Publishing The Temple Ceremony

[Vance]

Having just submitted my PhD thesis after 6.5 years of labour, I'm too tired to read through all 15 pages of this thread, but, in reponse to a few of the posts I have read, I offer almost exactly what I wrote on this topic last year:

I am headquartered in the School of Culture, History, and Languages in one of the world's major research universities. If one of our researchers ever published material which a society or group of people considered to be sacred and not for public eyes, s/he would be in breach of strongly worded ethical guidelines and would be harshly disciplined. It's a sad day when mostly godless academics have higher ethical standards in this area than some fellow Christians and disaffected/former members. The notion that the sacred is not something to be treated carelessly or casually is not unique to Latter-day Saints by any stretch.

Well said!

[thesometimesaint]

Cobalt-70:

It doesn't matter if it has commercial value or not. A bootleg copy of Hollywood movie, may or may not have any commercial value, especially if it is a poor copy. Trying to profit from a bootleg copy. It can and does involve further criminal penalties. The theft is in the copying. Profit just further criminalizes it.

From the Temple Recommend itself: "It remains the property of the Church, is not transferable, and must be surrendered on demand".

[LeSellers]

if they [the LDS Church] still have copyrights in the ceremony, they cannot protect them.

Why, I wonder, the reluctance to say "we" in these cases? Ah, well.

The whole of your paragraph demonstrates a lack of understanding of current copyright law. One need not submit a copy to secure a copyright. All that needs to be done is publish the work. The copyright is automatic.

This has not always been the case. And, as you note, since a right not defended is a right lost, there may not be any protection through the courts. But the issue is not legality, it is morality. The law does not always recognize the ethical stand.

Lehi

[Cobalt-70]

Cobalt-70:

It doesn't matter if it has commercial value or not. A bootleg copy of Hollywood movie, may or may not have any commercial value, especially if it is a poor copy. Trying to profit from a bootleg copy. It can and does involve further criminal penalties. The theft is in the copying. Profit just further criminalizes it.

From the Temple Recommend itself: "It remains the property of the Church, is not transferable, and must be surrendered on demand".

It says that the recommend itself is the property of the church. The recommend, however, is not a non-disclosure agreement for anything learned in the temple.

Copying a movie, even a Hollywood blockbuster, is not a crime unless copies of it are sold for commercial advantage or private financial gain. Otherwise, it is a matter of civil law, and the LDS Church is free to sue, or not to sue. The Justice Department stays out of it. Moreover, most of the time we are not talking about people distributing the endowment video or audio, but rather distributing the transcribed text. Regardless of any moral or ethical implications, the government is not going to arrest anybody for distributing transcripts of the endowment ceremony for whatever anti-Mormon or academic purpose they see fit, because it is not a crime. I'm sure that the LDS Church wouldn't want the government to be arresting people on that basis, either, even if they could, because if that happens then the endowment ceremony itself goes on public trial.

[altersteve]

Copying a movie, even a Hollywood blockbuster, is not a crime unless copies of it are sold for commercial advantage or private financial gain.

Or unless you are doing so to avoid paying for it. If you're simply making one copy of a movie that you already bought as a "back-up" copy, that's fine.

[Cobalt-70]

Why, I wonder, the reluctance to say "we" in these cases? Ah, well.

The whole of your paragraph demonstrates a lack of understanding of current copyright law. One need not submit a copy to secure a copyright. All that needs to be done is publish the work. The copyright is automatic.

This has not always been the case. And, as you note, since a right not defended is a right lost, there may not be any protection through the courts. But the issue is not legality, it is morality. The law does not always recognize the ethical stand.

Because I am not the LDS Church. I'm a member of the LDS Church, yes, but the church's copyrights, held by Intellectual Reserve, Inc., are not my own.

You didn't read my post carefully. I said that you have to submit a copy to the Copyright Office to register a copyright, and you have to register a copyright before you can file suit. But unless you are suing somebody, registration is optional. You can still have a copyright without registering it. Moreover, you don't actually have to publish something anymore to have a copyright in it. Copyright begins when an expression is fixed in tangible form.

Edited January 17, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[frankenstein]

frankenstein:

Yes I can, but will not do so here.

So can I, but according to paharon we both committed theft, as we have recorded or transcribed the whole thing input minds. My only point is that it is not theft to break covenants.

Edited January 17, 2012 by frankenstein

[thesometimesaint]

Cobalt-70:

Try getting a recommend without agreeing to the rules of the Church.

Whether the Church choose to press for prosecution, or the government chooses the prosecute has no bearing on its legality. Functionality is a different matter.

Just some of the myriad of examples of dumb laws still on the books in California. and every state has them.

http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/california

[thesometimesaint]

frankenstein:

A person can learn, and memorize the entire ceremony in a few sessions. It isn't that long, or hard. Even I did it.

All of us, of normal physical ability, and mental acuity, can break the rules. The only question is do we?

[Cobalt-70]

Or unless you are doing so to avoid paying for it. If you're simply making one copy of a movie that you already bought as a "back-up" copy, that's fine.

If you are just making copies to avoid paying for it yourself, or to pass it along to a friend, it is not criminal. You have to be making copies for "commercial advantage or private financial gain." Either that, or you have to be distributing, within a 180 day period, copies having a retail value greater than $1000, or you have to be distributing copies of a work "being prepared for commercial distribution." It's all set forth in section 506 of title 17 of the U.S. Code.

[Jeff K.]

I think the field has drifted far off. The presumption that one is not stealing rites specifically for mockery and desecration is the true reason this is being done. In order to carry such a thing out, we are forced to presume subterfuge and lies. Is it morally right to do so? And how does one justify that morality or rather such immorality..

So far people have basically been milling about man made laws which are not necessarily based on morality. And they use the manmade law to justify an action that immoral. Man made laws, ie laws passed by congress often do allow immorality or wrongful action that are completely legal. But why are we allowing the standard of what is right (regardless fo religious beliefs or lack thereof) to be subjected to an amoral position? We can argue legalities all day, but the moral implication of doing the wrong thing speaks more to the willingness to be dishonest than obeying the law does.

[Jaybear]

I think the field has drifted far off. The presumption that one is not stealing rites specifically for mockery and desecration is the true reason this is being done. In order to carry such a thing out, we are forced to presume subterfuge and lies. Is it morally right to do so? And how does one justify that morality or rather such immorality..

Morality is such fluid concept, especially among the religous minded.

Evangelicals can justify their behavior, believing sincerly that they are doing the lord's work.

ExMo's justify the breach of a covenant, with the sincere belief that they were the victims of fraud, and thus are free from their covenants.

[Hamba Tuhan]

CFR. Can you cite those guidelines? I am genuinely curious.

...

Nah. I don't belive you.

Just a few I've quickly selected:

'The researcher should ensure that research methods are respectful and acknowledge the cultural distinctiveness of communities or groups participating in the research.'

'There should be evidence of support for the research project from relevant communities or groups and the research methodology should engage with their social and cultural practices.'

'The researcher should ensure that research methods provide for mutually agreed mechanisms for such matters as...final reporting.'

'The research methods and processes should provide opportunities to develop trust and a sense of equal research partnerships.'

'The described benefits from research should have been discussed with and agreed to by the research stakeholders.'

'The realisable benefits for participants from the research processes, outcomes and outputs should be distributed in a way that is agreed to and considered fair by these participants.'

'The research proposal should demonstrate evidence of respectful engagement with research subjects.'

'The research processes should foster respectful, ethical research relationships that affirm the right of people to have different values, norms and aspirations.'

'Local cultural values should be acknowledged in the design and conduct of the research.'

'The design and conduct of the research should reflect continuing consultation with the local participant population and the communities to which they belong.'

'Researchers should have enough experience or access to expertise to enable them to engage with participants in ways that accord them due respect and protection.'

'The conduct of the research should take into account the opinions and expectations of participants and their communities.'

'Respect for participants requires having due regard for their beliefs, customs and cultural heritage, and for local laws.'

'Research projects should be conducted in accordance with the principle of peoples’ rights to maintain, control, protect and develop their intangible heritage, including their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions and intellectual property.'

'Cultural expressions are part of the heritage that exists in the cultural practices, resources and knowledge systems of peoples, and that are passed on by them in expressing their cultural identity. Researchers must respect, protect and maintain these rights.'

'Agree in writing on the sharing of intellectual property rights and moral rights between the researcher and individual contributors.'

'Include all possible measures in research projects to ensure protection of peoples’ communal rights in cultural expressions.'

'Respect the rights of peoples in relation to their knowledge, ideas, cultural expressions and materials, and their rights to maintain secrecy of knowledge and practices.'

'Show or distribute restricted material only with express permission from those who provided or are responsible for it.'

[LDSToronto]

I may be mistaken, but I'm recalling only having sworn to not reveal very specific items in the endowment. Not the entire proceedings.

...not that I have any desire to tell all...

Correct - this point has been made a number of times on this thread, but there seems to be an insistence by some that the whole ceremony is not to be revealed, which is false, given the wording of the ceremony itself.

H.

[LDSToronto]

The anti Mormons like Toronto for instance do not believe in reciprocating such respect, to them we are unworthy of being treated as we treat others in both policy and morality. To them any breach of morality that undermines our church is acceptable.

I also eat small, fattened children.

H.

[Hamba Tuhan]

The idea that has captivated me throughout the thread is that ANY depiction or transcription must be careless or casual simply by the fact that it is open to public view.

If, as a researcher, I gain access to rituals which a community wishes not to be public, making such rituals public clearly indicates that I did not care about the community's wishes.

PS Congrats on seeing that major undertaking through!

Thank you!

[Deborah]

ExMo's justify the breach of a covenant, with the sincere belief that they were the victims of fraud, and thus are free from their covenants.

The fraud excuse is the lamest of all. No one forced them to be in the church as evidenced by their exit. To claim fraud you would have to show deliberate hiding of information which has never been done by the church as evidenced by the so-called-defrauded in finding that information.

[bluebell]

Just a few I've quickly selected:

'The researcher should ensure that research methods are respectful and acknowledge the cultural distinctiveness of communities or groups participating in the research.'

'There should be evidence of support for the research project from relevant communities or groups and the research methodology should engage with their social and cultural practices.'

'The researcher should ensure that research methods provide for mutually agreed mechanisms for such matters as...final reporting.'

'The research methods and processes should provide opportunities to develop trust and a sense of equal research partnerships.'

'The described benefits from research should have been discussed with and agreed to by the research stakeholders.'

'The realisable benefits for participants from the research processes, outcomes and outputs should be distributed in a way that is agreed to and considered fair by these participants.'

'The research proposal should demonstrate evidence of respectful engagement with research subjects.'

'The research processes should foster respectful, ethical research relationships that affirm the right of people to have different values, norms and aspirations.'

'Local cultural values should be acknowledged in the design and conduct of the research.'

'The design and conduct of the research should reflect continuing consultation with the local participant population and the communities to which they belong.'

'Researchers should have enough experience or access to expertise to enable them to engage with participants in ways that accord them due respect and protection.'

'The conduct of the research should take into account the opinions and expectations of participants and their communities.'

'Respect for participants requires having due regard for their beliefs, customs and cultural heritage, and for local laws.'

'Research projects should be conducted in accordance with the principle of peoples’ rights to maintain, control, protect and develop their intangible heritage, including their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions and intellectual property.'

'Cultural expressions are part of the heritage that exists in the cultural practices, resources and knowledge systems of peoples, and that are passed on by them in expressing their cultural identity. Researchers must respect, protect and maintain these rights.'

'Agree in writing on the sharing of intellectual property rights and moral rights between the researcher and individual contributors.'

'Include all possible measures in research projects to ensure protection of peoples’ communal rights in cultural expressions.'

'Respect the rights of peoples in relation to their knowledge, ideas, cultural expressions and materials, and their rights to maintain secrecy of knowledge and practices.'

'Show or distribute restricted material only with express permission from those who provided or are responsible for it.'

So you're not the liar Jaybear accused you of being?

[Hamba Tuhan]

I may be mistaken, but I'm recalling only having sworn to not reveal very specific items in the endowment. Not the entire proceedings.

...not that I have any desire to tell all...

Correct - this point has been made a number of times on this thread, but there seems to be an insistence by some that the whole ceremony is not to be revealed, which is false, given the wording of the ceremony itself.

Are you seriously claiming that you did not understand before receiving your endowments that the community to which the ritual belongs has an expectation of respectful silence in relation to the experience in general?

So, by extension, if I as a researcher gain the trust of a society and am initiated into one of their esoteric rituals, knowing that they wish to keep it from public view, I can disregard that wish so long as the ritual itself didn't involve me swearing confidentiality? I'd love to run that one past the Ethics Committee in the Research Office of my university....

Edited January 17, 2012 by Hamba Tuhan

[Jaybear]

The fraud excuse is the lamest of all. No one forced them to be in the church as evidenced by their exit. To claim fraud you would have to show deliberate hiding of information which has never been done by the church as evidenced by the so-called-defrauded in finding that information.

If that were true, no one could ever cliam to have been defrauded.

[Senator]

Are you seriously claiming that you did not understand before receiving your endowments that the community to which the ritual belongs has an expectation of respectful silence in relation to the experience in general?

Not at all. I was very aware, even scared of speaking about it. (I was first initiated to the temple pre-1990, when certain promises were made with certain mortal consequences attached to the breaking thereof, for pete's sake.)

What I have come to learn since, is that we are culturally a bit over skittish in reguards to temple content and discussion. I have seen members unsure about reading Genesis's account of the creation, fearing a breach of temple confidentiality. Much of the temple narrative is simply scriptural.

So, by extension, if I as a researcher gain the trust of a society and am initiated into one of their esoteric rituals, knowing that they wish to keep it from public view, I can disregard that wish so long as the ritual itself didn't involve me swearing confidentiality? I'd love to run that one past the Ethics Committee in the Research Office of my university....

I'm not saying that.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Senator

[altersteve]

If you are just making copies to avoid paying for it yourself, or to pass it along to a friend, it is not criminal.

Yes it is. Borrowing a movie (or music album, or whatever) from your friend and making a copy of it for yourself to avoid paying for it is a violation of federal law. It's just incredibly easy to get away with this, so people rarely get punished for it.

Edited January 17, 2012 by altersteve

[LDSToronto]

I see no reason for anyone to publish or show the temple endowment except to mock and denigrate. You can make all the excuses you want for those who do but it won't take away their accountability. I find such people to be small-minded and arrogant. It is sad because the ignorant who view such things will think there is nothing special and not understand how profound the experience itself can be.

This reply is for everyone with a similar attitude:

When you can't see a reason to do something, it does not follow that others will also not see a reason to do that same thing.

Similarly, if your opinion differs from anothers opinion, that does not make the other person small-minded or ignorant. It makes the two opinions different.

H.

[Senator]

oops

Edited January 18, 2012 by Senator

[LDSToronto]

Are you seriously claiming that you did not understand before receiving your endowments that the community to which the ritual belongs has an expectation of respectful silence in relation to the experience in general?

So, by extension, if I as a researcher gain the trust of a society and am initiated into one of their esoteric rituals, knowing that they wish to keep it from public view, I can disregard that wish so long as the ritual itself didn't involve me swearing confidentiality? I'd love to run that one past the Ethics Committee in the Research Office of my university....

I don't particularly care what you do as a researcher; you are bound by your ethics and I'll respect that.

However, the fact remains that no Latter-day Saint is bound by covenent to keep anything secret save the portions where one is put under covenant. Sure, some Latter-day Saints can insist upon secrecy, but that insistence makes no difference because nobody is bound by covenent not to divulge those other portions.

There are many things sacred to the LDS - Cinepro presented a list of other sacred ordinances. None of those are secret. And we talk about them.

Besides, I can, in good faith, tell you that I have been in more than one Sunday School and priesthood lesson where the temple ceremony, non-secret parts, are spoken of freely, outside the temple.

The LDS can't have it both ways - you can't claim secrecy and then speak freely of any portion of the ceremony outside the temple.

H.