LDS Church Offended by American Primeval

Posted byRobbie Bridgstock Leave a comment on LDS Church Offended by American Primeval

If you have watched the whole 6 episodes of American Primeval on Netflix, you’d have done well to weather the portrayal of the frontier violence shown. As you may already know, it highlights the dreadful event of the Mountain Meadow Massacre (MMM)

The Official LDS church was ‘offended’ by this certificate 18 or TV-MA (mature) drama, and I ironically thought: ‘You mean the Brethren actually watched an 18-rated film?” (Shame on them)

Their statement complains:

“A recently released streaming series presents a fictionalized interpretation of events in mid-19th century Utah. While historical fiction can be illuminating, this drama is dangerously misleading. Brigham Young, a revered prophet and courageous pioneer, is, by any historical standard, egregiously mischaracterized as a villainous, violent fanatic. Other individuals and groups are also depicted in ways that reinforce stereotypes that are both inaccurate and harmful.” - LDS Newsroom Article: Depictions that Deceive: When Historical Fiction Does Harm - Kim Coates as Brigham Young, in the Netflix series, American Primeval | wasmormon.org
“A recently released streaming series presents a fictionalized interpretation of events in mid-19th century Utah. While historical fiction can be illuminating, this drama is dangerously misleading. Brigham Young, a revered prophet and courageous pioneer, is, by any historical standard, egregiously mischaracterized as a villainous, violent fanatic. Other individuals and groups are also depicted in ways that reinforce stereotypes that are both inaccurate and harmful.” – LDS Newsroom Article: Depictions that Deceive: When Historical Fiction Does Harm – Kim Coates as Brigham Young, in the Netflix series, American Primeval

A recently released streaming series presents a fictionalized interpretation of events in mid-19th century Utah. While historical fiction can be illuminating, this drama is dangerously misleading.

Brigham Young, a revered prophet and courageous pioneer, is, by any historical standard, egregiously mischaracterized as a villainous, violent fanatic. Other individuals and groups are also depicted in ways that reinforce stereotypes that are both inaccurate and harmful.

As to the Mountain Meadows Massacre, which the series inaccurately portrays as reflective of a whole faith group, the church has long acknowledged and condemned this horrific tragedy. It has also taken significant steps to uncover and share the full truth of what happened and promote healing

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/depictions-that-deceive-when-historical-fiction-does-harm
“As to the Mountain Meadows Massacre, which the series inaccurately portrays as reflective of a whole faith group, the church has long acknowledged and condemned this horrific tragedy. It has also taken significant steps to uncover and share the full truth of what happened and promote healing.” - LDS Newsroom Article: Depictions that Deceive: When Historical Fiction Does Harm | wasmormon.org
“As to the Mountain Meadows Massacre, which the series inaccurately portrays as reflective of a whole faith group, the church has long acknowledged and condemned this horrific tragedy. It has also taken significant steps to uncover and share the full truth of what happened and promote healing.” – LDS Newsroom Article: Depictions that Deceive: When Historical Fiction Does Harm

These statements are simply not true.

More Mountain Meadows Massacre Lies from the LDS Church

This response from the LDS Church is unsurprising, as it follows a familiar pattern of downplaying or reframing historical events that cast the church or its leaders in a negative light. While American Primeval is a work of historical fiction, the concerns it raises about Brigham Young’s leadership and the Mountain Meadows Massacre are rooted in documented history.

The church’s statement presents Young as a “revered prophet and courageous pioneer” who is “egregiously mischaracterized as a villainous, violent fanatic.” However, historical records show that Young’s rhetoric often included violent themes, and his leadership helped create an environment in which the massacre could occur. His fiery sermons, strict control over Utah, and teachings on blood atonement contributed to a culture of obedience and hostility toward outsiders.

Regarding the Mountain Meadows Massacre, the church claims it has “long acknowledged and condemned this horrific tragedy.” Yet for decades, LDS leaders deflected responsibility, blamed local leaders like John D. Lee, and only in recent years have they admitted church involvement—while still distancing Young from direct responsibility.

This reaction to American Primeval follows a familiar pattern: instead of addressing uncomfortable truths, the church frames the discussion as an attack on their faith, mischaracterization of history, or reinforcement of “harmful stereotypes.” But historical accuracy isn’t always faith-promoting, and whitewashing the past doesn’t change what really happened.

From the book: ‘The Mormon Menace – The Confessions of John Doyle Lee – Danite,’ it is almost unthinkable that Brigham Young did not either give authority for the attack or give the nod for its execution. John D. Lee emphatically believes so – right up to his death as a devout Mormon.

"I claim that Brigham Young is the real criminal, and that John D. Lee was an instrument in his hands. That Brigham Young used John D. Lee, as the assassin uses the dagger, to strike down his unsuspecting victim; and as the assassin throws away the dagger, to avoid its bloody blade leading to his detection, so Brigham Young used John D. Lee to do his horrid work; and when discovery becomes unavoidable, he hurls Lee from him, cuts him away from the Church, and casts him far out into the whirlpool of destruction. The assassin has no further use for his weapon. I also claim that if religious fanaticism can clear a man from crime, that John D. Lee was guiltless, for he was one of the most intensely fanatical Mormons that infested Utah in 1857. But I do not claim that the fact of his being a fanatic and blinded believer of Brigham Young's so-called revelations excused him — far from it." - William W. Bishop, Confidential Attorney of John D. Lee. Mormonism Unveiled; The life and confessions of the late Mormon bishop, John D. Lee. Introduction, Page 19 | wasmormon.org
“I claim that Brigham Young is the real criminal, and that John D. Lee was an instrument in his hands. That Brigham Young used John D. Lee, as the assassin uses the dagger, to strike down his unsuspecting victim; and as the assassin throws away the dagger, to avoid its bloody blade leading to his detection, so Brigham Young used John D. Lee to do his horrid work; and when discovery becomes unavoidable, he hurls Lee from him, cuts him away from the Church, and casts him far out into the whirlpool of destruction. The assassin has no further use for his weapon. I also claim that if religious fanaticism can clear a man from crime, that John D. Lee was guiltless, for he was one of the most intensely fanatical Mormons that infested Utah in 1857. But I do not claim that the fact of his being a fanatic and blinded believer of Brigham Young’s so-called revelations excused him — far from it.” – William W. Bishop, Confidential Attorney of John D. Lee. Mormonism Unveiled; The life and confessions of the late Mormon bishop, John D. Lee. Introduction, Page 19 The Mormon Mountain Meadows Massacre

There are other publications as well, such books as:

I witnessed and took part in Blood Oaths temples from 1965 till 1990 Back then, in 1857, the Mormon Temple Endowment ‘Oaths of Vengeance’ heightened and emboldened justification toward ‘Blood Atoning’ those who were passing through Utah territory from Arkansas – believed by some to include elements that had killed the prophet Joseph Smith and Parley P. Pratt. The Baker-Fancher Party wagon train had hoped to seek essential provisions from the Mormons in order to survive the rest of the journey but were refused. This alone was a shocking development. As some have already observed online, the film version of events was a bit of a shoot-out of Indians and others with hoods and the innocent wagon train travelers. However, the Mormon murderers had carefully planned EXACTLY how it was to be done in a systematic efficient manner….

The wagon train defended themselves for five days from attacks, until they were lured out by promises of safe passage and massacred by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, resulting in the deaths of 120 men, women, and children (All above six years of age). “The only way we could give safe passage,” the Mormons said, were for them to put all their weapons in a wagon – all the men to walk quite separate from the women and for the young ones to be put in the wagons too. At a given signal, both Indian and Mormon militia attacked with guns and Bowie Knives. All were murdered, right down to the 6 year olds. Many would have been knifed or bludgeoned to death and scalped; their bodies stripped naked for wolves to eat and all personal valuables taken, as well as everything else; all taken back to Salt Lake or sold and the tithing paid to Brigham. There were 17 under-six-year-old children were carted off to Salt Lake.

We must also remember that this was the time of the ‘Reformation’ in Salt Lake. A period of totally manic rededication of obedience and devotion to the cause. Members were encouraged to report to leaders and inform on or report each other if they slacked.

The LDS Church had falsely blamed the killings on local Paiute Indians, led by a one renegade Mormon, John D. Lee.

As a member from 1964 till 2006, I was informed of this same lie, then I was astonished to discover in 2007 that the church finally admitted THEY did it – well, not THEM, not the main leaders, but those nasty members as usual – just as in their own ‘Topical Guides & Essays’ they blamed members for the notion of Blacks being cursed, or the doctrine of inheriting their own planets in the Celestial Kingdom – Oh those stubborn, sinful members – they even stopped Zion from being accomplished during Smith’s day.

So, in September 2007 they sent Eyring and Jenson off to an anniversary memorial service of the descendants, to finally concede and confess (Of sorts). It has taken 150 years of lying and stone-walling not only to the murdered victims’ families but to us church members too.

Strange… was it a coincidence, that 4 months before this, the film ‘September Dawn’ saw the portrayal of the MMM? Up to this point the church had done nothing significant whatsoever to tell the real truth or support or recognize these descendant victims.

The Mormon hierarchy have all the rhetoric of care, but beneath the surface, are arrogant. What else should we expect from a theocracy? After many decades of complete denial and the pleadings of the massacre descendants falling on deaf ears… Then this film September Dawn was released, and low and behold – the PR machine of the Church went into damage limitation and came partially clean (Well, as I said, they blamed it on members, not on Brigham Young) But did they call a press conference, or announce it at General Conference, so to apologize to the members for years of lies? No

What really gets me is the manner in which the church talks about Brigham as a holy and celebrated pioneer leader of repute (Forgetting they too have already thrown him under the bus in those awful topical guide essays!)

Brigham Young was a greedy man; a thug, a racist, a murderer, a liar, a misogynist, and in addition, so much of his rhetoric was simply appalling.

The LDS Church’s claim that it has “long acknowledged and condemned” the Mountain Meadows Massacre and “taken significant steps to uncover and share the full truth” is misleading at best. The historical record shows that the church spent over a century avoiding responsibility, suppressing evidence, and even desecrating early attempts to memorialize the victims.

Mountain Meadows Massacre Monuments

1859: The First Memorial by the U.S. Army

  • In May 1859, U.S. Army Brevet Major James H. Carleton led an investigation into the massacre site and found the remains of the victims.
  • Carleton ordered a conical rock cairn built, approximately 12 feet high, with a cross placed on top. The base of the memorial included a wooden plaque with the inscription: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”

1861: Brigham Young’s Destruction of the Memorial

  • In 1861, Brigham Young visited the massacre site with a group that included Mormon militia members involved in the killings.
  • According to multiple reports, upon seeing the monument, Young ordered its destruction, instructing the men to dismantle the cairn and remove the cross.
  • Young reportedly remarked, “it should be Vengeance is mine, and I have taken a little.”

1864: Reconstructed Memorial by U.S. Army

  • In May 1864, a calvary company found the original memorial had been desecrated and rebuilt it.
  • The new cairn was twelve feet square at the base and four feet high, compactly filled in with loose stone and earth. From the square rose a pyramidal column seven feet high.
  • An inscription was added to the cross which again read, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
  • This reconstruction continued to be vandalized and was again dismantled in 1870 and again rebuilt.

1932: First Mormon-Acknowledged Marker

  • A small plaque was installed by descendants of the victims with minimal acknowledgment from the LDS Church.
  • This was a private effort, not an official church-sanctioned memorial.

1965: Memorial donated to the LDS Church

  • The Lytle family donated the 1932 Memorial to the church.
  • The church then discouraged visitors to the site, removed signage, a picnic table, and left the access road to ruin.

1990: A More Honest Memorial by Non-LDS Groups

  • A new monument was built through the efforts of victim descendants and historical organizations.
  • The church provided some support but continued to minimize its direct role in the massacre.
  • In attendance of the dedication, Gordon B. Hinkley stated: “He came as a representative of a church that has suffered much over what happened. While people can’t comprehend what occurred… he was grateful for reconciliation by the descendants on both sides….’Now if there is need for forgiveness, we ask that it be granted.’”
  • In 1998, the slabs of granite and the monument lay in pieces due to frost and earthquake damage.

1999: The First Official LDS Church-Sanctioned Monument

  • Under pressure from historians and descendants, the church finally erected a formal monument at the site.
  • A new memorial replaced the 1859 and 1932 memorials.
  • During construction, a large amount of skeletal remains were uncovered. These remains were sent to BYU and the University of Utah for examination until the descendants of the victims requested the remains be reburied immediately, which they were in a family service before the Monument dedication.
  • Then-LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley attended the dedication but refused to acknowledge Brigham Young’s role or the church’s institutional responsibility. Instead, he framed it as an unfortunate event carried out by misguided individuals. He stated, “That which we have done here must never be construed as an acknowledgment of the part of the church of any complicity in the occurrences of that fateful day.”

2007: 150th Anniversary

  • On September 11, 2007, approximately 400 people, including many descendants of those slain at Mountain Meadows, gathered to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the massacre.
  • Henry B. Eyring, LDS Apostle, issued a statement expressing regret for the actions of local church leaders in the massacre. Eyring stated, “We express profound regret for the massacre carried out in this valley 150 years ago today, and for the undue and untold suffering experienced by the victims then and by their relatives to the present time… What was done here long ago by members of our church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teachings and conduct. We cannot change what happened, but we can remember and honor those who were killed here.” This is the first acknowledgment that church leadership was in any responsible and is still a far cry from an apology.
  • Despite promises of transparency, the church continues to downplay or reframe details that implicate its leadership.

For over 140 years, the LDS Church resisted acknowledging its role in the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The first memorial was built by the U.S. Army in 1859, only to be torn down by Brigham Young himself in 1861. It was not until 1999 that the church first sanctioned a monument, and even then, it failed to fully admit the extent of its involvement. The church’s control over the massacre site today raises concerns about historical revisionism rather than transparency.

While American Primeval is historical fiction, its depiction of Brigham Young and the Mountain Meadows Massacre aligns more accurately with documented history than the LDS Church’s continued efforts to sanitize its past. The church’s response to the series—calling it “dangerously misleading” and accusing it of mischaracterization—is ironic given its own long-standing pattern of suppressing, distorting, and whitewashing history. Brigham Young was a violent theocrat whose rhetoric fueled the environment that led to the massacre, and the church has not taken meaningful steps to “share the full truth” or “promote healing.” Instead, it has focused on damage control, hidden behind vague denials, and controlled access to historical sites and records.

The reality is that the church’s version of history is the one that is more misleading, mischaracterized, and villainous—not the series that dares to expose uncomfortable truths. If you’ve experienced a faith transition or wrestled with discovering the full truth beyond the church’s MMM narrative or it’s broader narrative, consider sharing your story at wasmormon.org and helping others find transparency where the church refuses to provide it.

More reading:

This post is by Robbie Bridgstock.

Hi, I'm Robbie Bridgstock

I was a Mormon - Joined when I was 18 in 1964 and left when I was around 59 in 2006

Robbie Bridgstock profile image for wasmormon.org
Read My 'I was a Mormon' Story
Share Your Own Story

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply