Mormon Coffee

Video Courtesy of KSL.com

The Curse of Cain returns?

Comments (63)

You’ve probably heard about the current flap over the apparently unauthorized LDS proxy baptism of President Barak Obama’s deceased mother. People are offended on both sides of the issue. We’ve discussed this topic here on Mormon Coffee a couple of times over the years, when continuing LDS baptisms of Jewish Holocaust victims have been in the news. This time, though, there’s something related but different to talk about.

On the ABC News Political Punch blog, Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper wrote about the baptism of President Obama’s mother. Karen, a Mormon who commented on the blog, wrote,

“Baptisms for the Dead are just a symbolic gesture that we remember and love the deceased and welcome them into our faith. We understand that they have the same freedom in death as they had in life whether to accept or acknowledge our gesture.

“Consider the last chapter in the bible: [quoted Malachi 4:1, 5-6]

“We offer this gesture of symbolic baptism to demonstrate that our ‘hearts are turned to our fathers.’”

Read more »

Comments (70)

“Now the chief priests and the whole Council were seeking false testimony against Jesus that they might put him to death, but they found none, though many false witnesses came forward. At last two came forward and said, “This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to rebuild it in three days.’” (Matt 26:59-61)

Were these men lying? Todays readers of Matthew are aware of an earlier encounter that our Lord Jesus had with Jewish leaders early in his ministry. Asked for a sign by the Jews he replies “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19-21). An attentive reader of this exchange, which occurred after the first cleansing of the temple, will know that the witnesses distorted both the words and the meaning of Jesus’ claim. Their misunderstanding of what Jesus was saying to his interrogators is understandable, John tells us that even his disciples did not understand what Christ meant until after his resurrection (John 2:21, 22). These exchanges in Matthew’s and John’s Gospels are just two, of many, examples showing the role that Christ saw for the temple in past, present, and future redemptive history.

Read more »

Comments (26)

See here. The “15 minutes are up” bit after the end is inaccurate. There are other minor inaccuracies, like the color of the altar cloth. The music attempts to make the scene feel beautiful, but I doubt that will mitigate the complaints. The woman is crying at the end in anticipation of a “love court”, but the first thing I thought was how many ex-Mormons tell me how awkward and even creepy their experience felt to them.

Thoughts? Remember, keep your emotions in check. And remember that your taboos are not necessarily our taboos.

Update: Some of my favorite Mormon commentary on the episode:

Most contemporary Mormons feel that regardless of whatever the ceremony itself says about what should or should not be kept secret, all of it should. This extends even to official discourse within the institution itself. Noah Feldman’s concept of ’soft-secrecy,’ twentieth century Mormons’ proclivity to minimize those things which might seem odd or disturbing to contemporary is a useful way to conceptualize this, both within and without the boundaries of the Church.

The secrecy that surrounds the temple is one of the last bastions of peculiarity within a rushing tide of Mormon cultural assimilation. Maintaining that silence within the church is a way to assure ourselves that we are still possessed of holiness, of that special set-apartness that once characterized our entire lives. It’s a way to maintain the power of the distinctions and initiations that make Mormon culture strong and give it clarity…

This episode of Big Love, if it does nothing else, strips away Mormon secrecy and in so doing attempts to shove the Church unwillingly into the bright lights and cacophony of the public square.

Comments (73)

A Mormon left this comment on the Secrets of the Mormon Temples video a few days ago,

It saddens me that some have so little respect for what is sacred to others. Watching movies like this one literally destroy the sanctity that is in the temple and poison the minds of all who watch it, just as pornography defiles the minds of it’s viewers and destroys the sanctity of those who produce it. And those who made this video have violated a promise to God and will be subject to the consequences of such when they are judged.

Some thoughts come to mind.

• Inasmuch as the Old Testament publicized the going-ons of the temple, was it destroying sanctity and poisoning minds? 
• How is keeping this ceremony secret respectful of those who would appreciate making a more informed decision as to whether or not to join or stay in the Mormon Church? People are more sacred than rituals. Out of respect for the sacred nature of human beings created by God, I feel compelled as a Christian to help publicly expose the LDS ceremony so that people can make better informed choices. Instisting that I comply to the demand of Mormons to keep the ceremony secret is essentially insisting that I treat the ceremony as more sacred than the people who would be positively affected by open exposure to the ceremony.
• What is more sacred and meaningful: rituals, or the beliefs and teachings that give meaning to rituals? If teachings and beliefs are more sacred and meaningful than rituals, then how am I not to—according to Mormon standards—be utterly disgusted and repulsed in my living room when Mormon missionaries essentially tell me (either directly or indirectly) that nearly every single fundamental, distinctive doctrine I believe in traditional Christianity, especially on the nature of God, is either entirely wrong or has been fatally corrupted? Do you see the disconnect here? Non-Mormons are expected to have the maturity and patience to listen to explicit and implicit attacks on the very foundations of our sacred beliefs, especially when couched in a presentation that aims at introducing a more compelling alternative belief system. Shouldn’t non-Mormons be able to expect the same from Mormons? We’re all adults here, aren’t we?
• Is the pre-1990 part of the Mormon temple ceremony where Trinitarian ministers were mocked as hirelings of Satan is still “sacred”? If Trinitarians had a secret ceremony where we depicted Mormon bishops hirelings of Satan, what would they think if we said it was too “sacred” to talk about? If this PC culture, I have no doubt that the tolerance-police would use words like “defamation” and “disrepectful” and “hate speech” and “bigotry” to describe such a ceremony.
• Are the other parts of the ceremony which were removed in 1990, especially the tokens and penalties (that symbolized disembowlement and throat-slitting), still sacred? Did they cease to become sacred when the Mormon institution cleansed the larger ceremony of them? Do such tokens and penalties remain secretive forever? As generations pass, will Mormons deem discussion on the symbolic penalties of disembowlement and throat-slitting more acceptable, much like Mormon apologists today have apparently deemed discussion over Brigham’s inclusion of Adam-God into the temple ceremony at St. George as acceptable?

Read more »

Comments (11)

The LDS Church is in trouble – again – with the Jewish community over the Church’s continuing posthumous baptisms of Jewish Holocaust victims. (See here and here for background on the 13 year struggle regarding this issue.)

Monday (November 10, 2008) marked the 70th anniversary of Kristallnacht, the Nazi-incited riots against the Jews, considered to be the beginning of the Holocaust. Some survivors of the Holocaust and their families gathered in Manhattan to remember this important date. NPR reported,

“At the event names of the victims were read out loud. But these weren’t from the history books. The names came from the official records of the Mormon Church.”

Read more »

Comments (70)

Richard Packham’s video is also available on YouTube

Publicly exposing the Mormon temple ceremony takes away the superficial power of secretiveness and mystery and helps people face reality. The power of mystery is largely sapped with a simple YouTube video.

Obeying God’s commandments is a form of Christian worship. God’s word tells us:

“Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret. But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible, for anything that becomes visible is light. Therefore it says, ‘Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.’” (Ephesians 5:11-14)

Even the LDS Articles of Faith say, “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.” Since many Mormons use this verse to argue that the someone’s form and content of worship (especially their own) should never be criticized, I ask: Are Mormons going to criticize my form and content of worship when I obey God by exposing shameful things?

Trade in your green fig leaf apron for a cross. What God has revealed to the children of man, he has revealed to all the children of man. Find more private satisfaction in the public, personal word of God than in the shameful ceremonies of Joseph Smith.

Tips to Christians For Using (or Not Using) the LDS Temple Ceremony Content When Engaging Mormons

• Be led by the Spirit and be respectful and sensitive to people. The challenge here is immersing yourself in the Bible so that you adopt more biblical concepts of love and respect than worldly concepts. Being loving and sensitive will often require you to engage other issues of the heart and simply point people to the true nature of God and the gospel. But the Spirit may lead you to tear down false pretensions (cf. 2 Corinthians 10:4-5) and idolatry by exposing the ceremony. It is no more disrespectful to expose the shameful LDS temple ceremony than it is to expose pervasive mold to a prospective house buyer.
• Part of the whole question of whether to reveal the temple ceremony concerns strategic and loving engagement, but there is also a power struggle that is real. It cannot be ignored. People who feel like they have secrets often feel like they have a power over other people. Mormons will sometimes refer to the temple as the only appropriate place to discuss certain doctrines. Sometimes it helps to break this superficial facade of power and exclusivity by revealing your knowledge of the temple.
• Bringing up the ceremony will often end a conversation, so be wise about if and when you do it.
• That said, I suggest teaching Mormons who haven’t been through the ceremony, especially teenagers, the three secret hand clasps. Ask them if they think secret handshakes will help get them into Heavenly Father’s presence. Many will vehemently say, “No!” Express your agreement. Ask the same people, “If Satan told you to make a green fig leaf apron, what would you do?” The responses I hear are interesting. “I wouldn’t do it!” “I’d tell him to be quiet.” I like to advise people, “If Satan ever tells you to make a green fig leaf apron, rebuke him!” If they go through the temple ceremony, they will be reminded of these things. This will help them feel creeped out by the ceremony. They should feel that way, and you owe it to them in love to help them be sober about it.
• Break the news to them. The things you have just spoken of are actually in the LDS temple ceremony. If they don’t believe you, tell them to ask their parents. Or Google. The internet has more power to deliver knowledge than the Mormon “priesthood” ever will.
• Don’t over-sensationalize the role of Satan in the temple ceremony. I recommend a good article by Jerald and Sandra called, Obsession With Lucifer?.
• Expect opposition over this. Letting the cat out of the bag will drive some defenders of Mormonism in your community nuts. But keep a sober mind that this isn’t about them. It’s about the true seekers. The inherent shamefulness of the LDS temple ceremony really causes a crisis of conscience in people that causes them to leave the Mormon Church and take Christianity more seriously. Don’t want to see a close relationship severed? That’s OK. You can at least get the word out to people who haven’t been through the temple, who you can tolerate being upset at you. It’s worth it in the long run for their own sake.
• Remind your LDS friends that this isn’t a matter of trivial humor. It’s serious. It is a matter of informed consent. People have a right to know about this all before they join Mormonism.
• Ask, “Is the Book of Mormon is sacred?” “Of course.” “Is it public?” “Yes.” “So, if something is sacred, does it have to be secret and hidden from the public?” This helps when someone explains that simply because the ceremony is “sacred” it cannot be discussed publicly.
• Ask, “Why was the temple veil torn in two when Jesus was crucified?”
• Ask, “Can you think of any examples of people being married in the Old Testament temple?”
• Ask a Mormon if they are aware of the changes in the temple ceremony. Also ask, “Are the parts of the temple ceremony removed in 1990 still sacred?”
• Express your feelings about having your pastor mocked as a hireling of Satan in the pre-1990 LDS temple ceremony. Ask, “If Protestants had a secret ceremony where we called your bishops hirlings of Satan, what would you think if I said it was too ’sacred’ to talk about?”
• Point them to the sufficiency of Christ. Share Hebrews 7 and tell them you want them to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, our great high priest. Eternal life is all about knowing Jesus, receiving Jesus, and believing Jesus as he freely offers us the forgiveness of sins and fellowship with God forever. Christians now have the indwelling of the Spirit, and our level of intimacy and fellowship with God is not dependent on whether we are in a certain building.
• Be like Jesus: “And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.’” Mark 13:1-2

I’ll close with a letter from an ex-Mormon Christian written to Bill Mckeever:

“Good afternoon Mr. McKeever. This email is an apology to the nasty and derogatory remarks I sent you in the past. I do not know if you remember our conversations but it was obvious that I was so deep into Mormonism, I did not realize how uneducated I sounded for defending a false faith. It is my prayer that every member of the LDS church come to the realization that Joseph Smith is one of the false prophets that the Bible warns us about. I came to my realization shortly after finding out the details of Temple rituals. I was officially removed from the membership records as of May 2005… Realizing that accepting Christ as my personal savior and putting all of my trust in him instead of Gordon B. Hinckley has made a magnanimous impact upon my life as a Christian. I want to personally thank you for distributing websites like these to bring LDS members out of the dark and into the light. Thank you for being a bold servant of Christ and May God Bless you and your co-workers always. Please feel free to post this message on your site as a hopeful inspiration to all LDS who wish to leave.”

Comments (208)

Catholic News Service (CNS) reported last week on an April 2008 Vatican directive sent to Catholic dioceses throughout the world. In the letter, Catholic bishops are instructed to prohibit Latter-day Saints from microfilming and digitizing information contained in parish registers. CNS explained:

“Father James Massa, executive director of the U.S. bishops’ Secretariat of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, said the step was taken to prevent the Latter-day Saints from using records — such as baptismal documentation — to posthumously baptize by proxy the ancestors of church members.”

The Vatican directive says the purpose of this policy is to:

“ensure that such a detrimental practice is not permitted in [each bishop's] territory, due to the confidentiality of the faithful and so as not to cooperate with the erroneous practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

Father Massa commented that the directive has the potential to strain relations between the Catholic Church and Latter-day Saints,

“but I would also say that the purpose of interreligious dialogue is not to only identify agreements, but also to understand our differences. As Catholics, we have to make very clear to them their practice of so-called rebaptism is unacceptable from the standpoint of Catholic truth.”

On Sunday (May 5, 2008) LDS-owned Deseret News reported on the Vatican directive, logging many comments from readers. Through these comments, the Catholic Church is accused of bigotry, secrecy, stinginess, closed-mindedness, being pawns of the devil, etc. Many Mormon comments include disbelief and the question of why the Catholic Church would even care about LDS proxy baptisms if it doesn’t recognize that rite as efficacious anyway.

A fascinating theme repeated over and over by Latter-day Saints on this forum is this: The fact that the Catholic Church has decided to deny the LDS Church microfilming and digitizing access to Catholic parish records proves that the LDS Church is true. And not only that; it also proves the Catholic Church knows the LDS Church is true.

Though the Vatican says that the LDS practice of baptism for the dead is understood within Catholicism to be “detrimental,” “erroneous,” “unacceptable,” and outside the boundaries of “Catholic truth,” according to these Mormons, Rome’s actions speak louder than words. Consider a few comment excerpts:

“Strange that the boys in Rome are concerned with what they say [is] erroneous doctrine. Perhaps they are slowly realizing that Joseph Smith is indeed a prophet and they see a threat to their man-based religion with all its wealth. More confirmation that the gospel has been restored…”

“I don’t understand why the Catholic church would withhold family information from people of all denominations, who are trying to make links with their ancestors, unless the Catholic church believes that there just might be some credibility to the work done for the dead in LDS temples.”

“It makes the Catholic Church sound as if it is afraid LDS doctine might be correct! If the doctrine is wrong, what difference does it make? If it is correct, do you really want to put yourslf in direct opposition to God’s will? This makes the Catholic Church appear unsure of its doctrine.”

“… perhaps they consider the possibility that mormons are right but don’t want to admit it.”

“Like the Jews, apparently he [the Pope] must believe in the LDS doctrine of baptism for the dead and sealings of families or there would be no reason to fear how these records might be used by the church.”

The Catholic Church has plainly stated that it does not want to “cooperate with the erroneous practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” in regards to proxy baptism. Is it possible that this is the real reason for the Vatican’s directive? Could it be that the Catholic Church has read and taken to heart God’s Word where it teaches that cooperation is sometimes equal to participation (2 John 1:10-11; 1 Timothy 5:22)? Perhaps the Catholic Church finds these words appropriate in the current situation:

“…the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore, do not become partners with them… Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness…” (Ephesians 5:6-11).

What if that’s the motivation behind this directive after all?

—

Of related interest:
Mormons Should Try Walking in Jewish Shoes
Will Pope Benedict become a Mormon after he dies?

Comments (61)

We asked folks to guess what this is and where exactly it is from, offering a free DVD copy of The Gospel of John to the first non-evangelical who guessed correctly. After two days of waiting for people to guess, Peter Ould, our evangelical friend in Christ from the UK gave the answer: The above picture was taken in the children’s section of the LDS museum in downtown Salt Lake City. It is, as someone correctly guessed, a representation of what is on the Nauvoo temple. As I’m sure some Mormons want this conversation to cover historic iconography and symbolism, let me just say this: I know you can find some historic positive uses of the pentagram. I just find it disconcerting 1) that the symbol is, like many other things about the temple, so obviously of Smith’s masonic influence, and 2) that Mormons feel so much more comfortable with the pentagram than they do the symbol of the cross.

Here are some other pictures I took at the museum:

Comments (40)

On August 8th ABC’s Nightline posted a story about the Hill Cumorah Pageant, a Mormon drama enacted each year by LDS Church members for audiences in Palmyra, New York. The sub-title to the Nightline article reads, “In Upstate New York, Mormons Re-enact Their History and Answer Questions About the Scrutinized Faith.”

Journalists Dan Harris and Mary Marsh interviewed several people for their report. One was Latter-day Saint Boyd Tuttle, a cast member. When asked about the current media spotlight trained on the LDS Church due to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign Mr. Tuttle said,

“‘Personally, I think it’s a good thing because I think there’s a lot of misunderstanding about the church. And just with people, there’s a lot of misinformation … disseminated out there and a lot of people have, I think, very legitimate questions about the church.’”

The Nightline article noted that one of the most common questions people have is about “the Mormon secret temple rituals, which still exist today.” To this Mr. Tuttle replied,

“‘The temple is a very sacred place, and we hold it in special reverence. But we also tell everybody “anyone is welcome to come to the temple if they meet the requirements. …” So it’s not closed to Mormons, or closed to non-Mormons, but it’s closed to just people who are not prepared to enter therein.’”

Here a Mormon was given an opportunity to respond to a legitimate question about the LDS Church; the answer had the stunning potential to reach thousands. Mr. Tuttle bemoaned widespread misunderstandings and misinformation often disseminated about his church, yet his comments about the secret/sacred nature of LDS temples was thoroughly misleading to an uninformed public. He made LDS temple requirements sound similar to admission prerequisites for an institution of higher education — for those with sufficient GPAs (those “prepared” to attend), there will be no discrimination based on age, disability, national origin, race, religion, gender or sexual identity. This was a spurious impression to impart.

Mr. Tuttle said straight-up that the temple is not “closed to non-Mormons.” In truth, the first requirement that must be met for entrance into a dedicated LDS temple is membership in the LDS Church. I’m certain Mr. Tuttle knows this; evidently he didn’t want the general public to know this. In an apparent effort to make the reality of restricted LDS temples more palatable to non-Mormons, he’s resorted to disseminating his own misleading information about Mormonism.

One of the early comments posted to the ABC website by a reader of this story said this:

“Thank you DAN HARRIS, MARY MARSH, and ABC. It’s refreshing to have someone ask us about our religion instead of getting the often misperseption (sic) of others.”

You see what happened here when a Latter-day Saint was asked a sincere and legitimate question about his church. This is why Mormonism Research Ministry encourages people to learn about Mormonism from many sources: members, ex-members, and non-members alike.

Comments (31)