Comments on: Brother Able

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 01:52:00 +0000

Aaron, those are tough questions. The Church's official position is that we don't know why the ban was in place. I think that a lot of people that are familiar with the current scholarship tend to think that it was a mistake of sorts (see here, for example). It is certain that there was is no extant revelatory basis for the ban, and that the idea of the curse of Cain was imported from Christian theology that predated Mormonism (and was used to justify slavery). The first recorded reference we have is to the ban is in 1847. Polygamy is quite a bit more complicated as there is a documented supernatural trail of sorts. You have things like section 132 and accounts of angels, etc. Consequently, I think the vast majority of the Saints believe that for some reason or another God had his people engage in polygamy. Certainly, there are Mormons that think that the implementation of polygamy was in some cases flawed (and I think most people when faced with some particular examples would concede that the implementation was in those instances less than desirable).

By: aaron

aaron — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:57:32 +0000

Wow! I’ve never heard this before. This is pretty cool to see. So with my limited church history knowledge, what happened to make leaders say blacks couldn’t have the priesthood?

Also, this brings up another question…polygamy. What is/was that all about? I see Elder Holland took a stance that suggested the blacks not holding the priesthood was an error. Has anyone said this about polygamy?

aaron

By: Stirling

Stirling — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 01:21:04 +0000

M&M (in 3), thanks for your mention of the Holland quote. I hadn't read the text before, and find it (in almost full) here.

By: David Grua

David Grua — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 23:10:58 +0000

Thanks, Mark. I’ll have to check out the Tanners’ book.

By: Mark Brown

Mark Brown — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:44:04 +0000

David G.,

This is from Neither White nor Black, edited by Lester Bush and Armand Mauss:

This according to the findings of Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormons and Negroes (Salt Lake City, Utah, Modern Microfilm Co., 1970), pp. 12, 16, which contains documentary evidence indicating that Enoch Abel, a son of Elijah Abel, was ordained an elder on 10 Nov. 1900. and that a grandson, Elijah Abel, was ordained a priest on 5 Jul. 1934 and an elder on 29 Sept. 1935. The Tanners also suggested that Elijah Abel’s other surviving son, also named Elijah, may have been ordained to the priesthood.

By: Margaret Young

Margaret Young — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:42:59 +0000

To be honest, we didn’t delve into the generation beyond Elijah Abel’s children. Yes, there is a paper trail, but I don’t have much knowledge of church activity in the Abel family. We do know that his descendants eventually left the Church. Several have now read our trilogy and found new respect for their ancestor. We had a number of them at the monument dedication. They have also, for the most part, crossed the color line, btw.

By: David Grua

David Grua — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:39:07 +0000

Margaret: Is there any evidence for the ordainings aside from the monument? Not that I doubt that they happened, but I’m just wondering if evidence for them pops up elsewhere.

By: Margaret Young

Margaret Young — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:26:24 +0000

I’m not sure it was done “quietly.”
One son (Enoch, if I’m remembering) was ordained an elder; the grandson was ordained a deacon. Both ordinations are listed on the ELijah Abel monument in the SL Cemetery.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:12:28 +0000

bbell, I’m not certain that it was Cache Valley, but otherwise that is my understanding.

By: bbell

bbell — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:26:39 +0000

Is’nt it true that Able’s sons and grandsons were ordained quietly in Cache Valley prior to 1978?