Church Mischaracterized Since 1830: Fact or Fiction

"We have been mischaracterized since 1830, when the church was re-established. That's always been the case. I don't think it will ever go away. We don't like
it, but we don't spend all of our time trying to respond to it." - David A. Bednar, LDS Apostle — “We have been mischaracterized since 1830, when the church was re-established. That’s always been the case. I don’t think it will ever go away. We don’t like it, but we don’t spend all of our time trying to respond to it.” – David A. Bednar, LDS Apostle

Reporter: In 2003 the church denounced the book Under the Banner of Heaven by John Krakauer, calling Krakauer a storyteller who cuts corners to make the story sound good. Now Krakauer’s book has been adapted for TV and is streaming on Hulu. What does the church think of the Hulu adaptation, and more generally how do you feel about the depictions of the faith in media and culture? For example, the musical, The Book of Mormon, the TV series Big Love, and the reality show Sister Wives. How is this affecting the church?
David A. Bednar, LDS Apostle: So, the most honest answer is, I’ve read about this stuff, the Salt Lake Tribune, that you’ve already mentioned, had as one of their headlines, Under the Banner of Heaven: Fact or Fiction. There’s some discussion about how accurate is how fictional is it. So, this is not new.
Christ was mischaracterized, we have been mischaracterized since 1830, when the church was re-established. That’s always been the case. I don’t think it will ever go away. We don’t like it, but we don’t spend all of our time trying to respond to it. We have a mission to fulfill and we’re moving forward to accomplish that mission.
https://www.youtube.com/live/vAx1LRSB9kU?si=2FI2LdZDBHyM5sKF&t=2746

The Apostle’s statement about the Church being “mischaracterized since 1830” reflects a common perspective among church leaders: that the Church and its members have been subject to ongoing misunderstandings, distortions, or deliberate misrepresentation. Analyzing this statement involves both historical context and objective observations.

Historical Context

Early Criticism and Persecution: The LDS Church, founded in 1830, faced immediate opposition. Joseph Smith and early members were often accused of fraud, heresy, or other misconduct. The Church’s claims—such as the Book of Mormon as scripture and Smith’s visions—challenged traditional Christianity, drawing criticism from clergy and scholars alike. Joseph Smith was in fact tried in court for fraud during his treasure-digging escapades.

Violent “Persecution”: The Church did face violent mob actions, such as the tar-and-feathering of Joseph Smith, the Missouri Extermination Order, and the eventual expulsion of the Saints from Illinois. These events illustrate actual hostility, not mere mischaracterization. Also, these instances of violence were provoked and the church membership was not innocent of their own violent actions, such as the Battle of Crooked River in the Mormon War and even the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Joseph Smith was tarred and feathered, on the night of March 24, 1832, while he was living in Hiram, Ohio. Joseph Smith was also threatened with castration during the same incident. This threat arose from allegations that Smith was involved in inappropriate relationships with young women, including a claim that he attempted to seduce Nancy Marinda Johnson, the daughter of the family with whom he was staying.
The Missouri Extermination Order was issued by Governor Lilburn W. Boggs on October 27, 1838. Facing pressure from non-Mormon citizens and local leaders, the Governor believed the Mormons were inciting rebellion and threatening public safety. It declared that Mormons must be “exterminated or driven from the state” due to threats they posed to public safety and peace. This decree effectively sanctioned violent action against members of the Church.

Polygamy and Secrecy: The practice of polygamy, first practiced secretly, and officially announced in 1852, further fueled public opposition and accusations of moral corruption. This practice, along with secretive and exclusive temple rituals, led to widespread sensationalism in the press.

Ongoing Criticism: From the 20th century onward, issues such as the LDS Church’s racial restrictions (until 1978), its stance on LGBTQ+ issues, and its financial transparency continue to attract criticism which leaders categorize as misunderstandings.

Mischaracterization vs. Legitimate Criticism

Mischaracterizations: Early anti-Mormon literature often portrayed the Church and its leaders in exaggerated or entirely false ways. Cartoons and articles from the 19th century depicted polygamous families in unflattering terms, fueling stereotypes that persist.

Legitimate Criticisms: Scholars, former members, and others have raised questions about Joseph Smith’s credibility, historical inconsistencies in the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham, and the Church’s handling of sensitive issues. These are not mischaracterizations but informed critiques based on available evidence.

Response to Criticism

Despite Bednar’s statement that the Church does not “spend all of our time trying to respond to it,” the LDS Church has devoted significant resources to addressing public perceptions. Efforts include the “I’m a Mormon” campaign, essays on controversial topics (e.g., the Gospel Topics Essays), and direct responses to criticisms, such as those in Saints: The Story of the Church of Jesus Christ in the Latter Days.

Cultural and Religious Tensions

Some criticisms arise from cultural and theological differences. For example, evangelical Christians often reject LDS theology (e.g., additional scripture, non-Trinitarian beliefs) as heretical. Such tensions are less about mischaracterization and more about doctrinal conflict.

Modern Public Relations

The Church has actively sought to shape its public image, often emphasizing its contributions to community service, global humanitarian efforts, and moral values. This proactive effort suggests the Church does invest time in addressing mischaracterizations, even if it does not respond to every specific critique.

Bednar’s statement may hold some truth regarding violence toward church members, but it is not accurate to claim the Church does not spend significant effort addressing criticism or shaping its public image. Distinguishing between mischaracterization and valid critique is essential when evaluating such claims objectively. The Church has faced both unfair misrepresentation and legitimate challenges, which continue to shape its relationship with the broader public.

What is a Persecution Complex?

A persecution complex is a psychological or sociological condition where individuals or groups believe they are being constantly targeted or oppressed, even in the absence of evidence for such targeting. This mindset can stem from actual experiences of persecution but may also persist or exaggerate threats, often as a means of reinforcing group identity or justifying specific behaviors.

In religious groups, a persecution complex often manifests in viewing opposition, criticism, or rejection as evidence of the group’s righteousness, sometimes framing it as fulfillment of prophecies or divine trials.

Does the Mormon Church Exhibit a Persecution Complex?

The Church has a long history of framing its narrative around opposition and persecution. While the Church has faced genuine persecution, especially in its early history, it perpetuates a persecution complex by omitting or downplaying the reasons behind that opposition. Church leaders even use this persecution as proof that the church is true, attributing the persecution to Satan trying to stop the Lord’s work.

Although the religions of men are often tolerant of each other, they cannot abide the presence of living prophets and the truths of salvation. Their bitterness and opposition toward Mormonism are an essential witness of its truthfulness. Validity draws the fire… If Mormonism were not true, it could be ignored. The fact that Satan and his cohorts cannot leave it alone is an evidence of its truthfulness.
Joseph Fielding McConkie, Straightforward Answers To Tough Gospel Questions, Deseret Books

Historical Context of Persecution

Genuine Persecution: The early Mormon community faced violence, including mob attacks, the Missouri Extermination Order (1838), and the assassination of Joseph Smith in 1844. These events stemmed at least partly from religious intolerance and fear of Mormon expansion. The Mormon Extermination Order was more about keeping the peace than “exterminating” Mormons. The same “peace” Joseph Smith cites in his order to destroy the printing press behind the Nauvoo Expositor.

Provocative Practices: Many instances of conflict also arose from practices like polygamy (referred to as “spiritual wifery” by critics), secretive governance, and Joseph Smith’s political ambitions. These factors made Mormons appear as a social and political threat.

Modern Perpetuation of a Persecution Narrative

LDS leaders often reference early persecution as evidence of the Church’s divine mission. For example, General Conference talks frequently mention the Saints’ suffering as fulfilling prophecies of trials for God’s chosen people.

The narrative often frames opposition to Church practices (e.g., LGBTQ+ policies, doctrinal critiques) as misunderstanding or hostility toward truth, reinforcing a sense of being “in the world but not of it.”

I don’t think the church will ever break out of its persecution complex. The headquarters of the church is only two steps away from a siege mentality. It’s imbedded within the psyche of the culture.
Michael Quinn, https://culteducation.com/group/1057-the-mormon-church/13985-did-mormons-use-the-summer-olympics-for-self-promotion-.html

Omissions in the Narrative

While the Church emphasizes the unjust suffering of its members, it often downplays or omits actions that contribute to conflicts. For instance:

Joseph Smith’s introduction of polygamy and his secretive marriage practices caused dissent even among his followers.
His political ambitions in Nauvoo, including running for U.S. president and consolidating military power, alarmed non-Mormons.

The Church frames polygamy as a divine commandment while neglecting its social repercussions, including accusations of exploitation and coercion.

Sociological Benefits of a Persecution Complex

Strengthened Group Identity: Emphasizing persecution reinforces the idea that members are part of a divinely chosen, misunderstood group.

Deflection of Criticism: Framing opposition as persecution allows the Church to dismiss critiques without fully addressing them.

Unity Through Adversity: Members are encouraged to view personal trials and collective struggles as signs of spiritual strength.

Persecution or Justified Opposition?

While the LDS Church undeniably experienced significant opposition, all hostility can not be characterized as simple religious intolerance and persecution. Much of the opposition stemmed from legitimate concerns about practices and behaviors that were and still are socially or morally dangerous. For example, polygamy is morally corrupt and socially destabilizing. The theocratic tendencies of Joseph Smith in Nauvoo’s governance and militia fostered fears of Mormon political control. The exclusivity claim (that still exists today) asserts that Mormonism was (and still is) the “only true church,” which alienates and demeans every other denomination as only “playing church“. By omitting these factors, the Church’s narrative oversimplifies its historical interactions with broader society.

The Church’s persecution narrative contains elements of truth but reflect a persecution complex. While genuine intolerance and violence are undeniable, the Church’s framing omits its role in provoking opposition, reinforcing a self-image of victimhood. This approach serves to unify members and deflect criticism but misrepresents the full scope of its history.

Bednar’s statement that the Church has been mischaracterized since its inception misleads by framing the church as a perpetual victim of baseless prejudices. This narrative conveniently omits the actions of early church leaders, such as Joseph Smith’s controversial teachings and practices—including secretive polygamy and theocratic ambitions—that led to genuine societal clashes, not mere misunderstandings. By presenting a one-sided view, Bednar dismisses the valid concerns and experiences of those harmed or marginalized by the church’s doctrines, policies, or culture. He is guilty of mischaracterizing history by spinning and perpetuating the narrative that the church is the victim and has done no wrong and is above responding to such “persecution”.

For those who have felt silenced or alienated, sharing your experiences can be an empowering act of authenticity. If you have a story of faith deconstruction, marginalization, or finding new spiritual paths outside of Mormonism, consider sharing it at wasmormon.org. Your voice can provide clarity, solidarity, and hope for others on similar journeys.

More reading: