Deseret News | Book confronts LDS tragedy

Reader comments
Book confronts LDS tragedy

339 comments | Read story

Tragedy? | 10:29 a.m. July 19, 2008

Will the press ever tire of that word? They use it for every possible circumstance.

Try "atrocity" -- a much more appropriate when describing what happened at Mountain Meadows.

Kerry | 10:36 a.m. July 19, 2008

A religious group like the Mormons just don't set out and massacre a group of people for no reason at all. Something happened back then that has not been told. I think the wagon train egged it all on. Those Arkansans people were BIG Mormon haters of the worst kind, as I have read history too. I would like to know who truly took the first shot? I believe Brigham Young had a strong hand in the M-M-Massacre--NO DOUBT!

Sam the Lamanite | 10:39 a.m. July 19, 2008

Whether or not Young delivered the order to murder in the MMM is not entirely clear. what is clear is that he wanted their livestock stolen before they were massacred and he led a massive cover up after the deed took place. It is good to see the church attempt to close the book on this dreadful chapter once again... yet hard to believe it took so long to release the records they have been hiding.

Comments continue below

Historian | 10:48 a.m. July 19, 2008

Annie and Richard, it was interesting to see your postings one after the other, because your comments are representative of the two extremes of misinformation on the history of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Annie, Brigham Young did not have complete control over the members of the LDS Church. John D. Lee was only nine years younger than Young and was one of dozens of men "adopted" into Young's spiritual family in a practice that many Latter-day Saints briefly followed at the time. Many men "adopted" other men (as heads of families)during that period. Historical evidence clearly shows that many, many Latter-day Saints did not support Young and went against his counsel throughout his tenure.

On the other hand, Richard, historical evidence shows that the Arkansas emigrants did not go through the territory knocking down fences and poisoning water holes. Even if they did, does that justify the murder of 120 men, women and children?

Henry Drummond | 11:06 a.m. July 19, 2008

I think it is difficult for any institution to "investigate itself". I'm sure there will be no shortage of people who will dismiss this book, unread, for just that reason. While such a book will have a point of view that needs to be kept in mind, it should not be dismissed out of hand. It does represent progress.

As the authors pointed out nobody alive today had anything to do with the killing. People alive today have had a lot to do with disparaging the memory of those who were killed insisting that somehow the immigrants "were asking for it" and whose conduct brought this on themselves. I'm glad to see the Church repudiating that view as well as the view that this was the work of the Indians.

I also appreciate the fact that the authors acknowledge that relevant information has been withheld in the vault of the First Presidency for decades. There are other relevant documents including the letter that local leaders sent to Brigham Young asking for advice that have disappeared along with several diary entries of people with knowledge of the event. It would be interesting to know if they still exist.

Bill | 11:17 a.m. July 19, 2008

The most serious blunder made by the Fancher Party was to allow the "missouri wildcats" to accompany them through Utah, thus unwittingly providing cover for those vermin. Without the "wildcats", the outcome would have been completely different.

Conspiracy theorists like to have one person to blame. I'm sorry to disappoint them but Brigham Young, with all his warts, did not order the massacre.

Thanks to the "wildcats", the settlers perceived the threat to be more than it was and, sadly, reacted to their misperception with horrible consequences. They will certainly pay the price for their tragic error in judgment.

At this point, the best we can do is understand what happened and why. Information provided by the researchers in their forthcoming book will provide the best answers available at this time. We owe them our gratitude.

James | 11:21 a.m. July 19, 2008

To Historian
I don't think you have all your historian facts straight either. Perhaps you need to go back a study the event(MMM) a bit closer. You are very bias in what you say for some reason or another. I also believe Brigham Young was involved. Some historians don't deserve to be called historians.

D. Michael Bass | 11:21 a.m. July 19, 2008

Uh-oh! Here we go again . . .

Anybody else tired of this retread discussion?

bob carlisle | 11:31 a.m. July 19, 2008

"finally" a book that tells everyone what we already know about the massacre. the lds church has said for years that some members in southern utah massacred a group of people. it was not ordered by the heads of the church or by god. this falls in line with the book. so yes thank you for wasting my time

Daniel D. | 11:41 a.m. July 19, 2008

Well said, Fredd. I couldn't agree more.

Uncle Bud | 11:48 a.m. July 19, 2008

Wake up people, of course Brigham ordered it. Why do you think the US Army was coming to Utah ? Because of Brighams tight fisted control.

CB | 11:58 a.m. July 19, 2008

Glad the book is dedicated to the 'victims' because I see all involved as victims, and fortunately it is the Lord who will judge, not a group of historians or bloggers.
Anybody happen to read the Old Testament lately, seems the Lord had the Israelites kill every living creature to cleanse the land, their downfall came when they didn't obey His edict.
I wouldn't even dare, even after a few days, to try to judge what caused this all to happen. Those involved may have had deep seated experiences we couldn't even imagine from their days in Missouri and Illinois, and still the others deep seated hatred and suspicion for things taught by their ministers and clergy about the Mormons. It was volatile and it caught fire. Amen!

Hubbard | 12:16 p.m. July 19, 2008

It is hard to follow the logic of some of the TBMs who post on this site, they profess how they love the Lord and their church but they have no respect or hunger for truth. How can you love God and not love and want truth. And two wrongs do not make one right, because other churchs have done terrible things is not an excuse for mormons to copy them. The devil does all terrible things, so is that our excuse.

Iron-ic County Utah | 12:23 p.m. July 19, 2008

MMM was a result of religious bigotry and blind obedience to authority.

The same horrible things are happening still, with ignorant LDS exercising religious bigorty and blind obedience to authority in discriminating against other American citizens in their right to marry whom they want.

Ironic for a group who claims they were subjected to religious persecution to now turn around and use their religion to persecute gay and lesbian people!

How absolutely ironic! And hypocritical!

This is not about LDS or not LDS | 12:36 p.m. July 19, 2008

My country lived a dark time under a military power for a long time, now young people talks about that and hate some of them and they werent born that time, I wish we can look forward thinking to do things better.
About MMM, I think is time to heal, if you are LDS or Not, 'cause here in Utah, you are mormon or you hate mormons, that's so stupid...THERE IS A TIME WHEN GOD WILL TAKE CHARGE, WITH JUSTICE...HIS JUSTICE.
We must heal, and remember the way you judge other, you will be judge in the same way.
Everyone of us will be judge, LDS OR NOT, be prepared for that time.
For now, forgive, be forgiven, and youll find peace.

Ernest T. Bass | 12:40 p.m. July 19, 2008

What did Young say on his first visit to the site?
Is that in the book? If so, how did they spin it?

Shawn | 12:43 p.m. July 19, 2008

It's easy to see the forest for the trees if you want to, but history is a process of creation as I have been taught in my history pedagogy classes and people who dig for certain bones always find them whether they represent what they think they do or not. Assuming that anyone who has a complex view of history is simply ignorant is simply ignorant as present circumstances show in the everyday lives of people we see on the news and all around us. "History" is an action and a reflection of the soul to seek either bitterness and division or understading and I hope that those who are so sure of themselves about how history unfolded investigate their motives and self-assuring beliefs just as the LDS characters are post-humesly asked here. It's not as bald faced as many would like to believe it is even as critics waiting hourly in great faith that the faith of others is false. I understand why people might think that Brigham Young was a corrupt man, but again, I believe it is missinformation and I am to be as honored and respected for my belief as any other.

Rick | 12:44 p.m. July 19, 2008

Did every catholic pedophile priest commit his horrific criminal act with the knowledge and permission of the pope? No, well then there is no reason to believe that B.Y. was personally involved in this action. Read "No man knows my history" and you will see that Mormons were sometimes, even according to Anti-mormon literature, innocent victims so when they reacted in a panicked outrageous fashion remember that past behavior by lds-enemies unfortunately did have something to do with the actions of the mormons, unfortunately in this case to innocent victims.

For a real shocker, read when the Extermination Order was lifted in Missouri. Yes, it was but a very very short few years ago.

Reality, mormons came into towns and improved the land without the help that non-mormons expected would be asked (for a price of course.) This independence self-contained group angered people since they already had eggs in their baskets from the gains they expected. When this didn't take place they ran the mormons out and grabbed the improved land. Ah, but many of you chose to ignore those facts.

Me, I'm not mormon but do enjoy history.

Phil | 12:48 p.m. July 19, 2008

Maybe this group of travelers deserved what they got at the hands of members of a certain church and Indians? Maybe the Indians did all the killing. Maybe the Indians who did the killing need a monument to their actions.

World History | 12:51 p.m. July 19, 2008

Go check your World History books, and you will see how difficult it is pinning down any history. No one will ever know for sure what really happened at MMM, except those that were there.

Everyone, do all your posturing, suppose this or that, but those who are responsible have probably already been dealt with.

Use it to fuel whatever your needs are.

I also think in those history books you will find many cases where religion has been an issue in wars, attacks, and other things negative.

Too many people have been killed in God's name, I'm sure he's not happy about it, and has a way with dealing with it.

anon | 1:06 p.m. July 19, 2008

Let the authors publish their work, read it and make your own decisions afterwards, then get on with your life and hope nobody researches it later and has to write all the details good or negative remembered by other people to satisy someone elses need to know all the stuff you left out when you talked about your life. Yes, MMM was a very bad incident, the Church has apologized, what more do people need and want? It's over with, does yammering it to death make it better or make it go away? It happened! A very long time ago! It wasn't a good thing! 911 happened but somehow that was a flicker in our PRESENT that we do know the details about and most people have already chosen to forget.

Claire | 1:19 p.m. July 19, 2008

Please stop all this!! It happened. It was terrible. Inocent people died, I know. But please: put an end. How many mormons died? Lost their houses? How many mormon women were raped? Are we going to look back over and over? Another book? How much money are the authors going to earn with it?
The church is growing and well. Be happy and forget.

Alex | 1:35 p.m. July 19, 2008

I guess the lesson learned on this issue for me is that I will not reply on the counsels of my Stake President or Bishop on anything. If I have a doctrinal question about some idea that a Stake President or Bishop proposes then I'm going to go to the General Authorities for the mind/will of the Lord. Going to a Stake President could get me in trouble like happened to the murderer - participants at Mountain Meadow.

Yep | 2:06 p.m. July 19, 2008

The real problem is organized religion in general.

Prophets are people. People do and say odd things.

Scriptures are written by people, not God.

Death, pain, destruction, all in the name of God.

Fredd | 2:10 p.m. July 19, 2008

The issue many Mormons on this board don't understand is that we, non-Mormons, look at the behavior of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young (and those around them) to see eveidence they were men of God. It influences our thoughts on whether your church is true or not. In MMM we have a very clearincident in which to judge early Mormon behavior. For over a hundred years the official church story was it was done by Indians with an unknown amount of influence from local Mormons. Now we know it was a completely led Mormon plot to steral and plunder and MURDER women and children. What was Brigham's influence? At a minimum he created an atmosphere that led an entire town of Mormons to conspire and plot or two weeks to murder WOMEN and CHILDREN and these settlers thought that would please Brigham. At a maximum he ordered it. But because of the massive cover-up orchestrated by Brigham and continued for over a 100 years we'll never know his full involvement. We do know he didn't seem to remorseful when he uttered his "vengance is mine, and I have taken it" comment. I'm not 100% accurate, but you get the point.

Whoops | 2:14 p.m. July 19, 2008

We can not understand nor can the authors convey, life 150 years ago. Personally, I have always wondered, given the occupation and attack of Utah by the United States during this time, why every single wagon train of these invaders was not massacred. It is a remarkable demonstration of restraint by any standard. And, because of this the one event stands out in stark contrast. We view the center piece and forget the landscape.

As to why, the church and it leaders didn't publicized it-it can never be known. But, a foreign army on the hill firing off a canon every morning may be some of the context.

Anonymous | 3:05 p.m. July 19, 2008

I recently visited MMM memorial site with my ward youth. The story that the YMs President read said that Brigham Young sent word to not meddle with the immigrants. He told them to leave them alone. Even though the immigrants were from missuri and were claiming they had the gun that killed Joeseph smith and were doing other things like that to rile the mormons up... Then the my YMs president said that even though they were mormons and generely good people, they still messed up and killed innocent people. Sin can take any one if they let it.

Kyle | 3:12 p.m. July 19, 2008

Here's a little story

"I was once wronged
then I forgave.
The end"

Tad | 3:20 p.m. July 19, 2008

It is not the mormons who are to blame, it is the federal goverment for interfering in deseret [utah] national rights. utah was given to the mormons by God to build up zion, the same as isreal; it is the gentiles who have come into the land of the mormons who are to blame for everything bad.

KM | 3:31 p.m. July 19, 2008

Some ask why the church doesn't open its records so they can find out what really happend?
Funny, that without the church records the anti-mormons would know litte or nothing about the history of the church.
Also funny that its the only history they are interested in knowing. forget the Book of Mormon and the other latter-day scriptures, the only thing they are looking for is a club to beat the church over the head with - and they are looking for the club in the churches own closet.
For me, I can only be humbled by the trials that BY went through, and the leadership he exibited.
Where he goes in the eternities, there I would like to go also.

D. Michael Bass | 3:44 p.m. July 19, 2008

Ernest T.,

"Spin" is a leitmotif of your posts: FARMS spins, the LDS Church spins, etc., etc.

You are rather generous with your unsubstantiated tautologies. Unfortunately (or fortunately) they don't prove anything.

Anonymous | 3:58 p.m. July 19, 2008

They should let this one die. The mormons have so many PR problems right now it has do be very embarrassing. Membership is already in a steep decline and these types of articles and publications will only hurt it further.

Mike | 3:55 p.m. July 19, 2008

Several on here have made very unsubstantiated declarations that Brigham Young Had "complete control over the LDS Church" and that he was totally involved because "he was the churches (sic) leader" and that he definitely knew what was going to happen and approved it.

Prove it or shut up!!

zoar | 4:01 p.m. July 19, 2008

No man is perfect but the principles as revealed through the Lord to Joseph Smith are true nothing changes that. All Churches have things in their past that were not appropriate behavior. The Inquisition and the Crusades are just two things that come to mind. Only Christ was perfect and he did tell us that the whole need no physician but those who are sick.

Ernest T. Bass | 4:03 p.m. July 19, 2008

D. Michael:
Huh?
If want to believe there is no spin coming from North Temple or FARMS that is certainly your perogitive but you're extremely naive if you believe it doesn't happen.

A thinker | 4:07 p.m. July 19, 2008

What happened back in Ceder City oh so many years ago happened in such a short time when peoples temper roared, that had any one sought BY's council on the matter one way or the other they didn't have time for an answer.
The didn't have cell phones back then and it was a a hard three day ride on horseback just one way. Perhaps the Indians sent a smoke signal!!

Anonymous | 4:21 p.m. July 19, 2008

Mormons have a real images problem with both how theye perceive themselves and how they woul like other people to perceive them. With all the iamage problem the mormons have I would have to assess that the church is in some real trouble.

kenny | 4:34 p.m. July 19, 2008

Back then Utah was still part of the wild wild west.People took the law in to their own hands and settled problems with their neighbors with the bullet.People like you and me carried guns and they probably used them more than we think.We were still a lawless society if you compare it to todays standards weither you were mormon or not.Yes there may be evidence some day that would point out a coverup by LDS church leaders but I dont think that would suggest that the church its self did a coverup.We need to separate the ways of the church from the ways of the people.Even a prophet is with sin and so are his followers.MMM was sad.Latter day saints doing bad things.God will judge them for the crimes.

Jim Didericksen | 4:43 p.m. July 19, 2008

The major problem with those who are so quick to defend Brigham Young is that they over look the convenient pages of diaries which seem to directly address that issue, which had been cut out of the documents of which Mr. Turley admits is a mystery. Moreover, there missing letters and other documents which others, at the time, claim to have read or seen, which are also missing. Doesn't that raise some sort of a red flag. If Brigham Young was so completely innocent, why would someone go to the effort to remove and destroy documents? As Mr Bagley indicates, the missing evidence speaks so loudly that it is hard to ignore. So, to those who jump to the defense of Brigham Young, please explain those types of seemingly incriminating actions by someone or groups of individuals who seemed to be worried about what evidence those documents may provide or indicate. Those sort of actions seem to have been designed to protect someone, otherwise the question remains as to why.

Anonymous | 4:51 p.m. July 19, 2008

To A thinker,

You disgrace the moniker you use. Think again.

The MMM was not a quick, impulsive, knee-jerk reaction. It was a complex, deliberately-planned military-like battle plan that took several days to concoct and carry out.

And it didn't happen in Cedar City.

Do you even know what planet you are on?

Mark | 5:04 p.m. July 19, 2008

Several have asked why it such an important story.

Look closely, we've got a persecuted religious sect preparing for warfare and mobs with the U.S. Army driving at them across the plains, with pioneers and a murdered religious leader and strange reformation-style radical theology and zealotry and fear of persecution and American indians on the warpath and a weak and slightly whacko U.S. President...

It's just one heckuva story!

History is history | 5:10 p.m. July 19, 2008

I am not worried about the MMM and who ordered it.

I am concerned with the mindset which caused a group of people to believe the action was justified. Even more of a worry: does that mindset still exist today? Are members ready to kill again?

Kar | 5:27 p.m. July 19, 2008

The church has no hidden records. Brigham Young made sure of that. Why do you think they collect the history from members.

Anonymous | 5:44 p.m. July 19, 2008

I wouldn't waste a one cent on purchasing and reading this book. From reading this article, again and again, as history speaks, excuses for the truth. Religion or not, men of God would not do this, war time or not, true men of God would not do this and then cover it up and let one man pay the price.

JC | 5:43 p.m. July 19, 2008

Brevet Major J. H. Carleton, U.S.A.
May 25, 1859

"The Mormons say the children were in the hands of the Indians and were purchased by them for rifles, blankets, etc., but the children say they have never lived with the Indians at all. The Mormons claimed of Dr. Forney sums of money, varying from $200 to $400, for attending them when sick, for feeding and clothing them, and for nourishing the infants from the time when they assumed to have purchased them from the Indians."

"Murders of the parents and despoilers of their property, these Mormons, rather these relentless, incarnate fiends, dared even to come forward and claim payment for having kept these little ones barely alive; these helpless orphans whom they themselves had already robbed of their natural protectors and support. Has there ever been an act which at all equaled this devilish hardihood in more than devilish effrontery? Never, but one; and even then the price was but "30 pieces of silver.""

Kyle | 5:53 p.m. July 19, 2008

Yawn.... Yawn....

Hash and rehash, It always seems that the past is more important that what occurs in the present. Those Spanish inquisitions were fairly brutal if not worse. I don't see any crying about that. Why? It happened in the past.

Learn from the past, Live in the present!!

TO mormon attackers | 5:54 p.m. July 19, 2008

Aren't we supposed forgive and forget?

OR does that just apply to mormons?

Re: Fredd | 6:14 p.m. July 19, 2008

You have way too much "faith" in science. Science isn't always knowledge because what science "knows" is always changing with new discoveries. All science is incomplete (including DNA science). Science is also often missued (junk science). Above all else,God requires our faith. Science does not produce salvation, faith does! The difference you have with those who have faith is that we believe there are more kinds of knowledge than science produces; revelation. For example,the word of wisdom (revelation) is years ahead of science and science is only beginning to catch up! Some of us don't have enough time (life is too short) to wait that long! So we lean heavily on our faith in the revelations. Plus all real science will eventually agree with revelations. I can't wait until science cathes up with the Lord's revelations about how He created the universe! How does science explain it? Big Bang theory! Now that takes LOTS of faith!

A few points | 6:37 p.m. July 19, 2008

1. It is beyond doubt that Brigham Young was a very controlling, gruff man. Read any number of his talks in the JofD and you will quickly get a feel for his style. Spencer W. Kimball he was not. It is hard to deny that he was NOT a good leader for a people that were already fearful and persecuted - his personality only took that to a whole new level.

2. Don't forget how long it took for information to travel between SLC and S. Utah at that time. It's not like BY could just send a text or jump on the phone to his leaders in S. Utah.

3. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young at least claimed to have constant communication with God. I suppose if you believed that it would have been extra incentive to "blindly follow" the prophet. But for many years Church leaders haven't even pretended to that kind of personal revelation or communication and yet members STILL blindly follow. I don't remember the last time a general authority - let alone prophet - even insinuated they had a visit with the Lord. And yet we follow without thinking just the same.

Matt | 6:42 p.m. July 19, 2008

Juanita Brooks' book on the subject has to be the best at putting the whole sad affair in context as she came from down in that area and had access to the people and records of those involved. I don't see how anyone will ever write a better account of this tragic event and the revisionists of the 21st century are left to only speculate as all those involved have passed on. But as Mrs. Brooks established in her book the world was a different place on the frontier of the 1850s in a very remote Southern Utah, with a Federal Army marching towards it to put down the perceived "Mormon Rebellion" and survival a daily struggle against famine, flood, and illness the people of Southern Utah were on edge to say the least. While innocent in the context of nobody words justify there murder, the Fancher party didn't do itself any favors but stirring up the feelings of the locals and Piute and nobody has ever proven they did not "stir the pot." It should have never happened and those who were involved will have to answer for their actions. Sometimes excessive stress leads to very tragic decisions; regrettable.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.