A visit to the Lee Ranch at Lee's Ferry yesterday in remembrance of 9/11/1857
Posted on 09/11/2007 7:50:23 PM PDT by Spiff
11 September 2007 Elder Henry B. Eyring’s remarks at the Mountain Meadows Massacre Sesquicentennial on 11 September 2007, in Washington County, Utah.
Dear Friends—
I speak today, by assignment, on behalf of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In so doing, I express their appreciation for the invitation to participate on this program.
It is important and appropriate that we meet together on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. We gather as relatives of the massacre victims and perpetrators and as unrelated but interested and sympathetic parties. We gather to remember and to honor those whose lives were taken prematurely and wrongly in this once lush and pastoral valley.
We believe it is our obligation to understand and learn from the past. For this reason, the Church responded favorably several years ago to the request of three experienced and able historians, Ronald W. Walker, Richard E. Turley, Jr., and Glen M. Leonard, to cooperate with their researching of a book about the awful event that occurred here a century and a half ago. The book they are writing is nearly complete and will be published in coming months by Oxford University Press under the title Massacre at Mountain Meadows.
Although they are Church employees, the authors have retained full editorial control and have drawn their own conclusions from the exhaustive body of historical material they assembled. They have been given full access to all relevant materials held by the Church. Two of the significant conclusions they have reached are (1) that the message conveying the will and intent of Brigham Young not to interfere with the immigrants arrived too late, and (2) that the responsibility for the massacre lies with local leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the regions near Mountain Meadows who also held civic and military positions and with members of the Church acting under their direction.
Although no event in history can fully be known, the work of these three authors has enabled us to know more than we ever have known about this unspeakable episode. The truth, as we have come to know it, saddens us deeply. The gospel of Jesus Christ that we espouse, abhors the cold-blooded killing of men, women, and children. Indeed, it advocates peace and forgiveness. What was done here long ago by members of our Church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct. We cannot change what happened, but we can remember and honor those who were killed here.
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.
A separate expression of regret is owed to the Paiute people who have unjustly borne for too long the principal blame for what occurred during the massacre. Although the extent of their involvement is disputed, it is believed they would not have participated without the direction and stimulus provided by local Church leaders and members.
We know, too, that many of those who carried out the massacre were haunted all their lives by what they did and saw on that unforgettable day. They and their relatives have also suffered under a heavy burden of guilt. No doubt Divine Justice will impose appropriate punishment upon those responsible for the massacre. Nevertheless, our continued prayer for their relatives is that knowledge of a God who is both just and merciful will bring a measure of peace to their souls.
In 1999, President Gordon B. Hinckley returned and joined with many of you in dedicating the monument that stands near our place of assembly today. The Church has worked with descendant groups since then to maintain the monument and surrounding property and continues to improve and preserve these premises and to make them attractive and accessible to all who visit. We are committed to do so in the future.
Having reflected and commented on both the past and future of this hallowed meadow, we conclude by expressing our love and desire for reconciliation to all who have in any way been affected by what occurred at Mountain Meadows 150 years ago today. May the God of Heaven, whose sons and daughters we all are, bless us to honor those who died here by extending to one another the pure love and spirit of forgiveness which His Only Begotten Son personified, is our prayer in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.
Almost an apology.
What a regrettable statement.
but, but....I thought it was not true......
“Gee, I wonder if the “real Christians” will be apologizing for all of the atrocities they perpetrated over the centuries?”
You have an odd view of Americans and our history.
I know it’s not PC but I simply can’t figure out why any person or entity thinks it is necessary to apologize for things that happened before any of us were born. Viewing history through the social mores of our time is just dangerous. Obviously bad things did happen but those who should take the responsibility are long gone. Get over it.
Certainly not as fast as all the secularists and atheists do. /sarc
The only person formally charged in the massacre was John Doyle Lee, local constable and Indian agent. He was tried and convicted, then executed by a firing squad in 1877 at Mountain Meadows.
Lee’s great-great-grandson, Mark Udall, is running for U.S. Senate from Colorado.
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_6854183
Posting articles about the LDS Church is just a ,cheap shot, way to go after Romney. Grow up, and stop TROLLING for bigots.
Wow...all that and no sarcasm tag?
I'm a Romney supporter. I'm a life-long member of the LDS Church. I'm also one who has expressed opposition to those who endlessly post anti-Mormon articles or dwell upon salacious stories about this tragedy that occured 150 years ago.
This article represents the LDS Church's official statement, an apology of sorts, about the event. I felt that it was appropriate to post the Church's own statement given some of the terrible stuff that others have been saying.
Reads just like Japanese statements concerning WWII.
No. Not really. jwatzzz is just a little shell-shocked from all of the vile anti-Mormon stuff that is unfortunately allowed here. I'm not offended in the slightest. But thanks for sticking up for me, RM.
I can tell you that when Elder Eyring said these words, it was with great heartbreak and tears were shed, many of them. These words don’t do them justice. Many Fancher, Baker and other descendants stood up and gave him a standing ovation, others sat on their hands. It is an interesting look into the power of forgiveness vs. bitterness. None of these people are connected to what happened, none are to blame or are victims. This is a civil war era tragedy, and yet after all this time, healing has only happened for some.
The 3 different MMM organizations split into three years ago, because the thought of reconciliation for some is out of the question. Some family members want the Church involved, others do not, and there is great division even within the family groups.
One very touching moment occurred when two individuals got up. Both are direct descendants of Lee and Fancher, respectively. They have started a new organization, the Lee/Fancher group. These two descendants of seemingly bitter enemies are now best friends, and travel the country trying to bring the families closure. Many have joined them, and healing is taking place.
BTW, Color, do you know a Linda Johnston? She is the historian/secretary of the John D. Lee Family organization, I’m assuming you're a member? She was a great interview! There were many Lee’s in attendance today.
Another cool thing that happened was the LDS church, working with the local wards in St. George, made 120 oak crosses, painted white, and each one, with representative ribbons on them were secured to the monument fence. The families that were there today took them home with them.
Anyway, I hope I'm not rambling too much, but there were some very touching moments today!
Cheers
Oh the wit of the Lord’s children never cease!:)
It is great pain to read this to think of Lee’s legacy and the tragic situation that he fallen into, almost reminds one a little of King David who also fell from grace!
“(1) that the message conveying the will and intent of Brigham Young not to interfere with the immigrants arrived too late.”
I’m trying to figure out what this statement means. The way I read it is that Brigham Young had dictatorial powers, and the statement infers that whatever way he decreed the events to transpire, that’s the direction the church members would have gone.
I’ve read about this massacre many years ago, but the details escape me.
You have an odd view of Americans and our history.
I don’t know what you mean exactly, but let me welcome you to FReerepublic. We can always use sharp minds around here.
Thank you for the report. Those who seek healing, will find healing. Those who seek reasons for bitterness will find that too. But who will be happier and more at peace?
A visit to the Lee Ranch at Lee's Ferry yesterday in remembrance of 9/11/1857
Beautiful!
And a beautiful painting called "Outside Panguitch" by Josh Elliott of Montana. Painted near the final resting place of John D. Lee, adopted son of Brigham Young, in Panguitch Utah.
Awesome, Thank you!!!
What is ironic is that many who found out about their histories in their late adult years, made it a life long quest, and became bitter forever. It would be better if they had never known it. My wife’s uncle was so wrapped up in the MMM, that he committed suicide and asked that his ashes be scattered at the Meadows.
Not my place to say (at all), but I don’t think LDS should be expressing regret for an event that happened 150 years ago. Enough already.
Thank you for your post. I appreciate having your observations and your perspective on this.
That one made me homesick.
““Gee, I wonder if the “real Christians” will be apologizing for all of the atrocities they perpetrated over the centuries?””
The odd view is that a huge number of Americans are massacred by fellow Americans in our recent American west and you somehow connect it to old European history.
All the whites involved of course would be able to be traced back to the distant Catholic European times but it didn’t seem to fit with our American west and a brutal wagon train massacre of American pioneers during the lifetime of Sigmund Freud.
Most people when hearing about pioneers and a massacre in 1857 Kit Carson days just wouldn’t think to jump back to the old “oh ya? What about the Crusades man?” line, or the Inquisition or whatever.
If it helps a few people get over it, then it is beneficial. Yes, it may be unnecessary, but that's not the point. There are people who have decided to become bitter over this and it is ruining their lives. Look at Sevenbak's uncle. If another expression of regret will help people move on and heal, then I see little wrong with that.
You have to join me at the Cliff Dwellers Bar & Grill where we will all tip a few in memory of the early history of Northern Arizona and the Arizona Strip where good times were had by all. Yesterday one of the locals said that there was always a bottle of cough syrup available. (Four Roses)
The little building with the green roof is the Johnson house. Lee’s house burned and was not re-built, though the foundation remains.
I ran out of disc space before I made it down to the river. I’m going back down there very soon as it is only about 80 miles from where we are.
BY did not have ‘dictatorial powers’, he was the elected governor of the territory and his powers were the same as any other governor in the USA. He did have the respect of the people more than other politicians do, so he had more personal influence than most politicians do.
At the time the MMM happened, there was no way to get messages around other than by sending a messenger and it was a three day ride from SLC to where it happened. When BY got word of what was going on there, he immediately sent a message telling them to let the settlers go on their way and leave them alone. That message arrived the day after MMM happened. If it had arrived in time, it is likely that MMM would not have happened, although the possibility of Lee and other rejecting those directions and suppressing the knowledge of them would still be a possibility.
I have to wonder if the movie, SEPTEMBER DAWN had any influence in all of these new so-called historical revelations... hmmmmmm
Wow, I am glad you speak for “most people”. If you were a strange female in Ma. in the 1600’s, I bet you would have a strange view of America. If you were a plains indian in the 1800’s, I bet you would have a strange view of America. If you got more hugs from your daddy when you were growing up, people like Mitt would not scare you.
“If you were a strange female in Ma. in the 1600’s”
My family was here then and they didn’t think of it as the United States yet or themselves as Americans, in fact they were English. And the females were not strange. As usual none of this has anything to do with the slaughter.
The Mormons were responsible for the massacre and the decades long cover up. Mr. Young tried to blame the Indians.
What angers the families to this day is the fact that the Mormon Church will not give up the land where the massacre occurred.
To this day they will not let crosses be put there because Mormons view crosses as pagan symbols. The families want the land turned over to the Federal Government as a historical site. The bones of the dead are still there.
Imagine the anger if Muslims owned the land near Shanksville PA, where flight 93 went into the ground. That is the anger that the descendants have to this day.
The church could put this behind them, they choose not to. One thing they did do, they baptised all the dead into the church, after they killed them.
Wrong. They've developed the site into a monument commemorating those who died there. They protect it, maintain it and beautify it in a respectful manner.
The Mormons were responsible for the massacre and the decades long cover up. Mr. Young tried to blame the Indians.
Saying that "The Mormons" were responsible for the massacre, as if every Mormon alive then and now is responsible, is as wrong as saying that every Catholic is responsible for the sexual abuse committed by a few Catholic Priests. Yes, a small group of local civil and militia leaders who were also Mormon were responsible for the massacre. That does not mean that the entire membership of the Church was or is responsible.
What angers the families to this day is the fact that the Mormon Church will not give up the land where the massacre occurred.
What angers the families alive now is that they choose to be angry over something that happened 150 years ago.
To this day they will not let crosses be put there because Mormons view crosses as pagan symbols. The families want the land turned over to the Federal Government as a historical site. The bones of the dead are still there.
Not true. In fact, the local LDS Church congregation made 120 crosses and placed them on the fence on Tuesday to recognize those killed. Further, the LDS Church does not consider the cross a "pagan symbol". Far from it.
Here are photos of some of the crosses that were placed on the site my local Church members:
Imagine the anger if Muslims owned the land near Shanksville PA, where flight 93 went into the ground. That is the anger that the descendants have to this day.
Comparing the LDS Church to Islamic terrorists is wild-eyed and just plain wrong. Lots of bad things happened in the "Wild West" frontier 150 years ago today. Applying today's standards to the events of that time and location is a mistake. This event was a tragedy, for which the primary instigator was tried and executed. Those who escaped civil justice should and will face divine justice. Your bitterness helps nothing.
The church could put this behind them, they choose not to. One thing they did do, they baptised all the dead into the church, after they killed them.
The LDS Church performs proxy baptisms for the ancestors and relatives of members who submit names for that purpose. And since you believe that the LDS Church is not true, then you believe that the Church's baptisms are not valid. So the, what's the problem? If the baptisms are not valid, then all that happened was some member of the Church got wet about the same time that someone else happened to read the name of one of the dead. On the other hand, from the point of view of the LDS Church, performing these ordinances for the dead was a high form of service to them.
The one time someone put a cross there, Brigham Young had it torn down and the bones of the dead scattered.
Nowhere did I say Mormons of today were responsible. They are not. Quit pulling out your victim card.
The Mormon church is responsible for how it treats the families of the victims. I’ll say it again. It would be the same if Muslims controlled the land in Shanksville. No damn difference.
Nobody in the church denies it happened.
The dispute is the contention that it was instigated by Brigham Young.
This is taught in Religion classes.
Communication at the time was limited to the speed of a horse, so the instruction to let them pass arrived too late.
You mean if anyone watched it before it crashed and burned, panned by even the critics of the Church?
LOL. Thanks for the invite. You never know, I’m down that way once in a blue moon for work. I’ll bring the (shocker) diet coke. ;-)
We’ll see you! Diet Coke?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.