Black Mormons?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I was watching the TV show "House" and saw a black doctor on Dr. House's team who was a Mormon. House, being the unrelenting scoffer of all things religious, pilloried the young Mormon on a bet with another doctor that he could get him to lose his temper. After numerous jabs about Joseph Smith, polygamy, and religion in general, the black Mormon decked Dr. House.

It was strangely humorous to me, not that a Mormon was driven to violence (I had once provoked a Mormon boy to hit me in Jr. High), but rather that he was a black Mormon. We are only about a generation from when the LDS church oozed with unabashed racism based on the belief about the darkness of skin being associated with God's curse upon the evil Lamanites. This curse was said to be upon what is today native Americans, but the hue=curse belief easily translated to colored people as well. I'm Native American, yet I take this indictment upon my race with grace and humor. I'm also well aware that those days are behind us and no detectable trace of racism can be found in the LDS church today.

The question I have to ask is, being only a few decades removed from the church's racist past, how many non whites are happy to call themselves Mormons. About what percentage of your congregation would you estimate is of a non caucasian heritage? Are there any Native Americans like myself? I don't mean to offend white people. I'm just curious as to the measure of change. Thank you.

[slamjet]

I'm Hispanic and I'm not only wondering what your question has to do with anything, I'm not very please with the insinuation that a white would not be happy to call themselves Mormon because I am. Plus that change was well over three decades ago. I had friends that were black before 1978 and they were happy to call themselves LDS.

And that House is a re-run. He get's that Mormon to cheat. Nice job writers. Haven't seen you do that too any other religions.

[Backroads]

I know quite a few Native American LDS members who have been always very happy to consider themselves Mormon. Heck, my high school math teacher once spent half a class explaining why to us (at a public school appropriate level). I live in a high Hispanic area, most of them are Mormons.

As for happy to call themselves Mormons, are you insinuating that a bunch of non-white Mormons spent years sitting around and being "forced" to be Mormons? That's kind of insulting to them.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I'm Hispanic and I'm not only wondering what your question has to do with anything, I'm not very please with the insinuation that a (non)white would not be happy to call themselves Mormon because I am. Plus that change was well over three decades ago. I had friends that were black before 1978 and they were happy to call themselves LDS.

And that House is a re-run. He get's that Mormon to cheat. Nice job writers. Haven't seen you do that too any other religions.

Don't mean to offend, my friend, but I believe I lay out a compelling argument for there to be a cause for umbrage. Being hispanic, you decend from Native Americans just like I do. I'm happy that the LDS changed, but there's no denying how recently racism was thick, especially in Utah. Taking the American landscape as an example, its clear that racial injustice takes several generations to heal from. Though today, I'm not bitter about the displacement of my people from their land, I might feel differently if it happened to my parents and grandparents and I was only a few decades removed from the offense. Do you see my point?

Oh, and yes, in the hollywood alter-reality, those who carry themselves with unimpeachable religious piety become the prime target for a staged moral downfall. Such is the product of screen writers with minds adumbrated by darkness.

Edited March 1, 2011 by Saintmichaeldefendthem1

[jayanna]

Our Patriarch is Native American. He has been a Patriarch for a very, very, very long time. He gave me my Patriarchal blessing. He is one of my favorite people ever.

We have a lot of older folks in my ward, we live in an area with an overwhelming native American population. I have never heard a word, or a hint of racist ideas in my church...except by nonmembers trying to point a finger.

We have a black priesthood holder who converted in his adulthood, whose wife will not come to church to hear her husband give a talk, teach, or even perform a baptism...because she says it is a church for white people. Who is racist, who?

Perhaps you should go to blacklds.org and have a read.

I cannot stand being accused of that. A child of God is a child of God.

Oh, and a hispanic missionary taught me and baptized me. He was the district leader.

Edited March 1, 2011 by jayanna

[slamjet]

No I don't. Study of the early Saint's in Utah will show they were extremely welcoming and supportive of the Native American population when everyone else was displacing and killing them.

Anytime you throw out incendiary stuff like that, you need to back it up. Did you know there were plenty of Blacks who were baptized into the church even before the 1978 pronouncement? Did you not read in the Book of Mormon where God said he was not going to forget the Laminates and will prosper them?

What you posted was a regurgitation of typical anti-Mormon drivel that has no basis in fact.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Our Patriarch is Native American. He has been a Patriarch for a very, very, very long time. He gave me my Patriarchal blessing. He is one of my favorite people ever.

We have a lot of older folks in my ward, we live in an area with an overwhelming native American population. I have never heard a word, or a hint of racist ideas in my church...except by nonmembers trying to point a finger.

We have a black priesthood holder who converted in his adulthood, whose wife will not come to church to hear her husband give a talk, teach, or even perform a baptism...because she says it is a church for white people. Who is racist, who?

Perhaps you should go to blacklds.org and have a read.

I cannot stand being accused of that. A child of God is a child of God.

Oh, and a hispanic missionary taught me and baptized me. He was the district leader.

Perhaps Native American Mormons feel a special connection with the BOM stories because of the role of their ancestors in it and what may be a cause for offense is turned into a cause for endearment. Please understand, I'm approaching this question with my mind wide open.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

No I don't. Study of the early Saint's in Utah will show they were extremely welcoming and supportive of the Native American population when everyone else was displacing and killing them.

Anytime you throw out incendiary stuff like that, you need to back it up. Did you know there were plenty of Blacks who were baptized into the church even before the 1978 pronouncement? Did you not read in the Book of Mormon where God said he was not going to forget the Laminates and will prosper them?

What you posted was a regurgitation of typical anti-Mormon drivel that has no basis in fact.

Then what an opportunity to set the record straight!

[Traveler]

Don't mean to offend, my friend, but I believe I lay out a compelling argument for there to be a cause for umbrage. Being hispanic, you decend from Native Americans just like I do. I'm happy that the LDS changed, but there's no denying how recently racism was thick, especially in Utah. Taking the American landscape as an example, its clear that racial injustice takes several generations to heal from. Though today, I'm not bitter about the displacement of my people from their land, I might feel differently if it happened to my parents and grandparents and I was only a few decades removed from the offense. Do you see my point?

Oh, and yes, in the hollywood alter-reality, those who carry themselves with unimpeachable religious piety become the prime target for a staged moral downfall. Such is the product of screen writers with minds adumbrated by darkness.

The last so-called Indian war was fought in 1923 in Blanding Utah. The war was being fought between the Native Americans and the USA - mostly the Calvary. The Mormons were not involved and for many years had good relationships as established by Jacob Hamblin. When the Mormons were driven from Nauvoo they fled into hostile “Indian” territory. It was thought that they would all be killed but as it turns out they were helped by the Native Americans.

There is a religious connection and it is believed that the American Indians are connected to the people of the Book of Mormon and will play an important role in building what the Mormons call Zion. Perhaps you should read the Book of Mormon.

On a personal note my wife is part Native American - and I had a mission companion and friend that is Native American that convinced me to spend 40 days in the wilderness on a dream quest.

The Traveler

[Backroads]

I guess I'm curious to see how individuals would feel about this. The ones I've known never had much of a problem with that. Our old mayor was a black Mormon; my parents went to high school with him. He and his family had been very active Mormons long before 1978.

There's really no way of lumping everyone's opinions together. Racism in Utah was nothing like where it was in other parts of the US. I'm sure there were some who had issues with the situation, but it seems they either accepted it, dealt with it, or left the Church.

[jayanna]

It does not matter to me what color anyone is...the twelve tribes are gathering, we are all sons and daughters of a Heavenly Father.

We are a congregation of wonderous variety. "'Love one another, as I have loved you. This new commandment, love one another. By this shall men know ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."' (Hymn no. 308) - not "what color are you?"

“We Must Keep One Another†- Ensign June 2001

The following is from a mission report from 1880, recorded by Amos Wright and in the church archives, available to read at Wind River Mission - Ensign Aug. 1982

when we left the lodge that night I found myself completely surrounded by Indians for several Hundred yards. It seemed as though I could not get away although it would soon be light. One would take hold of me and another and another, till I could not Begin to answer them all. The next day they commenced Coming Early[.] I was in the water almost constantly until after sundown, except when Confirming & Recording. Baptized & Confirmed about 120 persons that Day[.] I have no Ideah how many I administered to. … I became so weak towards Evening that it seemed to me that I could not say another word. still I said if they should come all night I would not turn one person away, & they did come till after sundown; some of them appeared to be perfectly Out of Breath and their Horses all of a Foam. …

At one point he got very very ill:

I did pray that I might be relieved or taken out of the world, for my suffering seemed to be beyond Endurance. Finally I asked the Indian who seemed to be so much Concerned for me, if he was a Mormon, (for they were all Strangers to me,) he replied that he was.

I then asked him if he would pray for me[.] he said he did not know how but would try. I ordained Him and told him to put his Hands on my head and Pray for me which he did[.] I felt very Much Relieved. I then asked him if those other two belonged to the church[.] he said they did. I ordained them[.] they all put their Hands on my head, and prayed for me. As the Gentiles would have it, the moment they took their Hands from my Head I happened to be Entirely well, but I would be afraid and ashamed to say that I was Healed in any Other way Only by the Power of God. And whether the sick were healed through my ministrations or not I think I was Healed through the ministrations of those 3 Indians.

He personally baptized hundreds and hundreds of the Shoshone tribe, and recorded each one:

Brother Wright’s November 1880 missionary report was discovered in 1978 in the archives of the Church, together with a small leather-bound notebook containing the names of all the Indians he had baptized during his numerous missions. These names were carefully recorded, together with sex, pronunciation, date and place of baptism, and confirmation. Included was the name of Chief Washakie, some of his other names, and their interpretation in English.

Measure of change, I certainly hope not.

Edited March 1, 2011 by jayanna

[Tyler90AZ]

Did you know part of the reason Mormons were driven out of so many locations is because they were against slavery?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

The last so-called Indian war was fought in 1923 in Blanding Utah. The war was being fought between the Native Americans and the USA - mostly the Calvary. The Mormons were not involved and for many years had good relationships as established by Jacob Hamblin. When the Mormons were driven from Nauvoo they fled into hostile “Indian” territory. It was thought that they would all be killed but as it turns out they were helped by the Native Americans.

There is a religious connection and it is believed that the American Indians are connected to the people of the Book of Mormon and will play an important role in building what the Mormons call Zion. Perhaps you should read the Book of Mormon.

On a personal note my wife is part Native American - and I had a mission companion and friend that is Native American that convinced me to spend 40 days in the wilderness on a dream quest.

The Traveler

It's clear that the early Mormon settlers were on the receiving end of persecutions, not the giving end. I can see how good relations would have been established between equally afflicted parties. Setting Native Americans aside for a moment, I think the particular attitude toward blacks was influenced by the prevailing segregationist attitudes of those days and the Mormons were far from the only ones who saw it as their "christian duty" to oppose integration. The reverberations in many Protestant churches from past racial segregation can be seen even today with congregations that are almost entirely black or white. I don't think the LDS church would be immune from the lag in racial homogenization experienced in so many other churches.

[bytebear]

When I read phrases like "the LDS church oozed with unabashed racism" my testimony of the Gospel is reaffirmed. You see, God puts stumbling blocks in front of people so that only the elect who are willing to search with hearts and look toward God for answers rather than the understanding of men will find the truth. Already you have learned a little more about the history of the LDS Church and its not so racist view of Native Americans. I pray you will continue to learn and study, and seek God's guidance in understanding the purposes behind the priesthood restriction, and move beyond blind accusations.

[jayanna]

I don't think the LDS church would be immune from the lag in racial homogenization experienced in so many other churches.

Our church is one of the first in the U.S. to have black priests preaching to white congregations, and in fact the wards are assigned according to geographical location alone. You go to the ward where you live...and all of the buildings are built according to the amount of people meeting in them...buildings are made to the same degree of comfort and elaboration in all neighborhoods, not according to how much the local members make in their vocations. The number of regular attendees determines the size of the building (and we are getting a new one soon, yay!)

My ward building has the same quality of carpeting and wall dressings, and paintings as the ward buildings in the richest part of the nearby metropolis.

I have seen my church record, and my race is nowhere on it.

[Elphaba]

I know this thread is about black LDS, but since the Church's early relationship with Native Americans has been discussed a few times, I thought it important to explain that while intent and effort were genuine, most of the time things did not go well between the two groups, mostly because they both struggled for their very survival.

From the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

RELATIONS IN THE GREAT BASIN. When the Latter-day Saints arrived in the Great Salt Lake Valley in 1847, they found several Native American tribal groups there and in adjacent valleys. The Church members soon had to weigh their need to put the limited arable land into production for the establishment of Zion against their obligation to accommodate their Native American neighbors and bring them the unique message in the Book of Mormon.

Brigham Young taught that kindness and fairness were the best means to coexist with Native Americans and, like many other white Americans at the time, he hoped eventually to assimilate the Indians entirely into the mainstream culture. He admonished settlers to extend friendship, trade fairly, teach white man's ways, and generously share what they had. Individuals and Church groups gave, where possible, from their limited supplies of food, clothing, and livestock. But the rapid expansion of LDS settlers along the Wasatch Range, their preoccupation with building Zion, and the spread of European diseases unfortunately contravened many of these conciliatory efforts.

A dominating factor leading to resentment and hostility was the extremely limited availability of life-sustaining resources in the Great Basin, which in the main was marginal desert and mountain terrain dotted with small valley oases of green. Although Native Americans had learned to survive, it was an extremely delicate balance that was destroyed by the arrival of the Latter-day Saints in 1847. The tribal chiefs who initially welcomed the Mormons soon found themselves and their people being dispossessed by what appeared to them to be a never-ending horde, and in time they responded by raiding LDS-owned stock and fields, which resources were all that remained in the oases which once supported plants and wildlife that were the staples of the Native American diet. The Latter-day Saints, like others invading the western frontier, concerned with survival in the wilderness, responded at times with force.

An important factor in the conflict was the vast cultural gap between the two peoples. Native Americans in the Great Basin concentrated on scratching for survival in a barren land. Their uncanny survival skills could have been used by the Mormons in 1848, when drought and pestilence nearly destroyed the pioneers' first crops and famine seriously threatened their survival.

The Utes, Shoshones, and other tribal groups in the basin had little interest in being farmers or cowherders, or living in stuffy sod or log houses. They preferred their hunter-gatherer way of life under the open sky and often resisted, sometimes even scoffed at, the acculturation proffered them. Nor did they have a concept of land ownership or the accumulation of property. They shared both the land and its bounty-a phenomenon that European Americans have never fully understood. The culture gap all but precluded any significant acculturation or accommodation.

Within a few years, LDS settlers inhabited most of the arable land in Utah. Native Americans, therefore, had few options: They could leave, they could give up their own culture and assimilate with the Mormons, they could beg, they could take what bounty they could get and pay the consequences, or they could fight. Conflict was inevitable. Conflict mixed with accommodation prevailed in Utah for many years. Violent clashes occurred between Mormons and Native Americans in 1849, 1850 (Chief Sowiette), 1853 (Chief Walkara), 1860, and 1865-1868 (Chief Black Hawk)-all for the same primary reasons and along similar lines. Conflict subsided, and finally disappeared, only when most of the surviving Native Americans were forced onto reservations by the United States government.

Still, the LDS hand of fellowship was continually extended. Leonard Arrington accurately comments that "the most prominent theme in Brigham's Indian policy in the 1850s was patience and forbearance…. He continued to emphasize always being ready, using all possible means to conciliate the Indians, and acting only on the defensive" (Arrington, p. 217). Farms for the Native Americans were established as early as 1851, both to raise crops for their use and to teach them how to farm; but most of the "Indian farms" failed owing to a lack of commitment on both sides as well as to insufficient funding. LDS emissaries (such as Jacob Hamblin, Dudley Leavitt, and Dimmick Huntington) continued, however, to serve Native American needs, and missionaries continued to approach them in Utah and in bordering states. Small numbers of Utes, Shoshones, Paiutes, Gosiutes, and Navajos assimilated into the mainstream culture, and some of that number became Latter-day Saints. But overall, reciprocal contact and accommodation were minimal. By the turn of the century, contact was almost nil because most Native Americans lived on reservations far removed from LDS communities. Their contact with whites was mainly limited to government soldiers and agency officials and to non-Mormon Christian missionaries.

Elphaba

[selek]

Not to be too blunt about this, but "Black Mormon" makes about as much sense as "Black Irish".

The first word in each compound adjective describes a particular heritage, but outside of "geneology", neither is relevent.

It is the latter word that is important, not the former.

There is no evidence whatever of someone being denied baptism or access to the Gospel based upon their lineage, skin color, or any other superficial status.

All were and all remain welcome in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Contrary to what the charge of racism insinuates, "blacks" have been part of Mormon congregations almost from the beginning- and were always welcomed as such.

There are d$#%^d few other faiths- and fewer congregations- who can make that claim.

Even today, fifty years after the Civil Rights era, Sunday morning remains the most segregated time slot in America.

If memory serves, the Southern Baptist congregation was formed because the Baptist unity split over the ordination of black ministers and the necessity of incorporating freed slaves into "white" congregations.

Travel throughout the country today, and you will find congregations of almost every faith that have separate services based solely upon the skin color of the congregants.

The closest you will come in LDS religious services are separate congregations based on language requirements- and even those are rare.

For the record, it was not "blacks" who were denied the Priesthood- it was those of African descent. In other words, lineage, not skin color.

"Blacks" have been ordained from the very beginning.

And finally, I am of a lineage (African American, Native American and several other things) that would have been denied the Priesthood before 1978.

I am proud to be Mormon and do not believe that either I nor my ancestors have been denied anything to which they were entitled by the Mormon Church.

[Mahonri]

Racism could/can be found in all American churches (even among Catholics) from the earliest of times. It wasn't something singular to Latter-day Saints.

Currently, I would describe our congregation as colorful. I home teach a Native American family, last Sunday I sat in back of a Latter-day Saint that some would describe as black, I would describe her as a wonderful sister in the Gospel of Christ.

[FunkyTown]

I was watching the TV show "House" and saw a black doctor on Dr. House's team who was a Mormon. House, being the unrelenting scoffer of all things religious, pilloried the young Mormon on a bet with another doctor that he could get him to lose his temper. After numerous jabs about Joseph Smith, polygamy, and religion in general, the black Mormon decked Dr. House.

It was strangely humorous to me, not that a Mormon was driven to violence (I had once provoked a Mormon boy to hit me in Jr. High), but rather that he was a black Mormon. We are only about a generation from when the LDS church oozed with unabashed racism based on the belief about the darkness of skin being associated with God's curse upon the evil Lamanites. This curse was said to be upon what is today native Americans, but the hue=curse belief easily translated to colored people as well. I'm Native American, yet I take this indictment upon my race with grace and humor. I'm also well aware that those days are behind us and no detectable trace of racism can be found in the LDS church today.

The question I have to ask is, being only a few decades removed from the church's racist past, how many non whites are happy to call themselves Mormons. About what percentage of your congregation would you estimate is of a non caucasian heritage? Are there any Native Americans like myself? I don't mean to offend white people. I'm just curious as to the measure of change. Thank you.

Depends on where you are. With there being all of 2 black guys in Utah, the numbers there aren't high.

In London, England, I'd say almost half are non-white.

Heck, the isle of Tonga is something like 32% LDS with most of the Polynesian countries showing a very high rate of adherents.

Latter-day Saints (LDS) / Mormon Statistics / Church of Jesus Christ Statistics

Black LDS members are very high. In Alberta, Native LDS members are very prevalent.

The gospel isn't something to teach only to specific races or creeds.

[Dravin]

Also according to Wiki 38% of the Church population resides in Latin America, they by and large are going to be non-white, this article [ Mormons in Africa: A Bright Land of Hope - LDS Newsroom ] gives a figure of 320,000 members in Africa (which would be predominately black). .38 of 13 million is something like 4.9 million, add in the Africa numbers and that's 5 and change million non-whites who are members of the Church. Then you have the Asia members, Japan for instance has 125K, South Korea has ~29K. Asia is dwarfed by Latin America but the point is there are a lot of non-whites who are Mormon (and yes, I'm aware all the numbers given are those on the rolls not necessarily active, but figures for America, Europe and Canada will have the same stipulation).

[NeuroTypical]

We are only about a generation from when the LDS church oozed with unabashed racism based on the belief about the darkness of skin being associated with God's curse upon the evil Lamanites.

...

I'm also well aware that those days are behind us and no detectable trace of racism can be found in the LDS church today.

I'm sorry - what part of this historical observation is unique to LDS folks? From what I can tell, you just described Americans in general - not mormons. It seems odd to single out Mormons and talk about our journey from humanity's racist past, as if our journey was somehow the only one that was made.

And as far as that history goes, mormons were persecuted for wanting to free slaves before it became fashionable to do so. Joseph Smith favored a solution to slavery that involved freeing blacks. The territory of Utah stood firmly with the northern states in the Civil War. Blacks were allowed membership into our church a heck of a lot earlier than a lot of Christian churches.

The question I have to ask is, being only a few decades removed from the church's racist past, how many non whites are happy to call themselves Mormons.

Well, the church is going gangbusters in South America and Africa. There are more saints outside of the US than in it.

You might want to check out Black LDS Mormons.

Edited March 1, 2011 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[RipplecutBuddha]

I'm wondering why one can state that the early church "oozed with racism" when historically speaking the LDS church was attacked because of its lack of racism.

1. The fact that Joseph was against slavery, even though he did not support the abolishment of it. He suggested the slaves be paid for, then set free.

2. The fact that the saints were helped on numerous occasions by the Native Americans during the years crossing the plains and settling in the west.

3. The fact that blacks were welcomed as members from the beginning, though they could not hold the priesthood. (The reason there are all black protestant churches in the south is because none were allowed to join already existing congregations....and now they have the nerve to call us racist.....)

regarding these issues, the church has been ahead of the curve, the healthy discussion of the priesthood notwithstanding.

I understand that what went on in the church in previous years is far different than what we want to see happening now, but those were different times, and the church, and the nation as a whole, has grown quite a bit since then. Maturation takes time, and in the process misaken ideas and incorrect notions come about here and there.

It's fine to examine the growth of the church, but you cannot study history through the eyes of today's society. It would be akin to criticizing Newton for not understanding Einstein's theories, then wonder why it happened.

Yes there was racism in the church, but as you study the period itself, outside the church racism was far worse for quite a while. It's all about perspective.

[Blackmarch]

I was watching the TV show "House" and saw a black doctor on Dr. House's team who was a Mormon. House, being the unrelenting scoffer of all things religious, pilloried the young Mormon on a bet with another doctor that he could get him to lose his temper. After numerous jabs about Joseph Smith, polygamy, and religion in general, the black Mormon decked Dr. House.

It was strangely humorous to me, not that a Mormon was driven to violence (I had once provoked a Mormon boy to hit me in Jr. High), but rather that he was a black Mormon. We are only about a generation from when the LDS church oozed with unabashed racism based on the belief about the darkness of skin being associated with God's curse upon the evil Lamanites. This curse was said to be upon what is today native Americans, but the hue=curse belief easily translated to colored people as well. I'm Native American, yet I take this indictment upon my race with grace and humor. I'm also well aware that those days are behind us and no detectable trace of racism can be found in the LDS church today.

The question I have to ask is, being only a few decades removed from the church's racist past, how many non whites are happy to call themselves Mormons. About what percentage of your congregation would you estimate is of a non caucasian heritage? Are there any Native Americans like myself? I don't mean to offend white people. I'm just curious as to the measure of change. Thank you.

The percentage is very dependant on where you go.. if you're in utah, arizona, california, the percentage is over 90% anglo or anglo mixed, where as if you go to outside the US or places like detroit that percentage is almost reversed.

You will find that the church racial mix tends to follow the area it covers.

In one perspective the Bible is very racist.

Gods priesthood at one point was limited to only certain jews.. over time it has opened up to more and more.

In the case of the book of mormon we have to understand what it means to be "cursed"- quite simply it means to be seperated from the blessings of God, which yes is a punishment, but if you study both the book of mormon and bible you will find that every group that had fallen away from God's people ended up being "cursed".

Edited March 1, 2011 by Blackmarch

[rameumptom]

I'm not sure I would call it "unabashed racism". Was there racism in the Church? Of course, but no more than in other religions and areas of the country.

Keeping people from the priesthood due to a teaching of Brigham Young is different than the Jim Crow Laws and the lynchings that went on in the South through the 1960s. Don't forget that the Southern Baptists broke away from American Baptists over the slavery issue (they were pro-slavery and believed the Bible supported black slavery). Many of these same Southern Baptists were the ones involved in the KKK, lynch mobs, and Jim Crow Laws. THIS is what I would call "unabashed racism."

Were there racist Mormons. Definitely. I spent 16 years in Montgomery, Alabama right after the Revelation on the Priesthood, and can definitely tell you we had a struggle getting many members to accept that blacks would now be baptized and joining the wards and branches.

Some of the teachings of the GAs back then were also racist, but based upon a misinterpretation/misunderstanding of Brigham Young's teachings.

As for the racial content of a ward, much of it depends on the mix in the locality. If you hadn't noticed, most cities are still not integrated. Whites tend to live in white neighborhoods, blacks in black neighborhoods, and Hispanics in Latin neighborhoods. Our ward units being geographical means just that: an inner city unit will have a greater chance of having a variety/mixture than a white suburb.

I serve in a Spanish congregation in Indianapolis. Given we pull most of them out of the three stakes here, it means we reduce the mixture in the wards. However, we do this on account of language, not race.

Still, when I was in Alabama, we saw an ever increasing mix in many of our units, as more and more blacks join the Church.

Again, since 1978, we've had thousands of blacks join in Africa. We are growing stakes, building temples, and many areas are now self-sufficient in leadership.

[pam]

I've always wondered why I never hear the terms Chinese Mormons, Japanese Mormons, English Mormons, but people are always quick to point out Black Mormons.

Heavenly Father certainly doesn't differentiate. As long as we keep putting titles, people will think racism.