John D. Lee's reinstatement

[JudoMinja]

The question was simply "Why was John D. Lee reinstated and what do you think about this?" He just wants some answers. And so do I... I asked missionaries and bishops for answers and they just shot me down.

It is quite possible that you've felt shot down simply because many members just don't know anything about this. I didn't know anything about it until I saw it in this thread, and then I went ahead and started doing some research. Now, I know I don't know everything about church history, but I think I know quite a bit more than your average member. Those members who already know about this and have studied this have typically done so because they've had to deal with the attacks of anti's, so as LM said, it is quite understandable that they may go on the offensive when it is brought up.

The thing is, our church history is not without its problems. When we start really studying it, we will find things that do not paint the church in the best light and may shake the faith of those who think the church and its leaders have to always be "perfect" for the gospel to really be true. That just isn't the case. The gospel IS true, and the church IS flawed. We are all human beings and prone to error, and that statement alone really explains why we do the work for everyone who is dead, even someone like John D. Lee and Hitler (yay Godwin's Law! ).

It is not up to us to judge. That is in God's hands. In order to put that in God's hands, we need to do the work for those who are dead so that they can choose whether or not to accept it, and all their options are available come judgement day.

[UfoTofu]

I appreciate all your responses.

Loudmouth M- Thanks for the link. I've seen it before, but since I crave more detail, I am currently reading the MMM by Juanita Brooks.

I honestly don't think I'm arguing in the least; I'd call this discussion. All my life I have been taught to question, analyze, and critically evaluate. Thus, when I came across rebaptism of Lee, I knew I needed more answers. Of course, I disapprove of the rebaptism or any other seemingly positive sanction of a mass murderer. From this site I hope to glean the opinions of members regarding this action.

Guy- I may not agree with the idea of the 'bunker' mentality, but it helps to clarify things for me a bit better.

Judo, mystic, black- I appreciate your rational responses!

Mystic- I see your point. I believe the more tempered responses are far more effective in addressing non members. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees with me. I would think that members of a group that has been subject to so many false assumptions would not be so quick to judge others.

Vort- Levrafsgirl summed it up quite nicely! You have been effectively told. :)

[NeuroTypical]

If I were a member of a group that included people who had committed an unspeakable atrocity in the past, I'd be a little defensive too.

Oh, wait...

[Suzie]

The topic of the Mountain Meadows Massacre is a very sensitive one for most members of the Church. I believe the number one reason some members appear to brush this topic off (as well as the topics about Blacks and the Priesthood, and other controversial ones) is because they probably know very little about it and often times (some)assume that when you question these things (historically speaking), you either lack faith or you're reading too much anti-mormon literature. Of course, the assumption is without basis and very silly.

[Suzie]

Now, about the topic in itself...

John D. Lee was reinstated in 1961 (after David O. McKay created a committee to investigate the Mountain Meadows massacre.) President McKay even allowed one of Lee's grandsons to be baptized by proxy for him and right after all the ordinances for him (including his priesthood) were also restored. I do not support or condemn their actions, it is not my place to do so at all.

What makes this case interesting is the fact that it cannot be compared to an average "posthumous baptism" we perform in the temples every day or even compare it (like some did, with Hitler). Even though both were involved and found guilty of the killing of innocent people the fact remains that Hitler was never a member but Lee WAS a former member. In this case, Lee wasn't only re-baptized but all his blessings were also restored.

His full reinstatement came after much investigation and consideration from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and the fact that the descendants of Lee has been requesting this to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for a long time. Like many, Lee's family believed he was merely a scapegoat and he shouldn't be the only one carrying the full blame (after all, the majority of the people involved in the massacre weren't excommunicated and died as members in "good" standing).

It's a hard bone to chew for some but there are many of those in Church history.

[SuperChris]

If I may posit some speculation, and it is speculation only - but I think it is likely, through the course of time, that every person who has been excommunicated will eventually (and posthumously, unless they repent in this life) have it reversed. The main reason that Lee, in particular, has had it happen already is because his descendents had been petitioning for it.

The reason I speculate this is because everything I've ever heard suggests that only a very, very few will reach outer darkness, and if you don't end up there then you'll end up going to one of the three kingdoms. And for even the telestial kingdom, you've got to have your temple work done.

The main purpose of excommunication to encourage repentance in this life, and it isn't intended to represent a condemnation to outer darkness. Basically what the reinstatement does, according to my understanding, is that it means that his temple work is again considered 'done', as it will eventually, in God's perfect fairness, be done for everyone who has ever lived - even those who do end up in outer darkness.

[Guest mysticmorini]

I don't think you have to have temple work done to enter the Telestial kingdom, the only required ordinance for the Celestial kingdom is Baptism.

[Guest gopecon]

Not sure if this has been adequately stated, but having Lee's work done does not mean that he is automatically in. Given that he was a member, I don't think that the normal "it only counts if they accept it" would apply. We believe that baptism and the other ordinances that were done for Lee are essential for salvation. Excommunication wipes those out. If someone (like Lee) repents in this life but is not afforded the chance to be rebaptized and have their blessings restored, then the work is done for them to give them the required ordinances. If he did not repent, then I don't believe it will matter. If he committed premeditated murder (as determined by the Righteous Judge), then I don't think it will matter as the D&C 42:18 says "And now, behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come."

[UfoTofu]

The information and insights provided here have been thought provoking and quite helpful. There's so much good stuff I couldn't even begin to respond to it all. While I certainly disagree with his reinstatement, I have a much better understanding of the thought process behind it.

I must note that the vast majority of the responses to my question have been logical, dispassionate and respectful and I appreciate that. Unfortunately, some have taken it upon themselves to respond to my question with inaccurate assumptions and unnecessary harshness. I have to wonder why Church members are allowed to address non members in this fashion.

And to he who said my opinion doesn't matter to anyone but myself. I agree that on this site, particularly since I'm a non member who dared to bring up a sensitive subject, your assertation is quite likely true. However, in reality, I hold a position in which I can influence quite a few people over the long term. Thus, you should be more careful in the way you address people.

[NeuroTypical]

I have to wonder why Church members are allowed to address non members in this fashion.

I don't understand that line of thought. This church doesn't 'allow' or 'disallow' its members to do anything...

But regardless, I'm glad some of what we had to give you found useful.

[estradling75]

I have to wonder why Church members are allowed to address non members in this fashion.

Perhaps you missed the disclaimer at the bottom of the website

LDS.Net is not owned by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (sometimes called the Mormon Church or LDS Church). The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. The views expressed by individual users are the responsibility of those users and do not necessarily represent the position of the More Good Foundation. For the official Church websites, please visit LDS.org and Mormon.org.

[Vort]

When Quinn dies will the work eventually be done for him so he can have the option too?

This betrays a fundamental misunderstanding. Doing baptismal and other proxy work for the dead does not magically give them the option of eternal life. Rather, if they are repentant and receptive, it allows them to progress. Can John D. Lee progress? I have no idea. He can if he repents, assuming he can repent of what he did. That goes equally for those who were complicit with him but who were not excommunicated by the Church (and executed by the state). The making of a covenant is of use only if the person is in a position to make and keep the covenant. For others, it may just be wasted effort.

To answer your question: I assume that if Brother Quinn does not repent and return to the fold during his lifetime, his work will be done for him, just like for anyone else. Whether it will be of any benefit to him is not something I can answer.

I agree that no one here today can comprehend the awful things they went through, but would you have PLANNED an attack to deceive the Missourians and shoot them and beat them and even murder their children? It is appauling to me.

I hope I would have done no such thing. I do think we're too quick to exculpate ourselves and say nonsense like, "If it had been ME, well, *I* would certainly never have done such-and-such." Easy to say sitting in front of your computer screen.

And I'm pretty sure we're all appalled by it.

You do not know what UfoTofu's wishes are. The question was simply "Why was John D. Lee reinstated and what do you think about this?"

Nope. His question was:

I fully understand the reasons behind John D. Lee's excommunication. I have a tough time comprehending the logic behind his posthumous reinstatement. Any ideas?

When he was told what the logic was, he decided that wasn't what he wanted to know, after all:

What are your feelings? Should he have been reinstated? What sort of standing does this man REALLY have in the Church?

Tell me, levrafsgirl: How are we supposed to answer whether he "should" have been reinstated? Do you or I know the mind of God? Since the ordinance has meaning only if Lee can repent, what sense does the question make, anyway? If he can't repent, it really doesn't matter whether his work is done or not, does it? And if he can repent, well, then, who are we to stand in the way of his repentance?

He just wants some answers. And so do I.

Then you must be pleased to have received them.

Of course his irritation and opinion matters!

How so? Do you think God will ask his opinion before rendering judgment on Brother Lee?

I have to ask, are you a member of the LDS church? Aren't you supposed to stand for love and kindness and charity?

I do not believe anything in my response was unkind or uncharitable. Can you say the same?

I was raised in the church and my whole life it felt like a family to me. But then I read about things like the Mountain Meadows Massacre. I asked missionaries and bishops for answers and they just shot me down. Like you, Vort. You are just shooting UfoTofu down.

You are bearing false witness, levrafsgirl. I have done no such thing. I have pointed out absurdity and judgmentalism when I saw it, but I have answered as best I can.

Why can't you answer the question asked with kindness like I thought Mormons would do? I thought Mormons were special. I guess they're not.

How disappointing to find out people are human.

Vort- Levrafsgirl summed it up quite nicely! You have been effectively told. :)

Well. I suppose I consider myself told, then.

And to he who said my opinion doesn't matter to anyone but myself. I agree that on this site, particularly since I'm a non member who dared to bring up a sensitive subject, your assertation is quite likely true. However, in reality, I hold a position in which I can influence quite a few people over the long term. Thus, you should be more careful in the way you address people.

A threat? Seriously? That's sad indeed.

I am sorry you are incapable of reading what someone writes without imputing false motives. Your opinion makes no difference -- zero, zip, nada, goose egg, zilch -- to Brother Lee's status in the eternities. As I wrote before, your opinion along with five bucks will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Nothing more. If you think your opinion has some supernatural ability to influence the destinies of the dead, well, more power to you.

Edited September 15, 2011 by Vort

[beefche]

However, in reality, I hold a position in which I can influence quite a few people over the long term. Thus, you should be more careful in the way you address people.

Please, tell us what use this type of threat on an anonymous board can do? I really am curious to know how you plan on using this board to influence these people.

[slamjet]

At the risk of asking a stupid question, isn't the discussion of the question and potential consternation as to why <insert name of nefarious person> had their temple work done an exercise in the type of judgement that Christ warned us not to do? Mainly because, in the end, the Church teaches (as far as I understand) that everyone who was sent to the planet earth to get a mortal body going to have their work done and we all, regardless of whether we like it or not, are going to be sealed together as one huge earth family? So to question why, or be against a person's work being done an unrighteous state of mind?

Or did I miss the topic of this thread altogether? Quite frankly, I can't figure out what the discussion is about.