Disciplinary Council Unless Passing The Heavenly Gate Is Withdrawn From Publication

[Stone holm]

Ran the whole second anointing thing past my wife, her reaction was exactly as I stated earlier. I have an open mind about it because it resolves some issues I had with Section 132, but it seems a bit odd that the Church would keep an ordinance like that so confidential except, I suspect the antis would have a field day with it if it were ever verified to exist.

[Kenngo1969]

You know most Mormons in the Church have never heard of this second anointing, and would doubt its existence if they were told of it.

If you currently hold a Temple Recommend, and/or are inclined to do whatever might be necessary for you to enter the Temple, listen very carefully the next time you participate in the Endowment ceremony.  It's there; I promise!

[MormonMason]

If you currently hold a Temple Recommend, and/or are inclined to do whatever might be necessary for you to enter the Temple, listen very carefully the next time you participate in the Endowment ceremony.  It's there; I promise!

Indeed, it is.

[Senator]

If you currently hold a Temple Recommend, and/or are inclined to do whatever might be necessary for you to enter the Temple, listen very carefully the next time you participate in the Endowment ceremony.  It's there; I promise!

 

Perhaps.

 

But that doesn't change the technical truth of Stone holm's statement, give the number of Mormons that are temple endowed; and frequent temple attenders, and very careful listeners; and picked up on the couched reference, and could connect it due to previous academic knowledge of the esoteric ordinance.

[Deborah]

But that doesn't change the technical truth of Stone holm's statement, give the number of Mormons that are temple endowed; and frequent temple attenders, and very careful listeners; and picked up on the couched reference, and could connect it due to previous academic knowledge of the esoteric ordinance.

 

Given that unless you are temple endowed in the first place that it doesn't apply anyway why does it matter? It's hardly a couched reference.

[Senator]

Given that unless you are temple endowed in the first place that it doesn't apply anyway why does it matter? It's hardly a couched reference.

 

Are you asking why does is matter that Stone holm's statement is true?

 

And yes, I would call it a couched reference. 

[LordUther]

Perhaps.

But that doesn't change the technical truth of Stone holm's statement, give the number of Mormons that are temple endowed; and frequent temple attenders, and very careful listeners; and picked up on the couched reference, and could connect it due to previous academic knowledge of the esoteric ordinance.

I think more members need to listen and pay attention more because 99% of what's discussed on these boards I learnt in seminary and various church classes. I really don't understand people's shock, it was all very openly understood and taught.

[Senator]

I think more members need to listen and pay attention more because 99% of what's discussed on these boards I learnt in seminary and various church classes. I really don't understand people's shock, it was all very openly understood and taught.

 

Perhaps you had extraordinary "seminary and various church classes"? 

[Stone holm]

I think more members need to listen and pay attention more because 99% of what's discussed on these boards I learnt in seminary and various church classes. I really don't understand people's shock, it was all very openly understood and taught.

Well I confess that I fight to stay awake during the endowment and joined the Church as an adult so did not attend Seminary, although I did teach it for awhile. I would challenge the notion that very many Mormons have ever heard of a second anointing as a separate ordinance administered by mortals. Most have heard of calling and election made sure. For most Mormons that is understood to mean The Lord personally appearing to the member and saying something like well done my good and faithful servant and assuring the member of his or her election. This is a mystical experience personally between the member and The Lord and does not involve Church officers General or otherwise. My wife attends the Temple at least once per week and she had heard nothing of it.

[Deborah]

Are you asking why does is matter that Stone holm's statement is true?

 

I'm asking why do others need to know about it if it doesn't apply. Having said that I also knew about it years ago even as a youth. I thought it was always understood. We talked about it in classes.

[Deborah]

And by the way the Second Anointing is also described as having your calling and election made sure, which is the term most often used to describe it.

[Stone holm]

And by the way the Second Anointing is also described as having your calling and election made sure, which is the term most often used to describe it.

That may be, but if it is most members do not understand it as such.

[Senator]

I'm asking why do others need to know about it if it doesn't apply. Having said that I also knew about it years ago even as a youth. I thought it was always understood. We talked about it in classes.

 

I'm sorry. I'm not following you. How does it not apply to a member of the church? 

 

And while we are adding our own anecdotal experiences, I cannot recall ever talking about the second anointing in any church setting as a youth. I recall knowledge of the phrase "calling and election made sure", but that was do to an overly zealous (and threatened to be ex-communicated) group of individuals in our stake that was pushing the issue. 

[Stone holm]

I'm sorry. I'm not following you. How does it not apply to a member of the church? 

 

And while we are adding our own anecdotal experiences, I cannot recall ever talking about the second anointing in any church setting as a youth. I recall knowledge of the phrase "calling and election made sure", but that was do to an overly zealous (and threatened to be ex-communicated) group of individuals in our stake that was pushing the issue.

I agree. I have never heard it discussed anywhere except on this Board, I have heard calling and election made sure, but a second anointing was never discussed in association with it. If such exists, although it probably should not be discussed when an individual has had it, I think it should be openly discussed and taught like any other doctrine. Secret ordinances just attract criticism and suspicion. This ordinance or rite is not being taught.

[smac97]

The LDS Church website includes only one reference to "second anointing." It is in "Doctrines of the Gospel Teacher Manual Chapter 19: Eternal Life" (http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-teacher-manual/chapter-19-eternal-life?lang=eng), which was published in 2011. The reference is "Caution: Exercise caution while discussing the doctrine of having our calling and election made sure. Avoid speculation. Use only the sources given here and in the student manual. Do not attempt in any way to discuss or answer questions about the second anointing."

 

It appears that this ordinance is not intended for general discussion in the Church.

 

Foot washing as an ordinance is also seldom discussed, though I am not aware of any proscription against talking about it (it's referenced in D&C 88:139-141, see also here).  The same goes for the "Law of Adoption."

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[Deborah]

I think it should be openly discussed and taught like any other doctrine.

 

But why? Seriously. It is a sacred and secret ordinances and those who receive it are not to talk about it. Smac beat me to the reference in the teacher's manual.

 

We are to strive to keep our temple covenants and that is part of the process of making our calling and election sure. Most will not receive the Second Anointing until after this life.

[smac97]

I'm sorry. I'm not following you. How does it not apply to a member of the church? 

 

And while we are adding our own anecdotal experiences, I cannot recall ever talking about the second anointing in any church setting as a youth. I recall knowledge of the phrase "calling and election made sure", but that was do to an overly zealous (and threatened to be ex-communicated) group of individuals in our stake that was pushing the issue. 

 

There is a very interesting 1976 Ensign article on this topic: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/07/accepted-of-the-lord-the-doctrine-of-making-your-calling-and-election-sure?lang=eng

 

As with any other aspect of the Gospel, this doctrine can be distorted or taken out of context.  But I do not think discussion of it is proscribed.

 

I do not recall this being discussed much in church settings, but I remember having discussions about it on my mission, and also with my father after I returned home.  There are also some additional resources about it on the LDS Church website:

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng

 

http://www.mormonchannel.org/qa/39

 

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1973/09/books?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng#

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/election?lang=eng

 

http://www.lds.org/manual/the-life-and-teachings-of-jesus-and-his-apostles/section-11-the-early-apostles-send-their-witness-to-the-world/chapter-51-partakers-of-the-divine-nature?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1977/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[Tacenda]

All blessings are predicated upon obedience.  If you don't obey then their goes the promised blessings.  Saying that no sin or disobedience can stop someone who has received their second annointing seems sort of akin to someone saying they've been born again, and hence, saved.

I am taken back a little by your reference to those that say they are born again or saved.  Don't you believe you will go to heaven and not hell, pretty much?  That's all the 'bornagains' are saying.  They have been regenerated and know that Jesus is God and want to live a Christ like life and are so thankful and joyful for that knowledge that Jesus died on the cross.  That they feel like if they didn't believe they were saved that would be denial of His sacrifice.  But the 'bornagains' don't live on the rat wheel that they are constantly working to stay obedient.  Can you imagine having that 'calling and election made sure' or the 'second annointing' put on you?  I can't imagine a bigger burden.  Like it was all up to how you live after you've received such a gift, and that to me doesn't feel like a gift at all.  

 

Yesterday while walking my dog I noticed a butterly sitting on a leaf and how peaceful it seemed.  Thoughts rushed in to how some of us aren't ever at peace we're constantly worried or guilt ridden at what we're not doing enough of or right.  Then my thoughts went to my former Bishop turned Stake President.  I live right next to our Stake Center and I drive by and will see his vehicle sitting outside his office all the time.  And I think of that burden, and how so much of what he's doing might be just busy work and so many members may be taking advantage or hand held and maybe we need to rely less on the church and more on the Saviour and be free in that alone. 

 

I think so many are forgetting that they are saved and not because of what we do. 

[Stone holm]

There is a very interesting 1976 Ensign article on this topic: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/07/accepted-of-the-lord-the-doctrine-of-making-your-calling-and-election-sure?lang=eng

 

As with any other aspect of the Gospel, this doctrine can be distorted or taken out of context.  But I do not think discussion of it is proscribed.

 

I do not recall this being discussed much in church settings, but I remember having discussions about it on my mission, and also with my father after I returned home.  There are also some additional resources about it on the LDS Church website:

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng[/url

 

http://www.mormonchannel.org/qa/39

 

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1973/09/books?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng#

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/election?lang=eng

 

http://www.lds.org/manual/the-life-and-teachings-of-jesus-and-his-apostles/section-11-the-early-apostles-send-their-witness-to-the-world/chapter-51-partakers-of-the-divine-nature?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

[url=http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1977/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure]http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1977/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

I read the first link, saw nothing new there, yes that has been taught, but there is no reference to a second anointing therein. Most members take this to mean if you are faithful, repent and go through all the Temple rites that are openly taught of that at some point The Lord appears to you and confirms you have made it sure. I doubt that more than one in a hundred of the Saints has ever heard anything about people going through an additional secret rite administered by a mortal Church official which is an additional sealing.

[Stone holm]

There is a very interesting 1976 Ensign article on this topic: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/07/accepted-of-the-lord-the-doctrine-of-making-your-calling-and-election-sure?lang=eng

 

As with any other aspect of the Gospel, this doctrine can be distorted or taken out of context.  But I do not think discussion of it is proscribed.

 

I do not recall this being discussed much in church settings, but I remember having discussions about it on my mission, and also with my father after I returned home.  There are also some additional resources about it on the LDS Church website:

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng

 

http://www.mormonchannel.org/qa/39

 

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1973/09/books?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng#

 

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/election?lang=eng

 

http://www.lds.org/manual/the-life-and-teachings-of-jesus-and-his-apostles/section-11-the-early-apostles-send-their-witness-to-the-world/chapter-51-partakers-of-the-divine-nature?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1977/04/the-light-of-christ?lang=eng&query=calling+and+election+sure

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

Okay read all these except the video, none of these teach anything other than what I previously described as an encounter between The Lord and a member, CFR on the teaching that there is a special ordinance performed by mortal Church officials involving a second anointing and sealing, other than the normal sealing in the Temple.

[smac97]

I am taken back a little by your reference to those that say they are born again or saved.  Don't you believe you will go to heaven and not hell, pretty much?

I think ksfisher was referring to other faith traditions within Christianity who subscribed to some form of OSAS ("Once Saved, Always Saved"). I think that concept is incorrect.

 

That's all the 'bornagains' are saying.  They have been regenerated and know that Jesus is God and want to live a Christ like life and are so thankful and joyful for that knowledge that Jesus died on the cross.

Well, no, that's not what they are all saying. We can have confidence in salvation, but a problem arises when this hope is distorted into some sort of "Get Out of Jail Free Card," where a person, once "saved," no longer need concern himself with obeying God. That just doesn't work for me.

 

That they feel like if they didn't believe they were saved that would be denial of His sacrifice.  But the 'bornagains' don't live on the rat wheel that they are constantly working to stay obedient.

"Rat wheel" clearly intends to denigrate obedience to God's commandments as being unnecessary and futile. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. I believe obedience to God is neither unnecessary nor futile. And I think the Bible backs me up on that.

 

Yesterday while walking my dog I noticed a butterly sitting on a leaf and how peaceful it seemed.  Thoughts rushed in to how some of us aren't ever at peace we're constantly worried or guilt ridden at what we're not doing enough of or right.

Such a mindset, where it exists, amounts to a misapplication of the Restored Gospel warrants correction.

 

Then my thoughts went to my former Bishop turned Stake President.  I live right next to our Stake Center and I drive by and will see his vehicle sitting outside his office all the time.  And I think of that burden, and how so much of what he's doing might be just busy work

I think you materially misunderstand the role and responsibilities of a stake president (and perhaps the role of a bishop as well). Their burdens do not (or should not) include "busy work."

I spent 3+ years on my stake's high council. I saw the stake president at work in his calling, but I never saw him engage in "busy work."

I have spent the last three years as a counselor in my ward's bishopric. Our bishop is a few years younger than I am and has six children with seven on the way. I have observed him at work in his calling, but I never see him engaged in "busy work."

Although my responsibilities as a counselor are not as heavy as my bishop's, I still do a fair amount of work (more than the average member, I suspect), but none of it is "busy work."

My stake president, my bishop and I are all family men. We all have busy lives, and I feel fairly confident in stating that none of us find much "busy work" in our callings.

I am glad you noticed a butterfly and experienced a peaceful moment. I have those, too. Last night for FHE, my wife and I took our children to a raspberry field and we picked raspberries while the sun went down. We had a beautiful view of the surrounding valley, and the sunset was quite pleasant. We did this after my kids spent the day at school and then doing homework and chores, after my wife spent the day cleaning the house and paying bills and helping the children, and after I spent all day in my law office. It was relaxing.

The day before (Sunday) my wife and I both took long naps after church (I generally put in about six hours in my calling on Sundays), with our older children keeping the younger ones quiet and at bay. We then had a simple dinner of chili and cornbread, then we watched an episode of "Cranford" with the kids (I am amazed that my kids enjoy British period dramas). It was relaxing.

The day before that was my wife's birthday. We gave her breakfast in bed and gave her her presents, then the kids cleaned the house while I painted the newly-installed doors in our basement, then the kids watched "Doctor Who." Then we dropped the kids off at a ward potluck while my wife and I went on a date. It was relaxing.

Why am I saying all of this? Simple: I want to point out that it is possible to devote one's self to the Church while still finding time to relax and spend with family.

 

and so many members may be taking advantage or hand held and maybe we need to rely less on the church and more on the Saviour and be free in that alone.

The Savior put the Church in place. Not as a substitute for Him, but as a mechanism to draw closer to him.

The LDS Church brings people to Christ. I do not resent those who need help from their brothers and sisters. I think the Church's emphasis on self-reliance is entirely appropriate, but it can take a while to get there. Meanwhile, people like my bishop and my stake president are there to help, and I am grateful that they are willing to provide that help.

 

I think so many are forgetting that they are saved and not because of what we do.

I don't think we should focus on being saved. I think we should focus on doing what is right. That's what God wants us to do.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 17, 2013 by smac97

[smac97]

I read the first link, saw nothing new there, yes that has been taught, but there is no reference to a second anointing therein.

The links are not about that ordinance. As I said, I do not think that ordinance is intended to be a topic of general discussion in the Church.

Discussion of "calling and election made sure," however, appears to be appropriate.

Most members take this to mean if you are faithful, repent and go through all the Temple rites that are openly taught of that at some point The Lord appears to you and confirms you have made it sure.

You've taken a poll? How do you know what "most members" think about this topic?

I doubt that more than one in a hundred of the Saints has ever heard anything about people going through an additional secret rite administered by a mortal Church official which is an additional sealing.

For the third time: I do not think that ordinance is intended to be a topic of general discussion in the Church.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

Okay read all these except the video, none of these teach anything other than what I previously described as an encounter between The Lord and a member, CFR on the teaching that there is a special ordinance performed by mortal Church officials involving a second anointing and sealing, other than the normal sealing in the Temple.

For the fourth time: I do not think that ordinance is intended to be a topic of general discussion in the Church.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

The links are not about that ordinance. As I said, I do not think that ordinance is intended to be a topic of general discussion in the Church.

Discussion of "calling and election made sure," however, appears to be appropriate.

You've taken a poll? How do you know what "most members" think about this topic?

For the third time: I do not think that ordinance is intended to be a topic of general discussion in the Church.

Thanks,

-Smac

I don't think those are my quotes. 

[smac97]

I don't think those are my quotes. 

 

Ack!  Sorry!

 

Thanks,

 

Spencer