Ryan Reeder
History 390R
Derr and Esplin
February 14, 2001
1. How were new emigrants assigned to the different colonies after arriving in Great Salt Lake City? Was it arbitrary? Through revelation to Brigham Young? Based on reports and needs of local leaders? Were family members and friends usually allowed to stay in the same area? How about nationalities-like Swedes in Springville; was that an exception or a general rule?
2. The text indicates that the United Order models of St. George, Brigham City, Salt Lake, and Orderville were in large part done away because of the polygamy persecutions of the mid 1880s. If so, why weren't they reinstated to some degree just five years later following the Manifesto? Or were they? Is there some connection between the United Order and polygamy?
3. The article on Juanita Brooks mentions the Deseret Book clerk stating that Mountain Meadows Massacre was in fiction where it belonged. To what degree is it safe to 'sanitize' our history? Elder Packer speaks of the dangers of giving equal time to the adversary, indicating that we are at war. Quite often, during wartime, we see have seen limitations on freedom of speech, such as Espionage and Sedition Acts, massive propaganda movements-which often distort the enemy, and extreme caution on release of information. How different, then, is the constant war between good and evil-the war in heaven on earth-from an earthly war? One of my companions refused to believe that polygamy existed in colonial Utah beyond merely caring for widows, despite my assertion that a large number of Utahns are descendants of polygamous relationships. So where do we draw the line on what might be potential ammunition for the adversary? I can see that just because something is true doesn't mean we should talk about it, especially if it has the potential to damage a weak brother's faith, as Paul indicates in 1 Corinthians chapter 8-"And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?" (1 Cor. 8:11). We are admonished to learn line upon line and precept on precept, and to not feed meat to those that have difficulty drinking milk. Yet there are historical facets, both events and the evolution of practices which may disturb those of weak faith. Yet hiding and covering up undesirable elements of the past isn't historically ethical. Besides, people are on various levels-to some, knowledge of polygamy and the mountain meadows massacre may be too much, another may have difficulty reconciling contradictions between general authorities in conference talks, and others may have learned principles which allow them to understand these issues, yet still aren't prepared to receive "all things." So what information should LDS historians disseminate?
Back to Questions