I think it’s often better for LDS Church to not directly respond to media like #AmericanPrimeval, no matter how bad the depictions. Rebuttals often come off defensive & draw more attention/perpetuate debate. They should leave it to apologists/analysts. But this statement is especially bad. /1 - ThreadSky

benjaminepark.bsky.social • 31 days ago

I think it’s often better for LDS Church to not directly respond to media like #AmericanPrimeval, no matter how bad the depictions. Rebuttals often come off defensive & draw more attention/perpetuate debate. They should leave it to apologists/analysts.

But this statement is especially bad. /1

Comments

emmakjarvis.bsky.social•31 days ago

Especially this late into the game. Like they knew about it BEFORE it came out. Why now???

skjiisa.bsky.social•31 days ago

I hadn’t heard of this show but I wanna watch it now

supermensch.bsky.social•31 days ago

Streisand effect FTW

ixtumea.bsky.social•30 days ago

I agree. It’s bad. Though I also agree that he portrayal of BY was over the top stereotypical religious leader. Nothing like the one my ancestor recorded in his journal. That alone turned me off after 1 episode

seattleskyeyes.bsky.social•31 days ago

The Mormons remain hyper-fixated on how they are viewed in the world by everyone else. While keeping their mouth shut would be less harmful to their reputation, they will continue to paint themselves into a corner to the delight of everyone watching them because optics.

benjaminepark.bsky.social•31 days ago

Most egregiously, the response contradicts the excellent scholarship the church’s own historians have produced, including those supported by the institution itself. These definitive volumes, by faithful/employed historians, paint a picture much bleaker than the statement acknowledges. /2

benjaminepark.bsky.social•31 days ago

To focus on 2 points in this paragraph:

First, an important lesson is how the whole faith shared complicity in the tragedy: leaders stoked the flames, faithful instigated moments of violence, & entire region shielded investigation. The Mountain Meadows Massacre was a communal sin. /3

bhtalmage.bsky.social•31 days ago

You'd agree that your disputes are largely value-driven narrative, not historical fact? Whether something is a "communal sin" or not isn't the same as acknowledging the who pulled the trigger.

Evidence is pretty strong that BY didn't order MMM. In fact ordered Fancher party to proceed in peace. /1

bhtalmage.bsky.social•31 days ago

Where something becomes a communal sin rather than the acts of individuals or a sub-community, isn't a self-evident boundary.

After BY found out Lee had lied to him, he consistently told authorities he'd help facilitate a prosecution (and did). Does that amount to condemning the attack? /2

bhtalmage.bsky.social•31 days ago

Did the Utah War and BY's violent rhetoric create an atmosphere where something like this was more likely? Almost certainly.

Does that amount to complicity? Is the United States' complicit b/c it heightened tensions by sending Johnston's army? Why one, if not the other? /3

bhtalmage.bsky.social•31 days ago

I am sure there are people who look at it and, in their minds, see an irrefutable through line. But not only are the interpretation of the events are subjective, but value-laden determinations like "complicity" and "communal sin" are subjective standards. /4

benjaminepark.bsky.social•31 days ago

Absolutely Buchanan is partially complicit for heightening tensions. I’m not letting him or Johnston off the hook.

But the MMM books are very clear on communal complicity, directly refuting the isolated community narrative found in this statement.

benjaminepark.bsky.social•31 days ago

And second, the scholarship has shown how church leaders/members covered up the truth and perpetuated a fable that blamed Paiutes for over a century. In the 168 years since 1857, the church has acknowledged and condemned their complicity for 3 decades. That’s hardly “long acknowledged.” /4

benjaminepark.bsky.social•31 days ago

And while I have critiqued the show for its one-dimensional depiction of Brigham Young, I should note that it’s just the reverse of the sanitized version depicted by the church.

The LDS tradition has yet to confront the complexity of Brigham Young, but that’s a topic for another day. /5

benjaminepark.bsky.social•31 days ago

Look, I was disappointed with the show’s use and abuse of history, as outlined in my review, in part because I knew it would reinforce stereotypes and this kind of response. But the church’s statement does not help the discussion & will perpetuate some of those very same stereotypes. /fin

smartchae.bsky.social•31 days ago

The line about the MMM being “long-acknowledged and condemned” is not in line with my lived experience. At all.

I was born and raised LDS, went on a mission, BYU graduate. If you bring up MMM at all around church people, they go silent and get awkward. No one talks about it. It’s a forbidden topic.

tarkus1980.bsky.social•30 days ago

Someone really needs to sit down the Church PR department and explain the Streisand Effect to them

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply