FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Criticism of Mormonism/Books/American Massacre/Chapter 14
< Criticism of Mormonism | Books | American Massacre
Revision as of 08:51, 21 November 2016 by RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→Response to claim: 216 - Former bishop Klingensmith is said to have claimed that the militia was "called out for the purpose of committing acts of hostility" against the emigrants)
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Response to claims made in Chapter 14: "Mountain Meadows, May 25, 1861"
| Chapter 13 | A FAIR Analysis of: American Massacre: The Tragedy at Mountain Meadows A work by author: Sally Denton
|
Chapter 15 |
Response to claim: 209 - Brigham's trip south in May 1861 was "to insure the southern Utahns understood the need for silence on the subject of Mountain Meadows"
The author(s) of American Massacre make(s) the following claim:
Brigham's trip south in May 1861 was "to insure the southern Utahns understood the need for silence on the subject of Mountain Meadows."Author's sources:
- Will Bagley, Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows (University of Oklahoma Press, 2002), 246.
- Compare treatment in Blood of the Prophets: p. 246.
FAIR's Response
Response to claim: 210 - Brigham is said to have ordered the cross and cairn at Mountain Meadows torn down
The author(s) of American Massacre make(s) the following claim:
Brigham is said to have ordered the cross and cairn at Mountain Meadows torn down.Author's sources: Wilford Woodruff journal, May 25, 1861.
FAIR's Response
Fact checking results: This claim is false
Neither Wilford Woodruff, nor John D. Lee said anything in their journals about Brigham Young ordering the destruction of the monument.
Question: Did Brigham Young order that the Mount Meadows monument be destroyed?
Neither Wilford Woodruff, nor John D. Lee said anything in their journals about Brigham Young ordering the destruction of the monument
The critical book One Nation Under Gods claims that when Brigham Young visited the Mountain Meadows Massacre site in 1860 and saw the monument, that he "ordered the monument and cross torn down" and demolished. [1]
If Brigham Young had ordered the monument's destruction, this would be an unfortunate example of the fallibility of mortal prophets. The ability of Lee and others to hide their crimes for a time is not unexpected given LDS doctrine (D&C 10꞉37).
Wilford Woodruff (and John D. Lee) said nothing in his journal about Brigham Young ordering—or desiring— the destruction of the monument. Waite's book reports a rumor, and Leavitt's account is frank to admit that all Brigham did was "raise his arm to the square" (this gesture is used, for example, during LDS baptisms to indicate that the priesthood is being invoked, and a covenant made). Leavitt presumes that Brigham wanted the monument destroyed, but this was his supposition. It is completely unsupported by Woodruff, and it is completely inconsistent with Lorenzo Brown's witness of three years later that the monument was still standing.
The author's claim that Wilford Woodruff's journal supports the destruction of the monument is absolutely unsupportable. It is certainly not a historical certainty that Brigham Young ordered the monument destroyed. The Leavitt account tells us only that some Church members interpreted Brigham's actions in that manner—we thus cannot rule out an intention by Brigham to have the monument destroyed, but historians are less skilled at mind-reading than even Dudley Leavitt would have been.
One Nation Under Gods gets the date and reference to Woodruff's diary wrong—the reference is to 1861, not 1860. But, there are more serious lapses.
Woodruff journal: There is no mention of Brigham Young tearing down the cross or demolishing the monument
The quote from Woodruff's journal reads simply:
25 A vary Cold morning. Much Ice on the Creek. I wore my great Coat & mittens. We visited the Mountain Meadow Monument put up at the burial place of 120 persons killed by Indians in 1857. The pile of stone was about 12 feet high, but begining to tumble down. A wooden Cross was placed on top with the following words: Vengence is mine and I will repay saith the Lord. President Young said it should be Vengence is mine and I have taken a little.
There is no mention of Brigham Young tearing down the cross or demolishing the monument—Woodruff noted that the monument was already "begining [sic] to tumble down," but said nothing about Brigham ordering it torn down.
Brooks: the monument was still standing three years after Brigham's first visit to the monument
The Brooks account is more on point. In favor of the claim that Brigham had something to do with the monument's destruction, Brooks cites:
- her grandfather, Dudley Leavitt, to one of his sons, who recorded it: "‘I was with a group of elders that went out with President Young to visit the spot in the spring of ’61. The soldiers had put up a monument, and on top of that a wooden cross with words burned into it, ‘Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay.’ Brother Brigham read that to himself and studied it for a while and then he read it out loud, ‘Vengeance is mine saith the Lord; I have repaid.’ He didn’t say another word. He didn’t give an order. He just lifted his right arm to the square, and in five minutes there wasn’t one stone left upon another. He didn’t have to tell us what he wanted done. We understood.’"
- Catherine Waite's book (which has a footnote which quotes from General Carlton) states that "this monument is said to have been destroyed the first time Brigham visited that part of the Territory" (Waite, The Mormon Prophet and his Harem, 71).
Brooks also cites the Lorenzo Brown diary from July 1, 1864 wherein he states that he passed by, and saw the monument still standing. This was three years after Brigham's first visit to the monument. It is possible that this was a rebuilt monument, but the description is strikingly similar:
went past the monument that was erected in commemoration of the Massacre that was committed at that place by officers & men of Company M Calafornia volunteers May 27 & 28 1864 It is built of cobble stone at the bottom and about 3 feet high then rounded up with earth & surmounted by a rough wooden cross the whole 6 or 7 feet high & perhaps 10 feet square On one side of the cross is inscribed Mountain Meadow Massacre and over that in smaller letters is vengeance is mine & I will repay saith the Lord. On the other side Done by officers & men of Co. M Cal. Vol. May 27th & 28th 1864 Some one has written below this in pencil. Remember Hauns mill and Carthage Jail….’[2]
Brigham H. Roberts adopted a similar view, writing, "later was destroyed either by some vandal’s hand or the ruthless ravages of time…. The destruction of this inscription is unjustly connected by the judge with President Young’s first visit to southern Utah after it was erected (1861)."[3]
Uncited material: John D. Lee says nothing about demolishing the monument
One Nation Under Gods does not mention the John D. Lee diary, which contains a second-hand account of Brigham Young proceeding "by way of Mountain Meadows." Lee says nothing about demolishing the monument.[4] He was to record Brigham's words as preserved by Woodruff six days later, so he clearly had an interest in the matter. An order for destruction or the actual event of destruction of the monument would arguably have been something he would have recorded had he heard about it.
Regardless of whether the Mormons actually dismantled the monument, later that same year (1861) there was torrential rain and snow that devastated parts of southern Utah and actually changed some of the landscape. If the monument was still standing prior to the heavy storms, it may not have been after the storms. In the following years, the monument was built up and torn down by various groups of people passing through.[5]
Response to claim: 213 - The "Godbeites" were "demanding disclosure" about the massacre
The author(s) of American Massacre make(s) the following claim:
The "Godbeites" were "demanding disclosure" about the massacre.Author's sources: *The author references a series of anonymous letters written under the pseudonym "Argus" that were published in the Utah Reporter between 1870 and 1871.
FAIR's Response
- For a detailed response, see: Anonymous source: "Argus"
Response to claim: 215 - The "entire blame of the massacre was shifted to" John D. Lee's shoulders
The author(s) of American Massacre make(s) the following claim:
The "entire blame of the massacre was shifted to" John D. Lee's shoulders.Author's sources: Brooks, John Doyle Lee, 296.
FAIR's Response
Fact checking results: This claim is false
This is clearly false. Contemporary government documents show that federal officials continued to "show...efforts by the federal machinery to prosecute others for at least eight years after Lee's trial." [6] If blame rested on Lee alone, this would make no sense.Response to claim: 215 - The author claims that Lee was "regaling" his family with "the divinity of Smith and their one true religion"
The author(s) of American Massacre make(s) the following claim:
The author claims that Lee was "regaling" his family with "the divinity of Smith and their one true religion."Author's sources: Brooks, Emma Lee, 57.
FAIR's Response
Fact checking results: This claim contains propaganda - The author, or the author's source, is providing information or ideas in a slanted way in order to instill a particular attitude or response in the reader
LDS doctrine has never regarded Joseph Smith as divine.
Life and Character |
|
Youth |
|
Revelations and the Church |
|
Prophetic Statements |
|
Society |
|
Plural marriage (polygamy) |
|
Death |
Must Joseph Smith approve anyone who gets into heaven?
Critics claim that Joseph claimed to be the judge of who received salvation (or that later leaders claimed this for him).
As a result, some critics have even charged that "Mormons worship Joseph Smith."
Jesus is the judge
No mortal's role in the judgment supersedes the role given to Jesus, as the Book of Mormon bears witness: "The keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name."(2 Nephi 9꞉41.)
Apostles have a role in judgment
Joseph's participation in the judgment (at the command and sufferance of Jesus) is no more or less than the role assigned to the Lord's apostles. At the Last Supper, Jesus taught that: "Ye [the apostles] are they which have continued with me in my temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."(Luke 22꞉28-30; see also Matthew 19꞉28.)
A similar promise to participate in the judgment of those among whom they were called to serve was given to the twelve Nephite Disciples (see 1 Nephi 12꞉9-10). This principle is also reiterated in modern revelation (see D&C 29꞉12).
Similarly, Brigham Young stated:
Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the vail in the great work of the last days...no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.... I will now tell you something that ought to comfort every man and woman on the face of the earth. Joseph Smith, junior, will again be on this earth dictating plans and calling forth his brethren to be baptized for the very characters who wish this was not so, in order to bring them into a kingdom to enjoy...he will never cease his operations, under the directions of the Son of God, until the last ones of the children of men are saved that can be, from Adam till now.... It is his mission to see that all the children of men in this last dispensation are saved, that can be, through the redemption.[7]
Clearly, Joseph's role is to function under the "direction...of the Son of God," and the primary goal is the salvation of all who will accept any degree of Christ and Joseph's witness of Him.
Conclusion
Members of the Church reserve their worship for God the Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Ghost. They do not worship Joseph Smith or any other mortal. Joseph Smith's position is analogous to the role which Peter or Paul plays in traditional creedal Christianity.
Elder Bruce R. McConkie stated:
Salvation is in Christ. There is no other by whom it comes. He is the Redeemer of men and the Savior of the world. He alone worked out the infinite and eternal atonement whereby all men are raised in immortality while those who believe and obey are raised also unto eternal life. "Salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent." None other has ever lived on earth, none other now lives among us, and none other will ever breathe the breath of life who can compare with him. None other, among all the billions of our Father's children, will ever deserve such eternal praise as all the hosts of heaven heap upon him. Yea, "There shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent." (Mosiah 3:17-18.)
But Christ and his laws can be known only by revelation. His gospel must come from heaven or remain forever unknown. And his word must go forth by the mouths of his servants the prophets, or the message will never be heard. Christ calls prophets. They represent him. Their voice is his voice; their words are his words; and they say what he would say if he were personally present. "I am the vine, ye are the branches," he says to his legal representatives on earth. "He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing." (John 15:5.)
And thus, for this dispensation of grace, we come to Joseph Smith. He was called of God to reveal anew the doctrines of salvation. He was called of God to stand as the Lord's legal administrator, dispensing salvation to all men—repeat: all men—in the last days. Christ is the True Vine; Joseph Smith is the chief branch for our day. Moroni told him that his "name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people." (JS-H 1:33.) And as the Prophet, years later, suffered in the jail at Liberty, Missouri, for the testimony of Jesus and the love of the Lord that was his, the voice of the Lord comforted him with these words: "The ends of the earth shall inquire after thy name, and fools shall have thee in derision, and hell shall rage against thee; While the pure in heart, and the wise, and the noble, and the virtuous, shall seek counsel, and authority, and blessings constantly from under thy hand." (D&C 122:1-2.)
And thus, all men—every living soul who has lived or shall live on earth between the spring of 1820 and that glorious future day when the Son of God shall return to reign personally on earth—all men in the latter days must turn to Joseph Smith to gain salvation. Why? The answer is clear and plain; let it be spoken with seven thunders. He alone can bring them the gospel; he alone can perform for them the ordinances of salvation and exaltation; he stands, as have all the prophets of all the ages in their times and seasons, in the place and stead of the Heavenly One in administering salvation to men on earth....
[335] We do not pretend to have authority and gospel knowledge because we read in holy writ that those anciently were so endowed. Ours is a modern commission; ours is a present-day power; the message we declare has been revealed anew to us. That it conforms to the ancient word is apparent, for it is the same gospel given again....
[338] The Lord sends men to match the message, and Joseph Smith, as a revealer of Christ and a restorer of eternal truth, has been the instrument in the hands of the Lord of preparing the way before him.[8]
Elder McConkie's intent is clear—salvation is only through Christ, and Christ can only be known through prophets, and only legal administrators can perform the necessary ordinances. Thus, to come to Christ, one must use what Joseph Smith offers. But, this is not to say that Joseph is the source of salvation, or that we must turn to Joseph in preference to Jesus. Joseph simply provides what we need so that we can completely turn to Jesus and receive all that He wishes to give us.
Critical sources |
|
Notes
- ↑ Richard Abanes, One Nation Under Gods, Endnote 103, page 567 (hardback); page 565 (paperback)
- ↑ Typescript of the Lorenzo Brown Journals is at Brigham Young University, page 294 of transcript; cited by Turley, Walker and Leonard, Massacre at Mountain Meadows, ?..
- ↑ {CHC1|vol=4|pages=176, note}}; also cited by Turley, Walker and Leonard, Massacre at Mountain Meadows, [citation needed]..
- ↑ Robert Glass Cleland and Juanita Brooks, eds., A Mormon Chronicle: The Diaries of John D. Lee 1848-1876, 2 vols. (San Marino, California: The Huntington Library, 1955. Reprinted Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1983), 1:311-312.(dated May 25th [24th, 1861]).
- ↑ James G. Bleak, Annals of the Southern Utah Mission (25 December 1861 and January-February 1862), 113-114.
- ↑ Robert D. Crockett, "The Denton Debacle (Review of: American Massacre: The Tragedy at Mountain Meadows, September 1857)," FARMS Review 16/1 (2004): 135–148. off-site
- ↑ Brigham Young, "Intelligence, etc.," (9 October 1859) Journal of Discourses 7:289-289.
- ↑ Bruce R. McConkie, Millennial Messiah: The Second Coming of the Son of Man (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1982), 333–335, 338.
Response to claim: 216 - Former bishop Klingensmith is said to have claimed that the militia was "called out for the purpose of committing acts of hostility" against the emigrants
The author(s) of American Massacre make(s) the following claim:
Former bishop Klingensmith is said to have claimed that the militia was "called out for the purpose of committing acts of hostility" against the emigrants, and that they were ordered to "kill all of said company of emigrants except the little children."Author's sources:
- "A MORMON MONSTROSITY": New York Herald, September 14, 1872. Philip Klingensmith affidavit, April 10, 1871, printed in T.B.H. Stenhouse, Rocky Mountain Saints: a full and complete history of the Mormons, from the first vision of Joseph Smith to the last courtship of Brigham Young (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1873), 439-442.
- Brooks, Mountain Meadows Massacre, 238-242.
- Backus, Mountain Meadows Witness, 274-277.
- New York Herald, September 14, 1872.
- Compare treatment in Blood of the Prophets: p. 178.
FAIR's Response
Fact checking results: The author has stated erroneous information or misinterpreted their sources
The author fails to tell us that the "former bishop" had admitted to participation in the murder, that his testimony was uncorroborated, and that he was deemed to be so unreliable that he was not called during the successful second trial of John D. Lee.- For a detailed response, see: Bishop Philip Klingensmith
Notes