Johnny Lee Hooker just passed away, and they held his service at the chapel on the Mormon Temple grounds in Oakland, CA.
Was he LDS? Because, as a Mormon, I have never seen a non-Mormon funeral at a Mormon church, especially one as grand as the chapel at the Temple.
I know Gladys Knight got baptized Mormon a couple years ago, but I am not sure if Hooker was or not.
Don’t Know if he was while he was alive, but now that he’s dead I’m sure he will be baptized by proxy.
Why a black man become a Mormon is beyond me. The church has a long history of racism towards blacks. Up until what, I think 1977, Black were not admitted as full members and concidered inferior. Guess the LDS are trying to gloss over that part of church history like everything else.
Many persons of African-american descent are baptized into the church each year, some famous, some not so famous. Most recently, the notables have been former NBA star Thurle Bailey, and reknowned singer Gladys Knight, both of whom are very active in the church and proud of their faith. And I am sure they have heard all the malicious anti-Mormon propaganda. Yet they remain faithful.
Our church is based on faith itself. We have faith that Jesus Christ came and atoned for the sins of the world. We have faith that if we accept Christ, and endure in faithfulness to the end, we will be saved.
We believe we are the literal restored church that Christ established on this earth during his ministry. And by that, we believe in prophets that lead and guide us, and we have faith in them.
Blacks have always shared in all the blessings of the gospel. They have always been able to be baptized, and become “full members”. In the 1800s, when the church was based in Missouri, it accepted blacks into its congregations, a practice not widely accepted in other “mainstream” churches until the 20th century. This wreaked displeasure with the local government of the then slave state, which lead to the driving out of Mormons from Missouri.
When the revelation to our prophet was given in 1978 to allow all worthy males the opportunity to hold the priesthood (the authority to baptized, pass the sacrament, and so forth), it was seen as a happy time for the members of the church, no matter the color. As a member of the church all of my life, I have not experienced or seen any racism. We are warned from the pulpit, and even in our own scriptures against it. We are taught to “love one another”.
If the church were racist against blacks, then why would Thurle Bailey and Gladys Knight have even joined, being so revered in the black community?
Without a doubt, it is that they have faith and believe that what they have accepted as the truth is the truth.
I don’t want to start a religious war but TitoBenito isn’t making this stuff up. When I was growing up I had a close friend who was Mormon and he told me many times that “Blacks (that wasn’t the term he used) weren’t welcome in his church, and that God didn’t make them equal to whites”. They were certainly human beings he would tell me… but couldn’t be full fledged members of “The Church”. I argued with him about it but he said it wasn’t his decision to make.
He didn’t make this up, and while this may have been in the late 60’s, I only think this thinking changed recently. Now they accept everyone… but I’m pretty sure that wasn’t always the case. I wasn’t a member so I can’t say for sure what was preached back then. By the way, this was in California we’re talking about… not Alabama or Utah.
What Christian denomination, other than the Society of Friends (Quakers), has a history of fair treatment to blacks? I’m not defending the Mormons, but why should they be the sole whipping boys when other denominations continue to practice racial separatism? At least the Mormons have acknowledged publickly that their attitudes were wrong. Other churches, perhaps quietly, still encourage the separation of blacks from “white” (or at least non-black) congregations. And I am not only talking about whacko “Christian Identity” churches in the boondocks somewhere, but well established sects.
Hm. Wonder if we can avoid the religious debate and answer the question?
I can’t find anything in a google search right off hand. I’d assume he did convert late in life if what the OP says is correct: I’m nowhere close to an expert on Mormons.
gwar I do not know if Johnny Lee Hooker was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I do know however, that it is not necessary to be a member to have a funeral in a LDS chapel. I’m a practicing member and have attended funerals for people who were not members in LDS chapels.
dolphinboy I’ve no doubt your friend was a member of the church. However, his comments and his views are racist views NOT condoned by the church or the gospel of Jesus Christ. Sadly, in this church, just like in many other faiths, people practice with varying degrees of faithfulness. In our faith just like in the rest of society people have varying political and personal views. Unfortunately those personally held beliefs ARE NOT in keeping with the gospel. The point I am trying to make is that gwar is correct. In the early years after the church was organized there were black members and leaders (as well as native american and mexican members) and the fact that people of any race or heritage were welcomed into full membership was one of the many reasons the people of Missouri were so determined to expel the “Mormons” from their state. Your comment that he said it wasn’t his decision to make is absolutely correct. I assure you that he could not have provided a scriptural cite or a quote from the president of the church to support his personal bias.
I’ve been a member before and after the revelation in 1978 that gwar mentioned and I assure you that then and now, I did and do worship and fellowship with members of many races and ethnic heritages including people of color from California, Guyana, New York, Samoa, Tahiti, Mexico, Brazil, and many other places. There are members of the church in over 160 countries. I’d say thats a more diverse membership than most people realize.
Racists can be found anywhere. In my faith, in other faiths, and among people who claim no faith. There are even those who make racism their faith. It can be found in any ethic group as well, it can even be found on a message board. It’s bad enough that your friend held such beliefs but please don’t attribute them to the church. There is no scriptural or doctrinal teachings that support his comments to you.
Abby
[hijack] FWIW, I’m not the world’s most perfect Mormon, but I am Mormon, and I am very much in love with my beautiful black wife. If any church member even dared to suggest something racist to me, I would not hesitate to give them the verbal whipping of their life. But everyone I’ve met has treated me with genuine respect and courtesy.
This is not to suggest that the Mormon church doesn’t have a bad history when it comes to this subject, but it’s something we’ve moved beyond as a church. [/hijack]
As for the OP: I don’t know if Mr. Hooker was Mormon, but Mormons are pretty liberal with lending out their chapels for non-Mormons to use. Maybe he just liked the temple grounds.
Here is a link to a 1998 LA Times article on LDS efforts to move away from some unfortunate views from their past. Once there, you can link to numerous other articles on the site, which I’ll grant is anti-Mormon.
From an interview with Apostle LeGrand Richards shortly after the revelation in 1978 to grant blacks the opportunity to enter the priesthood.
And more recently….
Poking around this site and others, it appears dolphinboy (or his friend) is wrong when he claims that blacks are not welcome in the church. Quite the contrary. There seems to be no hatred toward any human in Mormon doctrine. Pity is another story. The implication that dark skin is a deviation from perfection reflects a deeper and more troubling issue than the more bureaucratic concern of denying the priesthood to blacks.
AbbySthrnAccent, you are correct that there are racists in most groups, including religions. However, you basically claim that with Mormons, it’s errant individuals from a pure church. I think this may be reversed. There will always be a bit of tunnel vision in any institution that (at least in this country) is overwhelmingly white. In spite of this, the Mormons I have met have been color-blind in their treatment and attitudes toward other races. The LDS church, on the other hand, continues to be tied by scripture and traditional teaching to these tenets of the faith that are largely ignored by its members.
I look forward to being corrected on these matters.
Steering this hijack from GD back toward GQ, I was skeptical about AbbySthrnAccent’s claim that treatment of blacks, rather than anti-polygamy and other fearful anti-Mormon attitudes forced the group out of Missouri. However, I’m pleased to learn from Encyclopædia Britannica,
One thing I would like to say is that I am not accusing the church and its members of racism. Every group has its share or bigots. What bothers me is the history of racism. When the founders of your religion say that you as a black man or woman are inferior by definition and will forever be so, you should kind of wonder about if you picked the right church. Yes it is unfair to hold all Mormons accountable for the ramblings of some biggot down that street, who happens to be mormon. But I do beleive that Brigham Young spoke for the church, in the same way Paul spoke for early Christianity. And I do hold Mormons accountable for his words. Sure mainstream christianity has its nuts, but it is not like Paul ever said “Black people are dirty and if you have sex with them you ought be dead” as our good buddy Brigham did.
Brigham Young- “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.110).
http://www.xmission.com/~country/chngwrld/p297.htm a photocopy of the page
For instance in 1855 Brigham Young said: “You must not think, from what I say, that I am opposed to slavery. No! The negro is damned, and is to serve his master till God chooses to remove the curse of Ham . . .” (New York Herald, May 4, 1855, as cited in Dialogue, Spring 1973, p.56).
Thats very nice of Brigham to let those poor negros get to serve us for eternity, they should feel honored to be our slaves.( To anyone who might think I’m a racist note that I am using very unsubtle sarcasm)
Young again -"Treat the slaves kindly and let them live, for Ham must be the servant of servants until the curse is removed. Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? You cannot. Yet our Christian brethren think that they are going to overthrow the sentence of the Almighty upon the seed of Ham. They cannot do that, though they may kill them by thousands and tens of thousands (Millennial Star, vol. 25, p.787; also in Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p.250).
Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? Why yes you can! Just fast forward to 1978.
"Negroes in this life are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. (Abra. 1:20-27.)
Hey its in the book of Abraham. ( The papyrus from which Joe Smith claimed he translated the book of Abraham, by the way, turned up in 1967. Turns out it was really a copy of a pagan text called “the book of breathing”, which has nothing to with Abraham. But thats a whole other story).
And if you disagree argue against my facts. I already know that the church of today is not a racist group, that is not my arguement. So please don’t give me stories about how nice mormons are to blacks and how much you love all people. I beleive that, and I’m sure you are very sincere about your love for all people.
any comments?
To answer the OP, Johnny Lee Hooker was not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. His estate requested use for his services. I cannot provide a cite as I could not locate one online. I did however phone the Oakland Temple and ask. If this is inadequate for you please feel free to phone the temple. You’ll find them kind and happy to answer your question.
What the scriptures you claim to have quoted inThe Book of Abraham actually say are,
What it says at the end of verse 27 is the Pharoah, who was righteous, was not of the lineage which would have entitled him to the priesthood at that time. He was a secular leader who was a righteous man. When I reflect on this, what occurs to me is that in the old testament times most often the primary secular ruler (king or pharoah) and the primary spiritual leader (prophets and or priests) were not the same person so it does not seem unreasonable to me that the Pharoah was righteous yet not a priest. The term “negroes” wasn’t used in the verses you cited. I doubt it was even in exsistance at the time of Abraham.
I don’t disagree that your sources and quotes make Brigham Young appear to have said things that appear in our time to be quite inappropriate and racist. However, the length of this post already combined with your sarcasm, clipped and quoted here,
the rather lengthy clipping and misquote of the scriptures, and use of a flagrantly anti site as a source is such that I’m not comfortable addressing your other quotes. Frankly, I don’t have access to them independant of your link to the anti site. The Journal of Discourses is a multi-volume set that for me is cost prohibitive and not available at the local public library here in Texas. Your other quotes are from newspapers, which in my opinion often enough, then as now, reflected the bias of the owners of the time rather than the actual words or context intended by the person being quoted.
I reread my post, I’m quite certain I did not make the claim that “it’s errant individuals from a pure church.” I did say
I’ve answered the OP’s question finally and tried to respectfully address TitoBenito’s comment regarding a history of racism towards black people in the church. I’m not interested in continuing to dispute sarcasm and outrageously misquoted scriptures. The Church was organized in New York and becoming established in the west in the 30 years immediately preceeding the civil war. At that time, slavery and to apply todays term to the issues of that day, racism, exsisted in our country, in churches, in other political system and even divided families. I stand by my orginal comment that sadly, racism could and can be found in many if not most organizations of that day including but not limited to, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. However, racism has no place in the gospel of Jesus Christ. It’s one of the lessons in the parable of the good Samaritan to love and have compassion (not pity) for everyone.
Respectfully,
Abby
P.S. I wanted to provide a cite documenting the diversity of membership and that the membership of the church is not as predominately “white” as is commonly believed. However, membership the member records don’t indicate color of skin. But this site provided some interesting information and is not an “LDS” site.
Ding Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner. Thanks, Abby.
For further discussion of the history of Mormonism and race and any repercussions which may or may not be extant today, I direct you to Great Debates.
This thread, mercifully, is closed.