Discussions of the Priesthood restriction always start with several assumptions which are necessary to divest before any real understanding can come. Most I have found aren't particularly interested in looking for conclusions other than "Brigham Young was evil," but this post is for anyone who is curious for other perspectives.
Nearly always, it is explicitly assumed that the priesthood ban was a bad thing, and then using problem of evil-type reasoning the conclusion of "and therefore was not inspired of God" is jumped to. Thinking about the priesthood ban is boiled down to just a few heuristic bullet points such as "racism", "premortal punishment", "prophetic fallibility", and "curse". These heuristics are used to reach the conclusion that the ban was not of God, but the heuristics are not neccessarily (as is the nature of heuristics) accurate to reality, and I believe if a person were to reason carefully, from God's perspective as given in the scriptures, upon the related principles, they would not find it as objectionable as the charicatured version. I will be reasoning on a strict scriptural basis here, so those who already do not believe the scriptures to be inspired will not find these thoughts compelling. I would insist that the priesthood restriction must be evaluated first from a perspective "as if" the church and scriptures are true, since that is the assumptiom Brigham Young and others would have been working from. It should be no suprise that when a person starts with radically different assumptions that they find the restriction makes no sense.
The first idea I wish to address is the idea that the restriction upon blacks was due to their actions and "valiance" in the premortal life. Since the priesthood equals leadership which equals power (at least, in the worldly mind; remember God's kingdom doesn't work like that at all, and that priesthood is about responsibility and being a servant as in Matt 20:25-29), the thought is that since blacks had less (worldly) "power" during the restriction they must not have been as "valiant." Here's the fallacy: "Valiance" does not have a 1:1 relation to "blessings" in the gospel. It is especially important to note that trials themselves are often blessings in the gospel sense, because God's priority is our personal development, not our comfort. Thus we see in Genesis 3:17 God cursing the ground for Adam's sake; that by this curse Adam may have the ability to become like God, the greatest of blessings. The curse upon Adam was thus an enabler for certain divine blessings, which is a divine pattern seen in such as the Lamanites being a scourge on the Nephites to stir them to repentance, and the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's overcoming the curse being so strong in the gospel as to never fall away (Alma 23:6) they were known for their righteousness, despite their race's "curse" (Alma 27:27). Keep in mind that the 2000 stripling warriers of whom not a single one could be killed in battle sprang from this "cursed" lineage. . No, none of these instances are an absolute parallel to the Priesthood restriction, but it does suggest a different avenue of study, a better alternative to simply assuming God just kind of let the church careen out of control for a century or so, and gives I think a much better view on what Brigham and others may have been thinking when they referred to African Americans as "cursed" which likely many have not thought about.
Occasionally, people take exception to the idea that the priesthood restriction was based on the "Curse of Cain." I have seen quite often people say "Black skin is not a curse." It seems to me that that is forcing the conclusion to fit the formula and not the other way around, but either way it must be remembered that the mark of cain was different than the curse of cain; the mark was given as a protection for Cain. Black skin (even if it was somehow the mark of Cain) would not, doctrinally, even if this folklore was taken for granted, make a person inferior.
A third argument brought up fairly often is that "a child is not guilty because of the transgression of a parent" (Alma 30:25) But the question is not whether a child is guilty, but a question of punishment. Does the God of the scriptures curse or punish for something you didn't do? Uniquivocally, Yes. (Deut 5:9, 23:2-3 and D&C 124:50) For example, we all have mortality and sin inherent from our first parents, Adam and Eve. We inherited the curse their transgression brought upon us, though it is an article of faith that we are not judged by it. Rather, we are judged by how we respond to the circumstances we find ourselves in. In fact, one of the most astonishing theological points of Mormonism is that the hereditary chain also goes backwards, with the fathers being literally redeemed by the efforts of their children in temple work, and perhaps in other marvelous ways we aren't yet privy to. (2 Nephi 4:6?)
The dynamics of the various "cursings of God" is a very interesting study, for which additional points are given in the compass.
Is it possible, like the man born blind, the restriction was to allow the glory of God to shine forth? The body of the church has many parts. Can the eye say I have no need of thee?" For a time, perhaps we need the blessings only a cursed-yet-faithful generation could bring upon us. For every blessing, there is a law upon which it is predicated. Perhaps, and I speak only as a man, God saw fit in the premortal world to provide a way that some spirits could gain a powerful blessing, obtainable no other way than by taking upon them certain restrictions in this life. I know from revelation from the almighty himself that this has been the case in at least one major trial in my life, for which I praise God and am ever thankful.
Amen.
----------------compass---------------
Alma 17:15 - The curse of God had fallen on them because of the traditions of their fathers, but the promises of the Lord were still extended to them.
2 Nephi 40:6 - The scales of darkness shall fall from their eyes and after several generations they shall be pure/white and delightsome
Alma 23:18 - they became industrious, and the curse of God did no longer follow them.
Alma 45:15-16 is an interesting mirror to Genesis 3:17 - Alma blesses the earth for the righteous sake, that it should be cursed to those who do wickedly, which is then called a blessing.
Helaman 13:21 - ye are cursed because of your riches, and also are your riches cursed because ye have set your hearts upon them.
Deut 23:3 - An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord until the tenth generation.
"we have been unconsciously evaluating others solely in terms of material welfare, instead of in terms of faith, charity, kindness, spirituality, and other Christian virtues." -Blacks and the Priesthood, Setting the Record Straight, Marcus H., Ph.D. Martins
