Mountain Meadows Massacre, Tomorrow Is The

[shanstress70]

2 : an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret

3 : a poor substitute : MAKESHIFT

Well, what am I to think now?

I am still bother by Tuttle's insistence: "We don't use the word 'apology.' We used 'profound regret."

Did the church authority in question also admit to error along with expressing regret? Because the way the definition is worded, both elements must be there; hence, "accompanied by".

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

2 : an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret

3 : a poor substitute : MAKESHIFT

Well, what am I to think now?

I am still bother by Tuttle's insistence: "We don't use the word 'apology.' We used 'profound regret."

Did the church authority in question also admit to error along with expressing regret? Because the way the definition is worded, both elements must be there; hence, "accompanied by".

I believe he did. Here are excerpts from the September 11 Salt Lake Tribune article:

Updated 5:35 PM- MOUNTAIN MEADOWS - A Mormon apostle, speaking Tuesday at the 150th anniversary memorial service for victims of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, apologized for the church's role, expressing "profound regret for the massacre."

In a statement considered ground breaking, Elder Henry B. Eyring, a member of the Quorum of Twelve, said new research shows local Mormon leaders were responsible for recruiting Paiute Indians to participate in the crime during which 120 men, women and children of the Fancher-Baker wagon train, en route to California from Arkansas, were brutally killed by a group of Mormon militia members and some Paiute allies, although the Paiutes' participation remains disputed.

"What was done here long ago by members of our church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct," said Eyring, who choked up while reading a statement delivered on behalf of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. "We cannot change what happened, but we can remember and honor those who were killed here.

```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

So, yes, he does clearly state the Mormon mlitia members were the killers at MMM, and that it was a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching.

Next, the article states:

The words, "we're sorry," were not part of the statement, but Richard Turley Jr., the LDS Church's managing director of family and church history and co-author of the forthcoming book, Massacre at Mountain Meadows, insisted after the ceremony that the statement was meant to be an apology.

"[The church] is deeply, deeply sorry," he said. "What happened here was horrific."

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

So, as to the literal definition of "profound regret," I do believe Elder Eyring's words were an apology. I do not believe Tuttle thinks so. And I have no idea with Church authorities believe. I think it comes down to, as Doctor Steuss says, do you believe Tuttle or do you believe Turley.

Changing to subject a bit, I was very put off by Elder Eyring's opening statement. His "lead" is "new research" about Mormons recruiting the local Paiutes, and buried in it is the Mormon leaders responsibility for the actual crime.

1. Anyone who has read up on the MMM knows the local leaders recruited the Paiutes to participate. This is not "new resarch."

2. I see no reason at all to put the Paiutes in the lead paragraph. Doing so watered down the Mormon militia's actions of cold-blooded murdering the 120 men, women and chldren. Yes, it still mentions them, but if Elder Eyring's words had ONLY mentioned them, the impact would have been much stronger. Including the Paiutes in that lead paragraph toned down the horror, and again, was unecessary to the speech.

3. The way it's written, and said by Elder Eyring, makes the Paiutes participation sounds stronger than it actually was. If you read further down into the article, the Church is trying to make amends with the Paiutes for having blamed the murders on them for the last 150 years. This lead in the speech was a horrible beginning, and in my opinion, offensive.

I also am very wary of what I keep seeing when someone is discussing the upcoming Turley/Leonard/Walker book--the use of the "new research" claim. If you are someone with in interest in MMM and have read just the general books available, you already know this isn't "new" information. It concerns me that this is how they are passing out pieces of the book here and there. I don't understand the need for the "new research" moniker when it's no such thing.

Back to the apology issue, I say yes, technically it is an apology. But without everyone fully on board, I don't feel the excitement I did before.

Elphaba

[Brother Dorsey]

Back to the apology issue, I say yes, technically it is an apology. But without everyone fully on board, I don't feel the excitement I did before.

Elphaba

Excitement? Why? Because you think the Church was directly responsible? Is this standard thinking of ex-Mormons with axes to grind? Personally I don't think the "Church" has anything to apologize for. The MMM was a horrible act by members of the church and was no way ordered or sanctioned by the "Church". It's like asking the peaceful, God fearing majority of Muslims here in the U.S. to apologize for 9/11. Heck, I heard that Ted Bundy was a Catholic...does the Catholic church need to apologize for his acts? Saying that the church needs to apologize is nothing but a bunch of crapola as far as I'm concerned....those that the MMM directly effected are long dead gone and buried. No matter how you twist it the "Church" was not then or is not now responsible for the bad choices of it's members. Take a chill pill for crying out loud.

PS: I'm still waiting for the Egyptians to apologize to me for the 300 years of bondage my ancestors were put through! I won't be able to sleep until they do! <sarc>

[Elphaba]

Excitement? Why? Because you think the Church was directly responsible?

The Church? No. Church officials, including BY? In a very complicated way, partially.

Is this standard thinking of ex-Mormons with axes to grind?

I don't know. You'd have to ask one.

Personally I don't think the "Church" has anything to apologize for.

I don't either. I think current Church officials should apologize for the Church officials' who committed these horrific murders at the time. And I think they just did.

The MMM was a horrible act by members of the church and was no way ordered or sanctioned by the "Church".

It's not that black and white. Brigham did not issue an order to kill the party, no. Like I said, it's extremely complicated. But his actions, before, and especially afterwards, show some culpability. I'm hoping the forthcoming book will clarify this.

It's like asking the peaceful, God fearing majority of Muslims here in the U.S. to apologize for 9/11. Heck, Iheard that Ted Bundy was a Catholic...does the Catholic church need to apologize for his acts?

It's nothing like either of those examples, and just your saying so indicates your absolute ignorance of the entire matter.

Saying that the church needs to apologize is nothing but a bunch of crapola as far as I'm concerned....

Thank you for your opinion.

those that the MMM directly effected are long dead gone and buried.

Not in the hearts of those who loved them and their ancestors.

No matter how you twist it the "Church" was not then or is not now responsible for the bad choices of it's members.

Not the "Church." Actions taken by prominent members of the "Church.

Take a chill pill for crying out loud.

No, thank you.

It's obvious you've never read anything about the massacre, and therefore it's easy for you to dismiss the cold-blooded murder of 120 men, women and children. Even Elder Eyring had tears in his eyes as he spoke of them at the memorial. "Putting it behind us is the goal," and there are people within the Church who are finally working to make that happen.

You seem to think no one is left who is touched by this tragedy. You're wrong. The descendants of the perpetrators from So. Utah have felt this guilt for the past 150 years as it has lingered generation after generation. The descendants of the Fancher-Baker wangontrain, especially those of the children who survived, have lived with much anger and pain because of the brutal murder of their ancestors.

Then there are the Paiutes who for almost 150 years were blamed, by the murders and officials in the Church, for the murders, when in fact their participation was probably very limited. This has had an effect on generations of their youth.

Obviously you're entitled to your opinion, and I have no problem with you giving it. But since you're ignorant of the details of the MMM, please keep your rudeness about the incident out of my thread. You're dismissing generations of people's anguish, as if this little mass murder was nothing a little "chill pill" couldn't take care of.

Elphaba

PS: I'm still waiting for the Egyptians to apologize to me for the 300 years of bondage my ancestors were put through! I won't be able to sleep until they do! <sarc>

So the Mormons murdering 120 people was fine because of what the Egyptians did? Is that how you justify cold-blooded murder?

[Moksha]

Elf, what do you think of the idea that Elder Eyring did indeed issue an apology, but such apology was overridden in an official Church statement by administrative fiat from a higher ranking Apostle?

Just a thought.

[Brother Dorsey]

[so the Mormons murdering 120 people was fine because of what the Egyptians did? Is that how you justify cold-blooded murder?

Which proves my point...

"the Mormons murdering 120 people"

You actually have it in your head that the "Mormon" church sactioned this event don't you?

The "mormons" as a church murdered no one...

Just because the murderers happened to be of the LDS faith does not mean that the "Mormons" are to blame and should apologize.

And my statement about the Egyptians was sarcastic (that's what the <sarc> means) Go back and read the context of that statement....it was meant to show how blown out of proportion you have made this whole apology thing....didn't I read in an earlier post that you had no geneology connection to MMM? If so why would you feel such a need for an apology from anyone regarding it?

And as far as my so called "ignorance" regarding the MMM....I know the whole story...from both the anti-Mormon side and the side which bares the truth. Lets call a spade a spade here shall we....You, my dear are an ex-Mormon and of course you are going to choose the side which suits your adgenda the best...and that is the negative Mormon side. You and none of your kind can proove that the MMM was sactioned by the church, however history has prooved it was not regardless of how the church "handled" the situation after the fact. The bottom line is that the LDS church as a whole should never have to apologize for the acts and poor choices of it's members regardless of what postion they hold in the church.

[Elphaba]

Elf, what do you think of the idea that Elder Eyring did indeed issue an apology, but such apology was overridden in an official Church statement by administrative fiat from a higher ranking Apostle?

Just a thought.

I think it doesn't matter.

I didn't realize Tuttle was from a higher ranking apostle. However, according to the dictionary, Elder Eyring's worlds, profound "regret," mean an "apology." He can't take back the words. That, in combination with Turley's comments where he very clearly states the Church meant to apologize, are a very strong case for an apology.

That's my humble opinion.

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

Which proves my point..."the Mormons murdering 120 people"

Well, who do you think it was? It wasn't the Quakers? It wasn’t the Maoris. It was the Mormons. Every single person who was involved was a Mormon, with the exception of a few Paiutes. There's nothing wrong with saying "The Mormons."

I do get your point. You see me saying “The Mormons” as all inclusive of the Church as a whole. Of course, that’s not what I meant at all, but I can say it differently in the future, as I obviously never meant the entire Church. If you had read anything I’ve written about MMM, you would have know that.

You actually have it in your head that the "Mormon" church sactioned[sic] this event don't you?

Have you actually read any of my posts regarding the MMM? Isn’t it logical that that’s the first thing you should have done in preparation for your guerilla attack on the evil apostate?

Of course I do not believe the Church sanctioned such a horrific event. Why all the sneering and outright lying? Isn't lying a sin?

The "mormons"[sic] as a church murdered no one...

Couldn't agree more and have so a number of times.

Just because the murderers happened to be of the LDS faith does not mean that the "Mormons" are to blame and should apologize.

If you‘re speaking of the entire membership, I‘ve never said they were.

However, that does not mean Church officials should just pretend it never happened and dismiss the pain it causes even to this day. Happily, Church officials are stepping up and sincerely trying to ease the pain that the Mormons (those who participated in the MMM) caused 150 years ago, which was horrific.

And my statement about the Egyptians was sarcastic (that's what the <sarc> means) Go back and read the context of that statement....it was meant to show how blown out of proportion you have made this whole apology thing

Yes, I saw the "sarcastic," which made it even more of an obtuse and insulting comment to the people who were shot in the head, bashed in the head with rifle buts, or both 150 years ago at MMM.

didn't I read in an earlier post that you had no geneology[sic] connection to MMM? If so why would you feel such a need for an apology from anyone regarding it?

Because I do.

And as far as my so called "ignorance" regarding the MMM....I know the whole story...from both the anti-Mormon side and the side which bares the truth.

Please don’t insult my intelligence. It is SO obvious you know nothing about MMM other than "the Church didn't do it."

Lets [sic] call a spade a spade here shall we....You, my dear are an ex-Mormon and of course you are going to choose the side which suits your adgenda [sic] the best...and that is the negative Mormon side.

Okay, let's. You are someone who dreams of being the intellectual defender of the faith, but who unfortunately is just a small-minded, small-thinking man. You actually have a reputation for searching out “ex-Mormons” and attacking them, only to discover they’re not really the “anti” you claim they are, and that your accusations are lies because your attempts to learn what you can about the person were so pathetic and irresponsible you end up with erroneous information, and once you put it on the board, you just look pitiful. My spade’s full for now. Give me another one and I’ll keep going.

You and none of your kind can proove [sic] that the MMM was sactioned [sic] by the church, however history has prooved [sic] it was not regardless of how the church "handled" the situation after the fact.

“My kind” and I, the Utah State Historical Society and The Daughters of the Utah Pioneers, plus all of the books, journals and articles I have read have never believed the MMM was sanctioned by the Church. Your accusations are irrational, and your knee-jerk overreactions and outright stupid and oh-so-predictable “defender of the faith” talking points are a joke.

The bottom line is that the LDS church as a whole should never have to apologize for the acts and poor choices of it's [sic] members regardless of what postion [sic] they hold in the church.

Again, proof that you lied above when you said, “I know the whole story...from both the anti-Mormon side and the side which bares the truth.” Perhaps lie is too strong. Perhaps you think you know the whole story, and aren’t aware of the fact that you know absolutely nothing.

Okay, I’ll give you a break and assume you’re just ignorant when it comes to the MMM. Very ignorant.

Elphaba

[sixpacktr]

I don't understand the need for some to have the church apologize for the actions of some of its members. Why is this so important to you?

If we follow that reasoning, then we should demand an apology from all churches who has a member commit murder or rape. Then we should demand that their parents apologize as well, because they had a hand in their upbringing. Then we ought to demand an apology from the company they worked for as well because they might have driven them to it thru stress, etc.

It is pointless. Bro Dorsey is right: the Church didn't commit the murders. Some misguided men that felt they needed to do this, for whatever reason, did it.

Grow up, quit trying to find fault where none exists...

[Elphaba]

I don't understand the need for some to have the church apologize for the actions of some of its members. Why is this so important to you?

If we follow that reasoning, then we should demand an apology from all churches who has a member commit murder or rape. Then we should demand that their parents apologize as well, because they had a hand in their upbringing. Then we ought to demand an apology from the company they worked for as well because they might have driven them to it thru stress, etc.

It is pointless. Bro Dorsey is right: the Church didn't commit the murders. Some misguided men that felt they needed to do this, for whatever reason, did it.

Grow up, quit trying to find fault where none exists...

For someone who is always so angry when the Church's actions are questioned, I find your post hypocritical.

Church officials have felt the need to build a memorial, have a number of ceremonies, and then on the 150 anniversary, to actually apologize.

So who are you question what the Church officals did?

Elphaba

[Brother Dorsey]

I don't understand the need for some to have the church apologize for the actions of some of its members. Why is this so important to you?

If we follow that reasoning, then we should demand an apology from all churches who has a member commit murder or rape. Then we should demand that their parents apologize as well, because they had a hand in their upbringing. Then we ought to demand an apology from the company they worked for as well because they might have driven them to it thru stress, etc.

It is pointless. Bro Dorsey is right: the Church didn't commit the murders. Some misguided men that felt they needed to do this, for whatever reason, did it.

Grow up, quit trying to find fault where none exists...

It doesn't matter Six....I see her true agenda.......besides I've learned long ago, if you get into a debate about a particular subject and your opposition looses their cool, then you must have proved your point because instead of attacking the subject of the debate they start to attack the debater as in "You are pathetic loser who dreams of being the intellectual defender of the faith, but who unfortunately is just a small-minded, small-thinking man." Oh, and "you're ignorant" too!....can't forget that gem. Where's a Mod when you need one anyway? LOL! Actually Six, she just doesn't understand I guess....as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints we love her and pray for her to regain her testimony and hope someday she will shed the blanket of hatred she has for the church. I've seen it many times....intellectuals who make the things of the physical world their idols. Science and human reasoning are their idols. They forget that with God all things are possible. I forgive you Elpha for the terse things you called me, I know you didn't mean them. May God bless you and soften your heart.

[sixpacktr]

<div class='quotemain'>

I don't understand the need for some to have the church apologize for the actions of some of its members. Why is this so important to you?

If we follow that reasoning, then we should demand an apology from all churches who has a member commit murder or rape. Then we should demand that their parents apologize as well, because they had a hand in their upbringing. Then we ought to demand an apology from the company they worked for as well because they might have driven them to it thru stress, etc.

It is pointless. Bro Dorsey is right: the Church didn't commit the murders. Some misguided men that felt they needed to do this, for whatever reason, did it.

Grow up, quit trying to find fault where none exists...

It doesn't matter Six....I see her true agenda.......besides I've learned long ago, if you get into a debate about a particular subject and your opposition looses their cool, then you must have proved your point because instead of attacking the subject of the debate they start to attack the debater as in "You are pathetic loser who dreams of being the intellectual defender of the faith, but who unfortunately is just a small-minded, small-thinking man." Oh, and "you're ignorant" too!....can't forget that gem. Where's a Mod when you need one anyway? LOL! Actually Six, she just doesn't understand I guess....as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints we love her and pray for her to regain her testimony and hope someday she will shed the blanket of hatred she has for the church. I've seen it many times....intellectuals who make the things of the physical world their idols. Science and human reasoning are their idols. They forget that with God all things are possible. I forgive you Elpha for the terse things you called me, I know you didn't mean them. May God bless you and soften your heart.

I just noticed that on the 2nd page you said what I said on this page. Guess I should read the entire string first, but I also noticed that there wasn't a real answer to that either. The 'warm fuzzy de jour' anymore is an apology. Commit a murder? Didn't apologize? What type of animal are you?! As if, if you apologize, well, we'll forget that little murder thing you did. Like my wife says: if sorry were good enough, we wouldn't need the cops...

Still think that this is a big to do about nothing. Not that this wasn't bad, but it was 150 years ago, and the church had nothing to do with it. But somehow Emma thinks that she is owed an apology, and if it doesn't happen the way she thinks it should, it just doesn't satisfy...

I've noticed that certain people think that when they create a thread it is 'theirs', and you aren't allowed to say what you want on 'their' thread. Kind of interesting take, that...

[pam]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

I don't understand the need for some to have the church apologize for the actions of some of its members. Why is this so important to you?

If we follow that reasoning, then we should demand an apology from all churches who has a member commit murder or rape. Then we should demand that their parents apologize as well, because they had a hand in their upbringing. Then we ought to demand an apology from the company they worked for as well because they might have driven them to it thru stress, etc.

It is pointless. Bro Dorsey is right: the Church didn't commit the murders. Some misguided men that felt they needed to do this, for whatever reason, did it.

Grow up, quit trying to find fault where none exists...

It doesn't matter Six....I see her true agenda.......besides I've learned long ago, if you get into a debate about a particular subject and your opposition looses their cool, then you must have proved your point because instead of attacking the subject of the debate they start to attack the debater as in "You are pathetic loser who dreams of being the intellectual defender of the faith, but who unfortunately is just a small-minded, small-thinking man." Oh, and "you're ignorant" too!....can't forget that gem. Where's a Mod when you need one anyway? LOL! Actually Six, she just doesn't understand I guess....as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints we love her and pray for her to regain her testimony and hope someday she will shed the blanket of hatred she has for the church. I've seen it many times....intellectuals who make the things of the physical world their idols. Science and human reasoning are their idols. They forget that with God all things are possible. I forgive you Elpha for the terse things you called me, I know you didn't mean them. May God bless you and soften your heart.

I just noticed that on the 2nd page you said what I said on this page. Guess I should read the entire string first, but I also noticed that there wasn't a real answer to that either. The 'warm fuzzy de jour' anymore is an apology. Commit a murder? Didn't apologize? What type of animal are you?! As if, if you apologize, well, we'll forget that little murder thing you did. Like my wife says: if sorry were good enough, we wouldn't need the cops...

Still think that this is a big to do about nothing. Not that this wasn't bad, but it was 150 years ago, and the church had nothing to do with it. But somehow Emma thinks that she is owed an apology, and if it doesn't happen the way she thinks it should, it just doesn't satisfy...

I've noticed that certain people think that when they create a thread it is 'theirs', and you aren't allowed to say what you want on 'their' thread. Kind of interesting take, that...

When you start a thread be it this one or another one, you have to expect that people will voice their opinions. Many times contrary to your way of thinking. Name calling or personal attacks is uncalled for.

[Elphaba]

It doesn't matter Six....I see her true agenda.......

Hi Brother Dorsey,

My true agenda re: MMM is a long-time, historical interest and to see a lot of people find closure. My passion is Mormon history, and obviously the MMM is a huge part of that.

besides I've learned long ago, if you get into a debate about a particular subject and your opposition looses their cool, then you must have proved your point because instead of attacking the subject of the debate they start to attack the debater as in "You are pathetic loser who dreams of being the intellectual defender of the faith, but who unfortunately is just a small-minded, small-thinking man." Oh, and "you're ignorant" too!....can't forget that gem.

You're correct. Those were all mean and unecessary remarks. I regret and apologize for them. In my defense, they were in response to your remarks as follows:

You actually have it in your head that the "Mormon" church sactioned[sic] this event don't you?

You and none of your kind can proove [sic] that the MMM was sactioned [sic] by the church, however history has prooved [sic] it was not regardless of how the church "handled" the situation after the fact.

Lets [sic] call a spade a spade here shall we....You, my dear are an ex-Mormon and of course you are going to choose the side which suits your adgenda [sic] the best...and that is the negative Mormon side.

You're snide, and erroneous comments about me were totally out of line.

So, I think it's clear that neither of us acted like the adults we are. However, again, I do apologize for my rude comments. Even if your comments had been ten times as bad as they were, I should never have responded as disrespectfully as I did.

Actually Six, she just doesn't understand I guess....as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints we love her and pray for her to regain her testimony and hope someday she will shed the blanket of hatred she has for the church.

I have no idea where you got the idea that I hate the Church. I love the Church and have no hatred for it whatsoever. I do criticize actions that some members take, but that is a totally different thing. Even though I am not a believer, the Church is still a very big part of my life, and I wouldn't want it any other way. Now that I've explained that to you, if you say it again in the future, it will be a lie. I'm not trying to be mean, but it is extremely offensive to me that you say this.

They forget that with God all things are possible. I forgive you Elpha for the terse things you called me, I know you didn't mean them. May God bless you and soften your heart

I actually have a much softer heart than you're aware of, and if you took the time to get to know me, I think you'd actually like me. So thank you for your forgiveness, and I offer you the same.

Elphaba

[pam]

Thank you Elphaba for your attempt. It was a nice thing to do though I know difficult. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

[CrimsonKairos]

The Church apologized in order to placate all the thin-skinned, melodramatics out there.

We have nothing to apologize for, any more than all the citizens of Missouri have to apologize for the actions of Joseph Smith's murderers or the governor.

[Elphaba]

Emma thinks that she is owed an apology, and if it doesn't happen the way she thinks it should, it just doesn't satisfy...

I've never said anything to indicate I am personally owed an apology.

I've noticed that certain people think that when they create a thread it is 'theirs', and you aren't allowed to say what you want on 'their' thread. Kind of interesting take, that...

There is a custom for most other boards I've been on that the originator of the OP has a certain amount of control over the thread. This is so he/she can keep the thread on point in case it starts to veer in different directions. It is not meant to curtail debate and disgreements. The only reason you would be prevented from saying something is if it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread and is too much of a distraction.

It is not nearly as prohibitive as you make it sound.

Apparently this is not a policy on this board.

Elphaba

Thank you Elphaba for your attempt. It was a nice thing to do though I know difficult. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

You're welcome Pam, though it wasn't difficult. I meant every world.

And if you weren't sticking to it, I'd have to hunt you down and make you say it all over again!

Elphaba

[Moksha]

Elf, it is obvious that most people posting here are not as well versed on this issue as yourself. There seems to be some lack of understanding of what the Church had to gain by offering a heart-felt and sincere apology. Could you fill us in on the details about the appropriateness and benefits of such an apology?

[Palerider]

Now....lets all go and eat some ice cream and chill out.......... B) B)

[pam]

Now....lets all go and eat some ice cream and chill out.......... B) B)

Of course you are buying.

[Palerider]

<div class='quotemain'>

Now....lets all go and eat some ice cream and chill out.......... B) B)

Of course you are buying.

NOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........

[Elphaba]

Elf, it is obvious that most people posting here are not as well versed on this issue as yourself. There seems to be some lack of understanding of what the Church had to gain by offering a heart-felt and sincere apology. Could you fill us in on the details about the appropriateness and benefits of such an apology?

Why would I Moksha?

All I would be doing is wasting my time because it's a complicated issue to explain. They have a right to their opinion about the MMM, they've already expressed it, and I respect that.

If anyone does want any of the details, just let me know.

Elphaba

[Snow]

My true agenda re: MMM is a long-time, historical interest and to see a lot of people find closure. My passion is Mormon history, and obviously the MMM is a huge part of that.

Truth in Advertising requires a correction: Your true agenda and passion is denigrating the Church. You're a little more subtle than your average anti-Mormon - you'll phrase your attacks in a certain way and toss around some praise here and there to lend some plausible deniablity, but there is no mistaking what you are really up to.

When this thread I wondered how long it would be before you started throwing in the polemical garbage... not long as it turns out.

I'm just a bit surprized that you have yet claimed that you personally were victimized by the MMM.

Elf, it is obvious that most people posting here are not as well versed on this issue as yourself. There seems to be some lack of understanding of what the Church had to gain by offering a heart-felt and sincere apology. Could you fill us in on the details about the appropriateness and benefits of such an apology?

Surely you can't be anything remotely close to serious. El be able to explain the Church's point of view? That's like asking Nancy Pelosi to explain William Buckley's motivations.

[Moksha]

Surely you can't be anything remotely close to serious. El be able to explain the Church's point of view? That's like asking Nancy Pelosi to explain William Buckley's motivations.

One does not have to be a Mormon to understand the benefits of putting this sick sore issue to rest, nor does one have to be a Mormon to realize the healing properties of repentence. Elf has many good things to say that should not be ignored because of any difference in religious affiliation.