Vengeance is Mine, and I have Taken a Little

[_Runtu]

This was exactly my sentiment as well. There is no question that Brigham young initiated the attack, the coverup and the spirit of fanaticism leading up to the terrorist attack.

This "apology" is nothing more than a sugar coated continuation of the party line.

I wouldn't agree that there's "no question" about these things. Certainly, Brigham Young was involved in the Reformation and its attendant fanaticism, as well as the war-fever talk preceding the arrival of Johnston's Army, but not even Will Bagley says there's indisputable evidence Brigham initiated the attack.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

What will it take? Seriously? An apology from the First Presidency?

Yes. I think the Church institution should acknowledge and apologize for the role BY and George A. Smith played in creating the atmosphere that made the massacre possible. BY was the Church president at the time (and Smith an apostle on the errand of BY in visiting the southern Utah colonies in preparation for war); the fact that general leaders of the Church (not just the locals, as stated by Eyring) played a role in events that led to the massacre, I think, requires the Church institution to accept at least some responsibility.

Do people who converted (or whose parents, or grandparents converted) to the church after MMM need to apologize too?

No, just the Church institution.

Who does it need to acknowledge as blaimworthy?

The role of general Church leaders in events contributing to the massacre.

What will be an acceptable apology? I'm dead serious. I'm guessing you have pain from this incident, so I'm asking, what kind of an apology will finally help lead to healing?

See above.

I thought that Eyring was moving in the right direction, but from your comments (as someone who evidently has a vested interest in the event [I assume you are a descendent?]) it’s evident that this isn’t enough.

I agree it was the right direction, but it wasn't enough. He really said nothing new -- local Church leaders have been blamed for a long time, and the Church has long expressed regret for the victims of the massacre.

What will it take to move forward?

See above.

[_Mercury]

What will it take to move forward?

The murder of 150+ general authorities. Is this acceptable? If the LDS church does not want to see themselves as culpable then they should have no problem with this either. This is harsh, fitting with the LDS church and the eye for an eye blood atonement bullsh*t brigham young preached.

Besides, after the equity from the dead GA's is appropriated we can see where exactly the financial structures lie within the LDS elite. It would be worth it just for that.

BLOOD ATONEMENT!

[_Doctor Steuss]

What will it take to move forward?

The murder of 150+ general authorities. Is this acceptable? If the LDS church does not want to see themselves as culpable then they should have no problem with this either. This is harsh, fitting with the LDS church and the eye for an eye blood atonement bullsh*t brigham young preached.

Besides, after the equity from the dead GA's is appropriated we can see where exactly the financial structures lie within the LDS elite. It would be worth it just for that.

BLOOD ATONEMENT!

If I ever become a General Authority, you can murder me if it will help the descendents of the victims heal. My one life is a small price for the healing of many.

I don't know who the other 149 will be though.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I think this is a step forward because I don't think the church has ever admitted that local leaders of the church, acting in their positions as leaders in the LDS church were responsible for the attack.

I agree it's a step in the right direction, but I honestly don't think it's anything new -- local leaders (whether Church or militia) have long been blamed.

In fact, apologists on MAD have repeated that story line and resisted admitting what this statement does admit: that the attack was coordinated by leaders acting in their callings as leaders of the church.

I'm not so sure Eyring was saying this -- in the story on the Church's website, it states that Eyring mentioned that the local Church leaders at blame also held civic and military positions.

It is simply unrealistic to ever expect that the church will lay even one particle of blame at BY's feet.

Perhaps, but they should, in my opinion.

For one thing, as far as I know, that cannot be proven, except indirectly.

I've never thought that BY actually ordered the massacre, but I do believe he set the stage for such a violent event to occur.

Despite MAD apologists' insistence that LDS do not view their prophets as not being allowed to lead them astray, we all know that's a deep part of the culture, so to admit he may have been involved in the murders is the equivalent of them admitting the church isn't true.

Ergo, the reason the Church institution has NEVER apologized for anything in its history.

I think this apology was as much as we'll ever get, and it's much better than the former denial and silence.

Perhaps ... I just don't think it's enough.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Certainly, Brigham Young was involved in the Reformation and its attendant fanaticism, as well as the war-fever talk preceding the arrival of Johnston's Army, but not even Will Bagley says there's indisputable evidence Brigham initiated the attack.

I have never claimed that BY ordered the attack, but I believe it is proven that as part of his war strategy BY intended to use the Indians to shut down emigrant travel through Utah. And inflaming the populace (and sending George A. Smith to do so in southern Utah) to prepare for war just made it worse. At the very least I think the evidence is clear that general leaders of the Church (i.e., BY and GAS) played a significant role in setting the stage for the later massacre. And for that the Church ought to accept responsibility and apologize.

[Guest]

Did those who killed attend the temple and take the oath of vengeance. who wrote the oath of vengeance? Brigham Young.

If I remember correctly manson never killed anyone either it was his followers.

If you read about the things BY said and his hostility toward the US, he certainly created a hostile environment.

I also just learned that these people were coming from the state where Parley P. Pratt was just murdered. This news hit Utah a few months prior to the massacre.

[_beastie]

I wouldn't agree that there's "no question" about these things. Certainly, Brigham Young was involved in the Reformation and its attendant fanaticism, as well as the war-fever talk preceding the arrival of Johnston's Army, but not even Will Bagley says there's indisputable evidence Brigham initiated the attack.

Exactly. We can't expect the church to admit something that isn't indisputable, particularly when it involves the prophet.

I do think they could have easily addressed the violent rhetoric, because that can be placed within the context of past persecution and Johnston's army. However, perhaps that was a can of worms they didn't want to open, and maybe feared placing the violent rhetoric in context would sound like justification.

[_asbestosman]

What will it take to move forward?

The murder of 150+ general authorities.

Wouldn't 150+ laymembers suffice? Maybe put up the prophet too in case you're convinced that BY was culpable. Wouldn't that be "fair"?

Besides, after the equity from the dead GA's is appropriated we can see where exactly the financial structures lie within the LDS elite. It would be worth it just for that.

Oh, so that's why you want 150+ General Authorities to die--not because you think it would be justice for the MMM. You really think highly of human life to wish for their deaths in order to see what happens to a few billion dollars.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

We can't expect the church to admit something that isn't indisputable, particularly when it involves the prophet.

We're talking about an apology, not the burden of proof to convict someone of a crime. Folks accept responsibility and apologize every day. To borrow from GBH's book title, I think on this issue the Church ought to "stand for something!"