In 2014, the church published a series of “personal essays” from then Mission President and rising black LDS leader, Ahmad Corbitt. Admittedly, Corbitt says he was “asked to write this paper” on the “topic of the priesthood and African peoples.” This followed the church publishing the Gospel Topic Essays, and his paper specifically mentions the “Race and the Priesthood” essay. The church asked one of the only rising Black leaders in the church to explain how he reconciled the church’s racial past and issues. His response was so flattering to the church that it was published and declares that the church is “one of the most racially unifying organizations in the history of the world.” The personal essay is split into 4 parts and each is published on the church website in the Church History section under “Perspectives on Church History.”
Essay declares LDS Church Among “Most Racially Unifying Organizations in the History of the World”
Ahmad Corbitt, General Authority Seventy, was born in August 1962 and joined the church at 18, just 2 years after the priesthood ban was lifted in June 1978. He was a young child barely of baptism age when the First Presidency declared the priesthood ban and racist policies of the church to be doctrine in 1969. Corbitt never experienced being denied the priesthood in his youth or seeing it in his family. Perhaps this is why his response to questions about the ban is not to share the history but to look forward. He states his response does not “look backward and attempt to provide a historical explanation,” even though he references the Gospel Topic Essay in a footnote. His historical rationalization, also hidden in a footnote, includes the excuse that “other churches and religions have also imposed restrictions based on race.” If other churches had jumped off a bridge, it would be ok for the One and Only True Church to do it, too…
Given the Church’s powerful potential and prophesied future in unifying God’s children, what do I say when concerned Latter-day Saints ask me about the priesthood ban? How do I urge them to respond if they are asked “Is the Mormon Church racist?” or “How can you belong to a church that once discriminated against black people?” A sincere African-American couple, newly baptized members of the Church, recently asked me to help them respond to these questions. I was serving as one of their ecclesiastical leaders at the time.
Rather than look backward and attempt to provide a historical explanation—an approach that can be helpful for many—I felt impressed to help this couple look forward—an approach I believe is essential for all people. I told my friends that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is one of the most successful international organizations in the world at promoting brotherhood and sisterhood among all races and ethnicities, including people of African descent. They were surprised. I explained that our Church is uniquely empowered and destined to achieve worldwide peace, harmony, and unity among all the peoples of the earth.
(Footnote: One effective way to respond is to help others understand relevant history, as the Church’s statement titled “Race and the Priesthood” does. Such an approach may include an explanation that other churches and religions have also imposed restrictions based on race. I believe that in taking this approach, we should avoid addressing these issues in ways that tear down other religions. Also, we should be careful, in these days of growing secularism and aggressive atheism, that we don’t diminish faith in general.)
Ahmad Corbitt, LDS General Authority Seventy, A Personal Essay on Race and the Priesthood, Part 2: Seeing as We Are Seen, October 13, 2014
https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/seeing-as-we-are-seen?lang=eng
Ahmad Corbitt’s response to questions about the LDS Church’s racial history is as troubling as it is evasive. Instead of directly addressing the priesthood ban—a doctrine that for over a century excluded Black members from full participation in their own faith—he encourages members to “look forward” rather than “look backward.” This approach is not only dismissive of the real harm caused by the Church’s past but also avoids accountability.
The suggestion that the LDS Church is “one of the most successful international organizations in the world at promoting brotherhood and sisterhood among all races and ethnicities” is a remarkable overstatement, given that its highest leadership remains exclusively white, and it has yet to formally apologize for its past racial discrimination. An organization truly committed to racial unity would not need to sidestep its own history or frame discussion of past racism as a distraction from a glorious future.
His footnote, which attempts to deflect responsibility by noting that other religions have also imposed racial restrictions, is another way of minimizing the Church’s actions rather than owning them. This “we weren’t the only ones” defense does nothing to undo the damage caused by racist teachings that were explicitly defended by Church prophets as divine. Furthermore, his warning against “diminishing faith in general” seems to suggest that openly acknowledging the Church’s racism might undermine religious belief itself—a telling indication of how fragile this history is to the LDS faith narrative.
True reconciliation requires more than looking forward. It requires acknowledgment, accountability, and meaningful action. Until the Church fully reckons with its past—including issuing a formal apology and diversifying its leadership—it cannot credibly claim to be a leader in racial unity.
I told of an African-American couple who came to me, as their ecclesiastical leader, for counsel about the ban that once prohibited black men and women of African descent from receiving all the blessings of the priesthood. They also had questions about the Book of Mormon.
They were concerned about Book of Mormon language they considered racist—a concern others have expressed. My friends were surprised when I told them that the Book of Mormon is, in my view, the most racially and ethnically unifying book on the earth.
(Footnote: This is not to say the Holy Bible is not a unifying book. It surely is. Nor is this intended to diminish in any way the Quran, Bhagavad Gita, or any other holy book in the world’s religions. This commentary simply highlights powerful ways in which the Book of Mormon uniquely addresses the divine mandate to be unified as God’s children, irrespective of color and ethnicity.)
Ahmad Corbitt, LDS General Authority Seventy A Personal Essay on Race and the Priesthood, Part 3: He Denieth None That Come unto Him, October 13, 2014
https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/he-denieth-none-that-come-unto-him
Ahmad Corbitt’s response to an African-American couple’s concerns about racist language in the Book of Mormon is astonishing in its deflection. Instead of engaging with their valid concerns, he insists—without evidence—that the Book of Mormon is “the most racially and ethnically unifying book on the earth.” This statement is not only dismissive of their experience but also ignores the actual content of the text.
The Book of Mormon explicitly associates righteousness with lighter skin and wickedness with darker skin. These passages have been used for generations to justify racist beliefs within the LDS Church, reinforcing a hierarchy where whiteness is tied to spiritual superiority. If a person of color reads these verses and feels marginalized, the appropriate response is not to dismiss their concerns with grand, unfounded claims about the book’s unifying power. It is to listen, acknowledge the issue, and consider the implications of such teachings.
His footnote, which attempts to soften the claim by acknowledging other religious texts, does little to mitigate the problem. The issue is not whether the Book of Mormon claims to promote unity—it’s whether its actual teachings and historical impact have done so. Compared to texts like Letter from Birmingham Jail, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, or even the New Testament, which explicitly calls for unity regardless of race (Galatians 3:28), the Book of Mormon falls far short.
Corbitt’s response illustrates a broader issue within the LDS Church: the tendency to whitewash complex history rather than confront it. If the Church truly wanted to be a force for racial unity, it would first acknowledge the harm its teachings have caused, address the concerns of marginalized members with sincerity, and take real steps toward inclusivity—starting with its own leadership and doctrine.
These personal essays push his message further in the included video where Ahmad Corbitt states:
People have asked me, ‘How can you as a black man be a member of the Mormon church?’ ‘Is the church racist’, or ‘I thought the church was racist.’
What I tell them is that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is one of the most racially unifying organizations in the history of the world. It is powerful in its potential to help all of the human family see one another as children of God. I think that black people, and white people, and Asians, Hispanics, and Aboriginal people from all over the world are coming together in the gospel, in Christ, and are becoming one under the banner of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It’s as if part of the marvelous work and a wonder that was prophesied would come about in these last days, which we know is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, includes Unity of the Human family.
The Book of Mormon is one of the most racially unifying books in the world. It’s the only book of scripture where God explicitly tells people of one color to reach out across color barriers. To those of another color with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, where God organizes a society in the context of a large family. I’m thinking of Lehi and Sariah who have children who then become divided and assume different colors and different cultures. But throughout their history God tells the righteous, of whatever color, to reach out to those of the other color, and ultimately in Fourth Nephi, he brings that whole family back to one in Christ and the scripture says, ‘Surely, there could not be a happier people among all the people created by the hand of God.’ I think that’s what God wants for his children in these latter days.
Ahmad Corbitt, Church Video: Till We All Come In The Unity Of The Faith, 2014
A Personal Essay on Race and the Priesthood, Part 4: Till We All Come in the Unity of the Faith, October 13, 2014
https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/till-we-all-come-in-the-unity-of-the-faith
Ahmad Corbitt’s claim that the LDS Church is “one of the most racially unifying organizations in the history of the world” and that the Book of Mormon is “one of the most racially unifying books in the world” is nothing short of astonishing. Given the Church’s history of racial exclusion and its ongoing lack of diversity in leadership, such a statement not only ignores reality but also disrespects the struggles of those who have fought for true racial unity.
Corbitt’s Argument
His evidence is pretty slim and doesn’t live up to the hype he gives it:
My friends were surprised when I told them that the Book of Mormon is, in my view, the most racially and ethnically unifying book on the earth. In response to their surprise, I shared the following overview of the Book of Mormon as it relates to the unity and harmony of the human family, irrespective of race and ethnicity:
1. In the Book of Mormon, the prophet Nephi declares that God, our Eternal Father, seeks to save all of His children, without regard to color or race: “He inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.” This truth is repeated throughout the Book of Mormon. I told my friends that I believe the Book of Mormon makes this point more explicitly, repeatedly, and forcefully than any other volume of scripture.
2. The Book of Mormon teaches this truth in the context of a large family with members of different colors. This family—led by the prophet Lehi and his wife, Sariah—emigrated from the Holy Land to the part of the world now known as the Americas. Shortly after arriving in their new home, they separated into two groups. The Nephites, who followed Lehi and Sariah’s son Nephi, remained fair skinned. The Lamanites, who followed Lehi and Sariah’s son Laman, became dark skinned. Over the next several hundred years, the Nephites generally followed the gospel of Jesus Christ and the Lamanites usually rejected it. However, at times the Lamanites were faithful while the Nephites strayed from gospel teachings. Much of the Book of Mormon contains accounts of interactions, both peaceful and violent, between and within these two cultures that were really one family.
Answering Questions about Certain Phrases in the Book of Mormon
Church members and others should beware, as I warned the couple who came to talk with me, of a tactic some use to try to discredit the Book of Mormon. They cherry-pick isolated Book of Mormon references that, out of context, sound negative, even offensive, to us today. One example is the ancient description of Laman’s people as having “a skin of blackness” so “that they might not be enticing” to the Nephites.31 Admittedly, these expressions collide with current sensibilities and speech. But they should not distract readers from the grand, eternal perspectives and purposes I’m convinced the Lord intended for the Book of Mormon. Rather, they should serve as reminders of these perspectives and purposes. Readers of this scriptural record should keep in mind that these words reflect the cultural perceptions and customs of ancient people in response to an unusual color change in their family.
Perhaps the Lamanites, who usually avoided the Nephites except to do battle against them, saw the color difference between the two peoples in completely opposite terms. Who knows? What’s important is that the early Nephite writers’ reactions to the darkness of the Lamanites’ skin is of no significance to us in our day. Obviously, Church leaders do not hold up the Book of Mormon as an authority on the science of racial origins or as a standard for human attractiveness. I believe that like Paul’s statements about women who wore braided hair or spoke in church, the significance of Nephite descriptions of the Lamanites’ skin is merely historical, not doctrinal.
While these descriptions of the Lamanites’ skin color change are not doctrinally significant in my view, they do add important context. They highlight cultural challenges that existed for Book of Mormon peoples, foreshadowing challenges that humanity faces today. It is impressive that such references can ultimately enable the book to communicate such a timely, urgent, and global message of unity and harmony across race and ethnicity. Thus, the Lord’s overarching message of peace eclipses the cultural ethnocentricities of the book’s ancient writers and modern-day readers.34 For me, it is inspiring to read the Book of Mormon and to be reminded, by the references to skin color, that a loving Heavenly Father is using the book to guide the human family to greater unity and peace.
3. The Book of Mormon provides models of people of different colors successfully applying the Savior’s unifying teachings… The Book of Mormon also provides models that can serve as warnings—accounts of tragic consequences that befell societies that rejected the Savior’s unifying gospel. The book chronicles numerous heartbreaking accounts of contention and war, mostly between people of different colors and cultures. In doing so, it exposes Lucifer’s age-old plan to instigate disunity by playing on demographic differences.
I believe that God is all-knowing—that He knew long ago of “calamity [that would] come upon the inhabitants of the earth,” including pervasive ethnic and racial strife. He also knew that advancements in technology would lead to unprecedented multiracial and multiethnic interaction among His children in our modern world—the so-called “global village.” I believe that with this foreknowledge, God prepared the Book of Mormon to, among other things, guide His children of different colors and cultures as we navigate these unique challenges and opportunities in search of universal unity and peace.
4. My assertion that the Book of Mormon is the most racially unifying book on earth may sound new to many, as it did to the black couple who came to me for advice, but the underlying principle is as old as the book itself. The prophet Moroni, who anciently hid and then angelically revealed the Book of Mormon record, declared that one of the book’s purposes was to gather scattered Israel. In his words, the Book of Mormon will “show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever.” He said that the book was written and compiled for “the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations.” The reference to “Jew and Gentile” encompasses the entire world, including all races and ethnic groups. Moroni’s declaration echoes the words of other Book of Mormon prophets who repeatedly taught of the scattering and gathering of Israel among all nations and the bringing of both Jew and Gentile unto Christ. The Savior Himself taught these truths to Book of Mormon peoples.
Ahmad Corbitt, LDS General Authority Seventy A Personal Essay on Race and the Priesthood, Part 3: He Denieth None That Come unto Him, October 13, 2014
https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/he-denieth-none-that-come-unto-him
Summarizing Corbitt’s Arguments
Universal Invitation
2 Nephi 26:33, stating God “denieth none…black and white…Jew and Gentile.” Claims the Book of Mormon is more explicit and repeated in this teaching than any other scripture.
Family-Based Diversity
Lehi’s family splits into Nephites and Lamanites. Nephites stay “fair-skinned”; Lamanites become “dark-skinned.” The narrative includes cultural and spiritual back-and-forth between groups, ultimately used to teach unity.
Defensive Framing of Racist Language
While he acknowledges “skin of blackness” as “not enticing” language, he argues this language is culturally based, not doctrinal, suggesting that these verses should be understood in historical context and used to teach modern lessons about race.
Examples of Racial Reconciliation
His claims suggest that the Book of Mormon models societies learning unity after conflict, even between racial or cultural groups, implies that Lucifer causes disunity by exploiting demographic differences, and argues that the Book of Mormon was divinely prepared to help modern readers navigate racial tensions of today.
Prophetic Purpose of Unity
Moroni claims the Book of Mormon’s purpose is to “convince Jew and Gentile” of Christ. This is interpreted as encompassing all races, fulfilling a purpose of global unity.
Critiquing Corbitt’s Arguments
While the Book of Mormon does contain some inclusive language, this does not erase its deeply problematic racial theology. The claim that it’s “the most racially unifying book on earth” demands scrutiny:
- Cherry-picking inclusivity doesn’t erase systemic racism: Citing 2 Nephi 26:33 ignores 2 Nephi 5:21, which states that God cursed the Lamanites with “a skin of blackness” so that they would not be “enticing” to the Nephites, which Corbitt includes in a footnote. But it’s not a footnote in the scripture—it’s foundational to the text’s racialized morality system. Then Corbitt dares to accuse those who discredit the Book of Mormon of cherry-picking “isolated Book of Mormon references that, out of context, sound negative, even offensive, to us today.”
- Race is portrayed as a sign of righteousness: The Book of Mormon frequently equates lighter skin with righteousness and darker skin with rebellion (see Alma 3:6, Jacob 3:5-9). Even where “dark” Lamanites repent, their skin becomes “white and delightsome” (3 Nephi 2:15). These are not cultural observations—as Corbitt wants to portray them—they are framed as divine judgments.
- Excusing racism as “historical context” is dangerous: Framing racist descriptions as merely cultural perceptions doesn’t align with the Church’s historical insistence that the Book of Mormon is the “most correct book” and a divine record of real peoples and real events. Either it’s inspired and authoritative, or it isn’t.
- The church used The Book of Mormon scripture to justify racism: For decades, LDS leaders cited these passages to defend the priesthood and temple bans on Black individuals. These weren’t fringe teachings—they were institutional doctrine backed by scripture and the prophetic mantle.
- Reductive use of “Jew and Gentile”: Claiming that references to “Jew and Gentile” automatically promote racial harmony is a stretch. These terms reflect theological divisions more than ethnic unity, and they reinforce binary thinking rather than universal inclusion.
- False equivalence with Paul’s writings: Comparing racist skin color curses to Paul’s cultural teachings about braided hair or women in church is misleading. Paul didn’t claim women’s fashion was a curse from God for sin. The Book of Mormon explicitly says dark skin was a divine curse.
The presence of a few inclusive verses cannot wash away the deeply racialized theology at the core of the Book of Mormon and the LDS Church.
For over a century, the LDS Church actively excluded Black men from its priesthood and barred Black members from temple ordinances essential for full participation in the faith. This wasn’t just an informal cultural bias—it was institutionalized doctrine, publicly defended by Church leaders who claimed that Black individuals were cursed, spiritually inferior, or less valiant in the pre-existence. Brigham Young, the Church’s second prophet, declared that interracial marriage should be punishable by death. Even after the 1978 priesthood ban was lifted, no formal apology was ever issued, and remnants of racist teachings persisted. How, then, can an organization with such a history be considered the example of racial unity?
Moreover, the Church’s top leadership remains overwhelmingly white and American. Since its founding in 1830, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles—the Church’s highest governing bodies—have never included a Black member. Historically, these leadership positions have been held almost exclusively by white American men, and even today, there is little racial or cultural representation. In recent years, the Church has made small steps toward diversity by appointing leaders from Latin America and Asia, but it has a long way to go before it could be considered even remotely on par with organizations that are genuinely racially inclusive.
Equally baffling is Corbitt’s claim that the Book of Mormon is one of the most racially unifying books in the world. This is a text that explicitly ties righteousness to lighter skin and wickedness to darker skin (2 Nephi 5:21, Alma 3:6, 3 Nephi 2:15). It portrays the Lamanites—a group marked by a “curse” of dark skin—as inferior to the light-skinned Nephites, reinforcing a racialized hierarchy. Where in the Book of Mormon is there a passage comparable to the universal calls for brotherhood found in texts like Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, or the speeches of Nelson Mandela, or even the Christian New Testament’s declaration that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free… for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28)?
If one were to compile a list of the most racially unifying organizations in history, the LDS Church would be far from the top. Instead, one might highlight:
- The Civil Rights Movement, led by figures like Martin Luther King Jr., which actively fought for racial equality through nonviolent resistance and legal reform.
- The Underground Railroad, a multi-racial network that helped enslaved people escape to freedom.
- South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which worked to heal racial divides after apartheid.
- The NAACP, which has spent over a century advocating for civil rights and racial justice.
Likewise, when considering the most racially unifying books, the Book of Mormon does not compare to:
- Frederick Douglass’s Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, which exposed the horrors of slavery and argued for the equality of all people.
- Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin, a novel that galvanized anti-slavery sentiment across the U.S. and abroad.
- Mahatma Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj, which promotes racial and cultural unity through nonviolent resistance.
What organizations and books would you include in the list of most racially unifying in the world today or in the history of the world? Would the LDS church and the Book of Mormon even be in consideration?
Evidence of LDS Church as Racially Unifying Force
The claim that the LDS Church is a racially unifying force ignores a long history of racially divisive teachings and practices. The Church has not only tolerated but actively enforced racial discrimination through doctrine, policy, and leadership statements. Below are some key examples of how the Church institutionalized racial exclusion and how it continues to downplay this history today.
The Priesthood and Temple Ban (1852–1978)
In 1852, Brigham Young officially declared that Black men were forbidden from holding the priesthood and that Black members could not participate in temple ordinances. He justified this policy by teaching that Black people bore the “curse of Cain” and that interracial marriage should be punishable by death.
The ban lasted until 1978, meaning the Church withheld full participation from Black members well after the Civil Rights Movement, when most other institutions had already abandoned segregation. While many defenders of the Church claim the ban was merely “policy,” the First Presidency reaffirmed multiple times that it was doctrine, making it clear that this was not simply folklore or human error, but an intentional theological position. Those who opposed and spoke against the ban were even excommunicated from the church, even those in 1977, just before the “doctrine” became a “policy” and was changed.
Church Defenses of Racism and Opposition to Civil Rights
The Church’s First Presidency issued a formal statement in 1949, stating that the priesthood ban was “not a matter of the declaration of policy but of direct commandment from the Lord.”
In 1969, the First Presidency doubled down on the ban, declaring that, “matters of faith, conscience, and theology are not within the purview of the civil law,” and that “from the beginning of this dispensation, Joseph Smith and all succeeding presidents of the Church have taught that Negroes… were not yet to receive the priesthood.” Famed church leader and theologist, Bruce R McConkie even published that “the Negroes are not equal with other races” in his monumental publication entitled Mormon Doctrine. The church fully taught that it was God’s will that those with a drop of “African blood” would not receive the priesthood.
While many Christian denominations were supporting civil rights, the LDS Church stood against it. Apostle Ezra Taft Benson, later the Church’s president, even condemned the Civil Rights Movement as communist propaganda! BYU faced boycotts in the 1960s and 1970s due to its racist policies, and Black athletes protested playing against its teams.
Support for Slavery and Racial Hierarchies
In early Utah, Brigham Young declared that Black people were divinely appointed to be subservient to white people and even legalized slavery. The Book of Mormon describes dark skin as a curse from God, associating whiteness with purity and righteousness. These passages were used for generations to justify the exclusion of people of color from full Church participation. The idea that Black people were “less valiant” in the premortal life was a common teaching throughout the 20th century, reinforcing the belief that their exclusion from the priesthood was divine justice rather than human prejudice.
Opposition to Interracial Marriage
Brigham Young, the second president of the Church, declared that interracial marriage between Black and white people should be punishable by death: “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.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110)
Well into the 20th century, LDS leaders continued to discourage and even condemn interracial marriage. Joseph Fielding Smith, later the 10th president of the Church, taught: “There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages… It is not the will of God that the races shall be amalgamated.” (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 61). Spencer W. Kimball, the same leader who lifted the priesthood ban in 1978, also opposed interracial marriage, stating: “We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally.” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 303)
BYU enforced racist dating policies well into the 1960s and 1970s. Brigham Young University had an unofficial but enforced ban on interracial dating. In 1969, Apostle Mark E. Petersen stated: “If I were to marry a Negro woman and have children by her, my children would all be cursed as to the priesthood.” Even after the 1978 priesthood ban was lifted, Church leaders continued to discourage interracial marriage. Members are still taught that it is “unwise” and that marrying within one’s race is preferable. Current church president, Russell M. Nelson, even counseled in 1995 that it was not wise for those of different ethnicities to join in marriage.
Does Ahmad Corbitt know this? He has a interracial marriage, and thus has not heeded the council of church leadership. His messaging is so on point, that he has risen in the ranks of church leadership to become one of the few General Authority Seventy people of color. As a General Authority, he’s among the top few LDS church leaders paid for their “service” in the church. He was also taken well care of as a Mission President, and all his international living expenses were more than covered. Does this influence his cherry-picking and the wishful-thinking he exhibits in his essays and videos about racial inclusion? Did he forget to look at the history, facts, or evidence? Or perhaps, he’s simply part of the whitewashing of church history, attempting to bury the truth with bold (yet false) claims about the church, scriptures, and doctrine of the church being the “most” racially and ethnically unifying.
The Church’s Whitewashing of Its Own History
Despite once claiming that the priesthood ban was divine doctrine, today’s Church leaders dismiss it as “folklore” and refuse to take accountability. The Church’s 2013 essay “Race and the Priesthood” vaguely attributes past racism to “the time and place in which the Church was established” while failing to acknowledge that previous leaders called it revelation.
The Church has never issued a formal apology for its racist policies or the harm they caused. Instead, it has attempted to distance itself from past teachings without addressing the deep-rooted institutional biases that remain. The leadership structure remains overwhelmingly white. There has never been a Black apostle, and until 2018, there had never been a Black general authority. Even now, Church leadership remains mostly white and American, failing to reflect the diversity of its worldwide membership.
The LDS Church’s history is riddled with racial exclusion, discriminatory policies, and theological justifications for inequality. While it now seeks to portray itself as racially unifying, it has yet to fully acknowledge or apologize for its past. If the Church truly wishes to be seen as a force for unity, it must do more than rewrite history—it must take accountability, diversify its leadership, and actively work to undo the damage caused by its past teachings.
Racial and Ethnic Unity at Church
Corbitt’s assertion that the LDS Church and the Book of Mormon are at the forefront of racial unity is not just an exaggeration or blasphemy—it’s a revisionist attempt to obscure the past. True racial unity requires not only diversity but also accountability, acknowledgment of past wrongs, and a commitment to dismantling systemic biases. The LDS Church has made some progress, but to claim it as the model for racial unity is to ignore history, overlook more deserving organizations, and diminish the work of those who have actually fought for racial equality. Rather than addressing the real concerns of Black members and others troubled by the Church’s racial history, he insists that the Mormon church and scripture are among the most racially unifying forces in the world. But history tells a different story. From the priesthood ban to leadership exclusion to scripture that reinforces racial hierarchies, the Church’s past and present do not align with Corbitt’s claims.
While some members may have found community and belonging, many have faced exclusion and pain. The real question isn’t whether the Church claims to be racially unifying—it’s whether it has, in practice, been unifying. Has LDS doctrine and culture promoted racial unity in your own experience? Have you felt truly seen and included, or have you encountered barriers that contradict the Church’s self-proclaimed status as racially unifying? No matter what antics the church publishes as apologetic gymnastics, the truth and your story matter. Consider sharing your story. Answer these questions and more by creating a profile at wasmormon.org and detailing the items on your shelf and what reconciliatory steps you took.
More reading:
- Church Claims Activism a Tactic of Satan and Gaslights Members
- Brigham Young’s Racist Remarks on Slaves, Seed, and Priesthood Doctrines
- Racist Brigham Young
- 1969 Official First Presidency Statement on the Doctrines of Banning Blacks from the Priesthood
- Authoritative Statement by the LDS Church on the Doctrine of Blacks in 1949
- The Lowry Nelson Letters and Racist Mormon Doctrine
- Mormon Leadership Dismisses Racist Doctrines as Folklore
- McConkie Got It Wrong – Redacted Mormon Doctrine
- Mormon Race Problems – As They Affect the Church, Mark E Petersen
- Mormons and the NAACP – Blacks and the Priesthood
- The Mormon Church Published The Gospel Topic Essays
- Truth and History are Anti-Mormon
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/learn/ahmad-s-corbitt
- https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/revelations-in-the-summer-of-1978
- https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/seeing-as-we-are-seen
- https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/he-denieth-none-that-come-unto-him
- https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/content/perspectives-on-church-history/till-we-all-come-in-the-unity-of-the-faith