The Doctrine Behind the Priesthood Ban that Nobody Talks About

Abraham 1

Prior to 1978, those with black skin were not able to hold the priesthood in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But did you know that there was theological justification for that idea? The decision that effectively barred millions of people here on earth from obtaining the fullness of the gospel was theologically justified through the doctrine of the pre-existence, the doctrine of a premortal life. In this video, I want to do three things. First, I want to demonstrate that pre-1978 Mormonism historically and theologically justified the practice of withholding the priesthood from those with black skin.

Second, I want to show that though the priesthood ban was lifted and the idea of the curse of Cain has now been rejected, the underlying theology surrounding premortality is still very present in modern Mormonism. And third, I want to prove to you that the premortal life itself is incompatible with the Bible. If you're pretty familiar with Christianity, but not very familiar with Mormonism, then the idea of a life before this one is probably pretty foreign to you. Mormonism has historically taught that we are essentially eternal beings. Before being born as spirit children in heaven, our essential nature eternally existed as intelligence.

One Elias apostle said this. Not only was Jesus in the beginning with God, but man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence or the light of truth was not created or made, neither indeed can be. In fact, in a statement that's really shocking for most Christians, Joseph Smith said that the mind of man is self-existent and co-eternal with God. Another LDS leader said, "Life, intelligence, mind, the light of truth is an unccreated, eternally existent, indestructible entity. He is as eternal as God is, coexistent, in fact with God, of the same kind of substance or essence with deity, though confessedly inferior in degree of intelligence and power of God." Many believe that these eternal intelligences were born as spirit children to heavenly parents in heaven before this life.

So Mormonism's premortal life is the period of time where we preexisted as these spirit children. The LDS church's gospel principles manual says this. Every person who was ever born on earth is our spirit brother or sister. Because we are the spirit children of God, we have inherited the potential to develop his divine qualities. All right. So if this is true, why don't we remember that? I mean, if we lived a whole life in heaven with heavenly parents, why do none of us have those memories? Well, according to LDS teaching, we were made to forget our knowledge and experiences so that we could be tested while here on earth.

16th LDS President Thomas Monson said, "How grateful we should be that a wise creator fashioned an earth and placed us here with a veil of forgetfulness of our previous existence so that we might experience a time of testing, an opportunity to prove ourselves in order to qualify for all that God has prepared for us to receive. Some LDS leaders actually taught that our nobility in the pre-existence determined the circumstances of our mortal life here on earth. This is how Mormonism theologically justified the priesthood ban. 10th president Joseph Fielding Smith said that the negro race, for instance, have been placed under restrictions because of their attitude in the world of spirits fueled out.

It cannot be looked upon as just that they should be deprived of the power of the priesthood without it being a punishment for some act or acts performed before they were born. Those with black skin couldn't hold the priesthood because they weren't as obedient in the pre-existence and thus they were born with black skin, a physical mark given to all those who are descended from Cain. This idea is somewhat referenced in the very first chapter of the book of Abraham. In Abraham 1, Pharaoh, who's a descendant of Ham, ultimately Cain, was cursed as pertaining to the priesthood. Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of priesthood.

9th LDS President David O McKay agreed with this reading of the book of Abraham, saying, "I know of no scriptural basis for denying the priesthood to negroes other than one verse in the book of Abraham. However, I believe, as you suggest, that the real reason dates back to our pre-existent life." Harold B. Lee, who served as the president of the LDS church just a few years before the priesthood ban was lifted, said this. Why, if God is a just father, are some of his children born to parents who have the mark of a black skin with which the seed of Cain were cursed and whose descendants were to be denied the right of the priesthood of God?

His answer, the condition in which we now live have been determined by the kind of lives we lived in the pre-existent world of spirits. In 1949, the first presidency of the LDS church stated that the practice of barring those with black skin from holding the priesthood was not just an arbitrary policy. Rather, it was a direct commandment from God that was based upon doctrine in the church. The attitude of the church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy, but of direct commandment from the Lord on which is founded the doctrine of the church from the days of its organization to the effect that Negroes may become members of the church, but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time.

Not a declaration of policy, but a direct commandment from the Lord is a really strong claim. The statement goes on to say, "The conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality." A couple of years later, the First Presidency released another statement saying, "The position of the church regarding the negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind. Namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality.

Under this principle, there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by Negroes. Though President David O McKay perhaps shifted his thinking on this later. In a private conversation 3 years after this, President Mccay said, "There is not now and there has never been a doctrine in this church that the Negroes are under a divine curse." He insisted that there is no doctrine of any kind pertaining to the Negro. We believe, he said, that we have scriptural precedent for withholding the priesthood from the Negro. It is a practice, not a doctrine. And the practice will someday be changed.

And that's all there is to it. I told President McCay that I thought his statement on the Negro issue was of major importance and that it should be made public both in print and in a conference statement in order to clear up the confusion of thousands of people in the church believing in the divine cursed teaching. To this he gave no reply except to reiterate his position saying there is no such doctrine and as far as I am concerned there never was. So what was the origin of this? Where did this commandment from the Lord come from? There's a lot of discussion about this. Some people think that it was second president Brigham Young who introduced it.

But there are at least some who believe that the origin of this commandment is actually found in Joseph Smith himself. Eldius Apostle Melvin J. Ballard said, "Why is it in this church we do not grant the priesthood to Negroes? It is alleged that the pro of Joseph said, and I have no reason to dispute it, that it is because of some act committed by them before they came into this life. The races of today are very largely reaping the consequences of a previous life. In 1947, the First Presidency released another statement tying the origin of the ban to Smith. From the days of the prophet Joseph, even until now, it has been the doctrine of the church, never questioned by any of the church leaders that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the gospel.

Joseph Smith

Another first presidency statement in 1969 similarly says, "From the beginning of this dispensation, Joseph Smith and all succeeding presidents of the church have taught that Negroes were not yet to receive the priesthood for reasons which we believe are known to God, but which he has not made fully known to man. Today, the modern mainline church denies that historically Joseph Smith had anything to do with the priesthood ban." The church website says, quote, "There is no reliable evidence that any black men were denied the priesthood during Joseph Smith's lifetime." The theology of your personal worthiness in the pre-existence and your placement here on earth is not just restricted to those with black skin, though those were the only ones who were restricted from holding the priesthood.

The degrees of righteousness in premortality determined the different degrees of circumstances one might be born into here on earth. Melvin Ballard said in conference, "God did not take three beautiful children yesterday morning and say to one, you go to the negro woman and to another one, you go to that Chinese mother and to another, you go down to that beautiful Christian home." In my opinion, there were classes and races and separation into different groups and conditions before we came to this earth and all are getting what they are entitled to receive here. Half a century later in the 1950s, Elias Apostle Mark E.

Peterson said, "We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance and our pre-existence, some of us are born as Chinese, some as Japanese, some as Indians, some as Negroes, some as Americans, some as Latter-day Saints. There are rewards and punishments fully in harmony with his established policy in dealing with sinners and saints, rewarding all according to their deeds." One question might be, did LDS leaders expect this ban to eventually go away? Brigham Young. Young said, "When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the priesthood and of coming into the kingdom of God and have received their resurrection from the dead, then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity." So once everyone else on the planet has been resurrected from the dead, then those with black skin will be able to hold the priesthood.

14 years before the priesthood ban was lifted, a reporter asked LDS prophet David McKay if blacks would one day receive the priesthood. He said, "Not in my lifetime, young man, nor yours." But only 14 years after this, in 1978, the first presidency led by Spencer Kimble said this. He has heard our prayers and by revelation has confirmed that the long promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the church may receive the holy priesthood. All worthy male members of the church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or color. So, how does the modern LDS church respond to all this?

In my interaction, most Latter-day Saints are quick to denounce the priesthood man. Some people say that it really wasn't from God in the first place, and the LDS leaders made a mistake. Other people say that it really was from God, but we don't really understand all of the reasons why God would do this at that time. But in terms of the underlying theology, the LDS church has now come out in no uncertain terms against the notion that our worthiness in the pre-existence determined our ethnic identities. One of the gospel topics essays on the LDS church website says, "Today the church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life, that mixed race marriages are a sin, or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else.

Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form." So, how does the church account for the plain fact that this teaching in the past was widespread? They say explanations for the restriction of the priesthood varied, but they were speculative and not the word of God. In fact, right after the ban was lifted, eldas apostle Bruce McConi said this. Forget everything that I have said or what President Brigham Young or President George Cuchanan or whomever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that has now come into the world.

I'll just tell you as an outsider I look at this and I say what is reliable? If the first presidency can say this is a direct commandment from God based on doctrine but then an apostle can come around and say just forget all that that was because we didn't have the light that we have now. How can I trust that what is said now by eldest leaders will actually be true 10 years from now? A lot of Latter-day Saints will point out that well, Christians broadly believed in the idea of the curse of Cain. This was a prevalent theology at that time. So, Latter-day Saints aren't unique in that. And that's true.

Even though Latter- Day Saints attaching the doctrine of pre-existence to this is pretty unique. But the difference is we didn't claim to have a prophet speaking on behalf of God. What can I actually trust to be of God? What use is a prophet when the prophet can just be wrong left and right? While the priesthood ban certainly has been lifted, the underlying theology that the pre-existence determines our status here on earth still kind of exists in the currents of LDS theology. I mean, for starters, the book of Abraham hasn't changed. It still references Pharaoh being kept from holding the priesthood because of his physical descent from Ham and Cain.

Well, why was Pharaoh born into that family? The only theory that's ever been put forth that I'm aware of to account for the different circumstances into which people are born is the theory that our nobility and the pre-existence determine those circumstances. The reality is there's just no answer in Mormonism except for what's been presented in the past. The Book of Abraham is still included in the standard works. Meaning that the idea that one's family descent could keep them from holding the priesthood, that's still a canonical idea. even if the policy has been removed. You also have to deal with the fact that this teaching about premortal worthiness was not like one or two scattered comments.

This was the consistent teaching for decades of the church in authoritative sources by multiple LDS leaders. 10th President Joseph Fieldingsmith really represented the historic teaching on this point pretty regularly. 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. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here and those who are not faithful received less. Is it not a reasonable belief that the Lord would select the choice spirits to come through the better grades of nations?

Moreover, is it not reasonable to believe that less worthy spirits would come through less favored lineage? Does this not account in very large part for the various grades of color and degree of intelligence we find here in the earth? Every man had his agency in the pre-existence, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The negro evidently is receiving the reward he merits. But what's more, even after the priesthood ban, there are some more modern statements where LDS leaders seem to still affirm the idea that how we lived in the pre-existence affects things here on earth.

Just one year after the priesthood ban was lifted in 1979, Bruce McConi was teaching this. Men are born in various families, nations, and races as a direct result of the pre-existent life. Many choice spirits from pre-existence are sent in selected families. A teachers guide in 1979 taught similar things. Does the kind of life we lived in the premortal existence influence where we are now? Yes. 18th president of the church, Don H. Oaks said in conference once, "In ways that have not been revealed, our actions in the spirit world influence us in mortality." Well, looking back now, do LDS leaders think that the ban was a mistake or was founded on problematic doctrine?

Jeremiah 15 · John 3

Well, 15th President Gordon B. Hinckley said in an interview, "So, in retrospect, was the church wrong in not ordaining blacks?" President Hinckley, no, I don't think it was wrong. Various things happened in different periods. There's a reason for them. So neither the ban nor the underlying theology was a mistake. Rather he said it's what God wanted at that time. Now Christians tend to disagree on a number of levels. I mean we don't even think that the LDS notion of priesthood authority itself is biblical. We have a totally different notion of priesthood. But there's one thing I really want to narrow into because it pulls the rug out from under this entire tower of the priesthood ban.

and that is quite simply that the Bible does not teach of a pre-existence contrary to the LDS understanding of the of quoted Jeremiah 15. Here's why Mormonism's idea of a premortal life and the implicit racism that used to go with that is false. Our physical natural birth precedes any spiritual existence, not the other way around. We are all firstborn in the natural image of Adam and then at the resurrection, Christians will be raised in the image of Christ. Jesus taught that he was the only one who was initially from heaven who descended to earth. He said to them, "You are from below. I am from above.

You are of this world. I am not of this world." Jesus was speaking to Jews who opposed him. And he said, "You don't know where I'm going, and you don't know where I came from. I'm not like you. You're from below. I am from above." Jesus states in John 3, "No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the son of man." Jesus is the only one who ascended into heaven in the way that he did because he's the only one who ever descended from heaven. Jesus was born just like you and I and yet he claims he is the only one who came down from heaven. If the pre-existence is true, these statements just don't make any sense.

If the LDS view is correct, then we all descended from heaven just like Jesus. John 3 continues on to say, "He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. Jesus also taught that he was the only one who has ever heard and seen the father since he is the only one who ever came from heaven. And the father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard. His form you have never seen. Not that anyone has seen the father except he who is from God. He has seen the father.

So then you might be wondering, how did Old Testament saints like Moses see God if no one has ever seen God? Well, John explains that for us. No one has ever seen God, the only begotten God who is at the father's side. He has made him known. Paul even says that no one has ever or can ever see God. The eternal son has revealed the father to mankind. That's why Jesus tells Philillip, "Whoever has seen me has seen the father." Jesus even tells his opponents that God is not their father. Jesus said to them, "If God were your father, you would love me. For I come from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me." And again, he says to the Jews, "You know me, and you know where I come from, but I have not come of my own accord.

He who sent me is true, and him you do not know. I know him, for I come from him, and he sent me." He tells his opponents that they don't know God, but that he knows God because he comes from him. He alone descended from heaven. That's why he knows God like this. The point of all of these verses is to show that Jesus is utterly unique. He's not like you and I. He comes from heaven. We come from earth. The son of God, who was not one of us, became one of us, came to earth in order to die in our place so that we could have eternal life. Yes, Jeremiah 15 says, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.

And before you were born, I consecrated you. I appointed you to be a prophet to the nations." But this verse says nothing about Jeremiah knowing God. It speaks about God's sovereign knowledge of Jeremiah even before he existed. I've always said I don't think Jeremiah 15 is conclusive in and of itself. If taken in isolation, it certainly might support the LDS view, but it also could just be a statement of God's forordination of Jeremiah before he was born. We need to look at other verses to get a clearer image of what Jeremiah meant here. The rest of scripture is clear. Humans did not pre-exist.

We began to exist when God knitted us together in our mother's wombs. Adam and Eve were first given existence when God breathed into them the breath of life. Mormonism's entire history of racism, the priesthood ban, and problematic statements of the past would all be resolved if they would just depart from this one false teaching. The pre-existence is one of those doctrines that a lot of Latter-day Saints believe was lost in the great apostasy. If you want to understand why I, as a Protestant, don't believe in a great apostasy, check out this video. Also, the pre-existence has a lot of crossover with the doctrine of us being spirit children.

And the doctrine of spirit children is massively significant for the difference in theological systems between Christianity and Mormonism. If you want to understand why we don't believe that we are all children of heavenly parents, then watch this video. Thank you so much for watching and God bless.