Temple prep - Endowed from on High "Lesson 3"

I'm reading the Church Education System's manual for temple preparation and adding my two cents. Text found here. 

Objective

“And we ask thee, Holy Father, that thy servants may go forth from this house armed with thy power, and that thy name may be upon them, and thy glory be round about them” (D&C 109:22). God powers are the best! Let's go make some new animal species and some tornadoes!

To help class members understand that those who attend the temple worthily will receive great blessings from the Lord. I've been reading a lot about "blessings" in these temple prep materials. I hope this lesson gets into some concrete details. People should know what to expect in temporal in return for the temple attendance.

Preparation

1. Carefully review the scriptures used in this lesson so that you will be prepared to lead the class discussion about them. Naturally.
   
2. You may want to prepare to have class members sing a hymn about temple work, such as “We Love Thy House, O God” (Hymns, no. 247), or about the eternal nature of truth, such as “Oh Say, What Is Truth?” (Hymns, no. 272). Sounds brainwashy, but on theme.
   
3. If Family Home Evening Video Supplement 2 (53277) is available, you may want to show “Temples Are for Eternal Covenants,” a six-minute segment. Oh dear Lord, DO NOT SHOW THAT VIDEO! The sentimentality is laid on in extremely thick layers of Carpenters-esque song and enough '80s soft focus to make everyone will feel awkward as fuck. Gordon's talk at the end is more of the same empty temple rhetoric we've seen previously. Skip the film.
   

Lesson Presentation

Ask class members if they have any questions. About what? You haven't even introduced the topic yet and the first lesson was too safe to incite any kind of questions, so unless these kids have read something on their own (from the Internet, say) they won't have anything to ask. Take the time required to answer questions to the best of your ability and as guided by the Lord’s Spirit. OK, fine. Here's a question: Why did the Church change the initiation back in 2005? Don't we criticize early Christianity for changing baptism from immersion to sprinkling? Why would God condone the change from sitting naked and getting touched to sitting in garments and only having gestures of touching? I thought we were supposed to be washed and anointed BEFORE dawning the garment of the holy priesthood. Remember that some aspects of temple work must not be discussed outside the temple. Like not being touched naked while being washed? It's no longer part of the temple so we can talk about it, can't we?

Temple Work Has Existed Since Ancient Times

You may want to begin by singing together a hymn about temple work or about the eternal nature of truth. Then again, the temple LDS ceremonies as we now have them don't seem to be eternal in nature at all. They are not to be found in ancient cultures and they have not remained the same since Joseph Smith made them up in the mid-1840s. Teaching that they are unchanging truth is misleading.

Explain that the Lord has always commanded His people to build temples. Well, not "always". The first construction we consider a temple - the Israelite tabernacle - was commanded thousands of years after the creation of Adam and Eve. I'm also reluctant to accept that God has a "people" and that that people is the Israelite nation and Jews. He has revealed the work to be done in temples. It has a lot to do with killing animals and burning their fat and blood, two of God's favorite foods.

• What temples or tabernacles are mentioned in the scriptures? The Israelite tabernacle, Solomon's (First Temple) and Second temple (started under Cyrus the Great, embellished by Herod and destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE) are all from the Bible; The Book of Mormon mentions an early Solomon temple replica built by Nephi and another one (or is it the same one) shows up hundreds of years later in the land of Bountiful (but all this stuff has never been confirmed in the slightest by archeology or anthropological research); Doctrine & Covenants calls for the construction of the Kirtland and Nauvoo temples; The Pearl of Great Price only rehashes references to Second Temple as found in Matthew.

Invite class members to review scripture indexes to find references dealing with temples and tabernacles. What does this have to do with the blessings you receive from the temple? Is this list making taking us somewhere? You may want to list the class members’ answers on the chalkboard. Because it helps the students feel like they've contributed to the lesson. You may also want to have class members review the following scriptures:

Moses’ tabernacle: Exodus 40:1–2, 34–38

Solomon’s temple: 2 Chronicles 3:1–2; 2 Chronicles 5:1

Herod’s temple: Matthew 21:12–15

Nephite temples: 2 Nephi 5:16; Mosiah 1:18; 3 Nephi 11:1

Explain that because of apostasy, all of these temples eventually lost their true purposes and were destroyed. The true purpose being sacrificing animals to Jehovah so he can relish in the smell of burnt fat and blood. Temple work in its fulness has been restored in our day through the Prophet Joseph Smith, bringing great blessings into our lives. And through the Freemasons. Don't forget the Freemasons! And don't ignore the fact that Joseph did not restore animal sacrifice, so I guess he didn't really restore the "fulness" of previous temples at all. Are we going to list the "great blessings" the temple brings to us?

Elder Bruce R. McConkie said: “The inspired erection and proper use of temples is one of the great evidences of the divinity of the Lord’s work. But cathedrals, synagogues, megachurches, and other religious buildings of other religions do not obviously. Wait, is he talking about penises? … Where there are temples, with the spirit of revelation resting upon those who administer therein, there the Lord’s people will be found; where these are not, the Church and kingdom and the truth of heaven are not” (Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. [1966], 781). Now he's talking about people with penises, er... Priesthood. Well who cares what Bruce is talking about considering all the things he's said that sound a lot like bullshit. I'm pretty sure we don't need to listen to him. He was never the prophet anyway.

Those Who Attend the Temple Worthily Are Promised Great Blessings

The temple, or the house of the Lord, is the place where we go to prepare for exaltation in the celestial kingdom. Right, going out into the world healing the sick and feeding the hungry is horrible preparation. YOU NEED THE ROBES AND HANDSHAKES! There we learn more about Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. That's debatable. You just learn a couple extra names. We make covenants with Them, and They promise wonderful blessings to us. What "wonderful blessings"? Do tell.

In the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord has described some of the blessings that come to those who attend the temple and live worthy of the covenants made there. Some of these blessings are described in section 109, which is the prayer offered at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. A prayer to God describes the blessings God will give us? Aren't prayers what we ask for and not necessarily what God will give us? The words of this prayer were given to Joseph Smith by revelation. Joseph, this is Almighty God. Here's what you need to say to me. I know it's weird I just need to hear it in your charming voice...

President Howard W. Hunter said that this prayer “continues to be answered upon us individually, upon us as families, and upon us as a people because of the priesthood power the Lord has given us to use in His holy temples” (“The Great Symbol of Our Membership,” Ensign, Oct. 1994, 4). If Howard said so it must be true!

President Hunter then quoted some of the verses from section 109. Ask the class members to read these verses: Doctrine and Covenants 109:10–12, 22–23, 59, 67, 72, 75. Ask them to look for the blessings mentioned by the Lord.

Following the reading, ask the class members to list the blessings they have identified. Let's just skip to where you these blessings are listed below... Write the comments on the chalkboard. The blessings mentioned may include the following:

1. The Lord’s glory will be upon His people. Sounds great, but what does this mean? Will we all be shining brighter than the noonday sun? Will our hair be as brilliant white flames? Will we be accompanied by hosts of angels singing our praises? What?
   
2. The Lord’s servants will leave the temple with the Lord’s power, name, and glory, and angels will have charge over them. What power is that? The power to make billions of spirit children? The power to descend from the sky in a pillar of fire and float in the air? What power are we talking about? Who of the endowed LDS community has shown any sign of having these god powers? As for his name, you don't have to go to the temple for it. It's Elohim. I'm still confused about what the "glory" of the Lord is supposed to mean here. What will the angels who have charge over us do? Are these guardian angels? Inspiring angels? Is it even an honor for angels to have charge over a human or is it more like an annoying babysitting duty?
   
3. The Lord’s servants will take the truth of the gospel from the temple to the ends of the earth. This is a blessing for us how? We've already got our new secret name, special secret underwear and know the True Order of Prayer. We're good to go. Isn't preaching to others more of a blessing to those "others" and not us?
   
4. Stakes will be organized so that the Lord’s people may be gathered. I can see how this is sort of a blessing. Having a supportive community definitely benefits our psychological health. That said, I can't see how going to the temple produces this blessing. You can't get a temple before you have a few stakes set up first, so what really produces the stake is getting people to come to church regularly in the first place and getting them to pay their tithing. Once the people are there and the money's in, you just might get a temple. The cause and effect here are backwards.
   
5. All of scattered Israel will learn the truth and rejoice. "Scattered Israel"? Oh please. The LDS Church has not been at all effective in finding scattered Israel. We're still adopting everyone into the tribe of Ephraim. The Church isn't very good about sharing the truth either. They only just opened up about one of Joseph's favorite magic peep stones. It took them 180 years to reveal that truth to the world.
   
6. The families of the Saints and all of their sick and afflicted will be remembered before the Lord. Remembered by not healed or succored. Notice that the rate of illness and recovery  for LDS people are comparable their neighbors' with similar diets and lifestyles.
   
7. The Lord’s kingdom will fill the whole earth. We talking about a temporal or spiritual kingdom? Does fill mean there are no gaps or does it mean you'll find a Mormon within a 500 mile radius regardless of where you drop a pin on the map (oceans excluded, of course)? So far the LDS Church does not own the whole world (just Utah and 2% of Florida) and only makes up about .2% of the earth's population. Looks like we had all better go to the temple a lot more!
   
8. The Lord’s servants will someday be caught up to meet the Lord and will be with Him forever. Ah yes, the rapture and the resurrection of the dead. That will be one disgusting and terrifying event of carrion and carnage. God can hardly wait.By the way, why didn't God have Joseph pray for the blessing of eternal families? Isn't that the kicker for Mormons these days?
   

“Yea, and my presence shall be [in my house], for I will come into it, and all the pure in heart that shall come into it shall see God” (D&C 97:16). I've never known anyone in all my life who has ever professed to have seen God in the temple, only a couple batty old women who claim they saw the spirit of some deceased person show up to thank them. I think this is a wonderful time to go back and listen to Tom Philips' description of his second anointing. It might also be a fine time to read what Dallin Oaks has to say about trying to be worthy of seeing Jesus.

• How do you feel when you consider these wonderful blessings promised to those who attend the temple worthily and honor their covenants? I feel like someone's trying to pull the wool over my eyes. I do. I feel like this is the typical sort of motivation to get all us jackasses chasing a carrot they'll never catch. I feel pleased with myself for no longer attending the temple. But let's keep in mind that feelings or just feelings.

President Howard W. Hunter said: “Has there ever been a people with such stirring and wonderful promises! Yes. No wonder the Lord desires that His followers point themselves toward His example and toward His temples” (Ensign, Oct. 1994, 5). Non sequitur.

The Lord also made promises connected with temples in Doctrine and Covenants 97. Ask the class members to read Doctrine and Covenants 97:15–21.

• What do verses 15–17 teach about what the Lord’s people must do to qualify for the Lord’s blessings in His temples? (Be pure in heart and not allow any unclean thing to come into the temples.) God wants to give you lots of shit but only if you've washed your hands. He hates putting shit in dirty hands, it takes the fun out of it.

Explain that those who are pure in heart are called Zion. Verses 15–21 teach that we can help to build Zion by worthily attending the temple and striving to be pure in heart and undefiled by evil. The part that especially helps build Zion is your tithing. Pay your tithing and give generous donations to the Church. God likes it like that. And stop kissing Satan's asshole! God hates that.

• What blessings are promised in these verses to a people worthy to be called Zion? They'll see the Lord grab a soda from the temple kitchen fridge or maybe catch him sneak from the bathroom to his bedroom post shower.

Explain that a city named Zion existed in ancient times. No it didn't. Joseph made it up for his completely bullshit "inspired translation" of the Bible. This city was built by the prophet Enoch and his people. It was taken to heaven because of the righteousness of its people (see D&C 38:4; Moses 7:18–21, 69). Beamed straight up into the anus of heaven!

Zion will also exist in the latter days. As a U.S. national park in southern Utah. In the tenth article of faith, the Lord promises that a city named Zion will be built on the American continent. In Missouri, right? Or is this what the Church has in mind in Florida? Ask the class members to read this article of faith. Explain that the scattered people of Israel will gather to this great city (see D&C 103:11–13). We just have to figure out who and where they are.

Today, the members of the Church are counseled to become worthy to attend the holy temple and to build up Zion wherever they are living in the world. How will that work? Will they all migrate to Zion, America with their various chunks of the city and fit them all together like a giant puzzle or something? Or do you mean that members everywhere need to learn how to be pure in heart so they can enter Zion after the LDS Church builds it somewhere? We are to make our homes like temples—places of purity, love, and personal revelation. If you're living in a motor home it will probably be easier for you to take your personal Zion to the real, though still undetermined Zion.

• What can we do to become more pure in heart? Sell all we have, give the money to the poor and live humble lives of service to others.
• In what ways does the world sometimes make it hard to remain pure in heart? The world presents us with endless opportunities to buy more and more cool shit and even more stuff that will isn't so cool and will definitely end up in the trash within a year or two.
• In what ways could you help your family, branch, or ward to become pure in heart? Encourage them to give up their giant homes, several cars, massive televisions, expensive recreational toys and live like Jesus did. Maybe we could turn our churches into hospitals, homeless shelters, free hostels for travelers or food distribution centers. We should probably stop developing so much land and start designating our properties as wildlife refuges or something.

Explain that those who make and keep temple covenants and strive throughout their lives to become pure in heart are those who can help to build Zion. It sounds like the ultimate temple blessing here is that you'll get to become another brick in the wall of Zion. "You'll be blessed to work for us!" It sounds like a scam.

Conclusion

Bear testimony that those who worthily attend the temple will receive great blessings from the Lord, including the blessings of being a Zion people. You can say anything at all here. Anything at all. Tell the students that because you went to the temple you were able to see an old woman out trying to find her dog, you stopped and helped her find it and now she's taking the discussions. Tell them that you were once worried about your child's health but then one day in the temple you met someone who is an expert at administering essential oils and now, thanks to that expertise, your child is healthy and happy. Tell them that because you go to the temple twice a month, the Church is now building a temple in your old mission area. You really can take any event you want and attribute it to either going or not going to the temple. We must do all that we can to become worthy of these blessings and to become pure in heart. Please reference the so called blessing discussed above. They're not as impressive as they sound.

You may want to show the video presentation “Temples Are for Eternal Covenants.” I repeat, DO NOT show this video (linked above). It is horrible and your students will resent it.

Temple prep - "Dressed in White"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.

When we do ordinance work in the temple we wear white clothing. This clothing is symbolic of purity and worthiness and cleanliness. No news here. Baptism clothing is white for the same reason.

Upon entering the temple you exchange your street clothing for the white clothing of the temple. No one wears everyday clothes to the temple. If by "street clothing" you mean "Sunday best", then yes. Actually, no. Men get to keep their why button up shirt they wear in, so not all "street clothing" is traded in. This change of clothing takes place in the locker room, where each individual is provided with a locker and a dressing space and is completely private. Kids, this is good, practical information, but it has absolutely nothing to do with knowing your temple covenants before you go. In the temple the ideal of modesty is carefully maintained. How scandalous it would be for men or women see any sexy skin of another man or woman! :S As you put your clothing in the locker you leave your cares and concerns and distractions there with them. You step out of this private little dressing area dressed in white and you feel a oneness and a sense of equality, for all around you are similarly dressed. Communist uniforms LDS style.

If you are going to the temple for the first time, counsel with your bishop. When he issues you a recommend he will explain something of the nature of the clothing that will be required in the temple. What "counseling" is there to be done? Just tell us what the clothing is! What's that? The Church now does tell everyone in the whole world about our temple clothing? Yeah! Excellent job, Church! Way to disclose! Obtaining this clothing need not be a worry to you. You can either buy it through Church Distribution Services or, in some cases, rent it at the temple. In the latter case a very modest fee is required which covers only the cost of laundering the clothing. Rental clothing is not available at the smaller temples. Good practical information here, kids, but chances are your parents will buy your clothes for you.

As with the ceremonies and ordinances of the temple, outside of the temple we say very little about the clothing worn inside. NOT ANYMORE, DUDE! We can say that it, like the ceremonies, has great symbolic meaning. You can say whatever you want when you prohibit everyone from talking about what you've said.

It is a mark of reverence and respect when the Church member visits the temple dressed and groomed in such a way that he or she would not be uncomfortable in the presence of the Lord. Why should anyone be ashamed to show up as they are to the Maker who made them? Maybe it's time the Lord took a good hard look at his handiwork. Suppose for a moment that you are invited to be the guest in the home of a prominent and highly respected leader. Now imagine you're the kind of fool to grovel at authority... You are given to understand that you will mingle with distinguished guests who have received similar invitations. And you're going to want to do some schmoozing... The invitation is an indication that the host holds you in very high regard. You realize that many others would highly prize such an invitation, but for one reason or another they have not likewise been invited and therefore are not able to attend. So relax, the "leader" already likes your shit. Under those circumstances it is doubtful that you would arrive in old work clothes or dressed as you do for recreation. It is doubtful that a man would go unshaven, or a woman with her hair unkempt. So please show your ability to follow all social norms for dress and grooming! This is one case where the ways of the world are indeed the ways of the Lord. Remember the Lord looketh on your lapels for dander and mustard dribbles, and your shoes for fresh polish.

People of dignity and refinement, upon receiving an invitation to an important gathering, frequently make inquiry as to what dress would be in order. Would you not prepare carefully for such a special occasion? This is rhetorical. You would. You most definitely would. You might even purchase new clothing in the hope that your appearance would not detract from the dignified nature of the setting. You don't want to stick out. Remember the parable of the nail.

Care would also be shown for the pressing and cleaning of your clothes. Holy shit, you're still talking about dressing prim and proper. You would feel uncomfortable if you were not properly attired. Unless that sort of thing doesn't bother you.

 
The opportunity to visit the temple might be compared to such an invitation. I think every reader understood where you were going with this, but thanks for spelling it out.

There is one occasion only when members of the Church are invited into the temple proper in “street” clothing, and that is when they witness a temple marriage. Again, most people don't call their Sunday best "street" clothing. In that case only the shoes are removed, and these may be replaced with white footwear. Why? This sounds horribly superstitious. Years ago the Brethren authorized this to be so for the convenience of those family members and friends who would not be going through an endowment session immediately prior to the marriage. So there was a temple change? What else has changed?

Brides and grooms enter the temple to be married for time and all eternity. Ahem! ...The word you're looking for is "sealed". There brides wear white dresses that are long-sleeved, modest in design and fabric, and free of elaborate ornamentation. God hates immodest female arms and prideful embellishments! Grooms also dress in white. Brethren who come to witness temple marriages do not wear tuxedos. Unless they're all white tuxedos.

We have been puzzled and a little saddened at times, when attending the temple, to find that some have come to witness marriages or to attend a session in the temple dressed as though they were going to a picnic or an athletic event. Or in terrible black tuxedos like they're going to the Oscars.

The privilege to enter the temple deserves more from us than that. Why do you assholes always act to entitled! Argh! It is pleasing to the Lord when we bathe our bodies and put on clean clothing, however inexpensive the clothing may be. Yes, expensive clothing is of no consequence, but for the Lord's sake, please bath. He really wants to watch you bathe. We should dress in such a way that we might comfortably attend a sacrament meeting or a gathering that is proper and dignified. So you're saying Sunday best, right?

On occasions there has been one to witness a wedding who obviously has paid little attention to the counsel that the Brethren have given about dress and grooming, about taking care not to emulate the world in the extremes of style in clothing, in hair length and arrangement, etc. We wonder why it is that a person who is mature enough to be admitted to the temple would not at once be sensible enough to know that the Lord could not be pleased with those who show obvious preference to follow after the ways of the world. Bro, this entire section you have been hammering us about following American dress norms. How are those norms separate from the world? Are you suggesting that God's culture is mid-century American? This is ethnocentrism at it's finest.

How could a recommended member attend the temple in clothing that is immodest or worldly? Apparently they can't. How could one wear a style of hair that is not in keeping with refinement and dignity? How long has this stick been up your ass??

When you have the opportunity to go to the temple to participate in the temple ceremonies or to witness a sealing, remember where you are. It's very easy to forget because all these LDS places look just about exactly the same. You are a guest in the house of the Lord. He doesn't want to come home to see you lounging about in his favorite chair watching your damn shows on his celestial television! You should groom yourself and clothe yourself in such a way that you would feel comfortable should your Host appear. Exactly! Sit quietly with your arms folded and DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING! (By the way, God loves you and is happy to see you.)

Those who hold and share in the blessings of the priesthood should have their bodies covered as was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith when the endowment ceremony was given to him. Temple change alert!

Members who have received their temple ordinances thereafter wear the special garment or underclothing. Garments are provided by an agency of the Church—and are generally available to members throughout the world through a distribution program operated by the Church. And they're very reasonably priced.

The garment represents sacred covenants. It fosters modesty and becomes a shield and protection to the wearer. Can we talk a bit about what you mean by "shield and protection"? I understand the Church is shying away from all those stories of how garments stop bullets and fire and bear claws and other such earthly annoyances, so are we to understand that they just somehow keep Satan out of our pants? Should we not be getting aroused in our garments? Going vague doesn't exactly help your case.

"I make all my clothes in my garage because 

I want to be sexy modest for the Lord."

The wearing of such a garment does not prevent members from dressing in the fashionable clothing generally worn in the nations of the world. Yes, it does. Mormon women have an extremely hard time buying fashionable clothing. That's why Utah fashion is it's own unfortunate thing. Only clothing that is immodest or extreme in style would be incompatible with wearing the garment. Don't laugh! Porn shoulders are a huge problem, man! Any member of the Church, whether he or she has been to the temple or not, would in proper spirit want to avoid extreme or revealing fashions. You keep using the word "extreme", isn't it past time for a definition? To me, Photoshopping sleeves on angels just might fit the definition.

There may be occasions when endowed members of the Church face questions on the garment. Questions like "Why the fuck can't I every find ones that fit right?" and "Why the hell am I wearing an extra layer in 100 degree heat?"

On one occasion one of the brethren was invited to speak to the faculty and staff of the Navy Chaplains Training School in Newport, Rhode Island. The audience included a number of high-ranking naval chaplains from the Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths. Yes! I love this very defensive story!

In the question-and-answer period one of the chaplains asked, “Can you tell us something about the special underwear that some Mormon servicemen wear?” The implication was, “Why do you do that? Isn’t it strange? Doesn’t that present a problem?”

To the chaplain who made the inquiry he responded with a question: “Which church do you represent?” In response he named one of the Protestant churches.

He said, “In civilian life and also when conducting the meetings in the military service you wear clerical clothing, do you not?” The chaplain said that he did. Yeah, dumb fucker, you sure do!

He continued: “I would suppose that that has some importance to you, that in a sense it sets you apart from the rest of your congregation. It is your uniform, as it were, of the ministry. Also, I suppose it may have a much more important place. It reminds you of who you are and what your obligations and covenants are. It is a continual reminder that you are a member of the clergy, that you regard yourself as a servant of the Lord, and that you are responsible to live in such a way as to be worthy of your ordination.”

He then told them: “You should be able to understand at least one of our reasons why Latter-day Saints have a deep spiritual commitment concerning the garment. He sure a fuck should be able to understand but he's a near-sighted, self-centered Mormon hater! A major difference between your churches and ours is that we do not have a professional clergy, as you do. Because Mormons are way above showing off their devotion like that, you superficial sack of shit! The congregations are all presided over by local leaders. They are men called from all walks of life. Yet they are ordained to the priesthood. They hold offices in the priesthood. They are set apart to presiding positions as presidents, counselors, and leaders in various categories. The women, too, share in that responsibility and in those obligations. Just at home though when their husband unload on them and ask for advice. We really don't allow any women to preside over men directly. The man who heads our congregation on Sunday as the bishop may go to work on Monday as a postal clerk, as an office worker, a farmer, a doctor; or he may be an air force pilot or a naval officer. The only thing he may not be is a woman. By our standard he is as much an ordained minister as you are by your standard. He is recognized as such by most governments. We draw something of the same benefits from this special clothing as you would draw from your clerical vestments. The difference is that we wear ours under our clothing instead of outside, for we are employed in various occupations in addition to our service in the Church. These sacred things we do not wish to parade before the world.” Because we're not self-righteous show offs!

He then explained that there are some deeper spiritual meanings as well, connecting the practice of wearing this garment with covenants that are made in the temple. Oh, do tell us what "deeper spiritual meanings" he explained! No one in the temple really bothers telling us anything more than that they represent the lamb skin garments God made for Adam and Eve and that they have some kind of protective power. We wouldn’t find it necessary to discuss these—not that they are secret, he repeated, but because they are sacred. Not secret, we just won't tell you about it because you're all swine.

The garment, covering the body, is a visual and tactile reminder of these covenants. Which covenants? For many Church members the garment has formed a barrier of protection when the wearer has been faced with temptation. Ah ha! They do keep Satan out of some Mormons' pants! (Just not mine.) Among other things it symbolizes our deep respect for the laws of God—among them the moral standard. Or more accurately they symbolize our tendency to shame God's creation and guilt those in our group who do not abide by this culturally specific dress standard.

Temple Prep - "Come to the Temple"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.

 

There are many reasons why one should want to come to the temple. Even its external appearance seems to hint of its deeply spiritual purposes. Sounds like curiosity and you said curiosity was not a good reason to go to the temple. I should also add that the external appearance of the temple is all you get before going through. No one hears about the secret rituals unless they have someone close to them break the temple rules or they do a little online searching. Much more is this evident within its walls. Over the door to the temple appears the tribute “Holiness to the Lord.” When you enter any dedicated temple, you are in the house of the Lord. That "Holiness to the Lord" tribute is still external, sir, not "within its walls". Anyway, I really hope you explain some of the internal stuff to help us all understand just why you think the Lord would live in an LDS temple. I suspect you saw him there one morning in his pajamas frying a couple of eggs, or at least found his toothbrush in the bathroom.

In the Church we build buildings of many kinds. Like luxury malls, sky rise apartments and anything else that will fit in a city designed for 500 thousand people. We're busy little bees, ain't we? In them we worship, we teach, we find recreation, we organize. You forgot "buy", "sell", "invest" and "strategize". We can organize stakes and wards and missions and quorums and Relief Societies in these buildings or even in rented halls. But, when we organize families according to the order that the Lord has revealed, we organize them in the temples. What? It sounds like you need a little lesson on how families are made. There are several options. The most popular method is sexual reproduction. Another very popular approach is adoption. Both sexual reproduction and adoption can happen different ways, but I'm guessing you're already not paying attention...  Temple marriage, that sealing ordinance, is a crowning blessing that you may claim in the holy temple. The way you've framed it, it sounds more like the capstone requiring a skillful crane maneuver. 

In the temples members of the Church who make themselves eligible can participate in the most exalted of the redeeming ordinances that have been revealed to mankind. There, in a sacred ceremony, an individual may be washed and anointed and instructed and endowed and sealed. Weren't we washed at baptism? Why do we need to be washed again? And what do we need anointing for? How does the content of the instruction you speak of differ from our regular meetings? What does "endowed" mean exactly? I think sealings are the only thing non-endowed members really understand before they go through the temple. It means an eternal marriage, right? A marriage that can never ever be dissolved by God or man. And when we have received these blessings for ourselves, we may officiate for those who have died without having had the same opportunity. Why would God not give so many billions of his children this opportunity in life? Why would he make nearly everyone who's ever lived writhe in sorrow and anguish over the unavoidable loss of their loved ones at death for the duration of their earth life? Don't you think they'll be at least a little annoyed to find out that someone else was sealed on their behalf? That all their emotional suffering was for nothing? The jokes on them! In the temples the sacred ordinances are performed for the living and for the dead alike. Those who died without the law are exempt from the law. That's what the scriptures say. Do you believe your own scriptures? Here is the baptismal font, where vicarious baptisms for the dead are performed, with worthy members acting as proxy for those who have gone beyond the veil. Baptism, like most rites in most cultures, is horribly arbitrary. It's almost like God didn't think this through.

“Come to the temple.” If not now, come soon. Pray fervently, set your lives in order, save whatever you can in hopes that that day may come. "Save" as in "save your money so you can spend it on temple attendance? This finally sounds a bit like temple attendance in Jesus' day. Will we buy sacrificial doves and oxen there or just T-shirts and keychains? Start now that sometimes very difficult and discouraging journey of repentance. Because you know your reader is that besmirched with sin? Keep in mind that your audience has been baptized, and repentance, dear brother, is a prerequisite for baptism. What I mean is, we know about repentance. The temple transforms the individual and makes abundantly worthwhile any efforts made to get there. You're right about being transformed. I doubled my efforts to understand what I had gotten involved in and those efforts to understand ultimately changed my life in a big way. For some who live at great distances from a temple, the temples will come to you before you might come to them. Keep your faith and your hope and determine that you will come—that you will be worthy and that you will come to the temple. If you're online you have no excuse for not going to the temple right now.

Making good men better

Growing up I remember hearing a David O. McKay quote quite often (#25):

To me this sounded like a proof of the Church. What we have makes better people, therefore we are the One True Church of God on Earth. It also sounded like a justification for staying Mormon even if the Church weren't true. Why abandon the fiction if it leads men to self-improvement? I preferred to see this statement as wise, prophetic council for a true prophet of God...

That is until I looked up "make good men better" on the Internet and learned that this little motto has been lifted from the Freemasons! (It's not the only thing Mormonism has borrowed.)

If the prophet's just getting his material from the Freemasons, what the hell are we doing in church instead of attending our local lodge? We might as well go to the source, right?

Here's your conspiracy handshake picture of the day. TOTAL FREEMASON HANDSHAKE!!!

Christmas confusion: holiday origins

Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (possibly), Saturnalia, Yule, Koleda, Winter Solstice - in a word: Christmas before Christ. This is where it all began. The shortest day of the year (which happens to be today this year) has been celebrated in various way across Europe and elsewhere centuries, if not millennia, before Jesus was ever laid in a manger. Many of these traditions are still practiced under the guise of Christian worship.

Isn't it a bit strange that one of the biggest celebrations in Christianity is little more than a ripoff of non-Christian peoples? Christianity is little more than a latecomer to the already teaming milieu of late-December religious holidays. Isn't it strange that Christianity has not bothered purging the pagan from this most holy of holidays? Doesn't that make us all practicing pagans to some degree?

Does it matter at all where Christimas came from as long as we make it mean whatever we want it to mean? Hasn't commercialism already effectively undermined the Christian facade it now bears?

We've really improved on the beauty of the holiday, haven't we? Happy Winter Solstice, brothers and sisters.

Traditional marriage

It's nice to see the LDS Church recognized that the tradition of marriage is an ever-changing one:

For much of Western history, family “interest”—economic, political, and social considerations—dominated the choice of spouse. Parents had the power to arrange marriages or forestall unions of which they disapproved. By the late 1700s, romance and personal choice began to rival these traditional motives and practices. By Joseph Smith’s time, many couples insisted on marrying for love, as he and Emma did when they eloped against her parents’ wishes. (See here.)

It's a small admission, but it's a hell of a lot better than their usual homophobic bullshit about "traditional marriage" going back to Adam and Eve. Here the Church admits that women have long been considered property of a man (like in D&C 132:62) and an important trade commodity (think of the tradition of asking for a father's permission and his agreement to "give away the bride"). Kudos.

Let's do what we can to avoid reinstating that tradition where it has fallen out of use.

Fashion trends

God doesn't give a shit about what we mortals might think is cool. God tells us what is right and we adjust our thoughts and behavior to match his righteousness. End of story.

Jesus and the infinite atonement

How does it make any sense whatsoever that because Jesus suffered for our sins and shortcomings everything will one day be restored to perfection? How does it make any sense that one event that took place thousands of years ago is making things right today? Try anticipating your great-great grandchildren's debts and having the money ready for them in their exact moment of need. Try doing something today to absolutely guarantee your house will be clean in 100 years.

You can't do it, can you? Well God did. He did it for everyone. It was easy. He just had to kill his demigod offspring.

It works that way, promise! I know you don't have any demigod children of your own, but I'm sure that sacrificing one of your regular mortal children should at least take your mind off dinner for a week or two. Just make sure to burn the fat for Jehovah.

Heavenly fatherliness #38 - With the times

According to popular wisdom, a good father does not try to maintain some gold standard of his own time - he allows his children to be citizens of their day and age.

Out of date parents and grandparents are an extremely common comic trope. Technology's a bitch to keep up with. Pop culture is impossible. Political correctness is a huge headache. There's a lot to keep up on.

Asking anyone to stay completely up to date is, I think, a very tall order. We spend our whole lives trying to figure life out and by the time we hit a certain age or place in life we like to think we have a certain understanding. We know what we like and what we don't like. We find good things, work hard and made sacrifices to get them. We become interested in preserving what we have instead of deciding what we want. We go through a lot of shit and learn a lot of life lessons. We see people get hurt, hurt a few ourselves, and develop an idea or two about how to be nice. We might even feel clear on what's right and wrong. How are we supposed to give that up? How do we stay loose and adaptable?

Thankfully Heavenly Father's standard of being is an eternal standard. We just don't fully understand those standards, that's why he defines earthly, cultural standards according to the immediate needs of his children - so we can understand them. Kind of. He's a little hard to figure out, as the number of doubts expressed on this blog might indicate.

What we understand to be godly changes constantly. Much of what is considered to be godly is by today's standards horribly unethical. I doubt the whole "eternal standard" argument is a good approach any more. How do we arrive at ethical behavior through observance of  God's standards when they're so clearly man-made?

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father.

A change of tune

Before Section 132 was included in The Doctrine & Covenants in 1876 there was another section that addressed polygamy specifically. It was Section 101 verse 4 (later Section 109), now edited out. It explicitly called polygamy a crime, denied its practice in the Church, and clarified that a man should have only one wife and a woman should have only one husband.

Apologists rest their defense of Joseph Smith's and early leaders' practice of polygamy despite scripture commanding against it on the fact that polygamy was not generally practiced in the Church, and/or that Oliver Cowdery wrote the now removed Section 101 as a statement of belief that was then approved by the ignorant masses of General Conference and not a revelation to the prophet. So why didn't Joseph repeal it, like, ever? Or at least modify it?

Why didn't the Church redact Section 132 in 1995 when it released the very monogamous-sounding Family proclamation? Or why didn't the Church at least include a more obvious polygamous family option in the proclamation so as to be true to its current doctrine? It all seems a little dishonest.

Call it sanctioned by God, call it evil, ignore it, either way it's coming back to hit you.

Or the children's crusade

Mormon boys in their late teens are expected to dedicate two years of their lives to proselytizing for the LDS Church as missionaries. It's a right of passage. It's proof of conviction. It's a badge of honor. It's a sign of marriageability. It's a test of leadership capability. It's something most young men feel significant pressure to do and be successful at.

The Church has recently found a way to amp up the pressure one feels to serve a mission by lowering the age of service for men from 19 to 18. What this means in the context of the United States is that now, instead of discussing which universities you're applying to or where you've decided to go, high school seniors will be talking about whether or not they've put in their mission papers (the application to go on a mission) and where they've been assigned to serve the Church.

In other words, the decision to serve is now made at an even younger, more impressionable age more squarely within the dynamics of peer pressure instead of being made after about a year of higher education and significant social distancing from friends and family. It's stands to reason that the Church is probably trying to increase the percentage of young men serving missions (about 30% in the U.S.)

The demographic that typically goes undiscussed in church is the 70% of young men who aren't going and they young men who return early from their missions for one reason or another. On an anecdotal note, my close friends who did not serve missions have all explained the shame and ostracism they experienced as a result of staying home. Those who come home early share those same feelings.

Isn't their a more inspired way? Couldn't Jesus instruct the Church leadership in the creation of a more flexible and loving program that would allow everyone to participate without all the baggage of social pressure and shame? Is this really how God wants his work carried out? Is this really how we want to treat our children?

A bishop's blues

Here's another great response to Dieter's "doubt your doubts" talk, this time focusing more on the concept of there being room in the Church for everyone. How is a bishop to react when he learns that what he's been teaching has just been disavowed? How is he to sleep at night when he's held his congregation's standard of belief to the heights of pure fiction and disciplined members according to that standard? Former bishop and current high councilman Ganesh Cherian of New Zealand spells out some very real issues that are developing in the wake of recently revealed light and knowledge.

Thus vote the Brethren!

Remember how in all of LDS scripture God essentially taps a dude on the shoulder, tells him he's now a prophet, and sends him off to tell everyone else what it is he (God) wants? I'm not sure that process was the most efficient considering the prophet to non-prophet ratio and the tendency for huge portions of the population to be skeptical of what one man has to say, but I think that process would be much more convincing than what we have going on today. The Church leaders (our dear prophets, seers, and revelators) no longer do things Moses' way, or Isaiah's way, or Jesus' way, or Samuel the Lamanite's way, or Joseph Smith's way of wielding all decisive power and authority on a matter; now they sit around in board meetings and vote like businessmen. And nothing passes unless there is a unanimous vote in favor. It sounds a bit Catholic, but such is the business of revealing God's Will for us today. I'm just curious what happened to the traditional method of prophecy, in which men had much less say in what the message would be.

The days of being wild

I think every member has had a conversation or two about the transformation of the Church's image from the early days of unique facial hair styles to the unimaginative, clone-ish, clean cut look of today. We could talk about the history of how this came to be and discuss how silly it all is, but there's something else about this transition that eventually stood out to me.

The more I compared and contrasted the early Church with our current LDS Church, the more I noticed significant differences. Generally speaking, the early Mormons seemed to have a far greater range of expressing individualism and variety of thought compared to today, when so much of what we must think, believe, and do is dictated with precision. What happened to the freedom of belief and expression that once was found in Mormonism?

Then one day a friend of mine pointed out in a brief aside that the early Mormons were incredibly liberal for their times and today Mormons are known for taking a very conservative stance on most issues. How did Utah become one of the reddest states of the U.S.A.? Why does the Tea Party do so well where the Church is strongest? What happened to the spirit of early Mormonism? Why would God find a bunch of liberal, democratically-minded people to start his church only to hand it over to close-minded theocratic reactionaries?

Something didn't seem consistent about the trajectory of this "perfect" Church. Reading about what brought about the changes only clarifies who's really at the helm of mainstream Mormonism.

The temple - washing and anointing

As is customary in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I took out my temple "endowment" a couple of weeks before going on a mission at nineteen years old. I had no idea what would happen. I knew I would be inducted into wearing Mormon garments somehow at some point and that was good enough for me. I had grown up seeing my parents garments regularly in the laundry but they were often washed separately from the rest of our underwear. I picked them up and looked at them from time to time for the sake of curiosity but never for too long (they were Mom and Dad's underwear after all and who really wants to handle their parents underwear?). Mom's were particularly mysterious because they were all silky and slippery and seemed generally shapeless and incomprehensible.

I had no problems believing in the legitimacy of garments. On my way to the temple I knew I would be instructed (or commanded) to wear garments all the time from that day forward and I was okay with that. I was even excited about it. Honored actually. Garments to me represented the passage to adulthood. I would finally get to dress like the adults and see and do what the adults in Mormonism do (except for having sex).

I had heard, however, that not everyone likes the temple, that some people stop going to the temple or even to church because it's so weird. Once I heard a cousin make some kind of joke about people running around naked. It was enough to make a fellow at least a little nervous. This was going to be the day that I learned why non-Mormons considered Mormonism a cult. But I knew I wasn't joining a cult. I knew the Church so well. I had an entire life of devout attendance under my belt and I was sure everything would turn out great and I'd treasure the experience for the rest of my life.

As it turns out once things got rolling I found myself a little annoyed that I had no idea what I was doing or what was coming next. Why was it so taboo to talk about the temple? Why hadn't I been given any kind of detailed rundown before the big event? We make little kids practice being baptized over and over in preparation for the big day, but no one gets any training whatsoever before going through the numerous ritualistic components of the temple.

So when I was instructed to take off all my clothes and put on the "shield" (read white poncho) I felt a little weird. "Oh, I guess you do get naked in front of people in the temple. Um... Okay, what the heck, I'm here and I'm committed (plus I've got a decent washboard going on), whatever, here it goes..." I started striping down and the two officiators (old white guys I'd never seen before in my life) freaked out a little bit and told me to put the shield on first and then get undressed underneath. "Oops! Thanks a ton for being so clear the first time, guys! Are you two new at this by any chance?"

I wasn't sure if they were embarrassed by my mistake, embarrassed by my naked body, annoyed they hadn't given me clearer instructions, or annoyed I didn't know the drill. Whatever the case may be, I definitely felt embarrassed and annoyed.

They indicated for me to sit down on a chair, which I did, and then one of the guys said an obviously scripted prayer, touched me with a wet (just water) finger, said another prayer of sorts about me becoming a kind and a priest to the most highest godliest gods, etc., and touched me again but this time with an olive oily finger.

When I say touched I mean his finger made contact with my skin. Mostly this was no biggy because it's not like he was giving me a holy handjob with oil, but then again it was pretty messed up. I was naked and this stranger was touching me in the name of the afterlife. And yes, he did reach just inside the poncho so he could touch my side. Twice. That's messed up. I didn't like it. 

The experience got a wheel or two turning. The first wheel spun in the direction of "this is not cool! why does God want me to do this?" and the other wheel ran the direction of "dude, we're so sensitive and PC these days! just think what this was like back in the ancientest of times!" I couldn't decide if this was an occasion worthy of calling the cops or a lesson in how I was too prideful and skeptical and needed to just let the Spirit work. Here's what I did: I blocked my doubts and went ahead with the rest of the experience. (I had a mission to go on for Christ's sake!) I was finally instructed to put my Gs on. They felt way too big but I was happy enough to have them. 

In 2005 the Church changed the washing and anointing so that inductees wear their garments under the shield so they're no longer totally naked under there and the administrators no longer physically touch the inductees. It's a nice enough change, I guess. It's still an incredibly uncomfortable ordeal to go through, I'm sure. The crazy thing is that back in the day people really were completely naked, without even a small poncho, during this ceremony. 

Considering the fact that Mormons have gone from totally naked in a bathtub where they were completely washed by someone else to sitting in their underwear and a poncho while someone only gestures to touch them, I think it's safe to say that the washing and anointing is one of the most changed rituals of Mormonism. And that's significant considering the fact that Mormon's make such a stink about baptism being altered from full emersion to just a couple of drops of water on the head.

I don't wear temple garments anymore because they're a crock of shit embroidered with Freemasonry symbols and I don't need lame Freemason symbolism on my underwear, however if I were to get some today, instead of paying my tithing and attending the temple and shopping at the Church Distribution Outlet, I'd just go to Mormon's Secret and buy some that fit.