Premortal valiance, race and the fairness of the plan
For a century leaders explained birth circumstances, above all Black skin, by premortal conduct; the Church disavowed that theory in 2013 without replacing it.
What the Church claims
Mortal circumstances reflect a just plan; all will have a fair and full opportunity to accept the gospel and its ordinances.
Once the evidence is in, this claim: Weak. On the historical/moral question (leaders taught it, the Church now disavows it) the record is clear; on the abstract fairness question LDS theology actually compares well with traditional exclusivism, so that part rates lower.
The record
- Abraham 3:22-23 teaches that 'noble and great' spirits were chosen before birth to be rulers - the scriptural seed of the idea that premortal merit shapes mortal station.
- The 2013 essay 'Race and the Priesthood' states that the Church today 'disavows the theories advanced in the past' that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor 'or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life'.
- The essay disavows 'theories'; it does not say the priesthood and temple restriction itself was an error or apologize for it.
The moving target
- 1842: Noble and great ones were foreordained.
- 2013-12: Disavows the premortal-unrighteousness and curse theories.
The exchange
FAIR / Gospel Topics essay framing
The 'less valiant' idea was always folk theory from individual leaders, never doctrine; the essay simply clears it away.
The answer: The essay's own wording - theories 'advanced in the past' - concedes they were advanced by those with authority. Their provenance - First Presidency statements and apostles' reference works - is set out in this site's topic on the priesthood and temple ban. Calling long-standing apostolic teaching 'folk theory' is a relabelling made after the fact, and it illustrates the unfalsifiability of 'prophets speak for God except when they turn out to be wrong'.
What they get right: It is true that no canonized revelation states the less-valiant theory.
mainstream LDS teaching
Foreordination is about callings and responsibility, not worth; and vicarious ordinances guarantee that everyone eventually gets a fair chance.
The answer: Foreordination-by-merit (Abr 3) plus a single mortal probation with wildly unequal starting conditions raises the fairness problem whichever way it is cut: either premortal merit explains unequal births (the disavowed theory, generalized) or it does not, in which case the distribution of gospel access is arbitrary. Proxy ordinances postpone rather than answer the question, and imply that the mortal test most humans take is conducted without the information the plan says is essential.
Both cases at full strength
The skeptics' case
The plan of salvation needs premortal existence to explain why a just God places spirits in radically unequal conditions. Historically the explanation offered was merit, and applied to race it produced a teaching the Church now disavows. But the disavowal removes the only explanation that was ever on offer while keeping the structure that generated it (Abraham 3's chosen 'noble and great ones'). The philosophical point is general: any doctrine that makes mortal station a function of premortal performance will tend to sanctify existing inequality; any doctrine that denies the link leaves mortal station unexplained within a plan that is supposed to be individually tailored.
The apologetic case
The Church has explicitly disavowed the racial theories; foreordination in scripture concerns assignments, not value; and a plan with universal posthumous opportunity is fairer than traditional Christian exclusivism, which damns the unevangelized outright.
What would change this
An official statement that the restriction itself was a human error, with an account of how prophetic guidance failed for ~125 years.
Closely related
Sources
An independent project. Not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or with any organization cited here. Summaries are written here; short quotations are attributed and linked. Every page names its sources so that it can be corrected, and every page can be challenged.