Many Americans may be surprised to learn that critics often accuse The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of racism and promoting the “white male patriarchy.” While the Church holds traditional values, labeling anything with white, male, or patriarchal influence as inherently racist oversimplifies complex issues and echoes common leftist critiques.

In this 9-part series, I’ll examine the priesthood restriction once placed on Black members—not to excuse it, but to explore its actual roots. While the Church did enforce this policy, I argue it wasn’t rooted in racism as the term is properly understood. We’ll explore the historical, doctrinal, and cultural context behind the restriction and how it was implemented.

This issue gained national attention during the 2012 Republican primaries, when Mitt Romney’s faith spotlighted the Church’s racial past. As the Huffington Post put it:

“Latter-day Saints…feel damned if they do and damned if they don’t: they can either doubt the integrity of their spiritual leaders or be accused of racism… If earlier Church leaders were wrong about race, what keeps them from being wrong about gender?”

That tension remains today, especially amid modern debates over gender roles and sexuality in the Church. These cultural flashpoints raise real concerns for members who want to uphold prophetic authority while distancing themselves from past discrimination.

Before diving deeper, we must define key terms often used in criticism:

-Racism: The belief that some races are inherently superior or inferior, often tied to violence, systemic oppression, and legal injustice—such as slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, and hate groups like the KKK.

-Intersectionality: A modern theory that frames social identity (race, gender, sexuality) as overlapping forms of oppression—often focusing blame on “white male patriarchy.”

When terms like racism are misapplied in every controversy, it diminishes the severity of real historical atrocities. In today’s “PC culture,” accusations are often quick and sweeping, creating pressure to apologize or conform without nuance.

Throughout this series, I aim to show that race was not the central reason for the priesthood restriction. It was not based on “human traits and capacities,” as racism truly is. However, I will acknowledge any harmful commentary. An early disclaimer is required: Latter-day Saints do not believe their prophets and leaders are infallible. Their weaknesses will be duly noted.

This complex history deserves a fair, thorough look—and a respectful conversation about faith, doctrine, and social justice.

Further Reading:

• Elijah Abel: The Life and Times of a Black Priesthood Holder by W. Kesler Jackson
• The Church’s “Race and the Priesthood” essay (linked in the Further Reading section)
• Joseph Smith’s 1836 letter to Oliver Cowdery, which reveals his cautious approach to slavery in the South, aiming to convert masters first, then slaves, all while warning slaveholders of divine accountability.

Scott Thormaehlen received his Master’s in History in 2016 and taught U.S. History in the Lone Star College system in Houston, Texas and for Alvin Community College. His writings have appeared in Accuracy in Academia, the Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies at Sam Houston State University, LDS Living, Meridian Magazine, and East Texas History – a project by Sam Houston State University.