Why Did the Church Withhold the Priesthood from African-American Men?

[Greg West]

Another chapter from A Mormon Answers the Hard Questions Posed by Anti-Mormons.

I feel obligated to tackle a subject, which frankly, may be more than I can handle. I pray for a spirit of meekness as I write, wishing to give no opportunity for offense. I understand that there are tender feelings on this subject. I would wish to look at it through the lens of cold logic and strict scriptural interpretation. However, I understand that to many people, this is an emotionally charged subject. I pray that the reader will understand my wish to seek understanding of God's ways, though they may be intentionally veiled to our limited understanding.

My interpretations here are my own. They are not official Church doctrine. Yet there are many who interpret the Church's silence on these issues to be a sign of embarrassment or shame for past prejudices. In the sensitive, politically-correct environment of today, I believe the Church seeks to avoid offense or misinterpretation by saying nothing at all.

However, my reality is that of a man who lives in an area where African-Americans make up half the population. There are many African-Americans who cordially receive our missionaries and attend our Church services. When these sincere individuals begin to consider Church membership, they are inevitably bombarded by anti-Mormon literature that misrepresents our views and history. In this chapter, I seek to provide those exposed to anti-Mormon views an opportunity to weigh those criticisms in the light of scripture and Mormon history.

Here are the facts. In or around 1832, a free African-American man named Elijah Abel was ordained to the important office of Seventy in the priesthood at Nauvoo, Illinois by the Prophet Joseph Smith. This is an office that was subordinate only to that of Apostle in our hierarchy. Elijah Abel was a faithful member of the Church all his life and served as a missionary. He was a Mormon pioneer who crossed the plains and eventually died in the faith in 1874 in Salt Lake City.

Joseph Smith apparently instructed the priesthood brethren, as they served missions around the United States, that they were to not ordain slaves to the Priesthood. In accordance with the teachings of the New Testament, if the slaves' masters would permit it, the missionaries could teach them the Restored Gospel and baptize them.

Joseph Smith was an unusually progressive individual on the subject of blacks and slavery in his time. He advocated not only freeing the slaves, but also giving them equal rights. This was something that even abolitionists did not support. When asked a question about what counsel he would give to a convert to the Church who owned 100 slaves, the Prophet Joseph replied:

I have advised them to bring their slaves into a free country and set them free-educate them-and give them equal rights. (Compilation on the Negro in Mormonism, p.40)

Joseph Smith taught plainly that one race was not superior to another. In preparation for the 1844 election, Joseph Smith declared his candidacy for the Presidency. The primary goal of his candidacy was to preserve the unity of the Church when political parties sought to divide the members. That unity was critical in preserving the Church as a body following the assassination of Joseph Smith in June of 1844.

Among the planks in Joseph Smith's political platform was the proposal to buy the freedom of the slaves in the United States by the sale of public lands in the West. The money raised would be used to compensate slave-holders for their “property” and provide for education for the slaves. As I mentioned previously, Joseph Smith wanted to give blacks equality, not just freedom. Later, an Illinois neighbor, Abraham Lincoln, proposed such a plan that was rejected by Congress. However, even Lincoln's desires never intended full equality for the freed slaves.

There is some lack of understanding of the Prophet's intent relating to the ordination of blacks. Some felt that he had no objection to ordaining free blacks. Others cited passages from Genesis in the Bible and the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price that indicated that the black race were descendants of Cain.

The mark of Cain doctrine originated long before the Mormon Church was founded. It was unfortunately used by Christians as moral justification for enslavement of blacks. Genesis 4:15 states that God placed “a mark” upon Cain after he had murdered his brother Abel. Many Christians (even before the founding of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) believed that this mark was a dark skin.

The fact is that we don't know what this passage means. Interpretations are based on translations, ancient non-scriptural documents, and scholarly writings. This doctrine predates the Church, but Mormons who believed it put a novel twist on it.
Mormons believe that Adam, Seth, Enoch, Methuselah, Noah, and other ancient patriarchs held the same priesthood that exists in the Church today. These men walked with God, spoke to Deity, and received instruction and commandments that blessed the ages in which they lived.

When Cain killed Abel, some believe that the curse placed upon him was not the “mark” but the denial of the right to the priesthood. As we review Genesis, we find that Cain was born first and would have held the birthright, which included ordination to the Priesthood of God. Instead, Cain rendered himself unworthy to this honor by offering a sacrifice to God in a manner contrary to God's will. Abel, on the other hand, was accepted by God. In his anger, Cain murdered his brother.
For this act, some Mormons believed that God cursed Cain and his posterity to be denied the Priesthood until the day that Abel would be resurrected from the dead and his posterity have the right offered to them. There is no scriptural support to this interpretation.

Some scholars, trying to unravel the history on this practice, have tried to lay it on Brigham Young's doorstep. The truth is that no one can say for sure. Did Joseph Smith privately convey such a teaching to Brigham Young or the other early Church councils? No one can say. We'll never know for sure until some historian unearths a journal, diary, or minutes of a meeting from that era. We do know Brigham Young's attitudes; however, concerning blacks and that he condemned slavery and the wicked slave masters..

Negroes should be treated like human beings, and not worse than dumb brutes. For their abuse of that race, the whites shall be cursed, unless they repent. (Journal of Discourses 10:111)

From Brigham Young down to the mid-1970s, the Presidents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints continued the ban on the ordination of blacks. By blacks, this meant men of African descent, through whom the curse upon Cain was believed to be perpetuated. I make a distinction here, because dark-skinned Polynesians and the Maori peoples of New Zealand were not under this ban.

The ban was not motivated by racism. The teachings of the modern prophets have always been that one race is not superior to another. It was motivated by a theological belief that God had denied the posterity of Cain the priesthood. Until revelation came from God, Presidents of the Church could not act otherwise.

Here is where a crucial difference between the Restored Church and sectarian Christianity plays a significant role. Among the churches of Christendom, since 325 A.D., councils of men have decided upon the contents of creeds, the definition of the Godhead, the role of the priesthood and authority, and every other facet and practice of their beliefs.

Such doctrines as ordaining women and gays to the priesthood are still debated hotly in our day among them. Without revelation from heaven, there is no single source of authority. It is doctrine by negotiation. Whoever has the most votes wins. Historically, truth does not often garner a majority in these councils.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints relies upon the principle of current, modern revelation. We regard the Church as a Divinely-appointed and organized creation. Man cannot change it or its doctrines to suit himself, no matter what political or social trends may lead the headlines of the day.

Many Church members, through the 1960s felt the pressure from the success of the civil rights' movement. Nevertheless, though many prayers were offered in behalf of black Americans and their struggle for equality, we had to wait for God's answers to come in his own time.

In the 1970s, Mormon missions in South America experienced explosive growth, particularly in Brazil. There came a time when the Church desired to build a temple in Sao Paulo. In preparing their family history work to submit to the new temple archives, it became apparent that many of the converts in Brazil were of mixed-race ancestry.

The President of the Church, Spencer W. Kimball, was faced with a moment similar to the one Peter experienced in the Bible. To Peter, his dilemma was Cornelius. As recorded in the Book of Acts, Peter had a vision where he was instructed to begin to baptize Gentiles. Christ's own instructions, until that time, was that the apostles were to preach to the House of Israel first.

President Kimball saw the Gospel going forth to the whole earth and saw a looming problem with the growth of the Church. How could local congregations be led by lay-ministers, as is done in the Church, if the Church cannot ordain and train local leaders to be the shepherds of those congregations?

Taking this issue to the Lord over several months in 1978, the answer came. President Kimball took this revelation to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and they, as a group, received this same revelation: that the time had come to permit all worthy males to be ordained to the Priesthood. Since that time, the Church has experienced marvelous growth in Africa and all over the world. Mormon congregations meet in Harlem and in many historically black cities and neighborhoods throughout the United States.

Many ask, how do black Mormons deal with the issue? There is no simple answer to this, but the overwhelming number of them will testify that regardless of the confusing past, the light of revelation has cleared the view and corrected any error in practice. The Holy Ghost manifested God's will and it testifies to any who seek knowledge and understanding with the intent to obey God's will.

There are a number of good web sites that deal with the issue from a personal point of view. Some of them give a good consideration of a variety of viewpoints. I strongly recommend the reader visit the site below, operated by the Genesis Group. This site offers an uncopyrighted "book" of nearly 70 pages that goes into great detail of the history, doctrine, and scriptural information on this subject.

http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/blackmormon/SAQ.html

The Genesis Group is an unofficial association of black Latter-day Saints. Today, there are also a number of prominent African-American Latter-day Saints, like NBA great Thurl Bailey and the incomparable singer Gladys Knight. There are some excellent speeches and videos by these two prominent African-American celebrities where they discuss their experiences and their testimonies. One of the greatest areas of regional growth in the Church is in Africa.

My point-of-view is not to try to justify or defend the doctrine that denied men of African descent the priesthood until 1978. Modern revelation has settled the issue. There is no more confusion as to the Lord's will in this situation. I wish to take a few moments and seek some distance from the emotional impact of the issue to examine the a more fundamental problem.

THE DEEPER QUESTION
The real question is not: "Why did the Mormon Church refrain from ordaining blacks to the priesthood?" The deeper question is: "Does God give preferential treatment to certain groups, nationalities, or individuals?" Is there scripture that shows that God has, at one time or another, denied blessings to one group of human beings while favoring another?

WHY ABRAHAM?
In the minds of many, the Bible is one of the most "politically incorrect" books because it speaks of a chosen people. The Old Testament is the history and archive of God's dealings with the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
The first five books are attributed to Moses, who provided the account of the world's creation, the ancient patriarchs of the human family, and the election of Abraham to grace through his faith in God. The rest of the Bible, including the New Testament, is a testimony of God's longsuffering and patience as he fulfills the promises he made to Abraham.

Abraham was promised that, though he and his wife were childless until very late in their lives, God would make his posterity more numerous than the stars in heaven. Through Abraham's posterity, all mankind would be blessed. This promise has been fulfilled on many levels. It is through Abraham's seed that the heritage of faith in the One True God has been preserved. It is through his seed that God's laws have come down to mankind. It is through his seed that prophets have preserved the testimony of God. It is through Jesus Christ, one of Abraham's descendants, that all the earth's people have the means of salvation and eternal life.

Abraham's blessings were so great because he obeyed God, even to the offering of his own son as a sacrifice. This sacrifice was in similitude of God's offering his only Son, Jesus Christ, to atone for the sins of all mankind. Abraham understood the sacrifice that God would offer, his own “Only Begotten Son,” like no other mortal man. For this reason, Abraham was referred to in the New Testament as the Friend of God. (See James 2:23)

A HOLY, CHOSEN, SPECIAL PEOPLE
To some of Abraham's posterity, the Israelites, the Lord spoke these words through Moses, his servant:

For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. (Deuteronomy 7:6)

Why would our Heavenly Father select one group of his children to be favored over another? Even our flawed sense of human fairness is stirred by the thought. What parent grants favor to one child over another? One explanation to this perceived inequity is that we enter into this life on foreordained paths that were influenced by our choices and our blessings earned in a premortal existence.

Proverbs 8:22 and Jeremiah 1:5 teach us that we were with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ in heaven before the world was created. In that existence as now, we were individuals with certain specific gifts, talents, abilities, and character flaws. We had free will and could obey or disobey God's commandments. Unimaginable as it may seem, Lucifer rebelled against the Father and was cast out of heaven. Many followed him. (Isaiah 14:12-15, Luke 10:18, Revelation 12:4-9)

Out of the war in heaven and other challenges, each of us distinguished ourselves to some degree or another. The Lord then selected us and foreordained us to the missions we would have in mortality. In his eternal wisdom and foreknowledge, he places the premortal souls of men and women into his plan of salvation, ensuring that they will have every opportunity to complete the mission or which he sends them. He gathers them into families, communities, and nations.

Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee.
When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
For the LORD’S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.
He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye. (Deuteronomy 32:7-10, italics added)

GOD DIVIDED THE EARTH
It is the Lord who divided mankind into nations and separated them one from another. Was it not the Lord who confounded the language of man at the Tower of Babel and created a barrier to unity and cooperation?

One of the political buzzwords of our time is "diversity." The Lord is the author of diversity, having separated us into nationalities, racial groups, and language groups. It is part of the plan that we overcome these divisions to "...come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." (Ephesians 4:13)

To Abraham, when he was chosen of God, he was told, "...I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee..." (Genesis 12:3) God will favor those who accept the testimony of Abraham and curse those who reject it.

GOD SHOWED PREFERENCE BETWEEN THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL
Generations later, Joseph brought his two sons to his father Israel to receive blessings at his hands. Israel knowingly set his right hand upon the younger brother Ephraim instead of Manasseh, the elder of the two brothers. When Joseph objected, seeking to correct his aged father's mistake, Israel indicated that inspiration was at work.

And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father’s hand, to remove it from Ephraim’s head unto Manasseh’s head.
And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head,
And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.
And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh. (Genesis 48:17-20)

In Genesis chapter 49, we read the blessings Israel gave to his sons, the fathers of the 12 tribes of Israel. To Joseph he said, "The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting chills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren." (Genesis 49:26)

Although we tend to associate Israel with Judaism, modern day Jewry is comprised mainly of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with a few remnants of the other tribes, including the Levites. The ancient Northern Kingdom was conquered and scattered the other tribes all throughout Gentile nations in Europe and Asia.

Yet it was to Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh that the preeminent blessings were promised. This was God's way of mingling the seed of the "children of promise" (Galatians 4:28) among the nations of the earth to fulfill the promises to Abraham. Jesus likened the Kingdom of God to a small amount of leaven that a woman hid in three measures of meal until the whole was leavened. The promises made to Abraham were extended to his posterity. Through the scattering of Israel among the people in distant lands, Abraham's seed, became as numerous as the stars in heaven.

JESUS AND THE CANAANITE WOMAN
When Jesus Christ ministered on the earth, he went first to the House of Israel. He told a Canaanite woman who came to him seeking a miracle for her daughter that "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 15:24) Jesus explained that his personal ministry was limited to the Israelites.

Today, he would be denounced as prejudiced or racist for such a statement. Mercifully, he granted the woman her desire because of the faith she manifested, but his commission from God the Father was to minister to Israelites, not Gentiles.
Jesus had already given instructions to the Twelve Apostles when he ordained them and sent them out. Their commission was limited by his own:

These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Matthew 10:5-6)

The Apostles were specifically instructed to not go to the Gentiles or Samaritans. This practice continued until the time that a further revelation was given to Peter to preach to and baptize the Gentile Cornelius and his family. (See Acts chapter 10).
As a result of that experience, Peter's view of the great Gospel work ahead of him expanded drastically. He understood that the commission to take the gospel to every nation was not limited to just Jews. He declared, "...Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." (Acts 10:34-35)

THE ANSWER
Therein lies the answer to our most fundamental question. God is not a respecter of persons. Worldly titles, status, wealth, nationality, race, etc. do not matter to Him. He loves all of his children with a perfect love. He does, however; show preference to those who make covenants with him and obey him. He honors covenants made across generations. He honors covenants made in the premortal life before we came to earth.
It pleased him to allow his covenant people Israel to be smitten and scattered by their enemies because it served His ultimate goal to spread the seed of Abraham, and the transcendent promises made to them, through all nations. The status of being elect or "chosen" is one fraught with peril and responsibility. To whom much is given, much is required. (Luke 12:48)

PETER AND CORNELIUS - A MODEL FOR CHANGES IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST
Peter's experience with Cornelius is a good place to summarize. In Peter's mind, he was given a specific charge by his Lord and Master. It was: preach the Gospel to the Jews first. The time would come when it would go to every nation, but he knew not when that would be.

Peter had no authority to go beyond the bounds of his commission from the Savior. It was the Lord's Church, not Peter's. However, when new revelation came, as was his right as the senior Apostle and leader of the Church, he implemented the changes commanded without delay. Nevertheless, it was not without some growing pains. Paul contended with Peter over this subject, because Peter hesitated to lodge with Gentile converts for fear of what the unconverted Jews would say. (Galatians 2:11-12)

In our day, some members may have used the priesthood ban to justify racist personal sentiments, though the origins of the practice don't show that racism was the reason for it's existence. The teachings of the prophets and the Church condemn racism. All we can say is that, for purposes hidden up unto God, the time for those restrictions did not end until 1978 when a specific revelation was given to God's prophet and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Since that time, the Church has expanded rapidly through Africa and among African-Americans.

CONCLUSION
Like I said at the beginning, I didn't want to get into the black-white racial divide and all its emotional components. Those are remnants of an unfortunate history. Americans in particular still need to work hard to foster racial harmony and acceptance.
What I wish to establish in an open, reasonable mind, is the premise that God has, in the past, chosen people for certain missions and denied others those same blessings based on his wisdom and his timetable. To the finite mind of man, these milestones may appear random, capricious, and arbitrary. My faith is that God, who knows the end from the beginning, is working to fulfill his purposes in a deliberate and intricate plan that balances foreordination and free will.

Perhaps the day will come when the sad history of slavery will be forgiven and African-Americans will say, like Joseph of old who was sold into slavery in Egypt by his brethren: "And God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance." (Genesis 45:7)

The descendants of those who suffered and toiled under unimaginable burdens now have the opportunity, according to God's timetable, to hold the blessings of the priesthood and minister in the House of the Lord for their ancestors to bring salvation and exaltation to them. The sufferings and injustices of the past will be in vain if God's designs are thwarted by those seeking to build political capital or to foster divisions in the household of faith.

Although we may not understand God's methods and his timing, my opinion is that our trust and faith are never misguided. It is wisdom in God that our faith and obedience be tested through difficult situations that we might not fully understand. I also believe that no man can take it upon himself, however noble his intent, to steady the Ark of God's own Church. To do so invites personal tragedy and a multitude of prideful errors. I hope my words here are accepted in the spirit of meekness and humility.

[Andre Mostert]

I think you dealt with this issue in a direct and informative fashion.

A side note. I lived for 12 years in Quincy, Illinois, which was part of the Nauvoo District and later Nauvoo Stake of the LDS Church. That means I spent a lot of time in Nauvoo. Elder Spencer W. Kimball, as an Apostle before he became President of the Church, was being interviewed by a lady newsperson from a Quincy TV station. I had set up the interview and was there when she asked him when he thought they would get the priesthood? He said he didn't know when but he did not expect it to be during his lifetime.

Few members know that his father Andrew Kimball was the 50th and last son of Heber C. Kimball who was Brigham Young's best friend, an Apostle and Counselor in the First Presidency. Andrew Kimball was called to serve as the LDS contact with American Indians. He served in that capacity for many years. I've always felt this helped prepare Spencer that he was ready when the Lord made the decision to give a revelation opening the Priesthood to all eligible men, including African-Americans.

[Greg West]

Thanks for the comments!

[Ronnie Bray]

Greg,

An excellent essay in which you cover significant issues well. By way of observation might I add that the late Gordon B Hinckley when asked about the denial of priesthood to Negroes, replied, "That's just the way the brethren interpreted it."

Whilst it is true that the reason behind the ban is not yet explained, that has not prevented some of our number from speculating on the possible reason. However, like most speculation, especially that which seeks to open God's mind and peer inside for an answer, it is a blind alley, and although there is some heat generated by this methodology, there is not enough light to help a no-see-um to see his feet, which is probably where the term came from. 

Noting what the punishment is – if, indeed, it is a punishment - raises the same question asked by Job’s comforters, "What have you done to offend God? You must have done something! Come on, Job, what was it, eh?"

However, Job had not offended God, yet was permitted by God to suffer at the hands of Satan. Why? The scripture suggests an answer, but we are surprised by the explanation that God was making a point and that to do so he put a good man into the hands of the Evil One.

I believe that some erudite men, including some GAs, have thought backwards on this by introducing the proposition that since God is just he allows no one to suffer unjustly. But this is not the case. Moral agency renders all good people liable to suffer at the hands of bad people and thoughtless friends. The part played by justice in this situation is that the good will be rewarded for doing good, and the evil will be punished for being wicked.

I have heard many of these speculative ‘constructions’ that include the “They were not valiant in the pre-existence; they were fence-sitters in the pre-mortal war in heaven; They rejected the priesthood when offered it in the PE; etc. Yet no prophet or apostle speaking or writing authoritatively has prefaced their explanation with “Thus saith the Lord … ” and until one does – if one ever does – we are left wandering in the darkness of our imaginations. It is a question I do not pose, and never have done. Sufficient unto the day thereof is the evil thereof.

You dealt with the denial of priesthood to roughly 90% of the Tribes of Israel, that office and responsibility being devolved for a season to the Tribe of Levi. The remainder of Israel although required to serve God and feed the priests, did not hold the priesthood. Yet this lack is not spoken of as punishment, or a sign of divine displeasure, but as the way God wanted it.

If we have to understand what God does before we can make sense of it, then we will always be seeking, but never finding, answers to this and other important questions, such as, “Do the pearly gates open inwards or outwards?”

We are easily satisfied by the fact that sisters are not called to the ranks of priesthood, but who in their right mind believes this lack to be consequent upon some great sin commissioned by every woman somewhere, sometime, or indeed to suggest that God is punishing all women for the frailty of one or a few women? The very idea is fatuous.

I know of some Latter-day ‘Aints’ in England that apostatised when the inspired declaration was made, and founded their own church. That is because they are racist, unjust, and have not faith in Almighty God’s competence to do the right thing at the right time for the right reason.

Ronnie

[Greg West]

A really great video clip from the documentary "He Inviteth All to Come."

[Greg West]

This week was the 30th anniversary of the priesthood revelation that permitted African-Americans to receive the priesthood. I first heard of the revelation when I was not a member of the Church. It was a curious event for me.

I was 18 years old and typically liberal for that age. When I hear Tom Brokaw announce that the president of the Mormon Church had had a revelation that authorized blacks to receive the priesthood, I didn't think, "Well, that's a racist doctrine" as I might have been prone to do. Instead I thought, "A revelation from God? Mormons believe in modern revelation?" It was one of many small steps that prepared me to encounter the Church a few months later.

The antis still try to hang the racist thing around our necks like a dead albatross. Even if there are individuals who may still harbor racist sentiments, they are dying out or their hearts are changing. I live in an area where black members of the Church come under a lot of social pressure from their own people. Whenever I see an African-American in the temple, I rejoice, because I know they went through a lot to get there. I baptized an African man on my mission. He was from Congo. It was a great blessing to know him and I often pray for him still, because he was from a country that was torn by war and revolution. I would consider it a great blessing if I were ever to find him in the temple someday.

Here are links to a couple of articles you might find interesting.

LDS black leaders call for spirit of unity
Much has changed for LDS blacks since '78

[Greg West]

Here's a follow-up that I thought would go nicely with this article. It's from the Washington Post about the growth of the Church in Nigeria. Check out the video too. (If the video link doesn't work here, check the S.P.A.M. videos page.)

The New Face of Global Mormonism