The Genesis of a church’s stand on race

(Tom Smart/ WASHINGTON POST ) - Darius Gray, left, and Don H. Harwell, both members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City, Utah.

(Tom Smart/ WASHINGTON POST ) - Darius Gray, left, and Don H. Harwell, both members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City, Utah.

On the drive back to Salt Lake, Harwell makes it clear he does not appreciate any attempt to connect the historic plight of blacks in the church to Romney, whom he strongly supports.

“This is the only stuff they can come up with,” Harwell says, referring to Romney’s political enemies. While he gives credit to church leaders who agitated against the ban, he acquits rank-and-file members who remained quiet. “We have prophets, seers and revelators as our leaders, and we have to follow them,” Harwell says, emphasizing that Romney “had no control over what the church did.”

Gallery

More from PostPolitics

How the IRS scandal helped immigration reform

How the IRS scandal helped immigration reform

THE FIX | Washington simply can't walk and chew gum.

Bachmann’s absurd claim of a vast IRS health database

Bachmann’s absurd claim of a vast IRS health database

FACT CHECKER | Rep. Michele Bachmann claims the IRS will have control of a vast database with the most intimate health-care secrets of Americans. Not so.

Full text of President Obama’s speech on national security

Full text of President Obama’s speech on national security

“We must define the nature and scope of this struggle, or else it will define us,” the president said.

Read more

A revelation

As Romney left Utah and moved to Massachusetts, a debate raged in Mormon intellectual circles between those who accepted the ban as doctrine and those who considered it a temporal policy. Progressives argued that the ban’s origins lay in pioneers seeking to appease anti-abolitionists as they passed through Missouri.

In 1973, Lester E. Bush, an amateur Mormon historian, made a strong case that no church president had ever received a revelation instituting the ban and thus no revelation was required to lift it. The next year, in the face of a potential NAACP lawsuit, the hierarchy quietly reversed another policy against performing baptisms of the dead and allowed other sacred rites “for people who had any Negro blood in their veins.” But the major issue was still the priesthood.

“There were internal conversations at the highest levels,” said Philip Barlow, a professor of Mormon history and religion.

Romney remained disengaged with the issue. “I don’t remember conversing with him about it,” said Barlow, who served as a counselor to Romney in the Boston church. Romney “was a very practical leader, not a theologian, not a historian, not a scholar but a business genius.”

In June 1978, Church President Spencer W. Kimball announced that God has “heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come” in which “all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or color.”

The lifting of the ban, which, like the church’s anti-polygamy Manifesto, is now part of church scripture, was an indelible moment that many Mormons consider the most emotional in their lives. Romney has said he pulled his car over to the side of the road to weep with joy upon learning of the lifting of the ban. “Even at this day it’s emotional,” he said in 2007 on “Meet the Press.”

Only five months after his revelation, Kimball dedicated a flagship temple in Brazil, a key gateway for expansion for a growing church. Soon after, the church sought to cleanse the aura of racism from church textbooks and, in 1981, even from a scriptural passage, in which a righteous tribe is described as “pure” rather than “white.”

More than three decades later, the church says it still doesn’t know where the ban came from.

“Though the origins of the priesthood restriction are unclear, it was understood that a change would require revelation,” said church spokesman Michael Purdy, who called the lifting of the ban “a day of great rejoicing” that led to “robust growth in Africa and racially diverse areas of the United States and Latin America.”

But the church will not say whether the revelation was necessary to lift the ban or to give the policy reversal the force of absolute authority.

What is clear is that the consequences of the ban are still rippling.

“When I did my mission in Atlanta, there were still some people who are hurt, people wouldn’t join because of it. They feel that it wasn’t based on revelation, that it was purely discrimination,” Barima Kwarteng, 24, a computer engineering major from Ghana, said as he carried books into the BYU library. “Some people were like, ‘Why are you a part of this church?’ ”

Nearby, in the Wilkinson Center, students attended a ’70s dance in honor of Black History Month. They dressed in funky outfits and listened to a DJ playing “Brick House” under a slideshow featuring a dunking Dr. J, the cast of “Diff’rent Strokes” and a box of Count Chocula cereal.

Ashley Wright, 19, a business management major, attended the party with an Asian American friend wearing an Afro wig.

“Growing up, I always thought it was a long time ago,” Wright, who is white, said of the ban. “I thought that was forever ago. But then I was like, ‘my parents were alive then.’ ”

Navirlene Volcy, a 19-year-old African American student majoring in neuroscience, spent the evening dancing in a circle with friends — some black, some not.

To her, the ban was a recent revelation.

“It kind of surprised me,” said Volcy. “There’s a class here where they talk about Brigham Young having feelings that colored people were inferior. How can you be a prophet and commune with God and think that?”

She said she’d like to know what Romney thought about the church’s complicated racial past, but she added: “I’m not sure it would make a difference. It hasn’t made me leave the church. People are imperfect.”

Loading...

Comments

Add your comment
 
Read what others are saying About Badges