Saints, Slaves, and Blacks Quotes

“their black skin. Further affirming such concepts of black inferiority was a steady stream of authoritative statements by LDS leaders and spokesmen brought forth from the 1830s to the early 1970s.3 Such controversial assertions notwithstanding, major aspects of this thesis has since been incorporated, all or in part, by subsequent scholars in their own studies of Mormonism and race.4 ******************”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Armand L. Mauss’s All Abraham’s Children: Changing Mormon Conceptions of Race and Lineage described the process by which Latter-day Saints constructed a racial identity for themselves while concurrently constructing racial identities for other racial groups, specifically blacks, as well as Native Americans and Jews. Utilizing a sociological framework, Mauss delineates the complex process by which these Mormon-defined lineages interact during the latter part of the twentieth century—all this occurring as the LDS Church expanded into a world-wide organization. Particularly enlightening is Mauss’s assertion that Latter-day Saints in constructing their own racial identity incorporated elements of “British Israelism” and “Anglo-Saxon Triumphalism.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Also weighing in with generally positive reviews were two notable outside scholars. Richard P. Howard, Reorganized Latter Day Saint Church historian, wrote in the John Whitmer Historical Association Journal praising the volume’s skillful handling of “the complex development of racism, anti-slavery attitudes, anti-abolitionism, and the controversial origins of the black priesthood denial.” He, however, felt that it did “not go nearly far enough . . . to document the interaction between Mormonism and the wider cultural values which tended until the 1960s to legitimate the racist position of the church during all of its previous history.” He also faulted the volume for what he saw as its all too brief discussion of the concurrent treatment of blacks within the RLDS Church—such denomination having had accepted blacks in full equality since 1865. But he concluded that “Saints, Slaves, and Blacks should be a high priority on the reading lists of the scholars, leaders, and members of all institutional expressions of Mormonism.”28”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“[too] narrowly on the Mormon experience to the exclusion of forces operating within the larger society.” “Notwithstanding,” he proclaimed it “a valuable contribution to Mormon history. . . . [E]ssential reading for anyone interested in the development of Mormon racial policies.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Henry J. Wolfinger, a historian associated with the National Archives and Records Service and author of a pathbreaking, in-depth essay chronicling the life of black Mormon pioneer Jane Manning James, called the book “well-written and carefully organized.” It provides “the fullest discussion to date” of the “origins and development” Mormonism’s “racial doctrines . . . based on a command of the secondary literature and extensive research in primary sources.” But he also opined that the volume overstated “the importance of antislavery sentiment within the church after the death of Joseph Smith, given the legalization of slavery in Utah Territory in 1852 and Brigham Young’s view that the institution was divinely ordained.” He further asserted that the volume’s discussion of the “development of the church’s racial policies focuses”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“useful [and] objective,” further proclaiming it “the accepted authority on its controversial topic. . . . The volume is history, not propaganda.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Following its publication in 1981, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks received further scrutiny from scholars in a series of reviews published in newspapers and professional journals. Stanford J. Layton, Managing Editor of the Utah Historical Quarterly, praised the book in the Salt Lake Tribune. The volume, Layton opined, projected “the heft and feel of scholarship . . . apparent on every page,” which deserved the attention of all those seeking to understand “how a racially discriminatory priesthood policy emerged during Mormonism’s formative years and solidified over time.”21 Likewise, Eli M. Oboler, head librarian at Idaho State University in Pocatello, Idaho, wrote in the Idaho State Journal and characterized the volume as”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Also most helpful was Fawn M. Brodie, a professor of history at the University of California, Los Angeles, well-known in Mormon circles as the author of a controversial 1945 biography on Joseph Smith, No Man Knows My History. Brodie had put forth her own historical analysis of Mormonism’s black ban in a short but influential 1970 monograph, “Can We Manipulate the Past?”16 After carefully reading my unrevised dissertation, Brodie offered a mixed evaluation. She praised my dissertation as “written up with care,” confessing that she had “learned much from it.” But she pointed out certain deficiencies. In particular, the writing style, she opined, reflected a “non-professional quality” akin that of “a jack-Mormon who is afraid of offending devout Mormons.” The narrative, she further noted, projected a “disembodied quality” most evident in the work’s discussion of “the Book of Mormon as if Joseph Smith was nowhere in the neighborhood.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“The dissertation concluded with an epilogue pessimistically predicting that the ban would continue into the indefinite future, citing several factors. Crucial was the canonical status accorded Joseph Smith’s scriptural writings representing “the core of basic Latter-day Saint theology.” From the late nineteenth century on, Church leaders utilized the Pearl of Great Price as essential proof text affirming blacks as the literal descendants of Ham—the accursed son of Noah who had been “cursed as pertaining to the priesthood.” Also discouraging the ban’s removal was that it affected “only a few” individuals—given the stark fact that a mere handful of African-Americans had cast their lot with the LDS Church. A final factor was the potential for backlash against activists calling for change—this coming from Mormon leaders and rank-and-file members. Such was reflected in a 1972 poll which found that 70% of Utah-based Mormons opposed lifting the ban.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Mormon-black relations. This work’s central thesis was that two factors drove Brigham Young to implement the Church’s black ban by 1852. Most important was a developing sense of Mormon “whiteness” wherein Latter-day Saints identified themselves as a divinely “chosen” people, while conversely labeling blacks a biblically cursed race, given their skin color and alleged descent from the accursed biblical counter-figures of Cain, Ham, and Canaan. Further motivating Young was his embrace of black slavery, which he considered divinely sanctioned. Thus as Utah Territorial Governor he called for its legalization—this occurring in February 1852, shortly following Mormon migration to the Great Basin. Utah became the only western territory to approve slavery. Young in calling for this statute claimed a divinely sanctioned link between black servitude and black priesthood denial—the latter practice made public for the first time in his 1852 statement calling for black slavery. The dissertation also drew a number of conclusions relative to the perpetuation of the black priesthood and temple ban. The ban was firmly established by the time of Brigham Young’s death in 1877, given that the Mormon leader repeatedly affirmed its divine legitimacy over the previous quarter century. Further assuring perpetuation of the ban was official LDS embrace of the historical myth that Joseph Smith established the restriction. Such mythmaking received scriptural justification through canonization of the Pearl of Great Price in 1880, a work consisting of the Books of Moses and Abraham. All such developments made the subordinate status of Mormon blacks virtually “irreversible by 1880,” enabling the ban to continue unchanged into the mid-1970s.13”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“a PhD dissertation at the University of California, Davis.11 After carefully weighing the contrasting arguments of Taggart and Bush, I determined that Bush made by far the more convincing case—specifically his central thesis that the priesthood ban resulted from socio-economic prejudices endemic in American society at large. Such anti-black attitudes as embraced by Brigham Young were incorporated as policy, which evolved into doctrine—all of which occurred following the death of Joseph Smith.12 Striking was the breadth of Bush’s historical narrative tracing the evolution of Mormon anti-black attitudes and related practices from the 1830s to the 1970s. Impressive was the array of primary documents Bush marshaled in support of his arguments. By contrast, Taggart’s relatively limited work proved wanting in its overly simplistic “Missouri Thesis” that Joseph Smith had impulsively implemented the priesthood ban in a futile effort to alleviate Mormon difficulties in that slave state. The thoroughness of Bush’s findings notwithstanding, I determined that Bush had not adequately dealt with the origins of the ban as it involved Joseph Smith. Specifically, I became convinced that Smith himself held certain racist, anti-black attitudes which, in turn, were given scriptural legitimacy through his canonical writings, specifically the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price. Bush, moreover, failed to acknowledge the crucial role played by the emergence of Mormon ethnic whiteness affirming the Saints’ self-perceived status as a divinely favored race. Conversely, Mormons viewed blacks as a marginalized race, the accursed descendants of Cain, Ham, and Caanan. Further validating African-American’s accursed status was their dark skin.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“a PhD dissertation at the University of California, Davis.11 After carefully weighing the contrasting arguments of Taggart and Bush, I determined that Bush made by far the more convincing case—specifically his central thesis that the priesthood ban resulted from socio-economic prejudices endemic in American society at large. Such anti-black attitudes as embraced by Brigham Young were incorporated as policy, which evolved into doctrine—all of which occurred following the death of Joseph Smith.12 Striking was the breadth of Bush’s historical”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Mormon Thought, the first appearing in 1969 and the second in 1973. In his 1969 essay “A Commentary on Steven G. Taggart’s Mormonism’s Negro Policy: Social and Historical Origins,” Bush excoriated Taggart for his limited, incomplete research.7 Bush systematically dismantled Taggart’s central thesis that Joseph Smith initiated black priesthood denial in response to Latter-day Saint difficulties in Missouri. Bush supported his refutation with extensive documentation.8 Bush further developed his arguments in a second in-depth Dialogue article entitled “Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview” published in 1973. His fifty-seven page essay containing some 219 footnotes constituted by far the most comprehensive examination of Mormon racial policy up to that time.9 Bush’s essay drew heavily from a four-hundred-page compendium of primary and secondary documents compiled over some ten years. Covering the period from the 1830s to the 1970s, Bush’s “Compilation on the Negro in Mormonism” contains First Presidency minutes, Quorum of the Twelve meeting minutes, and other General Authority interviews and writings.10 Bush’s carefully written text found minimal evidence to support the LDS Church’s official position that the priesthood ban resulted from divine revelation—thus contradicting a major justification for its existence. Seeking to undermine its legitimacy and thus prod the Church toward change, Bush summarily dismissed the ban as the unfortunate product of socio-historical forces present in the larger nineteenth century American society. The scholarly studies of Stephen Taggart and especially Lester E. Bush Jr. greatly influenced my own work, which commenced as”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Securing publication of Saints, Slaves, and Blacks proved most challenging. Five different presses rejected the manuscript. Ultimately, Greenwood Press—a small academic press based in Westport Connecticut—accepted it. Once in print, the volume garnered minimal exposure due in part to limited promotion. Outrageously overpriced, the book’s primary market was university and public libraries. When its limited print run sold out, the volume went out of print—this occurring a mere five years following publication. Reissue of Saints, Slaves, and Blacks in a relatively inexpensive paperback edition is intended to make it available to a wider audience. Such a reprint is also timely in that 2018 marks the fortieth anniversary of the lifting of the priesthood and temple ban. The volume deserves republication for an even more important reason. When first published, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks provided a unique, albeit controversial, perspective relative to the origins of black priesthood denial. Its central thesis that the ban emerged largely as the byproduct of Mormon ethnic whiteness initially articulated in the Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price was provocative. Building on these scriptural proof-texts, nineteenth century Latter-day Saints viewed themselves as a divinely “chosen” lineage—the literal descendants of the House of Israel. They considered their “whiteness” emblematic, indeed proof, of their status as the Lord’s “favored people.” Conversely, Mormons utilized these same scriptures, along with the Old Testament, to prove that black people were members of a divinely cursed race, given their alleged descent from two accursed Biblical counter-figures—Ham, the misbehaving son of Noah, and Cain, humankind’s alleged first murderer. Physical proof of African-American accursed status was”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Saints, Slaves, and Blacks found itself the victim of bad timing, appearing just three years following the LDS Church’s 1978 Black Revelation. Mormons of all stripes anxious to move on focused on embracing their black brethren and sisters as ecclesiastical equals while ignoring the Church’s recently abandoned practice of black priesthood denial and prohibition on African-American entry into the temple. A climate of institutional amnesia prevailed, wherein Latter-day Saints chose to forget this now embarrassing practice, previously promoted as essential doctrine.”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Mormonism emerged in the nineteenth century as one of the few religious expressions in American culture with no antecedents anywhere else. It quickly spread to Europe and elsewhere, but the new faith owed little to those churches and confessions that were originally brought to North America from other continents. Yet, like all religious expressions, Mormonism reflected the historical conditions in which it arose and took distinctive shape. Alongside their restorationist hopes, perfectionist aspirations, and millennialist dreams, faithful Mormons embodied social attitudes common to the culture that nurtured them. One of these subsidiary viewpoints was prejudice toward black people, and this volume provides detailed analysis of that attitude over the course of approximately 150 years. Professor Bringhurst provides us with a case study of how cultural influences are often absorbed by religious groups and then become perpetuated as part of the sacred tradition. Using Mormon racial discrimination as a specific example, he shows how an early social attitude can be codified as part of religious behavior itself and then survive long after the demise of conditions that initially generated it. Bringhurst carefully elucidates how early Mormon doctrine correlated ideas of sin, depravity, and dark-skinned peoples. He shows why men saw ordination to the priesthood and women saw marriage to men ordained to the priesthood as crucial elements in the salvation process. Then with”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.

“Saints, Slaves, and Blacks is a treasure. It touches on pivotal topics in American history. It is American religious history at its finest. And it dealt with complex issues of faith, religion, church, race, politics, and social standing that still impact most of us. Edward J. Blum San Diego State University”
― Newell Bringhurst, Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The Changing Place of Black People Within Mormonism, 2nd ed.