Rev. O’Neil Dozier writes about Mitt Romney’s religion, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
On Monday, March 12, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. Rev. O’Neal Dozier and a group of concerned Clergy and other Christians will hold a News/Press Conference to publicly ask Republican Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney to openly renounce his racist Mormon Religion.
The purpose of this request is to foster and maintain good race relations here in America.
The Mormon religion is prejudiced against Blacks, Jews and the Native American Indians. These allegations are substantiated and validated by the writings of the former Prophets and Seers of the Mormon Church. The Mormon Church says that the Book of Mormon is “the most correct book, even more correct than the Bible.” The Book of Mormon in 2nd Nephi, Chapters 5:21-23 accuses God of cursing African people and causing them to have black skin in order for them not to be attractive to white people. These verses also accuse God of causing the black African people to be disgusting and detestable to white people. Furthermore, these verses accuse God of being against inter-racial marriages between blacks and whites. The Mormon Prophet, Brigham Young in the (Mormon) Journal of Discourses further degrades black African people by saying that they are uncultured, unattractive, unpleasant, low-life, wild and unintelligent. Prophet Brigham Young further states that “if the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain (black person) the penalty under the Law of God is death on the spot.” Also, according to Mormon Doctrine, Native American Indians were also of the class of the cursed because their skin was also a darker color. Both Alma 3:6 and Mormon 5:15 of the Book of Mormon degrade the Lamanites, which are the Native American Indians in the same way they do black African people. The Mormon Church is also prejudiced against the Jews. In the (Mormon) Journal of Discourses, the Mormon Prophet, Brigham Young railed against the Jews in a very hateful way when he said, “I would rather undertake to convert five thousand Lamanites (Native American Indians), than to convert one of those poor miserable creatures (Jews) whose fathers killed the Savior… yes, I would rather undertake to CONVERT THE DEVIL HIMSELF, if it were possible… I would say, leave them and come home, the Lord does not require you to stay there, for they must suffer and be damned…leave them to live and die in their sins and ignorance…they take pleasure in their wickedness… (Mormon Journal of Discourses).
Also, it is newsworthy to mention that the Mormon Church has a bizarre Mormon practice that involves posthumously baptizing Non-Mormons by proxy. According to Helen Radkey, a former Mormon, both Adolf Hitler and Ted Bundy were baptized at Mormonism’s ground zero-Utah in 1993 and 2008 respectively. In fact, Radkey reported that the Mormon Church attempted to conceal the Hitler baptism. Helen Radkey also claims that the Mormon Church has posthumously baptized Holocaust victims, serial killers, 9/11 hijackers, Muslim terrorists, etc.
Because of the aforementioned facts, we believe that a Romney Presidential nomination for the Republican Party would widen the racial divide to a point of no return, because the Republican Party would be viewed as a racist political party. Romney’s nomination would cause the erroneous view that has long existed in the minds of black people, that the Republican Party is prejudice to become a reality. Also, if Romney gets the nomination, President Obama’s super pacs will educate the American people about his racist religion and he will probably lose to Obama.
I will give the reverend a benefit of a doubt and help to inform him, along with my readers, about what members of the LDS church actually believe. However, it is clear that the reverend is ignorant of our doctrines, and has cherry-picked quite a few examples, some erroneously. Trust me, reverend, you are not the first, nor will you be the last, to try and take on the LDS church. We know who you are and there are plenty of revelations about people like you and how to handle the problems you cause.
If you think you are doing the work of God, I implore you to ask God what he thinks of you attacking our church. I hope you realize, sooner rather than later, that we are not your enemy.
I won’t nitpick the details and mistakes the reverend has made. Suffice it to say, that they are many and they are minor compared to his larger contention against the LDS views on race, which are obviously incorrect.
First, we believe that although we are not punished for our ancestors sins, there are certain cause-effects that occur due to God’s justice. Note that we are not privvy to the full mind of God. If there is something he does that we do not agree with, it is us that is wrong, not him. (I doubt the reverend will argue with this.)
Yes, there are races of men that have been “cursed” with different skin colors. I can only say for certainty that the black and the American Indians (Lamanites) are so “cursed”. Why do I put quotes around “cursed”? Because, as you will see, the sins of the fathers are not punished in the children.
Unfortunately, I do not understand the full scope of the “curse” of the black skin on the descendants of Ham. They are a people alive today, and I believe, and important component of the preparation for the Lord’s Second Coming, held in reserve by their skin color and other divine factors. I do know that not a few people in the Bible were black, and righteous, and examples to all people everywhere. Those who think the blacks are a lesser race obviously disagree with how they are treated in scripture by God. If the only point of the black race was to show how God’s love extends to all people, even the children of a gross sinner, then so be it, that is enough. If the point of the black race is to expose the dark hearts inside the white race, and to allow themselves to see it and implore God to replace their black hearts with pure hearts, so be it. I am mostly ignorant on the subject.
We have a parallel of the descendants of Israel. Their “curse” was to be the chosen race, held to a higher standard, to be dispersed because of their hard-heartedness and then to be gathered in preparation of the Second Coming.
There is a reason to keep separate groups of people separate, even if they happen to share the same geography. In the case of the Lamanites and Nephites, both of whom were children of Lehi, a patriarch-saint on par with Abraham and Moses, it was because the ultimate destiny of the white race (the Nephites) was complete destruction, while the ultimate fate of the darker race (the Lamanites) was to greet the Savior at his Second Coming as the representatives of the tribe of Joseph, particularly Manasseh. If that is a “curse”, then I wish my children would be cursed in like manner.
The reason why God wanted to separate the Lamanites and Nephites was because he was intent on writing the Book of Mormon. He wanted to teach the world about the punishment for sin and the redemption of Jesus Christ. He wanted people to understand that just because your ancestors were righteous, or wicked, or whatever, it has no bearing whatsoever on what you choose for yourself. Righteous parents give birth to wicked children, and vice-versa. The ultimate message of the Book of Mormon can be summarized in 2 Nephi 2:27: “And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil.”
In fact, it was not on only one occasion that the Nephite prophets had to chastise the Nephite people for acting contrary to the plan of God. In fact, on more than a few occasions, the prophets asked that the people look to the Lamanites for proper behavior. Despite the fact that they were comparatively savage, even they understood the sanctity of marriage. In the end, the prophet Mormon declared that he could not recommend the Nephites to God, for fear God would smite him. From then on, Mormon and Moroni wrote to their enemies, the Lamanites, revealing to them the things they would need to know to rise up and blossom as a rose in the desert.
Were these racists? Or were these people that understand we each have a divine mission in life, no matter who our ancestors were or what color our skin is? In fact, we hear the Nephite prophets again and again condemning the people of Nephi for hating the Lamanites because of their skin color and savage culture. The greatest acts of compassion are found when individual Nephites set aside their racism, treat the Lamanites as co-inheritors of the tribe of Joseph, and teach them with love and respect. Indeed, it was the Savior who came to the Nephite people and demanded to see their records. When the message of Samuel the Lamanite, a prophet given the divine mission of declaring the birth of Christ to the Nephites, was found to be omitted, he immediately commanded the Nephite prophets to correct this gross error.
The Book of Mormon teaches that the greater sin lies with those who refuse to forgive, or to those who pretend that a person is unworthy of compassion because they brought upon themselves their troubles. That message is echoed in modern revelation, many times. If you’re black, or homosexual, or whatever, and you feel discriminated against by a Mormon, simply quote to them: “Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin.” (D&C 64:9)
The above examples of three “cursed” races suggests that every race and group of people are “cursed” in one degree or another, set apart for an important purpose, probably in anticipation of the Second Coming. Indeed, the Book of Mormon teaches that Jesus visited not just the Jews and the Nephites and Lamanites, but other descendents of Israel scattered throughout the world. Who knows what other races are preserved for some glorious purpose?
Did you know that the Gentiles are cursed according to the same Book of Mormon that revealed the curse of the Lamanites? Or that the people who are responsible for building Zion in the latter days (the members of the LDS church and other sincere believers in Christ) are also cursed?!? In fact, the LDS church, specifically, is cursed in modern revelation, a curse which has still not been lifted, and even repeated by living prophets!?!
Why do you think the reverend felt it necessary to “forget” these inconvenient facts and beliefs? Whatever “curse” has been extended to Blacks, or Jews, or Lamanites, or anyone, let it be known that the LDS church suffers a far greater curse, one that will not end as pretty as it will for the Lamanites if we do not redeem ourselves from our curse.
I believe that when we see the true history of God’s interactions with man, whatever distaste we have to his choosing to change one group of people’s skin color will disappear, and we will instead, be left to declare our God to be just and holy and gracious. Or do you disagree, reverend?
So, it is our ignorance that is our enemy, not God, and not the color of people’s skins. In our ignorance, or perhaps partial understandings, we are commanded to love all as our neighbor, and realize that all people, black or white, will be eligible for salvation, the conditions of which are simply a willingness to accept Jesus Christ as the Savior of the entire world, all the continents, islands, and all mankind in all their diverse forms, cultures, languages, and lands!
Brigham Young is a hard prophet to digest. It is easy to take any number of his quotes out of context. But to do so is no worse than lying outright about his overall message, which this reverend has. We do not reject Brigham Young’s teachings, but we do reject simplistic interpretations of his messages outside of the context of his day and his broader message. Brigham Young freely taught that the Jews, the Blacks, and the Lamanites, despite whatever curses they may have on their heads, will be saved along with the righteous of all races and nations. To suppose anything less is to call him a liar.
Brigham Young was given a hard lot to work with. Joseph Smith complained that trying to teach the saints (members of our church) new doctrine was like trying to drive a corn-dodger into a hemlock with a pumpkin as a beetle. The saints of Brigham Young’s time were worse in many ways. They smoked, drank, cursed, and committed acts of murder and adultery. His messages were not politically correct or intended to sooth the ears of the saints, but to stir them up to a remembrance of their Savior and their great duty to bring the priesthood to the entire world. Shall we forgive him for not being crystal clear when condemning the saints? Shall we forgive him for drawing parallels between the curses that God had extended to the Jews, the Blacks, and the Lamanites, to excite the minds of the saints to not be as foolish as those who earned the curses for the respective races were? I think the words of Brigham Young reflect more on the people he was speaking to than the mind and will of the Lord as expressed in Brigham Young’s life. I wonder if you would give a different sermon if you intended to achieve the same effect as Brigham Young did among the same people?
I testify that there are people who are racist in our church. I’m sad to report this. I myself may have racist tendencies, which cause me sorrow. However, I solidly confirm to you that the church in nowise endorses this, nor excuses it. Those who harbor these feelings are condemned by the words of our prophets past and present. We have no excuse if we fail to exorcise these feelings from our hearts. We would be more greatly condemned than Cain or Ham or Canaan or Laman or the Jews who murdered Jesus if we cannot learn to extend the full hand of fellowship to their descendants, despite whatever mark the Lord may have felt to leave on whomever’s skin.
I also testify that to put your own sense of morality on the Lord, or to condemn him for his choices is the extreme of insanity. We can claim ignorance, or partial understanding, but to think you know better than God, or you would do things any better if you were God, is inviting God to demonstrate his power in your life, and not in a good way. The Book of Mormon testifies of the ultimate fate of those who suffer from the ultimate conceit. To be learned is good, as long as we don’t put our trust in the arm of flesh, ie, our own fallible intellects.
Finally, a word on baptism for the dead. Again, to clarify, we in no way touch the dead bodies. We collect genealogical information in cooperation with the world. When a descendant of an individual requests that their temple work be done, their name is added to the roles of the temple. We perform vicarious ordinances for the dead so that when the final judgment arrives, they can claim to either accept or reject the baptism performed in their behalf. It is not just the least we can do, but if we do not do it, and if we do not bind all the families of the earth together into one united family, none of us, not one, will be redeemed at the last judgment.
If you disagree, you are probably ignorant of one or more things relating to this process and practice. I encourage you to understand what the LDS people actually believe regarding these ordinances and practices. You are free to contact our missionaries or attend our church services. We will be happy to unfold to you every detail of the doctrine as we understand it. If, after learning from us directly, you still disagree with the practice, then I’d like to hear from you as to why. The rest of you just sound silly to me because you’re attacking a straw man that doesn’t exist except in your fantasies.
If you think we dishonor your ancestors, then you don’t understand that we force nothing on them. They are free to receive or reject. Think of it as us leaving keys to our favorite car at their doorstep. They don’t have to take the keys, they don’t have to drive the car, but the option is now available. We do not add their names to our church records. We simply mark their records in our genealogical database as having the ordinances performed, so they need not be performed twice.
Consider it like this. Imagine a great Chinese emperor from the past. We teach that since he did not get baptized, he will be condemned to hell, despite whatever noble acts he performed in life. Once we’ve performed baptism in his behalf, we teach that he is now entitled to every degree of salvation and glory as Jesus Christ. Now he can rise past thrones and principalities, and inherit the throne of God himself along with all the faithful saints. Is this dishonor? Or is this the ultimate honor?
The official church policy is that we do not do ordinances for people who are not related to living members of the church or people who request that the work be done. We ask living relatives to ask permission from other living relatives who do not believe what we believe, so that they can explain what they actually believe about the ordinance. If anyone violates this policy, we take it very seriously. If you hear of someone violating this, you can let me know and I’ll be sure the proper authorities in our church are notified. To impugn the church’s honor by suggesting we do not actually enforce this policy is the ultimate insult.
If you think we do this to evil people because we believe they were good, then you don’t understand our vision of Christ’s sacrifice. He died to save the world, including Hitler, from spiritual and physical death. We hope that all, even Hitler, will embrace Christ’s sacrifice. We don’t think that what Hitler did was good in any way, but as a child of God, we extend to him and his children and ancestors the same blessings we wish to extend to everyone. We do not think there is much of a difference when it comes to big sins or little sins, any sinner of any degree is not going to be welcome back with God. We do not consider ourselves better or worse than any other, we are all sinners and we all must repent and receive Christ.
I think those who are using our baptism for the dead as political ammunition are making a huge mistake. When people come to understand this doctrine, they will swarm our church demanding to be a part of this divine work. Trust me, I have seen it baptize not a few people. If you wish to make hay about this, I actually encourage you to do so. Go ahead and invent whatever vicious lies you can to make yourself more appealing. When it comes time that people are actually aroused with curiosity about the doctrine, then people like me will come and clarify the doctrine, and enjoy the benefit of seeing yet another person decide to become Mormon.
If you really, really wished to attack our religion, you would attack the behaviors of individual members. That’s our weakest link, and it’s not hard to find many examples of bad Mormons. Unfortunately, Mitt Romney is not one of them. So you’d be doing a major mistake to attack Mitt Romney on his character.
And on that note, let me ask you: Do you think Mitt Romney will force his religion on anyone once he becomes president? Hasn’t he made it clear that he intends to serve the people of America, and that he honors and respects people of all religion? Hasn’t he made it clear that he intends to follow the law and constitution, even if it were to contradict his religion? What more can you ask for, and why would such a man who has declared such things and obviously not violated such promises in previous offices have his religion scrutinized?