Mormon Coffee

by Sharon

On Tuesday USA Todayposted an article by journalist Jill Lawrence: “Will Mormon faith hurt bid for White House?” There are some unexpected revelations in the article related to the doctrines and history of the LDS Church. They are grouped under the headings of “Theology,” “Polygamy,” “Racial History,” “Secrecy,” “Discipline,” and “Proselytizing.” This makes the USA Today article unique in that Ms. Lawrence discusses some of the real concerns Christians have with Mormonism rather than dismissing all critics as “bigots,” “ignorant,” or “misinformed.”

Another section of the USA Today article I like is this:

The ex-governor [Mormon Mitt Romney] says questions about his faith are fair to ask. Some queries he answers directly. “I don’t drink alcohol, I don’t smoke, I don’t drink coffee or tea. I also do a tithe,” he says, meaning he donates 10% of his income to the church. All are church requirements.Romney responds more generally when asked if he has participated in an endowment ceremony, in which men and women take vows of secrecy about temple rites and of obedience to the Lord, and begin the daily practice of wearing a sacred “temple garment” resembling abbreviated long underwear.

“I do attend the temple of my church…and people can learn about that by contacting the church,” he says, adding: “I’m sure on the Internet you can find every single aspect of what’s entailed.”

An inquirer will not learn much about the LDS endowment ceremony from the Mormon Church. In the sections about temples on two official LDS web sites (lds.org newsroom, the “official resource for news media, opinion leaders, and the public” and mormon.org, an informational site for non-members) the endowment ceremony is not even mentioned.

But Mr. Romney is correct that those who really want to know “can find every single aspect of what’s entailed” on the internet. All one need do is Google “LDS Endowment Ceremony.” There are almost 66,000 results from which to choose.

To make it a bit easier for those of you who want to learn about the endowment ceremony performed in LDS temples, here are some links to sites I believe are trustworthy.

For overviews and commentary:

• The LDS Temple Ceremony by Bill McKeever
• Temple Ritual Changed…Again by Sandra Tanner
• Mormon Temples: “The Gates of Heaven” by Sharon Lindbloom

For transcripts of the entire endowment ceremony (including past and current versions):

• The Mormon Temple Endowment Ceremony, Revised in 1990 by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, at the Mormons In Transition web site
• The Endowment Ceremony at the Concerned Christians web site

For related topics:

• Masonic Influence in the Endowment Ceremony by Bill McKeever
• LDS Endowment and Masonic Initiation by James David
• The LDS Temple Ceremony - Sacred or Secret? by Bill McKeever
• The Garments of the Holy Priesthood by Bill McKeever
• Temple “Worthiness” and the Bible by Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson

For everything you always wanted to know about LDS temples but were afraid to ask:

It was 130 years ago today that LDS recorder L. John Nuttall, by order of Brigham Young, transcribed the Lecture at the Veil in the St. George, Utah Temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Lecture at the Veil was a lesson at the end of the LDS endowment ceremony which summarized important theological concepts that had been taught throughout the ceremony.

From the time the Lecture at the Veil was first recorded in 1877, until it was removed in 1990, it had been an important element of the endowment ceremony. The content of the lecture in modern times did not include some of Brigham Young’s important teachings from the nineteenth century, the lecture having been revised during the intervening years.

The official transcription of Brigham Young’s veil lecture is not available, but John Nuttall recorded much of the same information in his private journal. In recognition of this 130th anniversary of Brigham Young’s Lecture at the Veil, an excerpt is provided here.

In the creation the Gods entered into an agreement about forming this earth, and putting Michael or Adam upon it. These things of which I have been speaking are what are termed the mysteries of godliness but they will enable you to understand the expression of Jesus, made while in jerusalem. “This is life eternal that they might know thee, the on[l]y true God and jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”We were once acquainted with the Gods and lived with them, but we had the privilege of taking upon us flesh that the spirit might have a house to dwell in. We did so and forgot all, and came into the world not recollecting anything of which we had previously learned.

We have heard a great deal about Adam and Eve, how they were formed and etc. Some think he was made like an adobe and the Lord breathed into him the breath of life, for we read “from dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return.” Well he was made of the dust of the earth but not of this earth. He was made just the same way you and I are made but on another earth.

Adam was an immortal being when he came on this earth; He had lived on an earth similar to ours; he had received the Priesthood and the keys thereof, and had been faithful in all things and gained his resurrection and his exaltation, and was crowned with glory, immortality and eternal lives, and was numbered with the Gods for such he became through his faithfulness, and had begotten all the spirit that was to come to this earth. And Eve our common Mother who is the mother of all living bore those spirits in the celestial world.

And when this earth was organized by Elohim. Jehovah & Michael, who is Adam our common Father, Adam & Eve had the privilege to continue the work of progression, consequently came to this earth and commenced the great work of forming tabernacles for those spirits to dwell in, and when Adam and those that assi[s]ted him had completed this kingdom our earth[,] he came to it, and slept and forgot all and became like an infant child.

It is said by Moses the historian that the Lord caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam and took from his side a rib and formed the woman that Adam called Eve — this should be interpreted that the Man Adam like all other men had the seed within him to propagate his species, but not the Woman; she conceives the seed but she does not produce it; consequently she was taken from the side or bowels of her father. This explains the mystery of Moses’ dark sayings in regard to Adam and Eve.

Adam and Eve when they were placed on this earth were immortal beings with flesh, bones and sinews. But upon partaking of the fruits of the earth while in the garden and cultivating the ground their bodies became changed from immortal to mortal beings with the blood coursing through their veins as the action of life — Adam was not under transgression until after he partook of the forbidden fruit; this was necessary that they might be together, that man might be. The woman was found in transgression not the man — Now in the law of Sacr[i]fice we have the promise of a Savior and Man had the privilege and showed forth his obedience by offering of the first fruits of the earth and the firstlings of the flocks; this as a showing that Jesus would come and shed his blood…

Father Adam’s oldest son (Jesus the Saviour) who is the heir of the family is Father Adam’s first begotten in the spirit world, who according to the flesh is the only begotten as it is written. (In his divinity he having gone back into the spirit world, and come in the spirit to Mary and she conceived, for when Adam and Eve got through with their work in this earth, they did not lay their bodies down in the dust, but returned to the spirit world from whence they came.

(as quoted in David John Buerger, The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship, 111-112. Paragraph breaks not in the original — inserted here to aid online reading.)

So reads the headline of a recent Reuters article written by Religion Editor Tom Heneghan. The article, which discusses the Mormon practice of baptism for the dead, appeared today on the Reuters web site.

PARIS (Reuters) - Pope Benedict was baptized at birth and will most likely be baptized again one year after his death, not by his Roman Catholic Church but by a Mormon he never met.The Mormons, a U.S.-based denomination officially named the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), encourage members to baptize the dead by proxy in the belief they are helping the deceased attain full access to heaven.

Church members are told to focus on their ancestors, a rite understandable in a relatively new denomination founded in 1830. But so many now perform the rituals for celebrities, heroes and perfect strangers that the practice has spun out of control.

Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Zedong, King Herod, Al Capone and Mickey Mouse have all appeared for a short time in the International Genealogical Index for proxy baptisms, said Helen Radkey, a researcher specialized in the IGI.

Journalist Tom Heneghan suggests it is reasonable to expect Pope Benedict to be baptized by proxy in an LDS temple a year after the Pope’s future but inevitable demise, citing “a centuries-long list of popes Mormons have baptized” already. Mr. Heneghan thinks it strange that Pope Benedict will be baptized LDS given the fact that, when he served in the capacity of “the Vatican’s top doctrinal authority,” he ruled that Mormon baptisms are not Christian.

LDS Church spokeswoman Kim Farah responded:

“There is no reason theologically why a former Pope or any other church leader shouldn’t be offered the same opportunity given to the rest of mankind.”

In fact, theologically, perhaps the Pope is more in need of this kind of Mormon intervention than the rest of mankind. According to past LDS apostles, the Catholic Church was founded by the Devil and all authority residing within that Church is only that “which his Satanic majesty was pleased to bestow upon her” (LDS Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, 1884, page 205).

In explaining a passage from the Book of Mormon, late LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie wrote,

It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church. Nephi saw this “church which is most abominable above all other churches” in vision. He “saw the devil that he was the foundation of it” and also the murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have been a part of this satanic organization. (1 Ne. 13:1-10)He saw that this most abominable of all churches was founded after the day of Christ and his apostles; that it took away from the gospel of the lamb many covenants and many plain and precious parts; that it perverted the right ways of the Lord; that it deleted many teachings from the Bible; that this church was the “mother of harlots;”… (1 Ne. 13:24-42)

Nephi beheld further that this church was the “mother of abominations,” and “the whore of all the earth”… (Mormon Doctrine, 1958 edition, page 130)

Later in the same book Apostle McConkie expanded on the doctrine a bit:

…speaking of harlots in the figurative sense, [Nephi] designated the Catholic Church as “the mother of harlots” (1 Nephi 13:34; 14:15-17), a title which means that the protestant churches, the harlot daughters which broke off from the great and abominable church, would themselves be apostate churches.” (ibid., page 315)

Given the view of the Catholic Church expressed by LDS apostles, maybe that explains why Pope John Paul II was vicariously baptized in a Mormon temple four times (and Pope Pius XII three times); maybe “the same opportunity given to the rest of mankind” — usually just one proxy baptism per person — isn’t sufficient for the worldwide leaders of Satan’s great and abominable church.

Interestingly, the Reuters article points out that the public version of the LDS Church’s International Genealogical Index available online is a “purged version,” which does not show the temple ordinances that have been performed for the individuals on the list; that information is only available to Mormons. Furthermore, the article says the name of Pope John Paul II has been removed from the online IGI, though his now-anonymous files remain in the database.

Names are purged from the public IGI after being found and publicized. Pope John Paul I and Pope Paul VI were both baptized and were listed on the online IGI in December but removed after Reuters asked about them, [LDS Church spokeswoman] Farah confirmed.

Researcher Helen Radkey claims, “They remove any names that could potentially cause criticism.”

I wonder if that’s the same reason the current edition of Mormon Doctrine no longer designates the Catholic Church as the “whore of all the earth.” While Bruce McConkie’s exposition of 1 Nephi was clearly in line with the teachings of earlier LDS leaders, subsequent editions of the book (after 1958) have “purged” from its pages the controversial identity of Catholicism as “the Church of the Devil.”

At last April’s General Conference, President James E. Faust (Second Counselor in the First Presidency) talked a bit about ministering angels (see “A Royal Priesthood”).

To understand President Faust’s comments, it’s important to first recognize that the LDS view of angels is different from the historic Christian understanding. According to the Bible, angels are created by God as angels–a specific created creature (see Psalm 148). Mormonism, on the other hand, teaches that angels are the spirits of human beings. Generally speaking, according to Mormonism, the angels who interact with people on earth are the spirits of human beings who have died and now reside in the Spirit World (see LDS Bible Dictionary, “Angels”). For example, in Mormonism the angel Michael is Adam, and the angel Gabriel is Noah.

With that background, let’s look at President Faust’s General Conference talk. He spoke about ministering angels (deceased human beings) and how they have appeared in both ancient and modern times to give “instruction, warnings, and directions, which benefited the people they visited.” President Faust continued by quoting sixth Prophet of the LDS Church, Joseph F. Smith:

“In like manner our fathers and mothers, brothers, sisters and friends who have passed away from this earth, having been faithful, and worthy to enjoy these rights and privileges, may have a mission given them to visit their relatives and friends upon the earth again, bringing from the Divine Presence messages of love, of warning, or reproof and instruction, to those whom they had learned to love in the flesh.”

President Faust then commented to his LDS congregation, “Many of us feel that we have had this experience.”

Indeed, there are many stories within Mormon circles that relate appearances of the dead to the LDS living. Many of these experiences take place in Mormon temples; Latter-day Saints consider each one sacred.

Christians have long been concerned over the way Mormons welcome and treasure communication with their deceased friends and loved ones, for God makes it abundantly clear that we are to have absolutely nothing to do with communing with the dead. He calls this behavior–and anyone who practices it–an “abomination” (see Deuteronomy 18:9-14). He says that by engaging in this forbidden pursuit people “prostitute” themselves, become “defiled,” and cause God to set His face against them (see Leviticus 19:26, 31; 20:6).

So the Mormon belief that it is a good thing to communicate with the dead raises red flags for Christians. But wait; there’s more.

As expressed above by President Smith, Mormons are taught that the dead who appear to them are sent by God, to complete a God-given mission; to bring them messages from the Divine Presence, messages of warning and instruction. Jesus’ parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man (Luke 16:19ff) casts doubt on God’s willingness to allow visits between the dead and the living. The parable says, “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.” Nevertheless, Mormon doctrine continues to encourage communication between the living and the dead.

But wait; there’s still more.

In his conference talk, President Faust went a bit further. He said,

“Many of us feel that we have had this experience [communicating with dead loved ones]. Their ministry has been and is an important part of the gospel.”

For Bible-believing Christians, this raises the question: What “gospel” is this?

How can something so emphatically denounced and forbidden by God in His Word be promoted as “an important part of the gospel”?

A bit further in the sermon quoted by President Faust (but not included in his conference talk), President Smith said,

“These are correct principles. There is no question about that in my mind. It is according to the Scriptures; it is according to the revelation of God to the Prophet Joseph Smith;…” (Gospel Doctrine, page 437)

The Scriptures say,

And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. (Isaiah 8:19-20)

So is communing with the dead an “important part of the gospel”? Is it a correct principle according to the Scriptures? You be the judge.

It started in 1995. Jewish leaders met with LDS Church representatives in an effort to find a solution to the concern Jews had over posthumous proxy Mormon baptisms of Jewish Holocaust victims. The two groups signed an agreement aimed at preventing the names of Holocaust victims from being added to the Church’s genealogical index and limiting any Jewish names in the index to those who were direct ancestors of living LDS Church members. The Church also agreed to remove any existing Jewish names in the index of which they were made aware.

In 2002 Jewish and LDS Church leaders reaffirmed the agreement reached in 1995.

In December 2003 concerned Jews told the press that the LDS Church was not honoring the 1995 agreement while Mormon officials claimed they remained in full compliance with the agreement.

The following April (2004) concerned Jewish leaders asked Senator Hilary Clinton to intervene in order to get the LDS Church to abide by the previous agreement. She met with LDS Senator Orin Hatch but Senator Clinton declined to comment on what was discussed at the private meeting. The LDS Church had no comment regarding the renewed accusations.

One year later, April 2005, Jewish leaders again met with LDS Church representatives. Saying the Church had broken its 10-year-old agreement to refrain from performing proxy baptisms of Jewish Holocaust victims, Jewish representatives again asked the Church to honor its 1995 agreement. The Church said it had always kept its part of the agreement; nevertheless, the two groups reaffirmed the existing pact.

Fast-forward another year to May 2006. The Jerusalem Post reports:

Jewish leaders in a dispute with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints over the practice of posthumous baptisms say there is new evidence that names of Jewish Holocaust victims continue to show up in the church’s vast genealogical database.

“We’ve been dealing with it for 11 years, since 1995, and we continue to deal with it,” said Ernest Michel, a Holocaust survivor and founding member of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors.

…A cross-referencing of more than 1,500 Dutch Jews whose names should have been deleted from the church’s International Genealogical Index remain in the database, Michel said.

Over the past three months, the entries were matched by Salt Lake City researcher Helen Radkey against a 1995 list of deleted names provided by church leaders to Michel’s organization.

This is a complicated issue, to be sure. The LDS Church maintains 400,000,000 names in their International Genealogical Index, a list continually growing, added to by millions of LDS members. A few thousand inappropriate Jewish names must seem insignificant to the Mormon Church. Yet is it right for the Church to sign an agreement that they cannot or will not honor?

Mormon President Gordon B. Hinckley told the Associated Press that baptism for the dead is only an offer of LDS Church membership–which deceased individuals are free to reject. “So there’s no injury done to anybody,” President Hinckley said.

This lack of sensitivity amazes me. I understand that baptism for the dead is viewed by Mormons as an act of love, done in order to provide everyone with a chance to attain a better level of glory in the afterlife. This is why I say it’s a complicated issue. But setting aside whether or not Mormons should continue to baptize Holocaust victims despite objections from the Jewish community, the statement that there is “no injury done to anybody” seems a rather cold defense.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper, 2003 associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said,

“As far as Judaism is concerned, [baptism of the dead] is theologically irrelevant, but emotionally it is quite distressful because it is viewed by many of us as a sign of disrespect.”

A year later, the new dean and founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Rabbi Marvin Hier, said,

“It’s ridiculous for people to pretend they have the key to heaven. And even if they say they want to do somebody a favor … it’s not a symbol of love. It’s a symbol of arrogance.”

I’m sure Mormons would disagree with the Jewish position expressed by these men; yet it would be a good thing for Mormons to try to understand the issue from the Jewish perspective.

Perhaps Mormons could consider this scenario. A powerful and influential group has begun collecting the names of Mormon pioneers and martyrs. They are compiling them into a database which is accessible to researchers worldwide and will likely continue to be accessible for hundreds of years. This database includes records for each Mormon who has given his or her life, or sacrificed in another significant way, in consequence of their determination to remain faithful to the Mormon Gospel. Attached to each name is a letter of resignation from LDS Church membership, sent by proxy to Church headquarters in Salt Lake City.

Though the letters are written and sent only to provide these departed ones the opportunity to leave Mormonism and join another church if they so wish, do LDS descendants of these Mormon pioneers merely shrug off their ancestors’ proxy resignations without another thought? Are Mormons not concerned about what future researchers may find and mistakenly believe about these LDS heroes?

I suspect Latter-day Saints would be very upset over Mormon pioneer proxy resignations from the LDS Church. They may even believe it to be an injustice to the memories of their loved-ones which, of course, is a devastating injury to everybody concerned.