Liminal Space - a concept stumbled across in this journey [Archive]

Born Free

15th July 2006, 09:02 PM

A valuable concept (for me anyway) in post-Mormon space has been that of liminality.

Wikipedia describes it in these terms

Liminality

Liminality (from the Latin word līmen, meaning "a threshold") is the quality of the second stage of a ritual in the theories of Arnold van Gennep, Victor Turner, and others. In these theories, a ritual, especially a rite of passage, involves some change to the participants, especially their social status. This change is accomplished by separating the participants from the rest of their social group (the first, or preliminary stage: separation); a period during which one is "betwixt and between", neither one status nor the other (the liminal stage); and a period during which one's new social status is confirmed (the final, or postliminal stage: reincorporation).

The liminal state is characterized by ambiguity, openness, and indeterminacy. One's sense of identity dissolves to some extent, bringing about disorientation. Liminality is a period of transition, during which your normal limits to thought, self-understanding, and behavior are relaxed, opening the way to something new.

Example

A simple example is a college graduation ceremony. The students are first separated from the rest of their community, both by gathering together and by wearing distinctive clothing. When the ceremony is in progress, the participants are no longer students but neither are they yet graduates. This is the distinctive character of liminality. Upon receiving his or her diploma, the student officially becomes a college graduate. The dean and professors shake the student's hand in congratulation, giving public recognition to the student's new status as a person with a college degree.

Has anyone else come across the idea, and seen its application to post-Mormon space?

I first came across it in a Richard Rohr workshop. The concept is familiar in many non-Mormon religious contexts.

One of the other places I came across it is in many belief systems around death and transition. Close study by anthropologists has revealed that people believed that after death and prior to burial, the spirit existed in liminal space. In this case they appear to have believed in the inherent danger of the disembodied spirit, which might try to attach itself to someone in this mortal existence, rather than passing over. In one Viking funeral ceremony observed and written up in some detail around 1,000AD, the male descendants of the dead man (a tribal leader), had to approach his fathers (as yet unlit) funeral pyre with fire brands, naked and taking care to keep their mouth closed and covering his anus. Bodily apertures were believed to have presented potential entry points into the body of the living, by the spirit of the dead, right at a critical point when they should be propelled unambiguously onto the other side, but might feel tempted to stay here.

OK, have I given you enough of the new concept and the bizarre in ritual to grab your attention?

BTW, a book written 1908 by Arnold van Gennep, is regarded as a seminal work on the concept. The title is The Rites of Passage:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226848493/sr=1-1/qid=1153014749/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7119833-1916813?ie=UTF8&s=books

Daryl

helemon

15th July 2006, 09:21 PM

taking care to keep their mouth closed and covering his anus.

http://www.polygamyinfo.com/plygmedia%2004%20204desnews.htm
At his 1996 retrial [Ron Lafferty] wore a sign that read "Exit Only" on the seat of his pants to ward off evil spirits he believed wanted to enter his body through his anus.

Maybe he had been reading old Norse legends?

helemon

16th July 2006, 12:01 AM

A valuable concept (for me anyway) in post-Mormon space has been that of liminality.

Apparently the Catholic church no longer believes in the idea of liminality:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0506867.htm
An international group of Vatican-appointed theologians is about to recommend that the Catholic Church close the doors of limbo forever.

runfromsafety

16th July 2006, 05:38 PM

Apparently the Catholic church no longer believes in the idea of liminality:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0506867.htm
The catholic concept of limbo is very different from liminality. Limbo was thought of a permanent state where unbaptised babies went. Liminality relates to a transitory state.

Nonetheless, I though this quote in the article was interesting...

"Pastorally and catechetically, the matter had been solved" with an affirmation that somehow God in his great love and mercy would ensure unbaptized babies enjoyed eternal life with him in heaven, "but we had to backtrack and do the theology,"

The LDS church is not the only one that changes it's doctrine by saying it actually never was the doctrine, reinterpreting past events, and then going back and redoing the theology. How about a simple "we were wrong".

runfromsafety

16th July 2006, 05:48 PM

Born Free

16th July 2006, 08:38 PM

Daryl,

I think this concept potentially has great application both to the path into mormonism, and the path out. The way the church subconciously or otherwise gets people into that space of transition from outside the church to where they are locked into the church (eg. concepts such as "being in the world, but not of the world", GBH's statement that every new member needs a friend, a calling and something else which escapes me right now).

People simply dont go in one step from having nothing to do with the church to being totally TBM. Some analysis of the transitionary stage and the psychological vehicles used (like the robes and ceremony at the school graduation) would be very interesting... I will certainly think about this some more.

Likewise, the concept has application in being used for good in helping transition out of the church. Perhaps seeing how it is applied in other spheres of life could provide valuable insights into how to help transition from the church.

Do you have a copy of this book?
Colin,

Sorry, the book is still sitting on my Wish List. I vaguely recall that there is a new book by someone else that is regarded as better these days. I think it may have been mentioned in one of the reviews of that book.

At the Richard Rohr public address that I attended, he made mention that conservatives want to rush back to the familiar, out of liminal space; whilst liberals and progressives, want to rush forward out of and past it. Few are prepared to sit in that space and feel it. (I am not sure that is on the CD I gave you a copy of - Masculine Spirituality, of whether that was in the Q&A after, which sadly was not recorded).

Interesting that I suspect that there is a feminine quality about liminal space - like a pregnancy, it will take its own time, there is uncertain, it unfolds in its own way. It is certainly not a masculine space, of thrust and decisiveness.

In some ways it reminds me of what David Dieda had to say about robust masculinity. He claims men make the same mistake; rushing past or retreating from the raw edge, which is where he claimed our real masculinity is to be experienced. That that is the space that requires real courage to be present for, and to fully feel the moment.

Daryl

Born Free

17th July 2006, 02:59 AM

Some other definitions:

From Freedictionary:

n. 1. (Anthropology) that temporary state during a rite of passage when the participant lacks social status or rank, is required to follow specified forms of conduct, and is expected to show obedience and humility.

Or here's another good exploration of the idea:

The metaphors and rituals of place and time - an introduction to liminality, or Why Christopher Robin wouldn't walk on the cracks by Bob Trubshaw @

http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/edge/liminal.htm

Some extracts:

We are obsessed with boundaries. Places are divided and sub-divided in a complex web of overlapping patterns of 'ownership', 'sacredness', 'historic interest', 'outstanding natural beauty' and much else.

The time-line of our own lives is also marked by boundaries - starting school, passing exams, leaving school, first job, marriage, first baby, through to retirement and the Final Frontier of death. Traditional custom still dictates the principal activities on such occasions.

One could also observe how we attempt to create clear boundaries between illness and health, war and peace, and - above all - between sacred and profane.

All these concepts are deeply rooted in our cultural and ritual preoccupations. They have been the subject of much research and discussion by folklorists and ethnologists, who tend to us the term 'liminality' (from Latin limen, 'boundary or threshold').

Liminal space is an important ingredient of the rituals transitioning young men in traditional cultures to manhood.

They are taken away from the women (and the village), and taken into the wilderness, where all the rituals are performed, and only when all those have been passed, and usually marked with some painful ritual (interestingly frequently involving genital wounding of some sort), are they brought back to the village, as adult members of community.

The space between leaving and rejoining the village is regarded as anthropologists as liminal space. The young men are outside community there; not young men, not yet warriors and adults. The male elders are the specialists in conducting the ritual, frequently led by a shaman.

Now, let me ask a curley question.

Are we inevitably flung into liminal space when we depart Mormonism, but without realising it?

[We are without (that) community, and we have not yet found a new one.

We have lost a mythology, but not yet found a new one. Along with that, we have lost our ritual, and not yet found new ones.

We have lost our holy places, and not yet found new ones.

We have lost our Holy Ones (male and female) and have not yet found new ones.

And, like little children, do we feel lost? Are we tempted to rush to a new village, regardless whether it is really 'ours'?

We have lost our holy places, and our holy songs, yet not found new ones.

If that is the case, how might we help someone see the value of liminal space? Have any of you rushed to escape liminal space? (I sure did in some ways, and in others, I was resentful of that space, not appreciative at all).

Is this in part what Bob McCue is on about as helpful when referring to the different perspective offered by the right hemisphere of the brain? Certainly the left hemisphere is the one that wants the familiar pattern of the 'old village'.

Daryl

peter_mary

17th July 2006, 08:35 AM

Has anyone else come across the idea, and seen its application to post-Mormon space?

Daryl
I know I've discussed Plato's Cave allegory on this site extensively in the past, but it sprung to mind as I read your thread here. In the cave allegory, when the poor unsuspecting soul is yanked from the cave and thrust for the first time in the daylight, he is in a truly liminal state. What he knew in the past is not there, but he can't yet see the new things before him. All he can do is stand there, dumbly, blinking, and wait for things to calm down so he can begin to see...and understand his new reality.

That IS the experience I had when I first flopped out of the church. You just stand there, blinking, wondering, WTF? It takes time for your "eyes" to adjust, and for the real world to begin to materialize...

lunaverse

17th July 2006, 12:30 PM

Born Free

17th July 2006, 07:59 PM

This is a pretty interesting subject.

I think that's what the resignation letter did for me, it was a ritual that stepped me out of liminality, and into a more defined space of "I am NOT a Mormon". The liminal stage then lasted several years.

Children are in a liminal stage from age 0 to 8. As "Members of Record", they are not yet official. Then you wait until 12 to become a "Young Man/Young Woman" and leave primary, sometimes with more ceremony than others, but always Young Women receive their first shiny gold necklace for Beehives. Then for many there is the transition into and out of the mission field. The temple creates a line between "endowed" and "unendowed".

Within the temple there is the stage after the washing (where you are washed clean of the sins of this generation, a separation) and before the endowment ceremony, and all of this leads up to "crossing the veil". I definintely felt a building and release process there that left me crying in the Celestial Room.

Luna

Luna,

I am not making sense of your first paragraph. What am I missing? Are you saying that your resignation letter was a valuable step on your journey through liminal space, but which continued longer?

I have developed a new version of the Stages MetaMap, in which liminality covers both the Bridging and Post-Mormon Stages. The Mormon Stage precedes it, and the Past Mormon (reintegrated back into broad community) Stages follows it.

An interesting point arises out of Colin's remarks about all the ritual used as we entered Mormonism. Do we do ourselves a great dissersive by overlooking the value of ritual to help process the after-Mormon liminality?

Luna, the resignation and confirmation letters therefore make great sense as important elements of ritual, particularly if they are valued as more than just letters. Letters speak to our cognitive minds, but alone, are very limited in speaking to the deeper places that frequently need healing.

What sort of rituals have others used to traverse this space? I realise as I write this that I have never used ritual in that powerful way for this specific purpose that I know works from other settings.

Daryl

Born Free

17th July 2006, 08:23 PM

I know I've discussed Plato's Cave allegory on this site extensively in the past, but it sprung to mind as I read your thread here. In the cave allegory, when the poor unsuspecting soul is yanked from the cave and thrust for the first time in the daylight, he is in a truly liminal state. What he knew in the past is not there, but he can't yet see the new things before him. All he can do is stand there, dumbly, blinking, and wait for things to calm down so he can begin to see...and understand his new reality.

That IS the experience I had when I first flopped out of the church. You just stand there, blinking, wondering, WTF? It takes time for your "eyes" to adjust, and for the real world to begin to materialize...
P_M,

You know how much I enjoy your writings, but can't recall ever reading any reference to Plato's Cave. Can you give me some threads, so I can look it up?

I do like the comparison with allowing the eyes to adjust, though, but am still not sure that captures it all. Liminality carries that concept of a very specific middle space 'Betwixt and between' (wasn't that the title of a horrible book by the singer Pat Boone that my mother gave me in the sixties, on sexuality - Christian of course?)

The idea in a ritual sense, is that the difference between State 1 and State 2 is more clearly appreciated if there is an apparent vacuum between, in contrast with a quick transition. Curious little rituals like lopping the foreskins off penises were used to help focus the mind, and communicate the gravity of the occasion. :eek: :Crazy: :eek:

Daryl

runfromsafety

17th July 2006, 08:23 PM

An interesting point arises out of Colin's remarks about all the ritual used as we entered Mormonism. Do we do ourselves a great dissersive by overlooking the value of ritual to help process the after-Mormon liminality?

Here's a few commonly used, most of which have been mentioned by people recently on the forum.

- Ceremonial burning of garments
- Bearing a negative testimony at church
- Participating in these forums
- Giving away/burning your old Mo books/pictures
- Sending the letter of resignation
- Submitting to a church disciplinary council
- Telling the home teachers to go away and never come back

Each of these things (except perhaps the forum) has an aspect of ritual about it. Each of them are described by many as a cathartic experience not without it's symbolism.

I suspect that some of these things can be part of a liminal stage, but may serve a purpose beyond that. Daryl... do you think, particularly with reference to your stages model, that the liminal stage can overlap other stages, or is that a contradiction in terms?

Born Free

17th July 2006, 08:33 PM

Here's a few commonly used, most of which have been mentioned by people recently on the forum.

- Ceremonial burning of garments
- Bearing a negative testimony at church
- Participating in these forums
- Giving away/burning your old Mo books/pictures
- Sending the letter of resignation
- Submitting to a church disciplinary council
- Telling the home teachers to go away and never come back

Each of these things (except perhaps the forum) has an aspect of ritual about it. Each of them are described by many as a cathartic experience not without it's symbolism.

I suspect that some of these things can be part of a liminal stage, but may serve a purpose beyond that. Daryl... do you think, particularly with reference to your stages model, that the liminal stage can overlap other stages, or is that a contradiction in terms?
Colin,

I have forwarded you the updated MetaMap. See what you think of where I have positioned liminality - well the specific post-Mormon liminality, anyway. I have sent a copy to Bob, both to see if he has come across the notion of liminality and to give him a copy of the latest cut of the diagram.

I will post this shortly on the Stages thread for everyone to critique.

Daryl

runfromsafety

17th July 2006, 09:00 PM

Colin,

I have forwarded you the updated MetaMap. Thanks Daryl... got it. I'll print it out and have good look at it tonight. Just one thought though from a quick look... did you think about including liminal space in the "Mormon phase" area. May help to show the power this has in transition, both in and out.

I think you are definitely onto something here - there could be tremendous value in considering the effects and positive use of liminal space.... kind of a "fight fire with fire" aspect.

Born Free

17th July 2006, 09:27 PM

Here's a few commonly used, most of which have been mentioned by people recently on the forum.

- Ceremonial burning of garments (private or public)
- Bearing a negative testimony at church (public)
- Participating in these forums (semi-public)
- Giving away/burning your old Mo books/pictures (private)
- Sending the letter of resignation (private - could be made public)
- Submitting to a church disciplinary council (public with capital P, indeed I even question the word submitting!)
- Telling the home teachers to go away and never come back (semi-public)

Each of these things (except perhaps the forum) has an aspect of ritual about it. Each of them are described by many as a cathartic experience not without it's symbolism.
<snip>
Colin,

Many of the items on this list are performed privately, even if with some ritual.

Most liminal ritual involves community. They affirm the transition, and the new identity.

Disciplinary hearings are public, but they are more likely part of the exiting Mormon space and entering liminal space. I am looking for the ones about existing liminal space and transitioning into PastMormon space and community. It is possible that this could be one of the unique process that post-Mo communities can create.

I have referred elsewhere here to asking my old men's group in Sydney to give me a blessing when I left. Many were ex SDA, so the process had impact for them too. It felt nice to reclaim that from Mormonism. I thoroughly enjoyed getting a 'blessing' from those men who had been witnesses to parts of my struggle and journey.

Can you imagine the power of having 'blessing' rituals where women were part of the 'blessers', where they got to be equal participants in the process? I am guessing that would really have some clout.

I have added private/public labels against each of the items on your list, just to sharpen the focus for this exercise.

Have you ever been involved in a smoking ceremony used by many native peoples including our aboriginals? That carries the idea of cleansing the spirit.

As 'modern' western people, we kid ourselves we are beyond ritual. I think that is piffle. We just replace one set of rituals with others, failing to see how we are missing a golden opportunity to make ritual work for/serve us.

Even eating together (breaking bread) as a group of post-Mormons is a ritual, particularly if we do so with some level of consciousness. It bonds us as a group in our new identity. I have only been to one small gathering of ex-Mormons in San Diego last year, and I greatly enjoyed it and it spoke to me on many levels. I did not choose the venue, but it was one of those boutique breweries, which had its own ritual significance in reclaiming head space.

I am convinced we could do much better in this regard.

Daryl

Born Free

17th July 2006, 10:56 PM

I was thinking back over Colin's idea of liminal space during membership.

It struck me that disfellowship might be the punitive use of liminal space.The person is placed in a no-mans-land, where they are forbidden participation in what Mormons regard as key saving ordinances - sacrament, etc..

That arose as I was thinking through the aspects of me where I felt most damaged or violated by Mormonism, and therefore primary targets from anti-rituals to reclaim the space from Mormonism for oneself.

Personally I was never dissed. I got the high-wire on first pass, but through a process where I took back my power.

I went before a Court of Luuurve, and when it got to the stage of 'What is your testimony of the Gospel?' I said definitively 'None. zip, nought. I have experienced more spirituality outside'.

That was a major reclaim for me. To say with minimal concern for the consequences that I cared zip for the things they regarded most highly, was freeing and reclaiming. They subsequently said 'Your parents joined the Church, and you never really had to decide for yourself. This court will free you to decide if the Church is for you'.

And of course, I looked over my shoulder for all of 5 seconds, wondering if I did the right thing - like hell! I never looked back and regretted that decision/moment for one second; indeed the further I get from the event, the only regret is that I didn't make that break 15 years earlier.

But the psychic scars are still there.

The number of times I deferred to 'the package' of Church and parents, and violated my own knowing, exacted a high price on my mind and self-esteem. All that time stuck in that space was time not available to pursue paths that were more me.

I seek better tools/skills/processes to heal those scars.

It has just struck me as I wrote this that departing Mormonism is like leaving the military. The military uses techniques refined over thousands of years to get men to a space where they are prepared to kill their fellow man, and partly through high levels of cohesion with the basic unit of training. But at the end, they spit those men out onto the street with minimal regard for what they have done to their heads.

Men coming back from serving in East Timor are experiencing PTSD at record levels. They went there in a peace-keeping role, yet many ended up helping digging up the corpses of civilians who had been brutally killed whilst unarmed. Surprise, surprise, it has messed with their heads big time.

What we don't know as we entered Mormonism is how much it messed with our heads, how seductive and pervasive the tactics they used. But when we leave, we think that reading a few books and the passage of a little time, will be all that is necessary to un-Mormon us.

Way, way too simple.

Daryl

peter_mary

18th July 2006, 09:21 AM

P_M,

You know how much I enjoy your writings, but can't recall ever reading any reference to Plato's Cave. Can you give me some threads, so I can look it up?

Daryl
Hmmm...for some reason I can't get the search function to work. If YOU can, you can search on Platos Cave and I'm sure it'll pop up. I have NO idea where in this forum are the posts on that allegory, though. I'll try again later...

helemon

18th July 2006, 09:39 AM

Hmmm...for some reason I can't get the search function to work. If YOU can, you can search on Platos Cave and I'm sure it'll pop up. I have NO idea where in this forum are the posts on that allegory, though. I'll try again later...
http://www.geocities.com/larkspur10/neo/matrixplatoscave.html
Upon returning to the cave, the freed prisoner would once again sit next beside the captives and tell them about the world that exists outside the cave. Of course, it would be very difficult for the Freed Man to adquately explain the real world, and in many ways, he would not be understood or believed no matter what he said. As Morpheus tells Neo while the two of them sit down and chat, "Unfortunately, no one can be told what the matrix is. You have to see it for yourself."

Dismissing his claims and laughing at him, the prisoners would most likely come to the conclusion that the Freed Man is insane, especially since they would realize that the Freed Man was having trouble re-adjusting to the dimly lit cave. In some respects, the Free Man, who has now become accustomed to the light, would now be blinded by the darkness.

In fact, the prisoners would even demonstrate hostility toward the free man if he persisted in his beliefs or tried to convince them to leave. They would not want to face the possibility that their idea of reality was flawed. In addition, prisoners would fear that they would become blind (unable to see the only reality they have ever known) if they left. As Plato explains, "Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death."

Here, Plato points out that prisoners would rather commit murder than allow anyone to take them out of the cave. They would fight to stay in the cave because it is the only world they have ever known and it is where they feel safe. In "The Matrix," Cypher kills several people in his quest to go back to the matrix (the cave).

lunaverse

18th July 2006, 01:56 PM

Luna,

I am not making sense of your first paragraph. What am I missing? Are you saying that your resignation letter was a valuable step on your journey through liminal space, but which continued longer?

Yes. The letter was a ritual which offered me a great deal of closure, but not complete closure. It stepped me from "in-active unofficial non-Moromon" into "Ex-Mormon" space, quite clearly, which was a huge step, release, crossing over. However it did not resolve a lot of issues I still have to deal with.

I mentally celebrate the anniversary of my resignation in November, just as I mentally celebrate my unofficial leaving every January.

Also, I seem to recall I hosted a party shortly after receiving my resignation confirmation. :)

An interesting point arises out of Colin's remarks about all the ritual used as we entered Mormonism. Do we do ourselves a great dissersive by overlooking the value of ritual to help process the after-Mormon liminality?

Luna, the resignation and confirmation letters therefore make great sense as important elements of ritual, particularly if they are valued as more than just letters. Letters speak to our cognitive minds, but alone, are very limited in speaking to the deeper places that frequently need healing.

Agreed, and I think some types of other ritual may assist in the process. Though I'm not sure what that would entail. I'd imagine it would have to be deeply personal.

Certainly my current work with occasional meditations on a female Goddess would be a personal ritual that helps me re-align my view of myself as a woman. This seems to have less to do with liminality and a one-time ritual of release or crossing over, than it is a gradual process.

Also, my housemate has questioned my obsession with sending my parents counter-Mormon information and arguments. I could certainly see this also as a progressive ritual to dis-entangle myself from them and the message they programmed me with. My motive is less to convince them than it is about me -- getting this stuff off my chest with current-Mo's, specifically those who made me Mormon in the first place. I'm not likely to convince them of anything, and I know that, but I still feel the drive to do this.

My housemate thinks it's unhealthy. I'm not so sure.

Other rituals people may participate in may involve joining other organizations, and whatever initiation ritual those orgs might use. Less of an "I am not" and more of an "I am now".

One could easily devise a ceremony of cleansing themselves from the Church, using whatever symbols have meaning to them. There are many pagan symbols of cleaning and protection that would suit.

A friend of mine holds Fire Ceremonies of the South American tradition. She was trained as a Shaman. It involves work beforehand by the participants. Participants take a stick or something flamable, and infuse it in their own way with something they want to release or let go of. At the ceremony, she will call space and prepare the fire using lots of ritual means. Then with intent, we place the object into the fire, and let it burn away. We are warned beforehand that if our intent is real enough, you really had better be ready for that thing to go away, because it will. (Be careful what you wish for, etc.)

I've only participated once, and it does seem to work. :) In this context, it seems to be about moving from the liminality of an area of life or aspect you want to change, to making a definitive act of intent to actually change it... going from a vague "I wish" and committing to the change.

Luna

Born Free

18th July 2006, 10:28 PM

Another place I came across the use of the term liminality was in a book on the treatment of the MMM victims.

Their bodies were left exposed to the elements. When US troops arrived at the site, they found clothes and hair caught on bushes, and skeletal remains scattered all around. They had clearly been consciously left in 'no-man's-land' in liminal space: not alive, nor dead and buried.

The treatment of their remains was deliberately disrespectful, leaving them in liminal space - betwixt and between.

(Interesting that this was done by a people who claim to place such stock in life and eternity. I wonder if the temple work was ever done for those people by Mormons, or whether assigning them to liminal space extended as far as also blocking those important (in Mormon beliefs) ordinances.)

Daryl

helemon

18th July 2006, 11:18 PM

The treatment of their remains was deliberately disrespectful, leaving them in liminal space - betwixt and between.

If they had given them a Christian burial that would have blown the cover story that Native Americans killed them. :duh

Born Free

18th July 2006, 11:46 PM

If they had given them a Christian burial that would have blown the cover story that Native Americans killed them. :duh

Even the dastardly dark skinned, indolent, evil descendents of Laman and Lemuel don't leave their dead lying around for the crows to pick, as far as I know! :eek:

And what was to stop the (uba-Christian) Mormons coming by, and treating the victim's (of the savagery of Indians who had been paid handsomely in prime livestock) remains respectfully after the event, if they really had clean noses?

But I am deadly serious on the Temple work. Anyone ever heard reference to that?

Daryl

PS: I went looking on the net for any reference to the victims of the MMM and temple work and I come up with this outrageous distraction. Take a look-see:

http://www.salamandersociety.com/proxy/

helemon

19th July 2006, 12:10 AM

Even the dastardly dark skinned, indolent, evil descendents of Laman and Lemuel don't leave their dead lying around for the crows to pick, as far as I know! :eek:

I don't know if Native Americans buried the dead of their enemy, but that is irrelevant. What was important in their mind most likely is that it played into the whole Native American as brutal godless savage stereotype that frontiers people bought into.
http://www.native-languages.org/iaq13.htm
The Aztecs were notorious for ritual cannibalism (warriors would eat a strip of flesh from enemies they had slain in combat).
...
None of the other 1200 Native American cultures engaged in culturally sanctioned cannibalism at the time of European contact.

runfromsafety

19th July 2006, 12:21 AM

I don't know if Native Americans buried the dead of their enemy, but that is irrelevant. What was important in their mind most likely is that it played into the whole Native American as brutal godless savage stereotype that frontiers people bought into. My reading of history is in agreement. There was very often a wide gulf between reality and perception in those days, particularly with the tyranny of distance and poor communication channels in those days. But dont get me started, or I'll wind up on one of my long winded historical dissertations :)

Born Free

19th July 2006, 12:31 AM

My reading of history is in agreement. There was very often a wide gulf between reality and perception in those days, particularly with the tyranny of distance and poor communication channels in those days. But dont get me started, or I'll wind up on one of my long winded historical dissertations :)
Colin,

If anyone would know if the T work was ever (hypocritically) done for the Fancher Party, you would.

Any clues?

Daryl

helemon

19th July 2006, 12:47 AM

Colin,

If anyone would know if the T work was ever (hypocritically) done for the Fancher Party, you would.

Any clues?

Daryl
Just did a check on Family Search and they do have some Fanchers listed. I didn't check to see what ordinances had been performed since I don't know the exact names of the members of that party.

Here is a list of the people killed at MMM
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wallner/mmmmem.htm
Melissa Ann Beller is listed in Family Search and it does say she was killed at MMM, but I could not find anything indicating whether her temple work had been done. However, I would bet it has.

helemon

19th July 2006, 12:52 AM

Colin,

If anyone would know if the T work was ever (hypocritically) done for the Fancher Party, you would.

Any clues?

Daryl
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mountainmeadows/leechrono.html
John Lee leaves for Salt Lake, where he will provide Young with a detailed account of the massacre. According to Lee, Young first expresses dismay and concern that the massacre will damage the LDS reputation. The next day, however, Young tells Lee, "I asked the Lord if it was all right for the deed to be done, to take away the vision of the deed from my mind, and the Lord did so, and I feel first rate. It is all right. The only fear I have is from traitors."

Nice to know that BY's conscience was so easily assuaged.:Puking

Brigham Young submits a report to the Indian Commissioner laying the blame for the massacre on mistreatment of Indians by non-Mormons.

It was probably the idea that he could blame the Indians that helped easy his troubled mind.:duh

runfromsafety

19th July 2006, 06:08 AM

Colin,

If anyone would know if the T work was ever (hypocritically) done for the Fancher Party, you would.

Any clues?

Daryl
Yes, temple work was done.

In 1990 an granite memorial done in typically lavish LDS style was dedicated, at which Fancher and Lee decendants spoke, as well as GBH... he took the podium representing, as he said "a people who had suffered much". His speach then kind of built towards an acknowledgement of the Church's role, but then said he had not come to apologise.... what a cop out. A lot of people were pretty dismayed to say the least. The memorial words (composed by an LDS museum committee) were equally lame....

"In Memorium. In the valley below between September 7 and 11 1857, a company of more than 120 Arkansas emigrants led by Capt John T Baker and Capt. Alexander Fancher was attacked while en route to California. The event is known in history as the Mountain Meadows Massacre"

This wording (in particular the singular reference to massacre) was designed to subtly shift blame to the indians again... who else in the popular mind was responsible for massacres in the American West? Only the LDS church could so brazenly suger coat history, still we should not be surprised should we.

Anyway, three years later 200 members of the John D. Lee family met at a 3 day reunion in St George to "close the book" on the MMM. The family conducted temple ordinances, including endowments and sealings, for the victims. One of them said "what we've done here today has been good for us, and I think it represents closure for the whole church on this terrible tragedy".

Tragedy? How about "crime". Amazing how something like this can receive "closure" in LDS minds just by benevolently doing some temple work.

The words on the monument got a lot of criticism in the following years. Eventually in 1998 GBH said "we express our regrets over what happened there and we all need to put this behind us". This was as close as the church has ever got to an apology or acknowledgement of complicity. Pretty lame.

Born Free

19th July 2006, 07:50 AM

Yes, temple work was done.

In 1990 an granite memorial done in typically lavish LDS style was dedicated, at which Fancher and Lee decendants spoke, as well as GBH... he took the podium representing, as he said "a people who had suffered much". His speach then kind of built towards an acknowledgement of the Church's role, but then said he had not come to apologise.... what a cop out. A lot of people were pretty dismayed to say the least. The memorial words (composed by an LDS museum committee) were equally lame....

"In Memorium. In the valley below between September 7 and 11 1857, a company of more than 120 Arkansas emigrants led by Capt John T Baker and Capt. Alexander Fancher was attacked while en route to California. The event is known in history as the Mountain Meadows Massacre"

This wording (in particular the singular reference to massacre) was designed to subtly shift blame to the indians again... who else in the popular mind was responsible for massacres in the American West? Only the LDS church could so brazenly suger coat history, still we should not be surprised should we.

Anyway, three years later 200 members of the John D. Lee family met at a 3 day reunion in St George to "close the book" on the MMM. The family conducted temple ordinances, including endowments and sealings, for the victims. One of them said "what we've done here today has been good for us, and I think it represents closure for the whole church on this terrible tragedy".

Tragedy? How about "crime". Amazing how something like this can receive "closure" in LDS minds just by benevolently doing some temple work.

The words on the monument got a lot of criticism in the following years. Eventually in 1998 GBH said "we express our regrets over what happened there and we all need to put this behind us". This was as close as the church has ever got to an apology or acknowledgement of complicity. Pretty lame.
If I was tempted to believe that we live after this life, surely such a mockery as that temple work proves such very unlikely to exist.

If ever there were 'aggrieved souls' as there should have been scores after such an event, they should have created absolute chaos if some one had the gall to perform Mormon temple work in their name.

Colin, thanks for illuminating another corner of the sordid Mormon world.

Why doesn't it surprise? Because after a while one gets to see a very predictable pattern. No excess is excessive.

Daryl

BTW, where did you access that Lee family information?