By Jerald and Sandra Tanner
A very important document concerning the anti-Negro doctrine of the Mormon Church was found in the George Albert Smith Papers at the University of Utah Library. George Albert Smith served as President of the Mormon Church from 1945 to 1951. His private papers are preserved at the University of Utah Library. Among this collection is a document listed as, “Excerpts From the Weekly Council Meetings of the Quorum of the Church, 1849-1940.” Since this document throws a great deal of light on the development of the anti-Negro doctrine, we printed it in its entirety in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? pages 582-585. The first Council Meeting is dated January 25, 1940. In the report of this Council Meeting we find the following about the Negro:
President Clark said at his request the clerk of the Council had copied from the old records of the Council discussions that have been had in the past on this subject. He said that he was positive that it was impossible with reference to the Brazilians to tell those who have Negro blood and those who have not, and we are baptizing these people into the Church. . . .
President Clark suggested that this matter be referred to the Twelve who might appoint a sub-committee to go into the matter with great care and make some ruling or re-affirm whatever ruling has been made on this question in the past as to whether or not one drop of negro blood deprives a man of the right to receive the priesthood. (“Excerpts From the Weekly Council Meetings of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, . . .” as printed in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? page 582.)
As we examine these discussions from the “old records of the Council” it is plain to see that the Mormon doctrine forbidding Negroes the Priesthood or access to the temple rites grew out of rumor and prejudice and did not come by revelation as the Mormon leaders have always claimed.
Joseph F. Smith, the sixth “Prophet, Seer and Revelator” of the Mormon Church, seemed to have no revelation on this subject. The following is taken from a Council Meeting held January 2, 1902:
President Smith, replying to this, referred to the doctrine taught by President Young which . . . he believed in himself, to the effect that the children of Gentile parents, in whose veins may exist a single drop of the blood of Ephraim, might be all pure-blooded Gentiles excepting one, and that one might extract all the blood of Ephraim from his parents’ veins, and be actually a fullblooded Ephraimite. He also referred to the case of a man named Billingsby, whose ancestor away back married an Indian woman, and whose descendants in every branch of his family were pure whites, with one exception, and that exception was one pure blooded Indian in every branch of the family . . . the same had been found to be the case with stockmen engaged in the improvement of breeds. Assuming therefore this doctrine to be sound, while the children of a man in whose veins may exist a single drop of negro blood, might be entirely white, yet one of his descendants might turn out to be a pronounced negro. And the question in President Smith’s mind was, when shall we get light enough to determine each case of its merits? He gave it as his opinion that in all cases where the blood of Cain showed itself, however slight, the line should be drawn there; but where children of tainted parents were found to be pure Ephraimites, they might be admitted to the temple. This was only an opinion, however, the subject would no doubt be considered later. (“Extracts” as printed in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality, pages 583-584)
On August 26, 1908, President Joseph F. Smith told that a Negro woman was sealed as a servant to Joseph Smith:
The same efforts he said had been made by Aunt Jane to receive her endowments and be sealed to her husband and have her children sealed to their parents and her appeal was made to all the Presidents from President Young down to the present First Presidency. But President Cannon conceived the idea that, under the circumstances, it would be proper to permit her to go to the temple to be adopted to the Prophet Joseph Smith as his servant and this was done. This seemed to ease her mind for a little while but did not satisfy her, and she still pleaded for her endowments.
The idea that this Negro woman should be sealed as a servant apparently stems from the teaching that slavery was a “divine institution.” Brigham Young, the second President of the Mormon Church, once stated that the Civil War could not free the slaves:
Ham will continue to be servant of servants, as the Lord decreed, until the curse is removed. Will the present struggle free the slave? No; . . . for Ham must be the servant of servants until the curse is removed. Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? You cannot. (Millennial Star, vol. 25, page 787; also published in Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, page 250)
The idea that the Negro is only worthy of the position of a servant has deep roots in Mormon theology. Mark E. Petersen, who is now serving as an Apostle in the Church, said that if a “ Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory” (Race Problems—As They Affect the Church, address by Mark E. Petersen at the Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College Level, Brigham Young University, August 27, 1954).
In Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? page 266, we quote Brigham Young as saying:
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, page 110)
In the “Excerpts From the Weekly Council Meetings of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles,” Brigham Young’s statement is cited under the date of March 8, 1863. In a Council Meeting held August 22, 1895, we read the following:
President Cannon remarked that the Prophet Joseph taught this doctrine: That the seed of Cain could not receive the Priesthood nor act in any of the offices of the priesthood until the seed of Abel should come forward and take precedence over Cain’s offspring; and that any white man who mingled his seed with that of Cain should be killed, and thus prevent any of the seed of Cain’s coming into possession of the priesthood.
In a report of a Council Meeting held December 15, 1897, we find the following:
A letter . . . was read, . . . enclosing a letter from Elder S. P. Oldham, who asked Brother Lyman the following questions, and Brother Lyman forwarded it to be answered by the First Presidency:
“Can a man (white) be permitted to receive the priesthood, who has a wife is either black or is tainted with negro blood?”
President Cannon said he had understood President Taylor to say that a man who had the priesthood who would marry a woman of the accursed seed, that if the law of the Lord were administered upon him . . . He would be killed, and his offspring, for the reason that the Lord had determined that the seed of Cain should not receive the priesthood in the flesh; and that this was the penalty put upon Cain, because if he had received the priesthood the seed of the murderer would get ahead of the seed of Abel who was murdered. The point, President Cannon said, which President Taylor sought to make was that if a white man who had received the priesthood should have children by a negro woman, he could go back and act for his dead ancestors on his wife’s side, and he therefore thought it would be improper for a man, as for instance the case referred to, to receive the priesthood for the reasons assigned as being those given by President Taylor.
While there was no formal action taken, this seemed to be the mind of the Council, President Snow adding that the way might be opened for the man referred to in the case under consideration to get a divorce from his present wife and marry a white woman, and he would then be entitled to the priesthood. (“Extracts” as printed in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? page 582)
This document certainly reveals the state of confusion that the Mormon leaders found themselves in as they tried to formulate their anti-Negro doctrine. It is plain to see that they did not know where to draw the line as to who could be ordained to the Priesthood. The Apostle John Henry Smith felt that “persons in whose veins the white blood predominated should not be barred from the temple.” Joseph F. Smith, the sixth President of the Church, gave it as his opinion that “in all cases where the blood of Cain showed itself, however slight, the line should be drawn there; but where children of tainted parents were found to be pure Ephraimites, they might be admitted to the temple.” While Joseph F. Smith was still serving as President of the Church, the following decision was reached: “Number 3—The descendants of Ham may receive baptism and confirmation but no one known to have in his veins negro blood, (it matters not how remote a degree) can either have the Priesthood in any degree or the blessings of the Temple of God; no matter how otherwise worthy he may be” (“Extracts,” as printed in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? page 584).
This is the policy that the Mormon leaders claim they follow today. In our new edition of Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? we point out that there have been a number of cases where people with Negro blood have been ordained to the Priesthood. For instance, the Negro blood in Elijah Abel and his descendants did not prevent them from holding the Priesthood. Although there is some false information concerning Elijah Abel in the “Excerpts From the Weekly Council Meeting of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles,” these records show that on August 22, 1895:
President Joseph F. Smith told of Brother Abel having been ordained a Seventy and afterwards a High Priest at Kirtland under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
In Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? we pointed out that some of Elijah Abel’s children married into the white race and that their descendants hold the Priesthood and do missionary work for the Mormon Church today. Although the Mormon leaders are aware of this, no attempt has been made to remove these special privileges from Elijah Abel’s descendants. The hypocrisy of this whole matter of giving special privileges was made plain in a letter from Joseph E. Taylor to John Taylor, the third President of the Church:
President J. Taylor
Sept. 5th, 1885
Dear Brother
Now comes a case of a young girl residing in the Eighteenth Ward of the City by the name of Laura Berry whose mother was a white woman but whose father was a very light mullatto. It appears she has fallen in love with brother Barons Son and it is reciprocated.
But the question of jeopardizing his future by such an alliance has caused a halt. She now desires to press her claim to privileges that others who are tainted with that blood have received. For example, the Meads family in the Eleventh Ward Mrs. Jones Elder Sister; (the former now resides in Logan) I am cognizant of all these having received their endowments here.
Brother Meads is a white man he married his wife many years ago; she was a quadroon and died some three years ago their children (the oldest a girl, are married to a white man) are all very dark.
The question I desire to ask is: Can you give this girl any privileges of a like character? The girl is very pretty and quite white and would not be suspected as having tainted blood in her veins unless her parentage was known Again I subscribe myself your brother in the Faith. (Letter from Joseph E. Taylor to President John Taylor, Sept. 5, 1885, Church Historical Department, John Taylor Letter File, b1346, Box 20, file #3, typed copy)
Originally appeared in: