one point says that he was saying this, even if there never was a prophet or apostle, Jesus Christ who spoke it before. He's saying I'm saying it right now is essentially what he says. But he doesn't also say, thus saith the Lord or the Lord told me this. He's asserting that these are his feelings. That's a part of the context, too, that maybe is important as well.
- [23:02]
A
Yeah, he seems to be responding to Orson Pratt, who probably said something like, no prophet or apostle has ever said anything like this before Brigham. And he literally leans into that and says, well, if none have ever said it, I'll say it right now, quote this. People that are commonly called Negroes are the children of Cain. I know they are. Close quote.
- [23:22]
B
And we should note that rather than this being like a revelatory context, it's a debate, like you said, Orson Pratt actually brings up some. Some very salient points. Among them, how are we going to do missionary work in Africa if we hold this view, which Brigham Young basically refutes. Now, we should note at the same time, too, Brigham Young does also say there will come a time when they will have all the privileges enjoyed by other saints and more. So he doesn't seem like he's articulating this as a permanent thing, but he is saying it's going to be the policy right now. But again, it's a legislative session, which is just shows how different the operations of the church and the government and everything were in this 1852 context.
- [24:07]
A
And we talked about when we did our series on this, that this isn't like a policy of the Church yet. Like, the church isn't even doing policies in the 1850s, right? It's not a policy until 19, like, oh, seven. But it is. It is like an understood thing based on this announcement at these legislative minutes, but it's not fully like, you know, crystallized until 1907 with Joseph F. Smith, who then gives out a very clear statement that even one drop of Negro blood, quote, unquote, would disqualify a man from the priesthood and women and men from the temple ordinances. And so this is the beginning of it, and then it sort of crystallizes back in 1907. I gotta say one more thing about Orson Pratt, though. Like, lest we hold him up as the patron saint of, you know, perfect 20, 25, like, views on race and all that stuff. Like, he didn't. Like, he actually eventually, like, he's on board with a priesthood ban for blacks and temple privileges not being available for blacks. But he takes a different rationale. He disagreed with Brigham Young's Cain logic because he said, like, what about, like, the idea that men will be punished for their own sins and not for the sins or transgressions of their parents? Like, why would an entire group of people be punished because of Cain murder? Like, that doesn't make sense. So rather than dropping it there, he said, what if there's a. What if there's a premortal component to this? And this is where this rationale really comes into the church very strong. This idea that maybe, maybe some spirits, quote, received bodies among the African Negroes because of good and evil circumstances under which the spirits enter this world must depend upon the good and evil actions they've done in a previous. Previous life or in the previous world. And this is where this idea of, like, valiant and premortality and less valiant in the war in heaven, like, comes into the picture really strong. Orson Hyde had said something like this back in 1845, actually. But Orson Pratt really leans into this thought, and it starts to take off from here. So we kind of have those three things going on, right? We've got the fear of race mixing, number one, that's just absolutely. Like you said, it's endemic to the entire nation. There are states that have laws against this. Most of them do. Not all of them at this time, but a lot of them do. I think the majority have laws against race mixing and having interracial marriage and having children. So that's huge. And then number two, there's this curse of Cain logic. And then number three, we get this less value in the premortality logic. And none of that, by the way, is supported by revelation. In fact, some of it is contradicted by revelation. But we'll talk about that later.
- [26:50]
B
Let me add one more wrinkle to this, too. The third rationale, which is that it's a premortality thing. Brigham Young disputes this, is in the council of 50 minutes as well. But in 1869, Brigham Young is asked if Joseph Smith had ever taught that there were neutral spirits in premortality. And Brigham Young said there was no neutral spirit in heaven. At the time of the rebellion, all took sides. If anyone said that he heard the prophet Joseph say that the spirits of the blacks were neutral in heaven, he would not believe them. For he heard Joseph say to the contrary, all spirits are pure that come from the presence of God, which is a light paraphrasing of section 93, which actually teaches that too. So they're having all these debates, and it's sort of frustrating, isn't it, because the rationale Brigham Young offers is very common. Like a lot of European teachers during this time believe that black people are descended from Cain. The rationale Orson Pratt is offering is very unique to Latter Day Saints. Not a lot of churches teach pre mortality, but they're arguing back and forth. And like you said, the policy, if we're gonna call it a policy, isn't really settled until 1907, when Joseph F. Smith feels like he needs to systematize the teachings of the church, that he needs to sit down and get everything in writing, essentially. And that's when a lot of these loose threads throughout the 19th century start to come together.
- [28:19]
A
And this might be a good time to Paus, just read from the Gospel Topics essay that once you know that, once you know the backstory that we've just covered, you'll notice that this is hitting each of those. So watch this. It says, quote, today the church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse. That's Brigham Young's position. Or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life. That's Orson practice position that mixed race marriages are a sin, which would be broader than just the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints at that time, but definitely that's inside our church during that time. Or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. That's our current position. Right. The Church disavows any of those theories. But when you know the history of the Church, you recognize those theories, right? In that one paragraph, they needed to be disavowed and they were soundly. So if you're asking, like, was this revelation? I think right there is a pretty good answer, right? Like, we disavow the very reasons given by Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, and others who will follow in those two veins, basically. And this idea about race mixing also not founded in revelation, which, by the way, we should say that Joseph Smith was against interracial marriage, publicly at least. He did make statements to that end too. So in that sense, he was a product of his time as well. But he resisted very successfully these other rationales as reasons to keep people out. He was always looking for reasons to bring people in which I love.
- [29:57]
B
And Joseph Smith was very opposed to slavery. Like he runs for president in 1844 on a platform to end slavery by the year 1850 or sooner, which was bold, to say the least, in an 1840s context, may have played a role in him getting killed, to be honest with you. So you can see how complicated this is.
- [30:18]
A
So to kind of bring this whole section to a close, I'm going just summarize again from Paul Reeve about kind of this introductory period of the priesthood ban. He said, quote, the open racial vision of the founding decades. That's Joseph Smith's time period gave way in fits and starts to a second phase marked by racial policies which barred priesthood ordination and temple admission from people of black African descent. These policies were inconsistently applied and were not in harmony with the scriptural mandates of the founding years. He further explains that the shift mirrored America's escalating obsession with racial purity and slavery debates. The fear of race mixing and the use of Old Testament curse narratives were the theological rationalizations for what was at bottom a human and a cultural decision, a condition that's surrounding them that they lean into. So that's how Paul Reeve summarizes this time period of the introduction of the ban.
- [31:22]
B
We're talking about the origins here. We're not going to do an exhaustive history of the ban because we've got six hours of content on that that we've already done. Please go back and look at that. This is valuable context for official decl. But we're going to fast forward here a little bit to what was happening in 1978. But let me set that up by saying this. In 1852, after the policy was first announced, we mentioned this, but Brigham Young also declared the time will come when they, meaning black members of the church, will have the privilege of all we have the privilege of and more. And it seems like a lot of other presidents of the church repeat this idea that the policy will one day eventually end. For instance, Wilford Woodruff wrote in his journal, the day will come when all that race, referring to black people will be redeemed and possess all the blessings. In 1928, President Heber J. Grant, in a letter referring to men of African descent, wrote that they could not hold the priesthood, quote, until such time as the Lord shall see fit to withdraw the decree. Two decades later, President David O. McKay recorded, sometime in God's eternal plan, the black members will be given the right to hold the priesthood. And in 1972, President Harold B. Lee said, the black members will achieve full status. We're just waiting for that time. So all of these prophetic desires are weighing heavily on Spencer W. Kimball when he's called as President of the church in 1973. And many of our listeners will know President Kimball was not expected to be President of the Church. Harold B. Lee was considerably younger than him and in better health. And President Kimball had all these health issues with his heart, with his voice, you name it, had dealt with it. But during his service to the church, it seems like he was uniquely prepared to sort of grapple with this issue linked to race. Ed Kimball, one of President Kimball's sons, said that during President Kimball's service, his heart had gone out to faithful priests to deny people whenever they resided in the world. And in 1977, President Kimball, again, there's some wonderful stuff written about this, and it's written by President Kimball's son. Ed Kimball, who's a marvelous guy, passed away a few years ago, wrote a 70 page article in BYU Studies that I highly suggest you read. And also the second volume of his biography on his father called Lengthen youn Stride is amazing. So much good stuff about this time period. So he notes that in 1977, President Kimball, in his words, began an exhaustive personal study of the Scriptures as well as statements of church leaders since Joseph Smith, and asked other general authorities to share their personal feelings relative to the long standing church policy. So President Kimball starts leading discussions with other church leaders for months and months, and President Kimball also wanted to know what the Lord's feelings were on the matter. President Kimball, for instance, wrote, I prayed with much fervency. I knew that something was before us that was extremely important to many of the children of God. And he went to the temple alone and especially on Sundays and Saturdays so that he could be alone. And he explained later, it went on for some time as I was searching for this because I wanted to be sure. Flash forward to 1978. On Tuesday, May 30, 1978, President Kimball read to his counselors, who were Marion G. Romney and Eldon Tanner, a tentative statement that he had written in longhand, removing all priesthood restrictions from black members except those restrictions as to worthiness that rest upon all. He said he'd had a good feeling that about it. And two days later, President Kimball asked the other members of the first presidency and the quorum of the 12 to come to the Salt Lake Temple to further discuss the subject. Then on Thursday, June 1, 1978, the First Presidency and the 12 counseled for two hours on the subject, each expressing himself freely. At 2:45pm they formed a prayer circle around the temple altar. And the Lord confirmed the wishes of the brethren to rescind the policy that prohibited African blacks from receiving the prisoners priesthood. That's the revelation, essentially.
- [35:45]
A
Yeah. Momentous occasion. This, this is, I Love that at 2:45pm is when they formed that circle. Because this, this is one of those flashbowl moments for many of them. They'll, they'll talk about this. There were, there were 13 men present. Elder Delbert L. Stapley was in the hospital and Marky Peterson was in South America. But they had the majority of the Quorum there. And they speak of a greater unanimity in the Count council of the 12 and the first presidency than they had ever experienced before. And many of them go on record talking about their experience. For instance, like Gordon B. Hinckley said, quote, not one of us who was present on that occasion was ever quite the same after that. President Benson Ezra Taft Benson said, following the prayer, we experienced the sweetest spirit of unity and conviction that I have ever experienced. Our bosoms burned with the righteousness of the decision we had had made. I love that one. President Thomas S. Monson, he said, the revelation was clear. There was an outpouring of the Spirit that came over us. The prophet of God had received the Lord's answer, and it was confirmed by those members of the twelve who with him, received the same revelation at the same time. And on and on. There's so many of these, these powerful eyewitness accounts that are worth looking at. As far as the two absent apostles go. The revelation was later shared with Elder Mark E. Peterson and Delbert Stapley. President Kimball informed Elder Peterson, who was on assignment in Quito, Ecuador, at the time, through a personal telephone call, Elder Peterson later recalled, he said, quote, I was delighted to know that a new revelation had come from the Lord. I felt the fact of the revelation's coming was more striking than the decision itself. On the telephone, I told President Kimball that I fully sustained both the revelation and him, 100%. All three members of the First Presidency, then go and visit Elder Stapley, who's in the hospital at that time. And he gave his approval of the revelation. So at that point, support for the revelation from the First Presidency and the twelve had become unanimous.
- [37:52]
B
And let me address that for just a second. This is sort of a minor controversy, but I have heard some people, some of the more cynical people I know, say they waited until Elder Peterson was out of town to hold this meeting, which Markey Peterson had been an ardent defender of the priesthood policy, but he was an ardent defender of the church generally. That quote that we shared there from Markey Peterson shows that, yeah, he said, I sustained both the revelation and President Kimball 100%, and the very efforts that the first presidency made. First to go to the hospital and talk to Elder Stapley and then to call Elder Peterson and make sure he was there shows that they recognize that unimaginative was very important when it came to this revelation being received and received the way that it was.
- [38:45]
A
That right there helps solve, I think, one of the biggest puzzles about why it took so long for this revelation to come, particularly because, as we talked about kind of the rough start, the fits and starts of this policy, even coming into the church, growing out of its racial context. There was no revelation that started it, but there seems to be no church president after Brigham Young that puts a stop to it until President Kimball. And that's caused a lot of angst for some people, like, how could this not be inspired if, you know, if so many. It was nine church presidents between President Brigham Young and President Kimball, like, there's nine church presidents and none of them stopped it. How could you say this wasn't an inspired policy? And I think what you just said right there is part of the key. Like, this is the first time the apostles had unitedly asked the Lord about this, asked him to rescind it. And the very first time the apostles got together and approached the Lord about this, he confirmed their decision to rescind it powerfully. Right? In ways we just described. Powerfully confirmed their decision. And so, you know, Elder McConkey actually spoke shortly after this, two months later, to a group of seminary institute teachers, religious educators in the church. And he highlighted this. He said, when we seek the Lord on a matter, speaking of the twelve Apostles and First Presidency, when we seek the Lord on a matter with sufficient faith and devotion, he gives us an answer. You'll recall that the Book of Mormon teaches that if the apostles in Jerusalem had asked the Lord, he would have told them about the Nephites. But they didn't ask. They didn't manifest that faith. So they didn't get an answer. And then he says, one underlying reason for what happened to us two months ago in 1978 of June is that the brethren asked in faith. They petitioned and desired and wanted an answer. President Kimball in particular and Casey, I think that that right there is for me a pretty satisfying response as to why it took so long. It's going to take over 100 years to get a quorum of the 12 and First Presidency again. Don't forget all the context outside the church, in the culture in America and racial tensions and segregation and all the things like keep all that in mind. It took over 100 years for the apostles to unitedly ask the Lord if we can extend the blessings of the priesthood and temple to all, regardless of race. And as soon as that happened, boom, the revelation came.
- [41:15]
B
This whole episode in studying it has led me to see how important it is for unanimity to be built among the leadership of the Church. The two examples that have really, really stood out to me are the 1890s, when Lorenzo Snow just does a lot of work to make sure that everybody is unified about the practice of succession and how a new president of the Church is chosen so that when he becomes president of the Church, we don't wait a couple years to reorganize the First Presidency. We just do it with the Lord's Sanction. And then this example with President Kimball where he spends several years working to build consensus, working through people's concerns, following the Lord's Counsel in section 121 of Using Persuasion, gentleness, meekness, loving kindness to get people to where they're okay with things. And bam, once they're unified, the revelation comes. So, boy, there's a lot of behind the scenes, we tend to imagine the prophet gets a revelation. Everybody's like, yes, sir, let's do this. Which does happen occasionally. But on a big issue like this, where they were seriously confronting the legacy of past racism in the Church, they needed to have this unanimity amongst themselves so that they could be in tune to receive the revelation that they did receive.
- [42:33]
A
That's big.
- [42:33]
B
Official Declaration 2 was canonized by vote of the church on September 30, 1978. So the revelation happens in June. The Official Declaration 2, which acknowledges the revelation, is canonized that September. And then it's added to the Doctrine and covenants in 1981. And again, we want to emphasize official declaration two is not the revelation. Revelation itself. It doesn't seem that there was a dialogic revelation received here, but it was a recognition of the revelation. And we should add Too that in 2013, a new edition of the Doctrine of Governments was produced that had an official historical introduction to Official Declaration 2, which hadn't been there before. And we're going to talk a little bit about that. There's a little bit of controversy linked to the historical introduction that we'll discuss. But okay, now that we've set the table, and man, did it take a while to set the table. But we told you this was coming. Complicated, right? Let's actually get to the content and read the official Declaration itself.
- [43:37]
A
Okay, so the way that it's in our Scriptures right now, it gives you a little context even to how this was read to the members of the Church. It says, to whom it may concern. On September 30, 1978, at the 148th Semiannual General Conference, Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the following was presented by President N. Eldon Tanner, First Counselor in the First Presidency of the Church. Here's what he said. In early June of this year, the First Presidency announced that a revelation had been received by President Spencer W. Kimball extending priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members of the Church. President Kimball has asked that I advise the Conference that after he had received this revelation, Revelation which came to him after extended meditation and prayer in the Sacred rooms of the holy temple. He presented it to his counselors, who accepted it and approved it. It was then presented to the quorum of the twelve Apostles, who unanimously approved it and was subsequently presented to all other general authorities who likewise approved it unanimously after the 12 had accepted. They have a sacred, like, solemn assembly in the temple where they invited all the Seventy to come. And the 70s were asked to sustain this after testimony was heard from those who were there when the revelation was received. And so that had happened as well. Okay. And then he said, president Kimball has asked now that I read this letter. And Casey, do you want to. Do you want to read the letter?
- [45:04]
B
Yeah. And let me just add, parenthetically, Marion D. Hanks, who is one of the 70 that was in that meeting, his son just wrote a really great biography of his dad where he describes his dad's experience sitting in the that meeting when they make the announcement. And his dad, who had been wrestling with this issue for years and years, just was overwhelmed. And Alden Tanner, President Kimball has now asked that I read this letter. Here's the letter. June 8, 1978, to all General and local priesthood officers of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints throughout the world. Dear brethren, as we have witnessed the expansion of the work of the Lord over the earth, we have been grateful that people of many nations have responded to the message of the restored Gospel and have joined the Church in ever increasing numbers. This in turn has inspired us with the desire to extend to every worthy member of the Church all the privileges and blessings which the Gospel affords, aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us, that at some time in God's eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood. And witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the upper room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance. He has heard our prayers and by revelation has confirmed that the long promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood with power to exercise its divine authority and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple. Accordingly, all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or or color. Priesthood leaders are instructed to follow the policy of carefully interviewing all candidates for ordination to either the Aaronic or the Melchizedek priesthood to ensure that they meet the established standards for worthiness. We declare with soberness that the Lord has now made known his will for the blessing of his children throughout the earth, who will hearken to the voice of his authorized servants and prepare them to receive every blessing of the Gospel. Sincerely yours, Spencer Wilson Kimball. N. Eldon Tanner Marion G. Romney the.
- [47:20]
A
First Presidency Then, once that letter was read, President N. Eldon Tanner said, recognizing Spencer W. Kimball as the prophet, seer and revelator and President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, it is proposed that we, as a constituent assembly, accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord. All in favor, please signify by raising your hand. Right hand. All the hands go up. Any opposed by the same sign? None. And then it says, the vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous in the affirmative. Salt Lake City, Utah September 30, 1978.
- [47:57]
B
I'll just say it's really nice to read that. It feels like I've scrutinized all the sections of the Doctrine and Covenants, but this one I just kind of. Yeah, let's. I haven't read it through carefully and man, like I was. It was getting misty in here when I was reading the language where they talked about the faithfulness. Sorry. Of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld. That President Kimball was saying, you know what? We see you and we see those of you that have been faithful in spite of being unable to hold the priesthood. That. That is just really cool. That hasn't hit me before because maybe I haven't sat down and just read through this word for word until just so powerful language in every section of the Doctrine and Covenants. But I love that part of this official declaration.
- [48:55]
A
You can call it in some ways an intercessory prayer, the way he said it here. We have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the upper room of the temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance on their behalf. It's beautiful, Casey. Thank you for sharing that, man. This is an intercessory prayer from a prophet pleading on behalf of a group of people to give them the full blessings of the gospel. What's more beautiful than that?
- [49:22]
B
Powerful. All right, so let's talk controversies. What could there possibly be? How do we deal with this? For instance, the historical introduction, which was introduced in 2013, which was a landmark, by the way. There's still people that reach out to me and basically say no. Didn't the practice originate with Joseph Smith? The Historical introduction that was Introduced, then made a number of landmark statements. Again, the introductions aren't canon, but they're very official statements. About as official as it gets. But the historical introduction acknowledges that people of African ancestry were ordained under Joseph Smith. But there's been controversy among people recently because the historical introduction also says church records offer no clear insights into the origins of the practice. That is in dispute a little bit. Right. So it seems like we know quite a bit about the origins of the practice. What would you say about that? If someone said, well, we don't really know the origin of the practice, strictly speaking, is that the best thing to say at this point?
- [50:33]
A
Yeah, at this point? No, that's not the best thing to say. I can see where people are coming from when they say, like, well, maybe this was a revelation because we just don't know the origins of it. Right. But by now, okay, it's 2025. Okay, see, now we know, according to the best researchers on this topic, which you mentioned, a lot of it's been done in the last 10 years since. So that's. That statement was 2013. That happens to be the same year that I think the Gospel topics essay on this comes out that same year. Since then, like we mentioned, Paul Reeve has published a couple books on this topic. One of them a Deseret book and others great research. As recently as this last year, some research by Matt Harris. Russell Stevenson has looked into this deeply. He's got a great book on the topic as well. And I would just say that according to the best researchers on this topic, the statement that quote records offer no clear insights is no longer really historically defensible. I think that's fair. We know more now than we did back in 2013 thanks to to their research, especially with the 1852 speeches now publicly available that provide context for the shift in policy. Once we get into that, we can see the rationale is actually explicit. We do know, like Brigham Young established that by first conflating black people with the curse of Cain, stating that these people that are commonly called Negroes are the children of Cain. I know they are. And then he says, I know they can't bear rule in the the priesthood. See, that's a rationale. That's a reason. Right? That's a reason. He also brought up the race mixing, that this was a problem, that we want to keep the races separate. This is part of the thing. We don't want blacks to rule in the church. Right. Because of all the fraught nature of the historical context of that time. And then this rationale is later put in competition with the rationale of being less valiant in the premortal life, that theory. But we do know the origins, like both, both those explanations used to justify the ban are very historically documented now. And I don't think there's a lot of dispute as to the origins of the ban as such. Right. I hope that one day that heading is is updated. There was just a batch of headings that were updated that was not changed in this round. Hopefully it could be updated in the next round because we've got got a lot better more I think robust research on this now that I think is pretty indisputable.
- [52:58]
B
You and I were both delighted to see that the, for example, the heading to section 119, which prior to 2025 had made it sound like the law of tithing replaced the law of consecration, which we argued. No, that's clearly not what the revelation says was updated to reflect that that wasn't the case. And I went back and looked at that to see if there had been any changes to the introduction to Official Declaration, and there haven't been. And you know what? We live in a new era where instead of producing a whole new edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, because it's almost all electronic now, they can issue updates from time to time.
- [53:37]
A
I don't think there's any ill will here. Right.
- [53:39]
B
I want to say that the 2013 historical introduction is groundbreaking. Like, I'm just so glad that it's there and I can actually point to it and say to my students, yeah, Joseph Smith doesn't appear to have been the originator of this practice. The second thing is, I would also say that them saying church records offer no clear insights into the origins of this practice. Yes, we have learned a lot since then, but are there still unanswered questions? Yeah, a ton. About the origins of the priesthood practice. And also that those historical introductions aren't meant to be exhaustive, that there's a lot of them in the Doctrine and Covenants that I could look at and say, oh, they should have put this or this or something this in. But it's intended to kind of give you the bare minimum. Here's what you need to know to know what was going on at the time. So maybe it will be changed or updated in the future. But I also don't want to back away from acknowledging that in 2013 it was a real game changer when those historical introductions were put into Official Declaration one and Official Declaration two. And I don't want to move Away from saying, I'm so grateful that they did that.
- [54:49]
A
It's.
- [54:49]
B
It really does help that the church put something in as official a format as they did to acknowledge that the origins of the priesthood policy were more complex. Because I still have wonderful, great members of the church, people that I love and respect that will send me extensive things saying, no, the policy originated with Joseph Smith, or the policy was a revelation and stuff like that that are getting harder and harder to defend. So I'm glad that it's there. Maybe it'll be updated in the future, but I'm not going to criticize either. It's still a difficult issue that the Church has handled with a surprising amount of grace and care in the last couple years. I'm just really grateful for that.
- [55:32]
A
I'll point out one thing that church records offer no clear insights on in terms of the origins of this practice. And I've had extended conversations with Paul Reeve about this and Russell Stevenson to our great scholars on this. I've pushed him to try to understand what happened between 1847, when Brigham Young actually in winter quarters, defends Q. Walker Lewis as being one of our best elders, and he says, we don't care about the color, to 1852, when he clearly cares about the color and now blacks are not allowed to be ordained to the priesthood. I've pushed these great scholars on, like, what happened in those five years. And both of them, them have said, we wish there were better records as to what happened. Like, something happened in there. It seems to be surrounding race mixing, right? This idea of intermarriage and having babies and that whole Enoch Lewis and his wife and their baby, like that whole kerfuffle that happened when Brigham Young found out about that seems to be playing into this. But there is, like, a couple gaps in those years where it's like, how does he come so strong in 1852 with such confidence to say, say, nope. Even though Orson Pratt is pushing back against him and saying, we haven't received a revelation about this, no apostles ever said this. And he says, well, I'll say it then. And, you know, so he's way more confident in 1852. In fact, he's 180% different in 1852 than he was in 1847. And let's go ahead and acknowledge there are not clear records as to exactly when he flipped and. And why precisely, although we suspect it's around that race mixing issue. So I think that's fair. Right? That is a blind spot still. And we wish there were better records, but there are not.
- [57:15]
B
And a responsible historian is gonna always be willing to say, we just don't know. We can infer things, we can make connections, but we don't know everything that we wanna know. And I think everybody that's dealt with this that we've cited here, like Paul Reeve and Russell Stevenson and Matt Harris, have been fair in their handling of the sources.
- [57:38]
A
So my concern is that people hide behind the phrase we don't know everything to basically suggest that maybe this was inspired, maybe God inspired. And it's like, seriously, can you really say that? Like, think about it. Like, the whole rationale Brigham Young did give when he was very confidently teaching this is Cain. That's been disavowed. The very rationale that Orson Pratt gave to defend this was premortal lesbian valiancy. That's been disavowed. The whole fear mongering in the United States and within the church about interracial marriage has been disavowed by our current church leaders. The revelation in 1978 overturned that policy very clearly, very quickly, as soon as there was unanimity among the quorum. And we've got statements like, for instance, just two months after this revelation was received, Bruce R. McConkey, in that same talk I quoted earlier, he. And this is as close to quote, unquote, an apology as you're ever going to, I think, hear. But he said this to church educators. He said, forget everything that I have said or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. And then here's his admission. He says, we spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that has now come. That's really good.
- [58:55]
B
Elder McConkie right there. Okay. And also the church essay in 2013 do go as far as to say any explanations that were given for any rationales for the priesthood policy the Church has disavowed. In fact, you read this already, but this is from the 2013 Gospel Topics essay. Today, the church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a prison premortal life, that mixed race marriages are a sin or the blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. So, yeah, the reasoning, the rationale behind the priesthood and temple policy has been disavowed by the church. Last summer, summer 2025, under topics and Questions on Gospel Library A whole new bunch of material on race and the priesthood, including a number of common questions, was published, and that is very, very updated, and it connects to primary sources and a lot of things that are really helpful in understanding this. So I recommend that as well. So the Church has gone as far as to say, yeah, the reasoning explaining this, we disavow. Or you quoted that statement by Quentin L. Cook where he said, Brigham Young said some things that don't reflect our current understanding and that we're products of his time, which we always run into this, and we have to grapple with it. The prophets are fallible. We don't believe in infallibility of prophets, and we also believe the prophets are influenced by their external environment, and we take that into account when we make our judgments.
- [60:36]
A
Yeah. I think that is at the heart of why this is such a hard topic, Casey, is because of our discomfort with prophetic fallibility. Like, we love the prophets. We sustain the prophets. We want to uphold them. And so when something like this, something so constant consequential as barring an entire race from priesthood ordinances is in our history, that's wildly uncomfortable for us because of our love of prophets. And so that instinct to defend them. I totally understand that. And I've seen people cut, you know, splice hairs with what you just said, saying, we know that the rationale wasn't inspired, but maybe Brigham Young was inspired, but it was just like that. The reasons he gave weren't inspired. Like, they'll try to, like, still, like, somehow defend him. And it's like, come on, can we just let a prophet make mistakes? Can we not try to hold on to the assumption that prophets are basically infallible? They can make small mistakes, but not big ones. Come on. They can make big mistakes, too. Like, Joseph Smith lost 116 pages of scripture, like, because he trusted in man more than God. And we got section three rebuking him up and down about that God. God works with. With infallible prophets. Right? Like. Like President Uchtdorf said back in 2013. He said, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when leaders in the church have simply made mistakes. God is perfect, but he works through us. His imperfect children and imperfect people make mistakes. If we want Brigham Young to weigh in on this, here's what he said. Quote, can a prophet or an apostle be mistaken? Do not ask me any such questions. For I will acknowledge that all the time, but this is important, too. But I do not acknowledge that I designedly lead this people astray. One hair's breadth from the truth. I do not knowingly do a wrong, although I may commit many wrongs. I love the balance in that statement of my heart's good, even though I might make mistakes. I'm not trying to lead anyone astray, even though I might commit many wrongs. And I think we're getting closer with the Gospel topics and essay with Paul Reeves book being published at that Deseret book. I think we're getting closer just to being more comfortable with saying this was a mistake and it was corrected in 1978 when the Quorum of the Twelve and First Presidency unitedly asked God if they could overturn it. And he powerfully, overwhelmingly said yes.
- [63:00]
B
And I'll go so far as to say I can still say without discomfort, I believe Brigham Young's a prophet of God, and I'm grateful for his leadership. I don't know if we know everything that we want to know here, to be honest, honest with you. But I also respect the teaching shared by leaders of the church, including President Oaks, that it's important to understand the origins of this, but we also don't want to dwell on it too much to the point to where we let it impact the future of the church.
- [63:29]
A
All right, Casey, so we're coming to the end of this. Let's talk about the consequences of Official Declaration 2.
- [63:41]
B
It's difficult to adequately state the consequences Of Official Declaration 2, but let's provide a couple snapshots of members of the church around the globe, particularly those of African ancestry. So, for instance, on June 11, 1978, just days after the revelation came, Joseph Freeman was the first man of African descent to be ordained an elder. And he and his wife were sealed in the Salt Lake Temple. Just a couple days later, in November 1978, the first missionaries were sent to Nigeria to establish the church in that part of Africa. And at the time, there were fewer than 1,000 African Americans among the church's 4 million Latter Day Saints. By 1998, this is 20 years after the revelation, there were an estimated 500,000 members with African roots and an estimated 100,000 in Africa, and the Christian another 300,000 in Brazil. But let me personalize this. One story that really touched me was the story of Helveccio and Ruda Martins, who were both black members of the church in Brazil. They were stunned when the revelation was given. In fact, this is what Helvecchio later recalls. He said, I could not contain my emotions. Ruda and I went into our bedroom, knelt down and prayed. We wept as we thanked Our Father in Heaven for an event we had only dreamed about. The day had actually arrived and our mortal lives. And two weeks later, Helvetio received the Melchizedek priesthood and then was given the privilege of ordaining his son, Marcus Martins, who I've met. Marcus Martins was the head of the religion department at BYU Hawaii for a number of years. Helvecchio later said, when he did this, when he ordained his son, I felt as if I would explode with joy, happiness and contentment. What an incredible experience for me and Marcus. And I cited him because in 1990, Helvetchio was ordained as a General Authority 70 and became the first person of black African descent to receive a calling as a general authority of the church. Elder Martins, when he was called, said this. I was not called by the Lord to represent any specific race, nationality or ethnic group of his children. I was called by prophecy, revelation and the laying on of hands to represent God's children, be they white, black or any other color, whether they lived on earth. Less than 13 years earlier, I had been given the priesthood, and now I stood at a pulpit that some of the greatest men of all time had occupied with the living apostles and prophets seated directly behind me. So Helvetio and Rudo Martins are just a sample of people that were affected by this revelation and the inclusion of official declaration too. It's such a powerful thing and I just wanted to have the voice of someone whose life was immediately changed by this and then went on to effect great change within the church.
- [66:37]
A
We should share a couple of statements from President Dallin H. Oaks, who said some great statements about all of this. Like for instance, on one occasion, he explained, whether we look on the revelation as the end of the beginning of the restoration or as the beginning of the end of what it portends, it is difficult to overstate itself importance in the fulfillment of divine command that the gospel must go to every nation kindred and people. That one's awesome. And then in 2018, on the 40th anniversary of the priesthood revelation, President Oaks offers the following commentary. He said. And this is so good, he said, when we consider what has happened in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and in the lives of its members since 1978, we all have cause for celebration. Institutionally, the church reacted swiftly to the revelation on the priesthood. Ordinations and temple recommends came immediately. The reasons that had been given to try to explain the prior restrictions on members of African ancestry, even those previously voiced by Revere church leaders, were promptly and publicly disavowed he goes on. Institutional policies or practices that could have inhibited the full integration of members of African Americans ancestry, such as the separate congregations common in many Christian churches, were prevented by the continuation of the long standing LDS policy of ward membership being determined geographically. Similarly, membership records continued to make no mention of race or ethnicity. The Lord had spoken through his prophet and his church obeyed. In contrast, changes in the hearts and practices of individuals individual members did not come suddenly and universally. Some accepted the effects of the revelation immediately and gracefully. Some accepted gradually. But some in their personal lives continued the attitudes of racism that have been painful to so many throughout the world, including the past 40 years. Others have wanted to look back, concentrating attention on re examining the past, including seeking reasons for the now outdated restrictions. However, most in the church, including its senior leadership, have concentrated on the opportunities of the future rather than the disappointments of the past. Tremendous line right there. He says. We have trusted the wisdom and timing of the Lord and accepted the directions of his prophet. We have realized the eternal significance of God's prophetic teaching that one being is as precious in his sight as as the other, quoting Jacob 2:21. In doing so, he concludes, we have received new impetus to fulfill the command that we are to teach the everlasting gospel unto all, to all nations, kindreds, tongues and people. Close quote.
- [69:27]
B
Good stuff, right? Right. An acknowledgement that the revelation didn't immediately change the hearts of every person and that some of us still grapple with some of the these issues today and will for some time for the immediate future. But that line the senior leadership have consecrated on the opportunities of the future rather than the disappointments of the past maybe frames this for us. Like what can we do for this? How can we work towards the goal of building Zion now that the Lord has made this change? And I love the way that Paul Reeve established this. We talked about different phases. He talks about a new phase where he says it did not mark something new as much as it re established a commitment to the founding principles of the revelation. Like one text that gets quoted all the time in the church and it should be quoted and shouted from the rooftops is that idea in the Book of Mormon that all are alike unto God, black and white, bond and free, male and female. That is such a powerful statement that has been with us since the beginning of the Restoration. Restoration. And it's something that we should all carry in our hearts with us. In fact, let me maybe take us home with a statement from Russell M. Nilsen, our recently departed prophet. He said this God does not love one race more than another. I assure you that your standing before God is not determined by the color of your skin. Today I call upon our members everywhere to lead out in abandoning attitudes and actions of prejudice. I plead with you to promote respect for all of God's children. So those are our marching orders right now. That's what the Lord has asked us to do. And not just be good people. Not just, you know, passively don't cause problems. But he says we're supposed to lead out in helping solve these problems and bring justice and equity to everybody.
- [71:27]
A
Yeah. And it seems like there's still work to do, right? There's still work to do. There are still brothers and sisters in our church who may not feel like they've been treated equally. And I think we can help lead out, as President Nelson is saying, in making sure that doesn't happen in our sphere of influence. Right. We don't want to ever be complicit to this scourge of elitism that has plagued really good men and women in times past. Let's just root it out of our souls. If we see any vestige of it still there, let's get it out. That's a great call to repentance. It's a very positive call to repentance from President Nelson. It's time to respect all of God's children. Full stop.
- [72:07]
B
Amen. Well, that was a fun ride. And like I said, if you want a more in depth discussion, we've got some other stuff. This is such a complicated subject and there's been so much good research on it. I can't believe this is the last time we're going to dip our toes in these waters. But for now, I hope you don't gloss over Official Declaration 2. I hope you have a good discussion about it and fully appreciate. Appreciate what? A milestone in the history of the church. Official Declaration 2 was 100.
- [72:36]
A
Well, thank you, Casey. Always a pleasure to be with you. And this concludes part two of three this week. Right. We still have articles of faith to discuss before this week's come. Follow me. Study concludes. So we'll see in the next episode and dive into that.
- [72:51]
B
Yep. See you there.
- [72:57]
A
Sam.