Interracial Marriage a Sin?
by W. John Walsh
Question:
Do Mormons consider interracial marriage a sin? Why did Brigham Young teach: "Shall I tell you the law of God
in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his
blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This
will always be so." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.10, p.109)
Answer:
First, the Journal of Discourses is not a source for official
Church doctrine (See The Seer and Journal of Discourses).
Second, prejudice against Blacks, or anyone else for that matter, is strictly against the
teachings of the LDS Church. (See Are Mormons Prejudiced
Against Blacks?)
Third, you are quoting this 1863 impromptu discourse out of
historical context. For example, in this same discourse (on the very next page),
President Young said:
"For their abuse of [the Black African] race, the whites will be cursed, unless
they repent." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.10, p.110)
Therefore, it is wrong to take the sentences you quoted as some type of racial
intolerance. While Brigham Young was probably influenced by his culture like all men (See Are
Prophets Infallible?), it seems a little unfair to accuse a man who said that whites
would be cursed for the evils of slavery with hatred towards blacks. So what was Brigham
Young talking about?
There are several points to be made about your quote. First, Brigham Young is not even
talking about intermarriage between whites and blacks. In 1863, there were few, if any,
places where whites were free to marry blacks in the United States. Therefore, President
Young is talking about sexual relations outside of marriage.
The strong opposition that Latter-day Saints have to sexual relations outside of
marriage is well-known. (See Law of Chastity; Adultery) The General
Handbook of Instruction states:
"God's standard for sexual morality has always been clear: 'Thou shalt not commit
adultery' (Ex. 20:14). In modern and…ancient times God has commanded all of his
children to lead strictly [chaste] lives before and after marriage—intimate relations
being permissible only between a man and a woman legally and lawfully married.
Accordingly, intimate relations outside of marriage are out of harmony with God's eternal
plan for his children. To be morally clean, a person must refrain from adultery and
fornication, from homosexual or lesbian relations, and from every other unholy, unnatural,
or impure practice"
Since Latter-day Saint men could not legally marry black women, then any sexual
relationships between them were strictly condemned.
Please note that President Young refers to a penalty of "death on the spot"
to the "white man of the chosen seed" and fails to mention any penalty applying
to the black woman involved. Why? There are at least two reasons.
First, when Brigham Young talks about a male member of "the chosen seed," he
is specifically referring to a man holding the priesthood. (See Priesthood home
page) Any Melchizedek
Priesthood holder who engages in sexual relations outside of marriage breaks the oath
and covenant of the priesthood and faces automatic excommunication from the Church
(See Disciplinary
Procedures). In LDS theology, excommunication is a form of spiritual death. As
President Spencer W. Kimball taught simply:
"Fornication leads to death." (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p.271)
Second, while some black women chose to be intimate with white men, many such unions
were the result of rape. It was very common for biracial children born in 1863 to be the
product of a forcible union. Since President Young does not mention any penalty to be
applied to the black woman, it is unlikely that he is talking about a consensual union.
While women who consent to sexual relations outside of marriage face Church discipline,
the General Handbook of Instructions states "Victims of the evil acts of others are
not guilty of sin."
In summary, by taking these three sentences out of historical context, you have twisted
their original meaning. President Young taught, and the Church still teaches, that if a priesthood holder breaks the oath and
covenant of the priesthood by engaging in sexual relations outside of marriage, then he
faces immediate excommunication, or spiritual death.
Epilogue: In the last few years since this article has been
written, I have received several letters objecting to what I have said. Usually, the
objections go something like this:
"Brigham Young was Racist! Why can't you just accept and proclaim it!
How can you take such a plain and obvious racist statement and try to twist it into
something else! Brigham Young was an evil man!"
My response is normally summarized as follows:
First, I don't believe that Brigham
Young was a racist individual, at least by my definition of the word. I have
read thousands upon thousands of historical records including assessments of his character
by those who knew him, both in and out of the Church; multitudes of sermons; personal
journals in his own hand, etc. Given this large background, I feel that I have come
to know the second President of the Church fairly well. I believe the full
historical record clearly shows that Brigham Young was a good and noble man who believed
that all men are children of God, loved of our Heavenly Father, and blessed in accordance
with their personal obedience to his commandments.
On what basis do you claim otherwise? Somebody from a competing faith digs through
thousands of documents and produces a few paragraphs which look bad on the appearance
level. Now somehow your so-called 'evidence' is supposed to outweigh all of the
other information available?
It's almost like you are purposely trying to find fault with someone you never met and
really don't know a lot about. In my Church, we try to give people the benefit of
the doubt. But then, most people don't follow our standards.
Now as far as this specific article, in your very long response, I noticed paragraphs
of empty rhetoric and unsupported statements, but I failed to see any evidence
contradicting what I said. You seemed upset that I made a few assumptions about what
Brigham Young meant. Why, yes I did. So did you. See, neither one of us
were present when the statement was made so neither one of us really knows, do we?
And Brigham Young certainly isn't here to explain it.
So we both have very limited knowledge about what happened and we both drew conclusions
based on this limited knowledge. You decided that Brigham Young was definitely a
racist and there could not be any other possibility. To be quite frank, I have
rarely seen such intolerance and bigotry as that which you have demonstrated.
On the other hand, I started with a different approach. I said, 'I don't know
exactly what happened, but let's see if I could put together an alternative story based on
what I do know. Since I know that during this time period a white person and a black
person could not be legally married, I know Brigham Young wasn't talking about sexual
relations between two legally married people. That means fornication. I know
what the Church teaches about fornication: "Fornication leads to death."
(The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p.271). To me, it seems that President
Kimball's statement is very similar to what Brigham Young is reported to have said.
The only difference is that Brigham Young apparently made the comments about particular
divisions of the society. Why? Prophets normally speak on issues in which the
people are having difficulty. So I start digging around historical data and I find
some interesting facts.
I find that, generally speaking, that society was very protective of the virtue of
white women. If a white woman was raped, her family often killed the attacker and
faced no punishment. While technically it was illegal to kill a rapist, no court
would convict a white man who defended the honor of his wife, daughter, sister, or mother.
In fact this attitude had prevailed in the United States until only recently.
In my own non-LDS family, I had an uncle who was discovered with another woman by
her husband. Her husband killed my uncle. The police escorted him out of the
state of Texas, but did not charge him with any crime.
Upon further investigation, I found that in 1863 the virtue of black women was not
protected by society to the same degree, if at all. Black men were not given the
same prerogative to protect the sanctity of their homes. Furthermore, people in some
areas of the country actually encouraged "virile" unmarried men to satisfy their
physical urgings with Black women. Many people felt such actions would help protect
the white population. To them, Black people were simply animals. They were not
human beings. Needless to say, the rape of black women was almost never prosecuted.
Now this is the context in which Brigham Young made his statement. After
discovering these facts, Brigham Young's statement could easily be taken as:
'Listen to me, you Latter-day Saints. You know that premarital sex is forbidden.
In some religions they may make exceptions to sex with black women because they
don't consider them to be real people. But I'm here telling you that if you do such
things, you forfeit your crowns of eternal life. Death on the spot.'
Now, at the end of the day, neither one of us can prove with absolute certainty what
Brigham Young meant. And he's not here to clarify. What I do know is that my
explanation matches with the historical context of the period and all the records about
Brigham Young the man. Your explanation is simply unsupported hate-filled rhetoric.
Now, if you want to continue to hunt through historical records trying to find
something with which to accuse men who aren't here to defend themselves, please feel free.
At the end of the day, what you say simply doesn't matter. God does live. Jesus
Christ is his Only Begotten Son.
They both appeared to
Joseph Smith. That means The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the
Kingdom of God on the earth. All your hate will never alter these eternal facts.
(See Blacks home
page; Response to Criticism home page; Accusatory
Questions home page; Interracial
Marriage)
|
