Black Methodists, White Mormons: Race and Antipolygamy

By August 15, 2011

(cross-posted at Religion in American History)

The latest issue of Religion and American Culture arrived in my mailbox last week, and I was excited to see the first article dealt with a topic sure to interest JI readers: “‘Until This Curse of Polygamy Is Wiped Out’: Black Methodists, White Mormons, and Constructions of Racial Identity in the Late Nineteenth Century,” written by James B. Bennett, associate professor of Religious Studies at Santa Clara University. 

The article examines the antipolygamy writings that appeared in the Southwestern Christian Advocate, the official organ of the Methodist Episcopal Church in late nineteenth century New Orleans. As Bennett explains, “Black critiques of Latter-day Saints are significant because they gave voice to anxieties confronting all African Americans, even as they expressed a particular denominational perspective” (170). In contrast to their fellow black Methodists in the African Methodist Episcopal Church and African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, African Americans in the MEC favored a racially-integrated religious body, believing it to be crucial to the ultimate goal of social and political equality. Critiquing the Mormons’ practice of polygamy served multiple functions in their efforts to achieve this end: it was part of an effort to curb the widespread Mormon settlement in the West, which limited to spaces available for black Americans unhappy in the South to migrate; it served as evidence that deviant sexuality was not instinctively tied to race (and played into fears that white polygamy was as threatening to black females as the adulterous relationships of white plantation owners and their black slaves in the antebellum era); and it provided the black Methodists with a convenient other whose lack of patriotism and religious heterodoxy contrasted with the black Methodists’ own orthodoxy and support for the nation. Additionally, Mormonism’s own policies of racial segregation were an impediment to the goal of an integrated Christian community, threatening to black Episcopal Methodists in the same way that the racial exclusivism of the AME and AMEZ Churches was.

Bennett’s nuanced article is insightful and well worth the read to anyone interested. It touches on the subject of the racialization of Mormons (which Paul Reeve’s in-progress book manuscript will discuss at length), and provides an interesting and needed complement to the several studies of anti-Mormonism largely limited to the writings of white Anglo-Americans. It also highlights the ways in which the author or editor’s own religious, racial, and regional identity affected the reasons for critiquing the Mormons. Bennett perceptively notes, for example, that anti-Catholicism served many of the same purposes as anti-Mormonism did for black Protestants in the nineteenth century, but that articulating anti-Catholic views in New Orleans, where most of the city’s religious and political elite were white Catholics, was dangerous business.

Bennett concludes by rehearsing the sad irony of what transpired following the events of the 1890s, as Latter-day Saints abandoned the practice of plural marriage (officially anyway) and began their long march toward the mainstream of American society. Southwestern Christian Advocate editor A.E.P. Albert celebrated Wilford Woodruff’s 1890 announcement, declaring that “the twin sister of slavery is now gone forever!” (186). But such celebratory declarations would soon turn to increased frustration. Mormonism’s march toward the mainstream in the first half of the 20th century cruelly coincided with the imposition and enforcement of Jim Crow laws throughout the South. The Methodist Episcopal Church, which these black Methodists had once seen as the engine driving the move toward racial equality, pushed them further to the fringes of the denomination. In 1939, the unification of the MEC, MEC, South, and Methodist Protestant Church, resulted in the official segregation of church jurisdictions—a policy that wouldn’t be reversed until “less than a decade before the 1978 Mormon decision to extend full privileges to people of African descent” (186).

Article filed under Categories of Periodization: Accommodation Categories of Periodization: Territorial Period Miscellaneous Race


  1. Thanks Chris. This sounds great. I look forward to reading it. The African-American perspective toward Mormons is certainly neglected and can serve to further contextualize the crystallization of Mormonism’s racial policies by the turn of the 20th century.

    Comment by Paul Reeve — August 15, 2011 @ 5:43 pm

  2. Sounds like a very interesting article. Thanks for the overview.

    Comment by Edje Jeter — August 15, 2011 @ 6:17 pm

  3. Very interesting article. I have put on Google alerts “Methodist Protestant” and have been surprised that in some of the history of the Black Churches in America Black Methodist Protestants were one of the first. Apparently many of those churches being entirely independent went another direction at the union as did a large group of others who retained the name.
    Democratic government rather than Roman Catholic government gave all the churches the right to decide for themselves. No Bishops could tell them what to do. I recently left the United Methodist Church and joined with the Methodist Protestant Church which was formed in 1828. My great grandfather left the Methodist Episcopal Church in 1840 and became a minister and missionary doctor with the Methodist Protestant Church in 1840 because of the Roman Catholic style government with Bishops begin elected for a lifetime. The whole thing started in 1784 at the Christmas Conference where Asbury and Coke and ministers only voted to start another Anglican Church in America with Methodist in front of the name. The hue and cry from a number of laity and ministers at the time was “We just fought a war to get rid of Kings and now we have put them in the church”. As a Methodist pastor after the union I was almost fired by a congregation for preaching and working with the local AME Church. Don’t tell me how “open” the Methodist Episcopal Church was about race! It seperated the race by jurisdiction and proceeded to drive many Black Methodist Protestant Churches another direction. Read history.

    Comment by Allen D. Mitchell — August 15, 2011 @ 7:11 pm

  4. Thanks for the heads-up, Chris. I was unaware of the article but am now excited to get a copy.

    Comment by Ben Park — August 15, 2011 @ 9:01 pm

  5. Thanks for this, Chris.

    Comment by Steve Fleming — August 21, 2011 @ 10:08 pm


Recent Comments

J Stuart on Reassessing the Classics: Armand: “Thanks for this. I think about this book all the time and I'm always glad to have a refresher on its contents and arguments.”

Tyler on Guest Post - Mormonism: “Thank you, all, for your help and support!”

J. Stapley on A Quick Note: Historicizing: “Here is the YM org chart from 1967, which doesn't include a YM's presidency, so perhaps that dating of the presidencies to the mid 1970s…”

Mees Tielens on The Mechanics of Applying: “Just a gentle tip that if you are one of the interdisciplinary folks presenting at MHA your panel will probably not be well attended, but…”

Ardis on The Mechanics of Applying: “Thanks, J. My memory isn't perfect, but so far as it extends I don't recall ever seeing such a comprehensive and easy-to-follow explainer of the…”

J Stuart on 2019 Book of Mormon: “Eccles Conference Center, Rooms 201 and 205. I don't have any further information and their website doesn't seem to be updated.”