Our Leaders are mostly white and American


pam
 Share

Recommended Posts

Opinion

I fully recognize that I’m probably putting myself on the chopping block for writing on such a controversial topic (especially as a white American) but I truly believe the principles surrounding this issue are important to digest, so here goes.

The new First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints faced some tough questions during January 16th’s press conference. One question in particular stuck out to me and I’d like to address is directly. The question, from The Salt Lake Tribune’s religion reporter, was:

https://mormonhub.com/blog/faith/defending-the-faith/white-american-lds/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watch this space! In a generation, I predict a much more integrated group of leaders. In fact, I predict that in 20 years the membership of the church will be majority Latin American/Asian/African heritage. Furhermore we will someday have a substantial contingent of former Muslims and those of Jewish heritage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sunday21 said:

Watch this space! In a generation, I predict a much more integrated group of leaders. In fact, I predict that in 20 years the membership of the church will be majority Latin American/Asian/African heritage. Furhermore we will someday have a substantial contingent of former Muslims and those of Jewish heritage. 

I think we are pretty much already there as far as majority of membership being Latin American etc.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is interesting.  It's from 2016.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints_membership_statistics

One thing that isn't there.  It's showing a large population of LDS from Republic of the Congo.   What isn't showing on this graph is that a temple is under construction there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something else here.  

https://ldschurchtemples.org/chronological/

If you take a look at the temples under construction and those announced, only 1 is in the United States.  This shows there is tremendous growth outside of the US for membership.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, pam said:

I think we are pretty much already there as far as majority of membership being Latin American etc.  

I'm pretty sure the plurality of Saints are white Americans in the western US. That will probably remain the case for our lifetimes. I have no stats to back my opinion up, but that's my impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vort said:

I'm pretty sure the plurality of Saints are white Americans in the western US. That will probably remain the case for our lifetimes. I have no stats to back my opinion up, but that's my impression.

Not talking about in the US.  Latin Americans would be those in the Latin American countries.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pam said:

Not talking about in the US.  Latin Americans would be those in the Latin American countries.  

Maybe I misunderstood you. I thought you wrote that the majority of membership was Latin American, not just the majority outside the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vort said:

Maybe I misunderstood you. I thought you wrote that the majority of membership was Latin American, not just the majority outside the US.

I probably should have said, A large number are Latin American not majority.  So that was my bad.  But I was talking about outside of the US.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Wikipedia page is correct, my quick guestimate-summing indicates the number of members from south of the US border, but still in the Americas, is fast approaching the number of members in the US (they're behind by a million or so).  Of course, it doesn't divide out US members by race or ethnicity, so who knows the real numbers.  I'm in the camp of "it doesn't really matter that much".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Vort said:

I'm pretty sure the plurality of Saints are white Americans in the western US. That will probably remain the case for our lifetimes. I have no stats to back my opinion up, but that's my impression.

Here's a stat to back your opinion up... The Roman Catholic Church does not have any record of a black pope in its 2,000+ year history.  Sure, early records from a couple thousand years ago showed a pope from Roman controlled North Africa but there's no indication that he was black.  And, to top it off, over 200 of the 266 popes are from Italy.  And it took them 2,000 years to call a pope that is not from Europe or then-Roman/Byzantine Empires.  And even then, he's white.  The Roman Catholic membership is very large and very diverse.  So okay, they are doing the best they can with the limitations of the lack of Priesthood Authority.  But I still do believe they plead earnestly to God for guidance and God continues to inspire them for God's purposes.

Edit:  Whoops.  I misunderstood your post, but I'll leave the comment here anyway.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zil said:

If the Wikipedia page is correct, my quick guestimate-summing indicates the number of members from south of the US border, but still in the Americas, is fast approaching the number of members in the US (they're behind by a million or so).  Of course, it doesn't divide out US members by race or ethnicity, so who knows the real numbers.  I'm in the camp of "it doesn't really matter that much".

I think it's interesting to know some of the statistics however.  To some critics that say the Church is just a white American religion this helps to dispel some of that.  The church is growing rapidly outside of the US.  At one time it would have been correct.  But it no longer is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pam said:

I think it's interesting to know some of the statistics however.  To some critics that say the Church is just a white American religion this helps to dispel some of that.  The church is growing rapidly outside of the US.  At one time it would have been correct.  But it no longer is.

In theory that should be useful, but in my experience, if you demonstrate that over half the Church is non-white, they'll accuse the leadership of oppressing the members; if the day came when half the leadership were non-white, they'd say it took too long (or even that it's not enough).  Etc. Etc.  I've long since given up on trying to convince anyone of anything via rational means (unless said person has already proven to be a rational thinker and the only problem is that they're lacking facts).  But if you want to give it a go, more power to ya! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zil said:

In theory that should be useful, but in my experience, if you demonstrate that over half the Church is non-white, they'll accuse the leadership of oppressing the members; if the day came when half the leadership were non-white, they'd say it took too long (or even that it's not enough).  Etc. Etc.  I've long since given up on trying to convince anyone of anything via rational means (unless said person has already proven to be a rational thinker and the only problem is that they're lacking facts).  But if you want to give it a go, more power to ya! :)

Mainly it's lacking facts and only seeing Utah as what the entire Church is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When people comment on the lack of racial diversity in the Church I usually respond with,"And?"

I think it's ridiculous that we've created a culture where numerical correlation = causation.

Quote

1: I took a class in statistics last semester.

2: So, what was that like?

1: Well, one of the most remarkable things they taught was that correlation does not necessarily equal causation.

2: So, you felt like you benefited from the class, then?

1: Well, I'm not sure.

If you're looking for race, doesn't that mean you're a racist?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Racism check:  If you heard they were going to move Church headquarters to Brazil or Africa, would you be ticked off because that would mean the skin pigment of the church leaders would probably darken over the next few decades?

*shrug*

That's racial appropriation!!!:.bullhorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Racism check:  If you heard they were going to move Church headquarters to Brazil or Africa, would you be ticked off because that would mean the skin pigment of the church leaders would probably darken over the next few decades?

*shrug*

Nope.  Wouldn't bother me a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will be fun as we increase our membership outside of North America. Think of the parties! The family reunions! We have one member from the Congo. That Bro is his own traveling party just himself. People from the Congo are very gracious and welcoming. What missionaries we will have! ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, pam said:

Opinion

I fully recognize that I’m probably putting myself on the chopping block for writing on such a controversial topic (especially as a white American) but I truly believe the principles surrounding this issue are important to digest, so here goes.

The new First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints faced some tough questions during January 16th’s press conference. One question in particular stuck out to me and I’d like to address is directly. The question, from The Salt Lake Tribune’s religion reporter, was:

https://mormonhub.com/blog/faith/defending-the-faith/white-american-lds/

Thanks for posting this.  

Have read a lot about racism lately - mainly motivated by the overt racism reported in the news.  Books like Between the World and Me, The Tears We Cannot Stop, The Hate u Give, Blood In The Water, White American Youth.  The last being my favorite - but mainly because it's the only one where a person starts of feeling one way and then changes.

i'd never been exposed to some of the perspectives in these books.  i never knew people of Color felt the way that some of those books express - how they view people of the white race as (with varying levels of conscious intent) participating and supporting a system that oppresses them.  And not all their points are something i can immediately discount.  It really made me look inside and realize that i am not free from some of the more subtle feelings of racism.  It's not an easy exercise to try and objectively separate the natural response one experiences when someone is racist towards you, and racism you would display even if they didn't dislike you to start with.  i don't think either side is really good at this.  The majority tells the minority to 'get over it' and discounts the overt display of racism by a few as an unfortunate, but extremely uncommon misnomer that no longer occurs in the mainstream, and the minority points to very subtle biases in various social systems,  and the fact that the majority is the one who 'started it'.  Until one or both sides begin to treat the other better than they deserve, the negative feedback loop will likely not only continue, but be amplified by time and stoked by satan.

Though to try and be somewhat on topic to your post, my personal feeling is that the fact that the mormon church leadership is mostly white american males is an artifact of some of these subtle biases - and i don't think the church creates those biases - but that it does reflect them.  But i am not operating under the self-imposed compulsion to believe that everything that comes out of the church leadership is divinely appointed (this is just my opinion).

i also believe that the malicious intent ascribed by the writer of that SLTrib article to the church because of the fact that leadership is mostly white, american, and male, is misplaced.  

Most of us are just making decisions, criticizing decisions, and choosing the support todecisions of others in a way that we genuinely believe will make the world a better place.  And when we hate or dislike others who do it in a way that is different from our own - or assume they do it intentionally to come after or persecute us - i think we cause more problems than we solve.

And i'll bookend this response with an additional admission that this is merely my own opinion - and is, as always, worth much less than you paid for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:
  Quote

1: I took a class in statistics last semester.

2: So, what was that like?

1: Well, one of the most remarkable things they taught was that correlation does not necessarily equal causation.

2: So, you felt like you benefited from the class, then?

1: Well, I'm not sure.

correlation.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share