![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
< Schwarze und das Priestertum
Kritiker machen geltend, dass die Kirche niemals eine Kopie der Offenbarung hergestellt hat, die den Schwarzen garantiert, das Priestertum erhalten zu können.
Revelation is a process which generally follows a model in which "man inquires and then God inspires." In other words, mortals must generally seek guidance before they receive inspiration. God will generally not provide answers to questions which have yet to be asked.
Furthermore, if we are unable to receive and implement an answer regarding a given issue, due to personal limitations or circumstances which would prevent obedience, God will generally refrain from communicating with us about it. This is not due to any limitation or lack of desire on his part, but due to mortal limitations.
God rarely—if ever—uses his prophets as "teletype machines" who mindlessly transmit God's will word for word—he requires his prophets to inquire with some thought as to potential answers LuB 9:7-9). After they seek confirmation, the Lord can gently correct or confirm. A striking Biblical example of this principle comes from King David: He announced to Nathan, the prophet, that he wished to build a temple. Nathan thought this a grand idea, and replied "Go, do all that is in thine heart; for the LORD is with thee." However, despite Nathan's sincere belief that God concurred with David's plan, he later received a revelation which contravened his initial enthusiasm. siehe 2. Sam 7:2-17) God corrected his prophet and enhanced his imperfect understanding of the divine will.
Viewing revelation as a process often requiring patient preparation helps us understand why the priesthood ban wasn't lifted sooner. Lester Bush points out "three principle factors," while allowing for others, that created obstacles: "...the authority of decades of vigorous and unwavering First Presidency endorsement of the policy; a preconceived and highly literalistic reading of several verses in the Pearl of Great Price; and an ambient culture which was indifferent to, if not supportive of, Mormon attitudes toward blacks."[1]
Sometimes critics from other Christian faiths excuse beliefs and behaviors in their denominations' pasts, while suggesting a much higher standard should have been met by a community led by revelation. This criticism seems to ignore dynamics manifest in Biblical times in which inspired leaders such as Moses and Paul accepted slavery as part of the cultural norm and even promoted regulations for it Exodus 21:20-27; Lev 25:44-46; Deut 23:15-16; Epheser &:5-9; Pil 1:8-12; 1. Tim 6:1; Titus2:9. While what these leaders faced is not perfectly parallel to those in modern times, these prophets did not receive more socially progressive revelation than modern readers would have expected.[2] It is clear that sometimes less than ideal practices were permitted and upheld because of the "hardness of [Moses's followers'] hearts Mark 10:5."
Biblical history is replete with examples of the difficulty of gaining widespread conformity even after a paradigm-shifting revelation has been received. The New Testament apostles debated over how best to transition from preaching the Gospel only to the Jews to accommodating Gentile converts (Apg 15). Despite numerous miraculous manifestations to motivate them, the Israelites had to wander 40 years Deut 8:2 to weed out idolatrous beliefs keeping them from inheriting a promised land. Mormon history also has its examples of this type, including the length of time it took the general membership to come into full compliance with the Wort der Weisheit and the Manifest. If a revelation ending the priesthood ban had been received earlier, the Saints might not have accepted it. (Elder Marion D. Hanks is reported to have said "For me it was never that blacks [were unqualified but that] the rest of us had to be brought to a condition of spiritual maturity...to meet the moment of change with grace and goodness.[3]")
In 1954, after visiting the struggling South African mission, David O. McKay began to consider lifting the ban. In a conversation with Sterling McMurrin, he said, "It is a practice, not a doctrine, and the practice will some day be changed."[4] This was a departure from a 1949 First Presidency statement defending the ban as doctrinal, indicating a shift in his opinion. Leonard Arrington reported that President McKay formed a special committee of the Twelve that "concluded there was no sound scriptural basis for the policy but that church membership was not prepared for its reversal."[5] However, David O. McKay felt that only a revelation could end the ban. Sometime between 1968 and his death in 1970 he confided his prayerful attempts to church architect, Richard Jackson, "I’ve inquired of the Lord repeatedly. The last time I did it was late last night. I was told, with no discussion, not to bring the subject up with the Lord again; that the time will come, but it will not be my time, and to leave the subject alone."[6].
As McKay's health declined, his counselor, Hugh B. Brown, attempted to lift the ban as an administrative decision. However, it became even clearer that a century of precedent was difficult to reverse without a revelation, especially when some members and leaders—echoing George Q. Cannon—felt there might be a revelatory basis for the policy.
President McKay reportedly told Elder Marion D. Hanks that "he had pleaded and pleaded with the Lord, but had not had the answer he sought."[7]
Harold B. Lee was inclined to reconfirm the ban,[8] though Church Historian Leonard Arrington
Following Joseph Fielding Smith's death, President Lee did say, "For those who don't believe in modern revelation there is no adequate explanation. Those who do understand revelation stand by and wait until the Lord speaks....It's only a matter of time before the black achieves full status in the Church. We must believe in the justice of God. The black will achieve full status, we're just waiting for that time."[10]
As the church expanded its missionary outreach and temple building programs, leaders continued to run into problems of black ancestry preventing the building of local leadership in certain areas, most notably Brazil. The prayerful attempts to obtain the will of God intensified. Finally in June 1978, a revelation that "every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood" was received and later canonized as Amtliche Erklärung 2.
Many witnesses described the 1978 revelation on the priesthood. Wrote the past LDS Church Historian:
Elder David B. Haight said of the same experience:
Wiki Artikel zur Priestertumsoffenbarung 1978 |
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now