- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Any feedback from the Staylds crew on the new story last night on channel 4 about “Masonry and Mormonism?” I didn’t see it, I’m too far away from UT. Was it any good? Also not in Utah. Can you post a review? Is there a link to it online? One more not in Utah. No clue. A link would be great. I live in Utah, but never heard about it. It was fairly quick and I was expecting a series of stories, but it was just one evening. It went into some detail, by interviewing an LDS historian, about the role of Masonry in Nauvoo, and some of the commonality between masonic rituals and temple ceremonies. They also interviewed the Grand Mason of the Salt Lake Masonic Lodge, who just happens to be the first LDS Grand Mason in SLC.
They prominently displayed the masonic symbols of the compass and the square, but didn’t explain them, nor the commonality.
It was on KUTV News, and here is a link:
http://connect2utah.com/content/fulltext/?cid=61791http://connect2utah.com/content/fulltext/?cid=61791” class=”bbcode_url”> Interesting. Thanks for the link. You are right, it was a pretty short, shallow story. About the only thing I think will cause cog-dis is that JS was calling out for the masons to save him when he was martyred. I would have expected less emphasis on it going back to Solomon’s temple and more on the fact that Freemasonry did not actually originate at Solomon’s temple.
I have been concerned about the relationship of Masonry with the LDS Temple. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing evil or satanic about Masonry. George Washington was a Mason! They have had a very important Male Fraternity that emphases moral integrity and charity – very good ideals.
The problem is that I don’t believe that Masonry belongs as part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (perhaps as a good, solid fraternity). There are many excellent organizations such as Boy Scouts of America, but these organizations are the products of good men, not God.
My first problem is that Masons have a long and extensive history of racism against African Americans. They allowed freed slaves to preside over funerals, but that was about it. Black males were segregated and not allowed to otherwise officiate in temple ceremonies. Now, this sounds a bit like excluding black males from the priesthood.
In my opinion, the Temple cannot be totally “cleansed” until all elements of men including those of masonry are replaced with those of God.
Christ had to clear the Temple twice during his moral life. It saddens me to see shadows of masonry in our Temples because the Temple should be reserved only for God and His Holy Ordinances and should NEVER be used for practices such as masonic ritual. I think that this was my biggest problem with the Temple, it felt like the “initiatory” was a mockery to baptism which should have been our “initiation” into the church. If practices like initiatory actually originated from masonic fraternity initiation, they should be done away with. We need to return to Christ and His Foundation of, faith, repentance, baptism by immersion and receipt of the Holy Ghost.
Initiatory practices will not “save” us.
I wanted to also mention that Christ taught that a “Man cannot server two masters”, for either he will love one or hate the other. Masons have a “Grand Master”. Our faith has a “Grand Master” and He is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. We simply cannot be associated with an organization that has a “Grand Master” and allow that “Grand Mastery” into our Temples. This is trying to literally serve two masters.
I think (and it is not for me to say) that it is high time we cleansed our temples starting with our mortal temples, cleansing ourselves from impure thoughts and works. Next, I pray that we could cleanse our physical House of the Lord, looking back retrospectively and ensuring that our Temples are truly, “unspotted from the world” and free from excessive influence of men”. That is the only way for the Spirit of the Lord to truly engulf the Temple.
Some may argue, that masonry goes back to Solomon’s Temple and therefore we are justified in retaining these practices. History does not witness to this effect. The Church was “restored” by direct revelation from God, not by vestiges of the past.
Sorry to be so verbose. Obviously this is a subject that I am passionate about. I love the word, “anoint”, I hate the word “initiate”.
The word, “initiate” has come to be associated with initiations at fraternities. This exercises include the most unwholesome of acts, (drinking, sex with prostitutes, pledges to persons other than God). What a disgrace this initiations are, what an abomination!!!!!! I despise secret oaths, they are of Satan.
Anointing,on the other hand, are Holy, Divine, Respectful and set one apart from the world, not initiate one into the world. Christ was anointed and Holy. I have just always wished that “anointings” were performed in the Temple and not, initiatory work.
What would occur in temples, is they were rid of all the masonic elements? It may have been Valoel who posited this notion elsewhere, but I think it’s likely that Masonry provided a symbolic framework (like a book cover and binding) for JS to convey the spiritual content he felt the endowment conveys. Covenant making can be done without Masonic markers. Masonic markers could have been substituted with any other ritualistic markers. The content and purpose of the temple deviates significantly from masonry which is more like a fraternity and not a religion (my uncles were masons, and I grew up near the Masonic Homes, a masonic retirement facility). So, why Masonry? Probably a few reasons: 1) convenience – JS was exposed to it positively at the right time, 2) the appeal of symbolism to that era which is radically different from our own era, and 3) it was widely believed at that time that the Masonic rituals were legitimately ancient, giving them the patina of credibility.
But there is plenty of non-Masonic content to the temple. There is an interesting passage in Job that parallels a veil experience, and there are other obscure temple-related references in Isaiah and Revelation. JS knew his Bible, even better than masonry.
It could also be that JS really thought Masonry went back to Solomon’s temple and that he wanted to be sure to restore all things, so he included so much from masonry. There was a really great Dialogue article on masonry and mormonism that shows tons of parallels between Masonry in Illinois during the 1840s and the original temple endowment. Both have been changed since the 1840’s, but they were many times more similar to each other initially. In the vein of StayLDS, I just want to point out that even if JS completely copied Masonic rituals without any Divine inspiration, that does not mean that the temple ordinances cannot have personal meaning and bring you peace, edification, and enlightenment. On the other hand, if you are uncomfortable with JS co-opting Masonic rituals, you can decide to avoid the temple when you partake in the Mormon cafeteria.
I’m happy to discuss this topic, though. I loved the temple as a TBM and was an ordinance worker for several years in Provo. It was also the parallels between Mormonism and Masonry that crystalized my disaffection with the church.
. hawkgrrrl wrote:It may have been Valoel who posited this notion elsewhere, but I think it’s likely that Masonry provided a symbolic framework (like a book cover and binding) for JS to convey the spiritual content he felt the endowment conveys.
I know that Greg Kearney has stated something very similar to this as well. There is lots of non-Mason content as has been suggested. However, it’s hard to get rid of the “literal” feel of the temple ceremony IMHO for a TBM. Especially when quotes like the one from Brigham Young, “your endowment is to receive all the necessary…to enable you to pass the angels who stand as sentinels…,” tend to reinforce the notion. This makes even the Masonic part of it feel as if it came directly from God’s mouth to Joseph’s ears. Hence, I can see why it would be shocking for many TBMs to find out about the parallels to Masonry.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.