Mormonism and Freemasonry

[Lamanite]

I get no less than 2 e-mails a day requesting a reading list from friends and family who want to know more about the link between the Church and the Fraternity. (Thanks Dan Brown!)

I tell them to start with "The Early Masonic Catechisms" by Knoop, Jones and Hamer. I think the U of U still has this and others at the special collections library.

Morgan's "Exposed" does the job but is less than perfect at times. (Greg Kearny gave me another book and now I can't remember the name. It was a cheap book at Barnes and Noble. LOAP was with me. Maybe he can remember).

I tell them that Matthew Browns treatment may suffice depending on how seriously they want to pursue the subject. Perhaps if it is not adequate, They could run down his foot notes.

And I also think RSR does a nice job getting someone familiarized with the subject.

Any other books, essays, lectures etc. that any of you would add.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Oh, and the wiki stuff from FAIR is good if I remember right.

[HiJolly]

I get no less than 2 e-mails a day requesting a reading list from friends and family who want to know more about the link between the Church and the Fraternity. (Thanks Dan Brown!)

I tell them to start with "The Early Masonic Catechisms" by Knoop, Jones and Hamer. I think the U of U still has this and others at the special collections library.

Morgan's "Exposed" does the job but is less than perfect at times. (Greg Kearny gave me another book and now I can't remember the name. It was a cheap book at Barnes and Noble. LOAP was with me. Maybe he can remember).

I tell them that Matthew Browns treatment may suffice depending on how seriously they want to pursue the subject. Perhaps if it is not adequate, They could run down his foot notes.

And I also think RSR does a nice job getting someone familiarized with the subject.

Any other books, essays, lectures etc. that any of you would add.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Oh, and the wiki stuff from FAIR is good if I remember right.

All I want to say is that Matt B.'s book is not what it should have been. When his research approaches information that would put doubt on his thesis, he takes an abrupt 90-degree turn to ensure the info doesn't see the light of day. I would far rather have had him bring up the balancing info and deal with it honestly, rather than just pretend it doesn't exist.

Reminds me of the writing of Brother Palmer in his "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins" book. Same M.O., if a polar opposite position.

HiJolly

[cinepro]

I would highly recommend the Mormonstories podcast on the subject:

Masonry and Mormonism

It isn't the last word on the subject, but it will give them a good foundation for further inquiry. And it has the advantage of being a resource that is intimately and respectfully acquainted with both Masonry and the Mormon Temple ceremony.

[Mike Reed]

I tell them that Matthew Browns treatment may suffice depending on how seriously they want to pursue the subject. Perhaps if it is not adequate, They could run down his foot notes.

Here is Nick Literski's review of Matthew Brown's book: http://mormonmatters.org/2009/10/29/book-review-exploring-the-connection-between-mormons-and-masons/

As an intro, I'd suggest

Michael W. Homer's

[notHagoth7]

I get no less than 2 e-mails a day requesting a reading list from friends and family who want to know more about the link between the Church and the Fraternity. (Thanks Dan Brown!)

Is it something specific they want to know?

Is there a common concern they generally want to resolve?

Or is it just a vague request for more information?

(Without an answer to those questions, I would venture that throwing hundreds of pages at the situation isn't the best approach.)

[bjw]

I recommend doing some research on the Scottish Rite. I just went through the degrees of the rite and I was surprised at how much of the ideas expressed in the higher degrees are similar to some ideas in Mormonism. Of course, some of these same ideas are also expressed in the Kabbalah and other traditions, but its still interesting.

Also, I'd recommed "Endowed from on High" available on the FAIR website. Also, "Hidden Treasures of Knowledge" by Stephen Morgan as well as "Dynasty of the Holy Grail" by Vern Grosvenor Swanson.

[Lamanite]

I'm getting a lot of the same ol , "truth is truth, that's why there are similarities", alluding to the common ancestry of King Solomon's Temple. I try to say that connection is tenuous at best, and there remains no concrete link between either rituals and Solomon's temple.

They are frustrated and then ask for ref's and more readings.

That's why I'm trying to put together a 4 or 5 book reading list to help them get started. Or I could just have them read "Born in Blood" and be done with them

Big UP!

Lamanite

[livy111us]

Finding the similarities is not hard, especially if you are looking for them.

Matthew Brown does an excellent job in an interview with Carol Mikita on Oct 25th here:

http://pandora.bonnint.net/audio/people_of_faith.rss

http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2008_The_Israelite_Temple_and_the_Early_Christians.html

http://www.templestudy.com/2009/09/27/lord-speaks-ancient-temple-patterns-dc-124/

http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/1999_Early_Christian_and_Jewish_Rituals_Related_to_Temple_Practices.html

http://www.mormonmonastery.org/category/temple/references/temple-clothing/

http://en.fairmormon.org/Temples/Endowment/Freemasonry

The External links have some great articles as well

and these videos:

http://www.youtube.com/my_playlists?pi=0&ps=20&sf=&sa=0&sq=&dm=0&p=380518A7BFFBAF16

[notHagoth7]

...I try to say that connection is tenuous at best, and there remains no concrete link between either rituals...

They are frustrated and then ask for ref's and more readings.

That's a great start. And based on your initial synopsis, I'm willing to venture that you might serve them best by first probing into why they get frustrated.

And based on the topic, and on the clues you've provided, I'm reasonably certain that most of them don't really want to read several hundred pages of masonic minutiae. (Even if most of that content eventually resolved their concerns - and even if they had the spare time for that much extra-curricular reading.)

So if I'm reading the situation accurately from your initial clues, I'd venture that, in most cases, suggesting an intimidating reading stack will generally tend to elevate their frustration, without resolving their core concerns.

[Lamanite]

That's a great start. And based on your initial synopsis, I'm willing to venture that you might serve them best by first probing into why they get frustrated.

And based on the topic, and on the clues you've provided, I'm reasonably certain that most of them don't really want to read several hundred pages of masonic minutiae. (Even if most of that content eventually resolved their concerns - and even if they had the spare time for that much extra-curricular reading.)

So if I'm reading the situation accurately from your initial clues, I'd venture that, in most cases, suggesting an intimidating reading stack will generally tend to elevate their frustration, without resolving their core concerns.

1 out of 10 inquiries can not be counted on to read anything at all. Maybe 1 in 100 will actually make the trip to the UofU to dig up Early Masonic Catechisms. Almost no one wants to begin a serious study of anything.

I think most people want reassurance without have to do much at all. "Coddle and Indulge me but please do not upset the status quo" is their mantra.

So I agree with your assessment.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[notHagoth7]

So I agree with your assessment.

You've apparently misunderstood my assessment.

Almost no one wants to begin a serious study of anything.

More to the point, why should they need to study heavy tomes on this tangent issue? In the spectrum of good/better/best, it barely even appears on the radar.

I think most people want reassurance without have to do much at all. "Coddle and Indulge me but please do not upset the status quo" is their mantra.

Hmm. I can't agree.

I suspect the mantra is more along the lines of:

"If you have an answer with substance, please provide one. Otherwise, please don't patronize my intelligence by skirting the core issues or sweeping them under the carpet."

Methinks that is where the perceived frustration is coming from.

But hey, I've been wrong before. Try asking them.

[Lamanite]

You've apparently misunderstood my assessment.

More to the point, why should they need to study heavy tomes on this tangent issue? In the spectrum of good/better/best, it barely even appears on the radar.

Hmm. I can't agree.

I suspect the mantra is more along the lines of:

"If you have an answer with substance, please provide one. Otherwise, please don't patronize my intelligence by skirting the core issues or sweeping them under the carpet."

Methinks that is where the perceived frustration is coming from.

But hey, I've been wrong before. Try asking them.

Sorry, I guess I did misunderstand.

I guess the reason for their study should be the desire for further understanding. They contact me wanting sound bites. They want answers; and I am only interested in providing them with facts without the editorializing.

I have answers that carry weight and depth for me. I have opinions. However, I think gaining a basic understanding of the subject matter is necessary prior to engaging in meaningful discussion.

1. Is there a clear use/plagiarism of Masonic elements within the Mormon Endowment, both then and now?

2. What were Josephs intentions and reasons for borrowing/stealing these elements?

3. What responsibility does Hyrum, Joseph Sr., Brigham, John Lee...play in all of this?

4. What impact or relevance does any this have on the modern Church as a whole and the modern member as an individual?

How can one intelligibly discuss these questions with someone whose only exposure to the subject matter come from Dan Brown? I can't. So I say start reading something substantive.

Thanks to all who provided ref's and links!

Big UP!

Lamanite

[phaedrus ut]

I think one of the most direct introductions to the subject matter is: IS THERE NO HELP FOR THE WIDOW'S SON?,Presidential Address

Delivered At The Mormon History Association Convention April 20, 1974, by Dr. Reed C. Durham, Jr. It's easily found with a simple google search.

Apparently some were offended by the directness of his approach to the topic and questioned his testimony to which he wrote this response.

Phaedrus

[Lamanite]

I think one of the most direct introductions to the subject matter is: IS THERE NO HELP FOR THE WIDOW'S SON?,Presidential Address

Delivered At The Mormon History Association Convention April 20, 1974, by Dr. Reed C. Durham, Jr. It's easily found with a simple google search.

Apparently some were offended by the directness of his approach to the topic and questioned his testimony to which he wrote this response.

Phaedrus

Thanks Phaedrus,

Big UP!

Lamanite

[notHagoth7]

Sorry, I guess I did misunderstand.

No worries. I was apparently being too polite at first, so it was easy to be misunderstood.

Thanks for hearing me out with my more blunt/direct response, without taking offense.

I guess the reason for their study should be the desire for further understanding.

In general, I agree. However, out of all the things they can/should be studying, how high does that topic rank on their important-things-to-do meter?

My guess is that such tomes/topics will never rise to the top of most people's reading stacks, and with good reason.

They contact me wanting sound bites. They want answers; and I am only interested in providing them with facts without the editorializing.

Huh. I tend to provide both. However, I make a point of being very clear where fact ends and my opinion/extrapolation begins.

Most people who ask such questions want both. I'm willing to guess that people come to you because they value your opinion.

However, I think gaining a basic understanding of the subject matter is necessary prior to engaging in meaningful discussion.

And that's where we don't see eye to eye (yet?). I don't see the driving need for people to commit six months to studying the history of speculative freemasonry.

If they instead simply understand human nature and the process of inspiration, there are four-minute answers that can bridge most freemasonry concerns -

which allow people to quickly flush out the cognitive dissonance and get back to work on the more important things in life.

1. Is there a clear use/plagiarism of Masonic elements within the Mormon Endowment, both then and now?

2. What were Josephs intentions and reasons for borrowing/stealing these elements?

Plagiarism and stealing imply theft. Dishonesty. Deception. So I'd say a definite No.

Occasional borrowing, improving, and repurposing? You bet.

Claiming Joseph stole from freemasonry is akin to claiming GA's steal from C.S. Lewis.

Are there elements of freemasonry that Joseph freely adapted and repurposed to suit the instructional needs of Nauvou? In my opinion, a resounding yes. And there's zero shame or need to mince words about that. Such is part of what Joseph's role in restoration was. In a broad number of things, he took raw materials, prayed/pondered for clarity, restored them to a divine context, reshuffled the mix, and put them to work. He didn't create such things ex nihilo (out of nothing) when bits and pieces of them were available at hand as a catalyst/soup starter. Nor was he bound to retain such things in their previous context.

As I've said elsewhere, for all I care, Joseph could have plucked such things of a Cracker Jack box (if such things had existed), and leveraged it as an instructional tool. Its origins are **completely** irrelevant, if it has been repurposed to something I need to know/do in the here and now.

Step 1) Joseph encounters freemasonry.

Step 2) True to his nature, Joseph inquires of the Lord about the experience. And receives guidance.

Step 3) Nauvou endowment (and other) rituals quickly unfold.

Did Joseph improvise and riff on a few masonic things? Yes. In my opinion, as a prophet, that's his right. Just as I can take something that you or someone else might say, disagree with 75% of it, pluck out the portion that's true or simply useful, and run with it.

Maybe I'm a simpleton, but I don't see why that kernel of reality takes volumes or months of study to comprehend and resolve.

Unless someone takes the long way around, skirts apparent facts, and claims there's no connection between Joseph's interactions with freemasonry and events in Nauvou. Such attempts, in my view, are where apologists have overcorrected in the rush to defend Joseph from criticism. And in the process, both truth and LDS plausibility take a hit. To me, such an attempt to extinguishing doubt/criticism is like pouring kerosine on an open fire.

4. What impact or relevance does any this have on the modern Church as a whole and the modern member as an individual?

I think if LDS people attempt to claim freemasonry didn't serve as a catalyst for certain things, they're doing a disservice to truth, and causing themselves and the church to take a credibility hit in the process. They thereby give critics **actual** cause to say plagiarism is currently at work (because some are not willing to give freemasonry its fair due as a catalyst to certain things.)

[Mike Reed]

Here is a good, but very brief, intro to the topic of Mormonism and Freemasonry:

http://www.signaturebookslibrary.org/essays/mason.htm