Death to those who reveal inner chaple LDS practices.

[PaulDupre]

Just so everyone knows what we’re talking about:

The LDS temple endowment includes four secret handshakes (called tokens) and four secret passwords (the names of the tokens) and a hand gesture (called a sign) accompanying each token. After each sign and token was demonstrated and the name given, in the pre-1990 version the initiate was required to swear that he “will not reveal the …token… with its accompanying name, sign and penalty. Rather than do so, I would gladly suffer my life to be taken.” While saying this last part, the initiate would act out the penalty - i.e: drawing his thumb across his throat, across his chest (symbolizing tearing the heart out, or across and down the abdomen (hari kiri style).

Although the “penalties” are so named, it is not clear from the context that they were intended to be a threat of death from the LDS Church. They could just as easily be seen as a commitment to possible martyrdom rather that reveal something held as sacred and necessary to exaltation. Read the words “rather than (reveal the secret), I would gladly suffer my life to be taken.” That doesn’t really sound like a threat. I always thought it was a bit unfair to characterize it as such.

I am no fan of Mormonism, but we should stick to the facts.

 

[ForeverAdam]

One of the things that I have never understood about the LDS temple is the idea that we will have to show certain tokens in order to get into heaven. This idea is incompatible to a group that focuses on the Atonement of Christ being the only way to heaven.

The idea that there is a spiritual ascent to heaven, in which we will have to bypass angelic dignataries (in this case, fallen ones) in order to enter God’s presence, certainly has support in early Christianity, as the writings of Sts. Anthony the Great, John Chrysostom and Macarius the Great, attest. However, the way to bypass these fallen angels is by living the Christian life of faith and good works, and not by showing tokens.

The idea of the ascent of the soul to heaven was a theme taken by the Gnostics in early Christianity, but instead of focusing on righteous living of the Gospel as being the way of ascent, secret tokens and such were included (mainly taken from early Christian ceremonies, like marriage, which were symbolic gestures, but the Gnostics gave the tokens a secret power they never possessed). This emphasis on the handclasp and such (instead of faith) was carried on into the higher degrees of Masonry, particularly the “Rite of Exlatation” - Royal Arch Masonry.

Mormonism repeats this error, in no small part due to Joseph Smith’s belief that Masonry contained remnants of the ancient priesthood. I think it would be better for the LDS Church to officially downplay and eventually phase out the emphasis on, and use of the tokens as keys to heaven, and put more emphasis on the temple covenants, IMO.

In Christ,

Adam

 

[Veronica_Anne]

Jerusha:

I won’t present the evidence. It might offend someone. There are some anti-Masonic implications in the BOM, even though there was a Masonic Temple in Nauvoo. Again, he contradicted himself.

Shriners are Masons. They do do good. Nothing is all good, or all bad-- just degrees of both. Because we have alternatives, and they have anti-Catholic roots and attitudes, we do not participate. I don’t think we have any right to condemn Masonry-- for others.

We Catholics may not join any Mason group (men or women, boys or girls).

Located at this Web page is the answer that I copy-pasted below:

catholic.com/thisrock/1995/9506qq.asp

** It isn’t our feelings that are relevant; it’s canon law. Under canon 1374 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, Catholics are forbidden to join societies which plot against the Church. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith applied this to Masons, indicating that Catholics who join Masonic organizations are engaged in serious sin and are to be barred from the Eucharist.**

 

[Casen]

ForeverAdam:

One of the things that I have never understood about the LDS temple is the idea that we will have to show certain tokens in order to get into heaven. This idea is incompatible to a group that focuses on the Atonement of Christ being the only way to heaven.

Are you a former LDS member that has been to the temple? It seems you misunderstood the symbolic nature of the LDS endowment. We can’t raise ourselves into heaven, we can only be brought into heaven by God through the Atonement of Christ and that is exactly what the LDS temple endowment teaches.

 

[ForeverAdam]

“We can’t raise ourselves into heaven, we can only be brought into heaven by God through the Atonement of Christ and that is exactly what the LDS temple endowment teaches.”

I don’t dispute that you believe that it is only through Christ’s Atonement that you can enter heaven. I just find there is undue emphasis put on the tokens used in the Endowment. It would make more sense for the signs of the priesthood to be the covenants and not symbolic gestures. As you know, the climax of the Endowment (symbolic of our joining the Lord in heaven) places emphasis on the tokens. I don’t think that after ascending to heaven via the Atonement that our entrance will depend on showing symbolic tokens. Such an idea smacks of Gnosticism, and it incompatible to emphasis on the Atonement and righteous living in the spiritual ascent.

Yet Brigham Young said,

“Let me give you a definition in brief. Your endowment is, to receive all those ordinances in the house of the Lord, which are necessary for you, after you have departed this life, to enable you to walk back to the presence of the Father, passing the angels who stand as sentinels, being enabled to give them the key words, the signs and tokens, pertaining to the holy Priesthood, and gain your eternal exaltation in spite of earth and hell” (Discourses of Brigham Young, pp. 416).

I disagree. We will pass the angelic dignitaries, not by displaying secret (gnostic) knowledge, but by our life of faith that will be sorely tested. In other words, our fidelity to our covenants will be tested, not our knowledge of symbolic gestures.

In Christ,

Adam

 

[PaulDupre]

Casen:

Are you a former LDS member that has been to the temple? It seems you misunderstood the symbolic nature of the LDS endowment. We can’t raise ourselves into heaven, we can only be brought into heaven by God through the Atonement of Christ and that is exactly what the LDS temple endowment teaches.

According to Brigham Young, the signs and tokens are necessary for one “to pass by the angels who stand as sentinels, being able to give them the key words, the signs and tokens, pertaining to the Holy Priesthood, and gain your eternal exaltation” (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 416)

BTW, I am a former LDS who has been to the temple many times. I understand only too well the true nature of the endowment.

 

[stillsearching]

When my daughter was between four and eight years old, she had a burning desire, like most children of that age, to have a secret clubhouse, open to special people, an exclusive environment which I suppose if allowed to come to full fruition, would have included secret handshakes, passwords, and the wearing of symbolic garments, the meanings of such known only to the exclusive club members. But like most children, she has matured to developing a more encompassing world view, and now has relationships based on mutual integrity and morality. Her relationships are based now more on human dignity and worth. All children pass through the “clubhouse stage”. Mine was in a pinetree in front of my mother’s house. Unfortunately, some people never leave those early days of youth behind and so are somewhat retarded in their ability to give and receive love.

 

[ForeverAdam]

I agree that too much emphasis is placed on the tokens and “new names” in the LDS temple. We spiritually ascend to God through His grace in our life of faith. Showing hand signals and whispering new names is not essential, nor a part of it, I might add. For example, the “beating the breast” during the Confiteor and giving the kiss of peace, and the Christian name we receive at baptism and confirmation is symbolic of our faith and feeling as a Christian, and is not secret signals and knowledge that will open heaven’s doors (even if done in faith) for us.

That being said, I don’t think we can find anything reprehensible in making covenants to God to live by his laws, praying for people, or the concept of renewing our baptismal anointing, all of which are also found in some degree in the LDS temple endowment. What we find in the LDS temple is a ritual derived in no small part from Catholicism, particularly the monastic orders (LDS should know what I’m referring to) and displays some distant connection to some of the rituals in the Mass, interestingly enough. The reason for this is that many of the rituals in the LDS Endowment is mirrored in Royal Arch Masonry, and of course, the higher degrees of Masonry derived a lot from Gnosticism, and Gnosticism existed as an early heresy in the Catholic Church, hence the similarities.

I believe all the best things about the LDS temple can be found in the Mass, for in the Mass we covenant with God to serve Him, have the drama of Redemption manifested to us (in the most real sense!), join in praying the most holy of all prayers - The Lord’s prayer, and go through the veil of grace into the Holy of Holies, which is more than a symbolic room, it is that which Jesus said brings life everlasting, His body and blood - St. John 6:55, which we receive at Mass.

In Christ,

Adam

 

[Casen]

ForeverAdam:

I don’t dispute that you believe that it is only through Christ’s Atonement that you can enter heaven. I just find there is undue emphasis put on the tokens used in the Endowment. It would make more sense for the signs of the priesthood to be the covenants and not symbolic gestures. As you know, the climax of the Endowment (symbolic of our joining the Lord in heaven) places emphasis on the tokens. I don’t think that after ascending to heaven via the Atonement that our entrance will depend on showing symbolic tokens. Such an idea smacks of Gnosticism, and it incompatible to emphasis on the Atonement and righteous living in the spiritual ascent.

Adam,
The entire LDS endowment ceremony is centered on the Atonement, including the parts you’ve criticized here. I won’t go any further but you’re criticism of tokens and signs leads me to conclude that you only understand the endowment at the most superficial level.

 

[BJRumph]

We can’t raise ourselves into heaven, we can only be brought into heaven by God through the Atonement of Christ and that is exactly what the LDS temple endowment teaches.

To which I absolutely disagree as an endowed and sealed (and now ex-) member of the LDS church.

The Atonement only gets you to the Celestial Kingdom (at best); the purpose of the Temple is to provide the means for attaining Exaltation, something a bit beyond the “mere” salvation granted by the Atonement according to mormon theology. The limited “grace” of the Atonement only puts you into the position to begin your Temple worship and path to exaltation/godhood; it does not complete or fulfill its purpose. The Atonement is the spring-board of the Temple, not its end.

Are the tokens and signs symbolic? Certainly. However, regardless of how much Smith and others may have borrowed from masonic sources, they left out the most critical element of the masonic (or any Mystery school) teaching; the interpretation of the signs and symbols. Without that, the entire thing is an empty ceremony, as the symbols have no meaning or definiton to make them actually useful. Thus, a temple mormon must either invent their own interpretation; or take them as they are, and see them as literal devices (for which they have scriptural basis to make such. See Smith’s “testing of the Spirits” in the D&C).

For it to have any single meaning, a symbol must be defined by those who use the symbol to express their teachings, unless they are simply teaching a relativistic faith that has no foundation in an absolute Truth; wherein each member is expected to simply invent their own truth to take home with them, rather than learn an ineffiable, though quite specific, mystery of God. This is a fundamental reality for every mystery school or initiatic tradition, and it is the one lesson that Smith either didn’t learn himself, or did not pass on. Either way, it is absent from the temple, undermining its intent at being instructional.

If, as you suggest, the Temple teaches about the necessity of Grace rather than our effort, then the Tokens have no value, in any symbolical process, that can extend or reinforce that theological lesson. On the contrary, such elements can only represent a knowledge or power of the bearer as being the means to overcome some form of obstruction. Even if this power or knowledge is given to the bearer by God, the necessity of the bearer to exert themself to pass the barrier denies the definition of that power as being Grace. Grace removes the barrier, or intervenes for the candidate at the barrier, leaving the candidate passing the barrier through no effort of their own, beyond the simple following of their path to God; not wispering in the candidate’s ear teaching them to overcome the barrier through their own power.

Granted, the empowerment of mankind in becoming as God is what mormonism is about, but this is not Grace.

 

[Casen]

BJRumph:

To which I absolutely disagree as an endowed and sealed (and now ex-) member of the LDS church.

The Atonement only gets you to the Celestial Kingdom (at best); the purpose of the Temple is to provide the means for attaining Exaltation, something a bit beyond the “mere” salvation granted by the Atonement according to mormon theology. The limited “grace” of the Atonement only puts you into the position to begin your Temple worship and path to exaltation/godhood; it does not complete or fulfill its purpose. The Atonement is the spring-board of the Temple, not its end.

Are the tokens and signs symbolic? Certainly. However, regardless of how much Smith and others may have borrowed from masonic sources, they left out the most critical element of the masonic (or any Mystery school) teaching; the interpretation of the signs and symbols. Without that, the entire thing is an empty ceremony, as the symbols have no meaning or definiton to make them actually useful. Thus, a temple mormon must either invent their own interpretation; or take them as they are, and see them as literal devices (for which they have scriptural basis to make such. See Smith’s “testing of the Spirits” in the D&C).

For it to have any single meaning, a symbol must be defined by those who use the symbol to express their teachings, unless they are simply teaching a relativistic faith that has no foundation in an absolute Truth; wherein each member is expected to simply invent their own truth to take home with them, rather than learn an ineffiable, though quite specific, mystery of God. This is a fundamental reality for every mystery school or initiatic tradition, and it is the one lesson that Smith either didn’t learn himself, or did not pass on. Either way, it is absent from the temple, undermining its intent at being instructional.

If, as you suggest, the Temple teaches about the necessity of Grace rather than our effort, then the Tokens have no value, in any symbolical process, that can extend or reinforce that theological lesson. On the contrary, such elements can only represent a knowledge or power of the bearer as being the means to overcome some form of obstruction. Even if this power or knowledge is given to the bearer by God, the necessity of the bearer to exert themself to pass the barrier denies the definition of that power as being Grace. Grace removes the barrier, or intervenes for the candidate at the barrier, leaving the candidate passing the barrier through no effort of their own, beyond the simple following of their path to God; not wispering in the candidate’s ear teaching them to overcome the barrier through their own power.

Granted, the empowerment of mankind in becoming as God is what mormonism is about, but this is not Grace.

You’ve said several things wrong here which leads me to conclude that you didn’t understand the endowment. Regarding the interpretation of signs and symbols there is a very good reason the interpretation for all of them is not given during the ceremony. They must be revealed by the Holy Spirit to the initiate and they are only revealed to those that have proved themselves worthy and can keep a secret!

 

[stillsearching]

Casen:

You’ve said several things wrong here which leads me to conclude that you didn’t understand the endowment. Regarding the interpretation of signs and symbols there is a very good reason the interpretation for all of them is not given during the ceremony. They must be revealed by the Holy Spirit to the initiate and they are only revealed to those that have proved themselves worthy and can keep a secret!

Casen- I have a question. I have been taught that God wills all men to be saved. If that is the case, why is any of this secret?

 

[BJRumph]

So, again, you insist that the Temple is itself superfluous, for the candidate still has to rely only upon the Holy Spirit to gain the knowledge needed, which (again) makes the symbolic instruction pointless, for the candidate will only walk away believing whatever they want to believe about it, and call it the Spirit; thereby in your estimation, leaving the House of the Lord in a delusional state. No, I don’t think I have made any errors in my statements here (other than possibly not articulating the Christian veiw of Grace in a more clear manner).

I fully understood what was going on; and saw symbolical meaning in a great many things never even mentioned by critic or pro-mormon alike. Do you have any idea as to why there is a specific number of leaves on the apron, and why that specific number? Of course not, for such is not taught in a mormon temple.

Frankly, this isn’t going to go anywhere; I know that I know more about it than you do; and you know that you know more about it than I. Simple wheel-spinning. Your insistence that the endowment is about the Grace of Atonement, and I will not deny your right to interpret it as you wish. However, nothing in the Temple itself teaches such an interpretation; it is soley your creation.

And, I’ll ignore your snipe at my integrity. Frankly, anyone who thinks that the BoM supports polygamy is too far gone for reason to reach, and so any analysis they make about anything is suspect in my eye anyway. You are generally cordial, but rhetoric and articulation doesn’t make truth.

 

[Casen]

stillsearching:

Casen- I have a question. I have been taught that God wills all men to be saved. If that is the case, why is any of this secret?

Jesus answered your question in the New Testament…

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
(Matthew 13:10 - 13)

This also addresses BJRumph’s frustration with the symbolic nature of LDS temple practices. There are several layers of meaning, some of which can only be revealed by the Holy Spirit to the initiate. I’ve found the same to be true of the scriptures. What we gain from them is in proportion to how prepared we are to receive it.

 

[BJRumph]

Oh, I have no frustration with symbolic instruction or allegorical interpretation. If I did, I would not have been such an active member within the diverse initiatic traditions to which I have made myself a part of over the years.

No one is denying that even the temple ceremony possesses symbolical references that can be learned at many different levels. What I am asserting is that there is not given the foundation necessary for which to dive such depths in a consistant manner; the mormon initiate is necessarily compelled to interpret the temple in any fashion as they see fit, rather than arrive at a specific truth (which is the ENTIRE point of initiatic teaching).

Because of the symbolic mechanics created by the endowment’s processes, anyone familliar with them can see that they are not meant to produce the truth of “Grace”, but the truth of “Works”. If the Holy Spirit has taught you the truth about Grace over works, then that is in spite of, not due to the actual teaching of the Temple. I would suggest try praying to God for additional enlightenment.

I do have a problem with those who are very happy to say I am completely wrong about something, all the while failing to provide any form of evidence for such a declaration, or any evidence for their own position.

I was even kind enough to respect your vow not to reveal anything about the ceremony itself by talking in such a general manner as to avoid needing to reveal any actual specifics beyond what is already known to all.

You respond with a blanket “you have said several things wrong here…”, without you providing a single case of any of my asserted mistakes. Even your follow up response to Still is empty of real meaning, and contradictory to the fundamental purpose of the Temple within the mormon conception.

This is why I believe that such debates are ultimately fruitless, especially with yourself. You have shown that you will blindly defend against any perceived slight against your church, even when such a defense is impossible, and an actually reasonable person, such as TOm for a specific example, is willing to step back and recognize the problems with certain positions.

I pray that the Holy Spirit does bring you to greater truths than the meager fast your church has to offer you. If you actually believe in the Grace of God, then you are being prepared for an upcoming release from your spiritual bondage. Until then, there really isn’t anything more to say to those without ears.

 

[Casen]

BJRumph:

You respond with a blanket “you have said several things wrong here…”, without you providing a single case of any of my asserted mistakes. Even your follow up response to Still is empty of real meaning, and contradictory to the fundamental purpose of the Temple within the mormon conception.

This is why I believe that such debates are ultimately fruitless, especially with yourself. You have shown that you will blindly defend against any perceived slight against your church, even when such a defense is impossible, and an actually reasonable person, such as TOm for a specific example, is willing to step back and recognize the problems with certain positions.

OK, I can see that it isn’t really fair of me to say that you are wrong yet not elaborate. I get a little uncomfortable when it relates to the temple and didn’t/don’t want to go into detail but I can see that I would have been better off not writing anything.

 

[stillsearching]

Casen:

Jesus answered your question in the New Testament…

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
(Matthew 13:10 - 13)

This also addresses BJRumph’s frustration with the symbolic nature of LDS temple practices. There are several layers of meaning, some of which can only be revealed by the Holy Spirit to the initiate. I’ve found the same to be true of the scriptures. What we gain from them is in proportion to how prepared we are to receive it.

Okay, this is Jesus speaking in parables. Where does he say have secret handshakes, passwords, and symbols on your clothing? And then you will get into heaven? Do you really belive that heaven is such a trite place to be that one can earn it with a secret password? that is utterly degrading to people and to God.

 

[majick275]

In an attempt to provide an accurate answer to the original post:

The LDS church has not and does not threaten death to those who reveal the Temple Ceremony. (They have all been revealed in multiple locations by numerous disgruntled ex-mormons …although in some cases they have been “embellished” by those who are SO angry at/with LDS church that they prefer revenge to honesty)

Before 1990 portions of the Ceremony included symbolic gestures referred to as penalties. These were intended to impress upon the individual participants the seriousness of their covenants and the value of the eternal/spiritual over the earthly/mortal.

These penalties never implied that anyone would ever kill anybody for revealing these ceremonies. What they did state was that it would be better to die physically than to reveal (or worse, renounce) the “sacred” covenants, etc. entered into in the Temple.

Many changes have been made to these Temple Ceremonies (especially in recent times) to encourage greater attendance in these Temples. (changes that shorten the time required, changes that “soften” some of the more controversial principles that are taught there, changes that make Temple worship more “convenient”) some refer to this as “a kinder, gentler Temple” but that is not entirely correct as the essence of the ceremony is still intact and there is certainly nothing violent, illegal or even immoral happening in there. (except of course the perpetuation of false doctrine)

 

[twiztedseraph]

Mormonism… Enough said…I mean just reading some stuff (both for and against, I looked at some missionary sources) and watching that South Park episode was enough.

 

[BonnieBj]

I have an aritcle from Isaiah Bennett, a former Catholic priest who converted to Mormonism and then back to Catholicism. He hasn’t been killed by anyone yet and I can sort of see why they keep everything so secret, so that they can trap people with their lies. We need to pray for Mormons. Anyone interested in reading this can contact me. It is too long for the forum but very interesting and made me glad I don’t have to go through what they have to go through and that I’m not told the many lies they tell their people. This article has a lot of detailed “inside stuff.”