On Black Bodies in White Spaces: Conversations of Women’s Ordination and Women of African Descent in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

What is it like to be hypervisualized and invisible at the same time?

This question has persisted in the historical and present narrative of African-American women in the United States, that is, what is it like to stand in a room and watch yourself become the subject of discussions rooted in flawed perceptions of your existence and identity? From ideas of the “Mammy”, or the asexual black woman whose only joy in life comes from tending to her white master and his family, the “Jezebel”, an oversexualized black woman and the “Sapphire”, commonly known as the “Angry Black Woman”, black bodies, in the physical, spiritual, emotional and mental sense, have been put out for public consumption and discussion for centuries, often without the input of black voices. It is because of these historical and present experiences of African-American women in particular that concern identity politics that I have been left feeling disturbed with recent conversations about the “priesthood ban” by the Ordain Women movement and the subsequent articles (listed here and here) about women’s ordination written by Margaret Young for her blog at Patheos. The language and facts presented by both parties have excluded the experiences of women of African descent with regards to the priesthood and the temple as such, should be addressed.

As I write, I speak from a perspective of women born women in the African diaspora, specifically African-American women, within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Women of African descent are not a monolith and as such, I cannot testify of the experiences of those living in and/or from Africa, those from Africa who have immigrated to the United States or other countries nor every African-American woman in the Church. However, I can attest to the problematic aspects of discussing the Church policy that prohibited people of African descent from fully participating in temple ordinances from 1852* until the 1978 revelation by then-Church President Spencer W. Kimball, without referring to the policy in its entirety.

Often times the ban is referred to as the “priesthood ban” in regards to its effect on men of African descent however, the term does not encompass the full extent to which it affected the lives of women. In the online article, Renaming the “Priesthood Ban”, anonymously written for the LDS blog Zelophehad’s Daughters, the author describes this dichotomy and offers thoughts on renaming the policy in which two terms are introduced, Exaltation Exclusion and Priesthood-Temple Ban. I believe both help describe the effects of the ban. While the term “Priesthood-Temple Ban” addresses the physical implications of the ban, “Exaltation Exclusion” properly addresses the eternal implications the ban had on people of African descent. According to Mormon theology, there are 3 kingdoms of Heaven: the Celestial, Terrestrial and Telestial. The Celestial Kingdom is the highest. To reach the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom, that is, the degree closest to God, there are certain ordinances such as the “temple endowment” and sealings of spouses which must be performed that can only take place in LDS temples. For a considerable amount of the Church’s history, people of African descent could not hope to be exalted, or reach the “highest degree of glory”.

While I do respect and support the extensive work of both those involved with Ordain Women and the pursuit of equality both within and outside of the Church as well as Margaret Young, whose work has focused, in part, on Jane Manning James, one of the first female African-American members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the truth is this: white women have had access to the priesthood and temple in its entirety for much longer than women of color, particularly women of African descent.

For over a century, people of African descent were denied access to the most sacred of ordinances in our faith because of, in my opinion, racist ideologies at the time the Priesthood-Temple Ban was instituted.  Even though the ban was lifted in 1978, the memory of those teachings about the question of existence that surrounded people of African descent remained. While it was perhaps the desire of many General Authorities of the Church, that Church members would, as Elder Bruce R. McConkie, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, stated in his 1978 talk All Are Alike Unto God, “Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation,” people often do not forget teachings that have been commonplace in their lives. Even the words of those whom we consider to be prophets cannot quell the lingering attitudes that regarded any difference between people of African descent and whites as preordained. Though women’s ordination would allow for women to have greater access to leadership opportunities throughout the Church as an institution, it does not solve the ever-looming issues that many women of African descent, and presumably women of color, face. Many of these issues concern the benevolent and overtly racist dialogue that many people of color have come to know so well in our interactions with some Church members. I’m not against asking Church leaders to consider praying about the question of women’s ordination, but it is hard to align myself with any group or individual, whether for or against, who does not address the privileges that come with discussing women’s ordination or the priesthood as it has existed in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

“Woman” is not a universal experience and should never be regarded as such, whether in the Church or outside of it. The course of women within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is one that has diverged at several points. As an African-American woman and convert to the Church, my deepest connection to the Church lies in the presence of the Jane Manning James’s, Mary Sturlaugson Eyer’s, Mary Lucille Bankhead’s and countless others who challenged and transcended the physical and spiritual restrictions that once kept them from the hope of exaltation to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom. Their experiences help to provide strength, for myself at least, in a Church that has a troubling history, and arguably troubling present, with respect to race. For any group or individual to not talk about these experiences, to talk about equality without intersectionality, does a grave injustice to any discussion on the matter.

So again I pose this question, what is it like to be hypervisualized and invisible at the same time? The answer is, simply put: to be both is to be forced into silence. In this, if debates over whether or not women should receive the priesthood include talking about people of African descent, my hope is that all the facts about the ban are presented and there is some recognition of the privileges that come with discussing black bodies in white spaces.

*Denotes the year then-Church President Brigham Young made statements to the Utah Territorial Legislature regarding people of African descent and the priesthood.