This essay responds to the pressing need to pursue topics related to Mormonism from a research perspective that is at once critical, culturally affirming, and grounded in Indigenous views. The goal here is to provide a theoretical framework for Critical Indigenous Studies perspectives to emerge in Mormon and Lamanite Studies. I therefore submit the following questions as a contribution to and critique of Lamanite Studies within the broader fields of Mormon, Cultural, and Religious Studies: 1. Which theoretical frame(s) from Critical Indigenous Studies is/are best suited to address Lamanite and Mormon issues? 2. How might we reframe current Critical Indigenous Studies Theory to undertake research on Mormon and Western religious topics? To address these questions, the article first outlines its positionality as a basis for understanding Simon’s approach to the research. The bulk of the research here focuses on describing Lamanitism in terms of its relationship to racism and whiteness. The article therefore continues with a description of the figure of Hagoth in The Book of Mormon, with a particular emphasis on their relationship to Te Moana-Nui-ā-Kiwa. From there the article outlines Unger’s theorem of contextuality and considers how Lamanitism might be considered an “artificial context” from a Critical Indigenous Studies perspective. A discussion of the Doctrine of Discovery, Manifest Destiny, and Moana Jackson’s idea of the culture of colonization is followed by a description of the “Racial Contract” and its speculative extension to Indigenous adherents of the Mormon Church. The article then explicates important and interrelated tikanga values from Te Ao Māori such as tapu and mana. Lastly, the article identifies the “white possessive” as a key doctrine for Critical Indigenous Studies and undertakes a reworking of the doctrine for its application to the Mormon Church. More specifically, I transmute the notion “white patriarchal sovereignty” into “white patriarchal salvation” in order to tailor it to critical Indigenous discussions of the Church. In my conclusion I attempt to answer the question – What is to be done? I assert that the Church is in conflict with the cultural revival of Te Ao Māori and the idea of “original instructions.” The Church’s claim to salvific truth and thinking is contradicted by my very identity and culturally informed ontology. The ensuing discussion confirms that as a colonizing entity the Church operates parallel to the government as a co-invading force in Indigenous lands. The idea of a Lamanite people as Polynesians, which includes Māori is called into question. I provide a continuum model to explain Indigenous realities in relation to religiosity and decolonization and suggest some topics as case studies for further investigation. The true purpose of this article is to facilitate the integration of critical Indigenous with Mormon and/or Lamanite Studies to bring about much-needed dialogue, discussion, and debate on the place of indigeneity in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.