Black Mormons?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

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.

Let's examine the scriptures in question:

"...the Lord shall curse the land with much heat...and there was a blackness (2) came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people....And Enoch also beheld ...the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it were the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not a place among them." Moses 7:8,22 Pearl of Great Price

"...after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations." (I Nephi 12:23)

"...Behold, they had hardened their hearts against him...wherefore, as they were white, and exceeding fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticingunto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their sins." (2 Nephi 5:21-22)

"And the skins of the Lamanites were dark...which was a curse upon them because of their transgression against their brethren...therefore they were cursed; and the Lord God set a mark upon them. And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preservehis people..." (Alma 3:6,8)

"And then shall they [Lamanites] rejoice...and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people" (2 Nephi 30:6, 1830, 1920, and 1977 editions)

Many of the answers here have to do with the accord of the LDS church toward blacks and Native Americans replete with numerous attempts to scrubb LDS history of any imbrument of racism. I know a little bit about history and how it often confounds popular beliefs. Even during the slavery years, examples of great kindness could be found in slave states while examples of great cruelty and racism could be found in Northern non slave states. If I were to daisy chain the examples of southern kindness, I could paint a picture of slavery as not being such a bad thing while ommitting facts that work against such a notion. Going back to the LDS, while I'm sure that many examples of interracial justice can be cited, it serves no good purpose to present a completely white washed revision of LDS history bereft of ugliness. For example:

"There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient, more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less...There were no neutrals in the war in heaven. All took sides with either Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there...The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits" (Doctrines of Salvation published 1954,1:61,65,66)

--Joseph Fielding Smith

This was not the exception, it was the rule. And I make no apology for saying that the LDS "oozed with racism" because that is a fact. Now I'm coming at this as a Catholic from the Roman Catholic Church, an institution with 2000 years of history to answer for. And much of it was certainly not flattering. I see many Catholics make an attempt at revisionist history to remove any blemish from our record. Every atrocity and injustice has an explanation that mitigates or even exhonorates the Church's conduct. Maturity is being able to face the rueful events that plagued the history of your faith and still say, "I'm proud to be Mormon, not because we were perfect, but because of what we overcame." By the same note, I'm proud to be Catholic, even with the eggregious mistakes of our past.

[slamjet]

This thread is a whole lot of attempts at "Gotcha!" and is disconcerting. The OG poster really needs to think of something other than archaic, useless, meaningless innuendo and posting of anti-Mormon garbage and then demands the record to be set straight.

IF the OG poster really wanted to know, he would have done some research himself instead of trolling the internet for whatever will illicit a supposed intellectual discussion on church history.

If he want's to think that it is factual that the LDS church is oozing with racism then he needs to rethink his research technique because he has of yet to back it up with any meaningful sources. It's all innuendo and personal interpretation; quite far from fact.

If he thinks we are white-washing history, then he should move on. It's obvious he's not here to learn anything. Just to take little bits and pieces here and there to justify his own conclusions.

This thread needs to be locked.

Edited March 1, 2011 by slamjet

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

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.

A credit to Mormons missionary efforts the world over, to be sure. However, I think that the "race doesn't matter so why bring it up?" is a very white attitude and doesn't work toward reconciliation because it isn't true any more than the "every issue is a race issue" view held by some non white people. As a Mormon, you come from a heritage of perseverence through persecutions and as such shouldn't deny that same pride to blacks and Native Americans like myself who also have a heritage of perseverence through injustices. Put another way, if Mormon is an identity to be proud of, then so is black, hispanic, Chinese, and Native American and for the same reason.

[Backroads]

Saintmichael, I'm still confused at what you want out of us. Is there a particular answer you're looking for? Why is racism within the Church so different from racism outside of it?

[bytebear]

The LDS Church did not "ooze with racism." Studies have shown that members were no more or less racist than anyone else. Also, the concept of the "Mark of Cain" used to justify slavery existed long before the church. A few months back I posted a Time Magazine article about the church from the 1950s or 60s, and not one mention about the "oozing" of Mormon racism. Why? Because it wasn't an issue at the time. The OPs historical view is very narrow.

[Backroads]

A credit to Mormons missionary efforts the world over, to be sure. However, I think that the "race doesn't matter so why bring it up?" is a very white attitude and doesn't work toward reconciliation because it isn't true any more than the "every issue is a race issue" view held by some non white people. As a Mormon, you come from a heritage of perseverence through persecutions and as such shouldn't deny that same pride to blacks and Native Americans like myself who also have a heritage of perseverence through injustices. Put another way, if Mormon is an identity to be proud of, then so is black, hispanic, Chinese, and Native American and for the same reason.

Where have we been denying that pride to Native Americans and Blacks?

[bytebear]

A credit to Mormons missionary efforts the world over, to be sure. However, I think that the "race doesn't matter so why bring it up?" is a very white attitude and doesn't work toward reconciliation because it isn't true any more than the "every issue is a race issue" view held by some non white people. As a Mormon, you come from a heritage of perseverence through persecutions and as such shouldn't deny that same pride to blacks and Native Americans like myself who also have a heritage of perseverence through injustices. Put another way, if Mormon is an identity to be proud of, then so is black, hispanic, Chinese, and Native American and for the same reason.

Interesting that you mention Missionary efforts, but the church in Ghana and Nigeria came about without a single missionary there. The blacks of that country found the church first and established LDS congregations all on their own. Fascinating that a group of people outside the race issues of the United States can look past such things.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

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.

This is the vein of thought I'm trying to isolate and explore. Many have responded with examples of racial parity indicating that I didn't make my question clear enough. With the quoted sections of 2 Nephi in the BOM and also the Pearl of Great Price, how does any black man or Native American overcome the offensive hue=curse paradigm spelled out in the Book of Mormon to become a Mormon themselves? If you are Native American, then perhaps you can shed some light on this. There are so many respondants who are getting bent out of shape about the race issue, that I'm having difficulty getting an answer to an honest question. So let's look at this again:

"...the Lord shall curse the land with much heat...and there was a blackness (2) came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people....And Enoch also beheld ...the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it were the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not a place among them." Moses 7:8,22 Pearl of Great Price

"...after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations." (I Nephi 12:23)

"...Behold, they had hardened their hearts against him...wherefore, as they were white, and exceeding fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticingunto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their sins." (2 Nephi 5:21-22)

"And the skins of the Lamanites were dark...which was a curse upon them because of their transgression against their brethren...therefore they were cursed; and the Lord God set a mark upon them. And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preservehis people..." (Alma 3:6,8)

"And then shall they [Lamanites] rejoice...and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people" (2 Nephi 30:6, 1830, 1920, and 1977 editions)

My question is simple. Of those of non white descent who become Mormon, how do they view this? Moreover, how do they overcome it?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Interesting that you mention Missionary efforts, but the church in Ghana and Nigeria came about without a single missionary there. The blacks of that country found the church first and established LDS congregations all on their own. Fascinating that a group of people outside the race issues of the United States can look past such things.

Thanks for the information. That's an amazing fact.

[Backroads]

This is the vein of thought I'm trying to isolate and explore. Many have responded with examples of racial parity indicating that I didn't make my question clear enough. With the quoted sections of 2 Nephi in the BOM and also the Pearl of Great Price, how does any black man or Native American overcome the offensive hue=curse paradigm spelled out in the Book of Mormon to become a Mormon themselves? If you are Native American, then perhaps you can shed some light on this. There are so many respondants who are getting bent out of shape about the race issue, that I'm having difficulty getting an answer to an honest question. So let's look at this again:

My question is simple. Of those of non white descent who become Mormon, how do they view this? Moreover, how do they overcome it?

I would daresay the stuff in the scripture would be a matter of interpreation and personal feelings.

If that's your question, how did we get so far away from it? Maybe we should end the paranoia and look for some real examples, though I think those black LDS links might provide some perspective.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Where have we been denying that pride to Native Americans and Blacks?

It's easy to miss, but the statement that people shouldn't identify themselves as Black Mormon, Native American Mormon, Japanese Mormon, etc because race doesn't matter (a flatly false assertion) is a denial of heritage that can be offensive. I'm sure Pam meant no harm by it, but perhaps we should visit why non whites believe racial heritage does matter very much.

[slamjet]

It's easy to miss, but the statement that people shouldn't identify themselves as Black Mormon, Native American Mormon, Japanese Mormon, etc because race doesn't matter (a flatly false assertion) is a denial of heritage that can be offensive. I'm sure Pam meant no harm by it, but perhaps we should visit why non whites believe racial heritage does matter very much.

A flatly false assertion in who's book, yours?

Non-whites believe racial heritage does matter? That's a political question, not religious. And is just a flat out racist comment. What about white's who are full of pride in their British, Irish, Scottish, Italian, Etc heritage? All you are doing it trying to race-bait and foment distention. This is way, way, way below anything intellectual.

This whole thread, your insinuation and self proclamation of "truth" is insulting and idiotic.

[Backroads]

I agree--plenty of whites are very proud of their heritage.

I'm trying to read you right: I think you're saying that there should be more discussion about the feelings and history of non-white LDS members, which is a fair statement. But I also think there are many, many opportunities where that has happened. (are we still waiting for a forum member to share their personal feelings?) Yet I also subscibe to the notion that a member of a race/religion does not exactly represent every thought, feeling, and belief of that race/religion.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Saintmichael, I'm still confused at what you want out of us. Is there a particular answer you're looking for? Why is racism within the Church so different from racism outside of it?

Good point. Perhaps one of the biggest differences is how racism was codified in the LDS holy books the BOM and POGP. I won't bore you by posting those citations again. But while other Christian denominations practiced segregation, none of them have canonized scriptures of darkness of skin being a sign of God's hot disfavor. The reintigration of a Baptist church I can understand because practices can and do change. But what about a church that harbored racism as a matter supported by scripture?

Some are already coming after me with pitchforks, but I think you understand that I have the kindest regard and respect toward the LDS faith. I just have some honest questions about this issue. I won't keep touting the fact that I'm a Native American because I've never used that fact for leverage. I've never taken anything I haven't earned nor taken advantage of government programs that I would surely be eligible for. But that being my heritage, perhaps you can understand why this question intrigues me.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I would daresay the stuff in the scripture would be a matter of interpreation and personal feelings.

If that's your question, how did we get so far away from it? Maybe we should end the paranoia and look for some real examples, though I think those black LDS links might provide some perspective.

I read every single testamonial on blacklds.org but nobody touched on this specific issue. It really is a sensitive topic, isn't it?

[FunkyTown]

Good point. Perhaps one of the biggest differences is how racism was codified in the LDS holy books the BOM and POGP. I won't bore you by posting those citations again. But while other Christian denominations practiced segregation, none of them have canonized scriptures of darkness of skin being a sign of God's hot disfavor. The reintigration of a Baptist church I can understand because practices can and do change. But what about a church that harbored racism as a matter supported by scripture?

Some are already coming after me with pitchforks, but I think you understand that I have the kindest regard and respect toward the LDS faith. I just have some honest questions about this issue. I won't keep touting the fact that I'm a Native American because I've never used that fact for leverage. I've never taken anything I haven't earned nor taken advantage of government programs that I would surely be eligible for. But that being my heritage, perhaps you can understand why this question intrigues me.

I think the reason you're not getting as warm a response as you'd like is due to the tone with which you said certain things:

being only a few decades removed from the church's racist past

And:

We are only about a generation from when the LDS church oozed with unabashed racism

Both assume that racism was an affirmed truth in the scriptures and canonized truths. Since this is stuff that we believe, we obviously have to assume there were reasons beyond racism. If God inspired it, then it's not a case of racism. By assuming the church was racist, you're implying the scriptures were not inspired. It would be akin to going on to a conservative-minded Baptist website and saying, 'Knowing that the new testament is rife with misogyny, I'd like to know how any woman can join the church.'

It assumes far more than both parties agree to.

There's actually a website dedicated to answering your very questions - Black LDS Mormons

It will have analyses on all the various scriptures you're referring to and give responses.

I hope this was helpful.

[Blackmarch]

I'd like to share this video as it has some relevance to this thread. I've been enjoying this talk/lecture so far.

And i find it odd that this particular FAIRLDS video decided to show up today in my search topics (without having entered in anything that relates to race, or racial history)

it's given by Marcus Martins, one of the first few blacks to recieve the priesthood after the ban was lifted.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I think the reason you're not getting as warm a response as you'd like is due to the tone with which you said certain things:

FT, I can't apologize for those statements because they're true, so it may be that truth doesn't receive a warm reception. I think coming to terms with the mistakes of the past can only produce even better Mormons of stronger conviction.

Both assume that racism was an affirmed truth in the scriptures and canonized truths. Since this is stuff that we believe, we obviously have to assume there were reasons beyond racism. If God inspired it, then it's not a case of racism. By assuming the church was racist, you're implying the scriptures were not inspired.

No I don't believe the BOM or POGP were inspired, but Mormons do and that's the point.

It would be akin to going on to a conservative-minded Baptist website and saying, 'Knowing that the new testament is rife with misogyny, I'd like to know how any woman can join the church.'

It's a mistake to compare race with gender roles. Women even today cannot be a priest in my church nor will they ever. Nor should they be a priest, bishop, etc in any church and that has to do with the role God assigned to men and the different role He assigned to women. In regard to race, there should be no difference as a black man should be as qualified as a white man to hold the priesthood.

[Backroads]

I read every single testamonial on blacklds.org but nobody touched on this specific issue. It really is a sensitive topic, isn't it?

Apparently! I've heard that many do not like to feel that they have to pick between their religion and their race.

Anyone there open for direct quesitioning?

[FunkyTown]

FT, I can't apologize for those statements because they're true, so it may be that truth doesn't receive a warm reception. I think coming to terms with the mistakes of the past can only produce even better Mormons of stronger conviction.

No I don't believe the BOM or POGP were inspired, but Mormons do and that's the point.

But you realize you're coming in here, asking questions which suggest that the Book of Mormon isn't inspired. While that's where you're coming from, in order to have any meaningful dialogue, two parties have to come from a similar understanding of assumed truths. You're starting a dialogue with the assumed truth that the Book of Mormon is false. On a Mormon Website. To ask Mormons what they think.

That is an absurd thing to do. I don't think you're a stupid man, Michael. I'm fairly certain you can figure out why trying to have a conversation where the basic assumption is that the standard works of our church are wrong isn't going to go far on this website.

If you'd like, I can explain it in very basic terms, but I'm not going to condescend to you like that. You do recognize why there can be no real dialogue with the question you've asked, in the way you've asked?

[rameumptom]

There is truth, and then there is opinion based upon truth. Truth is, there was some racism in the LDS Church, based upon misinterpreted scripture and 19th century attitudes towards blacks.

Joseph Smith ordained blacks to the priesthood. That is a fact. Still, there is evidence that some other members held racist attitudes towards those blacks, like Elijah Abel.

It came to a head on the trek west (after Joseph's death), when one black elder set up his own community near Winter Quarters and successfully convinced a few white sisters to join him in plural marriage of his own making. This caused huge concerns among many members, especially considering the concept of eternal marriage would ever be affected by such if it were allowed to occur.

One member convinced Brigham Young that the scriptures talked about the curse of Cain and of Canaan, and in Abraham where the Pharaoh was cursed towards the priesthood, and with that began the curse tradition.

Later prophets, such as David O. McKay had it researched and could not find any revelation or proper scriptural interpretation to for any curse. Yet, when he asked the Lord to lift the ban, the Lord told him it was not the proper time. It wouldn't be until Spencer W. Kimball in 1978 that the Lord would establish it was the proper time.

Why the wait? We can only presume it was for these factors: 1. Civil Rights still was being played out under Pres McKay's presidency. 2. Some apostles may still have been holding on too strongly to the old belief. When Pres Kimball had the vision, 11 of the apostles were present. Elder Peterson, who was a strong proponent of the curse, was not present (think 3 witnesses, and Martin Harris having to withdraw for the others to see the gold plates). 3. The Church had turned global, was completing a temple in Brazil where there were many people of mixed race, and there was a need to know who could hold the priesthood and enter the temple.

I do not excuse the racism, then and now, in the Church. I do, however, recognize that beliefs and views were different there throughout American society than it is now. So, to judge the LDS so harshly on such an issue, while giving such a big pass on those religions that supported the KKK, the Confederacy, slavery, etc., is IMO hypocritical. The LDS promoted the end of slavery, were against secret combinations like the KKK, and most had no problem with giving blacks their civil rights. In this one thing we are still pilloried, though it was corrected a generation ago. Yes, we should not forget our mistakes, but let's place them in context with society, etc.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

But you realize you're coming in here, asking questions which suggest that the Book of Mormon isn't inspired.

Let's be clear, FT, that was a syllogism (BOM has these texts, God doesn't inspire racism, therefore BOM is not inspired) that you introduced, not me.

While that's where you're coming from, in order to have any meaningful dialogue, two parties have to come from a similar understanding of assumed truths. You're starting a dialogue with the assumed truth that the Book of Mormon is false. On a Mormon Website. To ask Mormons what they think.

My interest in the opinions of Mormons here are precisely because you believe those books to be inspired. My private beliefs don't apply because the discussion assumes that the BOM and POGP are inspired and I won't argue otherwise.

If you'd like, I can explain it in very basic terms, but I'm not going to condescend to you like that. You do recognize why there can be no real dialogue with the question you've asked, in the way you've asked?

I'm more interested in how black or NA members view these passages.

I'd like to share this video as it has some relevance to this thread. I've been enjoying this talk/lecture so far.

And i find it odd that this particular FAIRLDS video decided to show up today in my search topics (without having entered in anything that relates to race, or racial history)

it's given by Marcus Martins, one of the first few blacks to recieve the priesthood after the ban was lifted.

I watched this with great interest as well as part 2. It's interesting that Marcus Martins is frank about the racism he experienced in the LDS church, the very racism that some here are pretending didn't happen. He also believes that the ban on black priesthood was not inspired. Some may take hot issue with that, but it goes to show that blacks can have a very different persective on things than whites. Thank you for sharing this video. It does offer the perspective I'm looking for.

[rameumptom]

Originally Posted by Saintmichaeldefendthem1

I read every single testamonial on blacklds.org but nobody touched on this specific issue. It really is a sensitive topic, isn't it?

You read the testimonies, but did not go into the section on Priesthood?

Blacks and the Priesthood | Blacklds.org

Had you done so, you would have read my dear, deceased friend Renee state this:

I submit to you, brothers and sisters, that Heavenly Father did not punish us by giving us black skin and He didn’t show preference by allowing some to be born here while others endure different circumstances. Notice I didn’t say bad or evil circumstances, just different. But let’s continue, because I think in order to understand the priesthood ban, we must understand the prevailing attitudes of the day....

What are we supposed to do when someone makes an accusation against our Church leaders, either past or present, of being a racist? Agree with them–they certainly won’t be expecting that! But, by agreeing with them, all the “arguments” cease, and you can begin to really teach them. If you disagree and try to defend the Church, you’re already fighting a losing battle. Our Church leaders have made more than enough damning remarks to give our critics all the ammunition they need to accuse the Church of racism.....

What can we logically conclude from this? Only that the Lord knew of the ban, but did nothing to stop it. As to the exact reason why, only He knows.

But after much prayer and many talks with God, I think I might have an answer. Now, mind you, this is the “gospel according to Renee.” This isn’t something any General Authority has said, so I take full responsibility for my feelings. And speaking as a black LDS, this explanation has helped me more than any other…

The Lord has tried many times to make Himself known to His people. Since the beginning of our world, I believe His biggest wish is for all of His children to make it back to Him. But in coming to this world, we were given free agency. And sad as is it may be, not all of Heavenly Father’s children have used their free agency wisely. Christ Himself dealt with much opposition. The apostles dealt with opposition. Christians have always dealt with opposition. Finally, God had had enough, and when the last priesthood holder died, that was it! No more priesthood on the Earth…until the Church was restored.

We aren’t saying there were no more believers in Christ; there were–there always have been. But being a believer and having the priesthood are two entirely different things! The priesthood was now missing. Why the Lord chose to wait all those years to restore the Church, I don’t know. But He did, and now that He was ready to restore the Church, He still had to deal with the issues of the day. Slavery had not yet been abolished. So, Heavenly Father worked around it. He went ahead with His plans to reorganize His Church again. Remember, this would be the last time He did this on our Earth before the return of Christ.

Black people had been calling on God for years. They were already a tried and proven people. They were faithful in the midst of hardships. They had survived slavery; they had survived the taskmasters, they had survived the whip, the beatings, the hangings, the selling of their children. Heavenly Father knew He could count on them. So even though He didn’t give the word for the priesthood ban, He used it to further His purposes.

Sure enough, the people who had been calling on Him all through their days of slavery didn’t let Him down. When they heard the Gospel call, they responded. Saints like Jane Elizabeth Manning James, Elijah Abel, Green Flake, Hark Lay, and Samuel Chambers were among those who heard the Gospel message and responded. And since then, black people have continued to hear His call and respond to His voice.....

Brothers and sisters, black skin isn’t a curse. The curse of Cain was eternal separation from God. The curse was never being allowed back in the Father’s presence. The curse was knowing that he (Cain) had listened to the wrong voice and failed his mortal mission. That was the curse, not the skin. The dark skin was given as a protection. As my father has so beautifully taught me, black skin isn’t a curse, it’s a calling.

There are also excellent talks by Armand Mauss and Marvin Perkins.

Blacks and the Priesthood | Blacklds.org

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I do not excuse the racism, then and now, in the Church. I do, however, recognize that beliefs and views were different there throughout American society than it is now. So, to judge the LDS so harshly on such an issue, while giving such a big pass on those religions that supported the KKK, the Confederacy, slavery, etc., is IMO hypocritical. The LDS promoted the end of slavery, were against secret combinations like the KKK, and most had no problem with giving blacks their civil rights. In this one thing we are still pilloried, though it was corrected a generation ago. Yes, we should not forget our mistakes, but let's place them in context with society, etc.

Thank you so much. This is what I'm after, the truth. I find anti Mormon bigotry as distasteful as anyone here and that is certainly not my agenda. But to whitewash history serves no good purpose either. Christianity has had a long struggle on these issues. It was the Catholic Church that banned slavery in the entire continent of Europe during the middle ages, but then slavery returned between the 15th and 19th centuries, not only in America, but in many other nations as well, and it was a struggle yet again to purge this practice. Even during the darkest times of prevalent injustice, as you are pointing out, God has been at work through His people and that is very encouraging to know.

[rameumptom]

Today, we have LDS scholars who are experts in textual criticism. They look at a text and determine what it really meant by the text, not attempting to derive some personal meaning from it.

That's what caused this problem about believing a curse on the skin in the first place. The BoM talks about a "skin of blackness", yet what does that really mean? Native Americans are not black, they are more red-skinned. In fact, in Joseph Smith's day, "red-skin" was a common term for Indians. And what is a "skin of blackness?" Does it mean the same thing as "black skinned"? I personally do not think so. Instead, rather than determining actual color of skin, it is a metaphor for a person rejecting the light and choosing darkness. Most LDS scholars that do textual criticism agree with that assessment.

Sadly, we had Brigham Young decide on an interpretation, based upon the beliefs of the day, and then had people in the Church defending that interpretation ever since, rather than really looking closely at the text and seeing what it really was saying.