Should the Church apologise for Mountain Meadows Massacre?

[_cinepro]

I am sure you realize that the only historians that take Massacre at Mountain Meadows seriously are those with temple recommends in their wallet.

Has there ever been a book about an event in history that wasn't biased? What did you expect?

Obviously, when it comes to books about the Church (either for or against) "bias" is a huge issue.

That being said, I finally recently read "Massacre at Mountain Meadows", and all I can say is that if this was supposed to be a book that is biased for the Church, the authors did a terrible, terrible job.

I can't think of a single instance in the book where the Mormon participants were made to look at all justified, and almost none of the blame is placed on the traditional scapegoats, the indians. (while they did participate, it is clearly shown that they only did so at the encouragement and insistence of the Mormons).

If Turley and co. dodged tough questions and spun the evidence, I couldn't tell. But I'm not an expert on the subject, so I'm open to having a contrarian expert weigh in with their take as well.

[_Willy Law]

[
Obviously, when it comes to books about the Church (either for or against) "bias" is a huge issue.

That being said, I finally recently read "Massacre at Mountain Meadows", and all I can say is that if this was supposed to be a book that is biased for the Church, the authors did a terrible, terrible job.

I can't think of a single instance in the book where the Mormon participants were made to look at all justified, and almost none of the blame is placed on the traditional scapegoats, the indians. (while they did participate, it is clearly shown that they only did so at the encouragement and insistence of the Mormons).

If Turley and co. dodged tough questions and spun the evidence, I couldn't tell. But I'm not an expert on the subject, so I'm open to having a contrarian expert weigh in with their take as well.

I agree they pulled no punches in depicting the massacre and the local leaders involvement (although Dr. Peterson would say they were the local militia leaders not the local church leaders). Where some (myself, Sessions and the MMM society included) feel they towed the company line is in their allocation of blame for the lead up to the massacre. They also did not delve into the cover up after the fact, a subject which both Brooks and Bagley devote a large amount of ink. They promise this will be covered in a future volume so I will withhold judgement. But based on their kid gloves approach to the church hierarchy in regards to the build up to the MMM I am not holding my breath for anything but the party line. Assuming, that is, they do indeed publish a follow up.

[_aussieguy55]

Years ago I read Brook's book and now reading Bagley's book. From the description of the massacre in both books I cannot see for the life of me why Mckay readmitted John D Lee into the church. What happens to the others who participated? Shooting women through the head, cutting throats, no way they can claim to be good people. And then the cover up. Lee gets the opportunity to live a long life, while cutting short the lives of younger people

[_Willy Law]

Years ago I read Brook's book and now reading Bagley's book. From the description of the massacre in both books I cannot see for the life of me why Mckay readmitted John D Lee into the church. What happens to the others who participated? Shooting women through the head, cutting throats, no way they can claim to be good people. And then the cover up. Lee gets the opportunity to live a long life, while cutting short the lives of younger people

After everything I have read and heard, if I had to pick one guy to die for everything that happened I think I would pick Lee. If I was one of the relatives of the 120 people that were slaughtered however, I would have been enraged and insulted that only one person was executed for the massacre.

[_harmony]

Years ago I read Brook's book and now reading Bagley's book. From the description of the massacre in both books I cannot see for the life of me why Mckay readmitted John D Lee into the church.

Same idea as with Hitler.

[_jon]

It was a group of local civic/military/church leaders lurching from bungle to blunder to a crisis largely of their own making, at which point they panicked.

Regards,
Pahoran

And you can show that, with evidence, right?

I wonder if today's the day that Pahoran will answer this, or will he will he continue living up to his Book of Mormon namesake and fail to provide support...