Keys of the kingdom and the roots of the Nauvoo endowment

[Benjamin Seeker]

Here is a little background leading up to an interesting insight on priesthood restoration. One of the interesting items from our discussion here on the board was that, while the names of John the Baptist, and Peter, James, and John in relation to priesthood restoration didn't appear in print until 1835, there were some interesting precursors. One of the significant ones is the 1832 history which talks about the reception of the "holy priesthood" by the ministering of angels, and the reception of the "high priesthood' (no specific angels mentioned) and conferral of the "keys of the kingdom." The 1835 texts specifically link the conferral of the keys of the kingdom with Peter, James, and John, and an 1829 revelation linked Peter, James, and John with the "keys of this ministry," which was ministering unto those who would be heirs of salvation. Relevant recap finished.

Over on the relief society, keys, and priesthood discussion thread, someone brought up that JS describes giving keys to the sisters. The relevant portion of JS' comments from April 1842 read, "the keys of the kingdom are about to be given to them, that they may be able to detect everything false--as well as to the elders." JS made similar comments a month later. The History of the Church reads, "I preached in the grove on the keys of the Kingdom, Charity &c The keys are certain signs and words by which false spirits and personages may be detected from true, which cannot be revealed to the Elders till the Temple is completed."

For those who know, JS is clearly referencing the Nauvoo endowment, which would be given to a number of saints before JS' death. A more exciting insight, going back to the background I laid out above, is that JS correlates "the keys of the kingdom," a phrase used in both comments, and the ability to "detect false spirits and personages from true" or the ability to "detect everything false." This creates a phrasal link all the way back to 1832 and 1835's "keys of the kingdom," associated with the reception of the high priesthood (1832 and 1835) and a visit from Peter, James, and John (1835 only). This also creates a link between the personages of Peter, James and John and their "keys of this ministry" (1829) or "keys of the kingdom" (1835) and Joseph's Nauvoo endowment. I don't know that JS concieved of these keys in the same way across these time period (EDIT: I'm actually kind of certain he didn't, considering the "keys of the kingdom" were first associated with the apostleship, so it seems like the keys get repurposed in Nauvoo), but it's pretty cool to see some roots for the endowment stretching back to 1835, 32, and 29.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Benjamin Seeker

[CV75]

54 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

Here is a little background leading up to an interesting insight on priesthood restoration. One of the interesting items from our discussion here on the board was that, while the names of John the Baptist, and Peter, James, and John in relation to priesthood restoration didn't appear in print until 1835, there were some interesting precursors. One of the significant ones is the 1832 history which talks about the reception of the "holy priesthood" by the ministering of angels, and the reception of the "high priesthood' (no specific angels mentioned) and conferral of the "keys of the kingdom." The 1835 texts specifically link the conferral of the keys of the kingdom with Peter, James, and John, and an 1829 revelation linked Peter, James, and John with the "keys of this ministry," which was ministering unto those who would be heirs of salvation. Relevant recap finished.

Over on the relief society, keys, and priesthood discussion thread, someone brought up that JS describes giving keys to the sisters. The relevant portion of JS' comments from April 1842 read, "the keys of the kingdom are about to be given to them, that they may be able to detect everything false--as well as to the elders." JS made similar comments a month later. The History of the Church reads, "I preached in the grove on the keys of the Kingdom, Charity &c The keys are certain signs and words by which false spirits and personages may be detected from true, which cannot be revealed to the Elders till the Temple is completed."

For those who know, JS is clearly referencing the Nauvoo endowment, which would be given to a number of saints before JS' death. A more exciting insight, going back to the background I laid out above, is that JS correlates "the keys of the kingdom," a phrase used in both comments, and the ability to "detect false spirits and personages from true" or the ability to "detect everything false." This creates a phrasal link all the way back to 1832 and 1835's "keys of the kingdom," associated with the reception of the high priesthood (1832 and 1835) and a visit from Peter, James, and John (1835 only). This also creates a link between the personages of Peter, James and John and their "keys of this ministry" (1829) or "keys of the kingdom" (1835) and Joseph's Nauvoo endowment. I don't know that JS concieved of these keys in the same way across these time period (EDIT: I'm actually kind of certain he didn't, considering the "keys of the kingdom" were first associated with the apostleship, so it seems like the keys get repurposed in Nauvoo), but it's pretty cool to see some roots for the endowment stretching back to 1835, 32, and 29.

Perhaps the roots can be traced back to D&C 2 (1823), since “planting in the hearts” comes prior to turning the hearts to the fathers. This planting sets an undeviating pivot point, which of course contributes to detecting and avoiding everything false.

D&C 3 (1828) refers to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, which mrvelouus work and wonder Jesus links to this kind of “planting” in such places as 3 Nephi 25 – 26:2 (and 26:18, a possible reference to an endowment, as is 27:23), all the while speaking of staying on the straight and narrow (27:6, 33; 28:34). Many Book of Mormon cross-references to these themes, of course, and subsequent D&C sections concerning the Book of Mormon, beginning in 1829, continue this theme.

Also, the plates were “planted” and subsequently great things were brought forth in this regard “unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers in the latter days, and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.” (2 Nephi 3:12).

[Benjamin Seeker]

7 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Perhaps the roots can be traced back to D&C 2 (1823), since “planting in the hearts” comes prior to turning the hearts to the fathers. This planting sets an undeviating pivot point, which of course contributes to detecting and avoiding everything false.

 

D&C 3 (1828) refers to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, which mrvelouus work and wonder Jesus links to this kind of “planting” in such places as 3 Nephi 25 – 26:2 (and 26:18, a possible reference to an endowment, as is 27:23), all the while speaking of staying on the straight and narrow (27:6, 33; 28:34). Many Book of Mormon cross-references to these themes, of course, and subsequent D&C sections concerning the Book of Mormon, beginning in 1829, continue this theme.

 

Also, the plates were “planted” and subsequently great things were brought forth in this regard “unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers in the latter days, and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.” (2 Nephi 3:12).

 

CV, Are you suggesting the Elijah turning the hearts to the fathers, etc. is suggestive of ministering spirits/angels? That would be a hip interpretation, but I would want to see JS suggesting the interpretation himself. 

If you're not suggesting a ministering spirits/angels interpretation, then I think your suggestions don't have a clear, strong link to the "keys of the kingdom," "Peter, James, and John," or the ability to "detect false spirits and personages from true."

Edited March 13, 2017 by Benjamin Seeker

[Benjamin Seeker]

46 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Perhaps the roots can be traced back to D&C 2 (1823), since “planting in the hearts” comes prior to turning the hearts to the fathers. This planting sets an undeviating pivot point, which of course contributes to detecting and avoiding everything false.

 

D&C 3 (1828) refers to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, which mrvelouus work and wonder Jesus links to this kind of “planting” in such places as 3 Nephi 25 – 26:2 (and 26:18, a possible reference to an endowment, as is 27:23), all the while speaking of staying on the straight and narrow (27:6, 33; 28:34). Many Book of Mormon cross-references to these themes, of course, and subsequent D&C sections concerning the Book of Mormon, beginning in 1829, continue this theme.

 

Also, the plates were “planted” and subsequently great things were brought forth in this regard “unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers in the latter days, and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.” (2 Nephi 3:12).

 

Sorry, I guess what I should really ask is can you articulate the connection between the Nauvoo endowment and some of the elements you mentioned more specifically? I understand the general connections you're making, but I'm curious if it has more teeth than just a kind of general thematic link.

[CV75]

37 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

CV, Are you suggesting the Elijah turning the hearts to the fathers, etc. is suggestive of ministering spirits/angels? That would be a hip interpretation, but I would want to see JS suggesting the interpretation himself. 

If you're not suggesting a ministering spirits/angels interpretation, then I think your suggestions don't have a clear, strong link to the "keys of the kingdom," "Peter, James, and John," or the ability to "detect false spirits and personages from true."

I'm thinking that you "plant" the key -- insert it -- before turning it, and that the latter-day planting is the restoration in answer to the former planting, or the hiding of the plates and the sending of the woman into the wilderness (the apostasy).

I'm looking at this in terms of the evolution of Joseph's thoughts, going back in his record to the earliest references you mentioned. In D&C 2, he uniquely inserts the step to "plant" ahead of the step to "turn". In my mind, this makes "planting" the restoration of the priesthood, and the "turning" the results of that. I'm suggesting he thought of this imagery, or at least it was revealed to him, to describe this step several years before it occurred. The relics he saw in the box with the plates were certainly emblems  and tools of priesthood authority (sword, shield, breastplate, stones, etc.), a physical glimpse of spiritual things to come. i consider his first view and annual instructions, provided through the ministering angel Moroni, to be a preliminary/preparatory or rudimentary restoration.

[CV75]

10 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

Sorry, I guess what I should really ask is can you articulate the connection between the Nauvoo endowment and some of the elements you mentioned more specifically? I understand the general connections you're making, but I'm curious if it has more teeth than just a kind of general thematic link.

Where the Nauvoo endowment represents a progression of revelation, I can see how the original themes get fleshed out in the ceremonial details. That is probably too vague; maybe more later. I know there are some good studies of the Book of Mormon as a pattern for the temple ceremonies. I'm suggesting that in light of that, the revelations about it prior to its translation and publication reflect some of what Joseph Smith learned about what was to come in terms of priesthood restoration.

[CV75]

In an earlier thread, I offered a little on the idea of receiving the priesthood in its various constructs and means of transmittal:

• Conferral of power by voice (God only; as with Adam and the heads of new dispensations).
• Conferral of a defined scope of power (i.e. Priesthood, Aaronic and Melchizedekian) by the voice of God; by hands (angelic); and by hands (mortal).
• Conferral of authority (Keys) by Voice (God only; as with Adam's stewardship, naming animals; Joseph's "stewardship" of instruction by Moroni, translation, revelation, etc. before he received the Aaronic or Melchizedekian Priesthoods or any office); and by angelic (John the Baptist; Peter, James and John) or mortal hand.
• Ordination to an office, whether by angel or mortal (Joseph by Oliver).
• Ordination to an Order by Voice (God only; as with Adam and Eve's marriage); by angel or by mortal (out temples ordinances).

So I see  the "planting" as the restoration, and its first reference (and only reference until then, I believe) was in 1823. The tie-in with the endowment is that  "planting the promises" means planting the promise (or the Priesthood and the literal seed--D&C 107:40; Abraham 2:11) in the hearts (that is, in the midst of) of the children. Our midst is Zion, her stakes, the temple and families and the means through which the Lord is represented as being in our midst, and in the midst of all these things. This has to to with the restoration and ordaining to the "order."

Following the "planting" of the keys (restoration), we have the "turning" of the same keys (the liberating action) for our hearts (Zion, her stakes, temples, families, etc.) to our fathers to bind us to them and save them, and they us (D&C 128:15-18).

I know we often refer to the "hearts" in these verses to mean our own personal centers (thoughts, feelings, spirits, etc), but we are also joining individually of one mind and one heart with the whole (Zion past, present and future). We are turning more than our own individual interests.

Edited March 13, 2017 by CV75

[clarkgoble]

Benjamin I agree with the points you make. In particular I think something that doesn't get emphasized at church enough is what the temple teaches particularly women about aid of angels, casting out devils, and keys of knowledge. These aren't essentially tied to the male priesthood offices (although ministering of angels is an explicit feature of being a priest in the Aaronic Priesthood).

While I think we should keep explicit that priesthood in the temple, particularly for women, isn't the priesthood offices (which is how most contemporary Mormons use the phrase priesthood) we should also note the orders of priesthood both men and women go through there. That's something Elder Oaks didn't address in his otherwise great conference talk and that I've not seen really explained anywhere. (I'm not making a claim for the meaning of going through those orders - quite the contrary. I think it's something we all need clarified.)

[blueglass]

23 hours ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

some roots for the endowment stretching back to 1835, 32, and 29.

roots of the endowment may go back even further.  What are your thoughts on the pieces of the endowment from the lost 116pages?  They come up in that interview with Joseph Smith Sr by Fayette Lapham.  "When they, the Jews, first beheld this country, they sent out spies to see what manner of country it was, who reported that the country appeared to have been settled by a very large race of men, and had been, to all appearances, a very rich agricultural and manufacturing nation. They also found something of which they did not know the use, but when they went into the tabernacle, a voice said, "What have you got in your hand,
there?" They replied that they did not know, but had come to inquire; when the voice said, "Put it on your face, and put your face in a skin, and you will see what it is." They did so, and could see everything of the past, present, and future; and it was the same spectacles that Joseph found with the gold plates.   The gold ball stopped here and ceased to direct them any further; the family took possession of the country;"

The first use of keys is from LMS history where she refers to JS being hired by the Stowell's in 1825 because "he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye."  For 1825 the keys refer to the brown and white seer stones.  

[clarkgoble]

Looking forward to Don Bradley's book on the 116 pages whenever it gets published.

[Benjamin Seeker]

On 3/12/2017 at 9:04 PM, CV75 said:

I'm thinking that you "plant" the key -- insert it -- before turning it, and that the latter-day planting is the restoration in answer to the former planting, or the hiding of the plates and the sending of the woman into the wilderness (the apostasy).

I'm looking at this in terms of the evolution of Joseph's thoughts, going back in his record to the earliest references you mentioned. In D&C 2, he uniquely inserts the step to "plant" ahead of the step to "turn". In my mind, this makes "planting" the restoration of the priesthood, and the "turning" the results of that. I'm suggesting he thought of this imagery, or at least it was revealed to him, to describe this step several years before it occurred. The relics he saw in the box with the plates were certainly emblems  and tools of priesthood authority (sword, shield, breastplate, stones, etc.), a physical glimpse of spiritual things to come. i consider his first view and annual instructions, provided through the ministering angel Moroni, to be a preliminary/preparatory or rudimentary restoration.

Very cool ideas about the progression of planting and turning.

While I like it, the first thing we'd have to do is check the actual dates of the textual history.For example, I believe the text for D&C 2 first appears in 1835 or sometime around then. The claim is made that it dates way back, but because there is no previous textual record, it would be more responsible scholarship to assume that the exact wording of D&C 2 represents JS' thinking in 1835 or whenever it was first dictated/published.

[Benjamin Seeker]

16 hours ago, blueglass said:

roots of the endowment may go back even further.  What are your thoughts on the pieces of the endowment from the lost 116pages?  They come up in that interview with Joseph Smith Sr by Fayette Lapham.  "When they, the Jews, first beheld this country, they sent out spies to see what manner of country it was, who reported that the country appeared to have been settled by a very large race of men, and had been, to all appearances, a very rich agricultural and manufacturing nation. They also found something of which they did not know the use, but when they went into the tabernacle, a voice said, "What have you got in your hand,
there?" They replied that they did not know, but had come to inquire; when the voice said, "Put it on your face, and put your face in a skin, and you will see what it is." They did so, and could see everything of the past, present, and future; and it was the same spectacles that Joseph found with the gold plates.   The gold ball stopped here and ceased to direct them any further; the family took possession of the country;"

The first use of keys is from LMS history where she refers to JS being hired by the Stowell's in 1825 because "he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye."  For 1825 the keys refer to the brown and white seer stones.  

I love that story from the Joseph Smith Sr. interview. While it is certainly related to the conversation here, I think we need to temper our excitement about it in terms of presaging the endowment. This story is filtered through Joseph Smith Sr., and he is a Master Mason at this point. He was made a Master Mason in 1818 in a lodge in Canadaigua (I might be off a few years on the date but I don't feel like looking it up right now. Either way, he is a Master Mason well before he gave this interview.). It's possible some of the Masonic overtones/references we get in the interview are being made more explicit through Smith Sr.'s telling. For example, he says that the square and compass symbols of Masonry are displayed on the front page of the gold plates. This phrase, "What have you got in your hand," is also a Masonic element. It is either verbatim or nearly verbatim wording from several Masonic ceremonies, as documented in an early 19th century exposition on Masonry published in NY state. So, at least one of the elements that make this story so clearly linked to the endowment to the modern temple-going Mormon, may instead be a reflection of Masonry traceable through Smith Sr.'s Masonic membership in this early story and JS Jr.'s Masonic membership in the Nauvoo period.

Also, a quick note on the LMS history. This is a cool anecdote, but unfortunately, the specific use of the word key here can't be dated to 1825 because LMS dictated her history sometime after JS' death. However, it is cool to see the use of the term key to describe the seer stones. I believe it's LMS who also recorded the story of JS calling the Urim and Thummim a key as well.

[CV75]

38 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

Very cool ideas about the progression of planting and turning.

While I like it, the first thing we'd have to do is check the actual dates of the textual history.For example, I believe the text for D&C 2 first appears in 1835 or sometime around then. The claim is made that it dates way back, but because there is no previous textual record, it would be more responsible scholarship to assume that the exact wording of D&C 2 represents JS' thinking in 1835 or whenever it was first dictated/published.

Right, I don't think much if any primary source has been found from that early (1823).

[blueglass]

On 3/14/2017 at 0:02 PM, Benjamin Seeker said:

I love that story from the Joseph Smith Sr. interview. While it is certainly related to the conversation here, I think we need to temper our excitement about it in terms of presaging the endowment. This story is filtered through Joseph Smith Sr., and he is a Master Mason at this point. He was made a Master Mason in 1818 in a lodge in Canadaigua (I might be off a few years on the date but I don't feel like looking it up right now. Either way, he is a Master Mason well before he gave this interview.). It's possible some of the Masonic overtones/references we get in the interview are being made more explicit through Smith Sr.'s telling. For example, he says that the square and compass symbols of Masonry are displayed on the front page of the gold plates. This phrase, "What have you got in your hand," is also a Masonic element. It is either verbatim or nearly verbatim wording from several Masonic ceremonies, as documented in an early 19th century exposition on Masonry published in NY state. So, at least one of the elements that make this story so clearly linked to the endowment to the modern temple-going Mormon, may instead be a reflection of Masonry traceable through Smith Sr.'s Masonic membership in this early story and JS Jr.'s Masonic membership in the Nauvoo period.

Also, a quick note on the LMS history. This is a cool anecdote, but unfortunately, the specific use of the word key here can't be dated to 1825 because LMS dictated her history sometime after JS' death. However, it is cool to see the use of the term key to describe the seer stones. I believe it's LMS who also recorded the story of JS calling the Urim and Thummim a key as well.

Here's a link to Larry Porter's article in the ensign referencing the Stowell silver mine project.  Unfortunately they were financially destitute and had to send Joseph out with the seer stone again to earn money for the mortgage.  

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2001/02/joseph-smiths-susquehanna-years?lang=eng&clang=ase

For more on the silver mine project - these entrepreneurial archaeologists have likely found the 40' cave Joseph worked on. http://archival.link/mormoncave/story  Also they compiled most of the known accounts referencing the cave.  http://archival.link/mormoncave/sources#david-whitmer

Could be where the "plates" or Cu plates made to look like Au/Tumbaga were buried as Stowell in an 1830 court trial said the golden plates as he saw them "resembled a stone of greenish caste".  

 

[Benjamin Seeker]

1 hour ago, blueglass said:

For more on the silver mine project - these entrepreneurial archaeologists have likely found the 40' cave Joseph worked on. http://archival.link/mormoncave/story  Also they compiled most of the known accounts referencing the cave.  http://archival.link/mormoncave/sources#david-whitmer

I've been to this cave since they redug it! I don't believe they think this is related to the silver mine. Wasn't that on Stowell's land or someplace distant from Palmyra? This cave is within a mile or two of hill Cumorah, and it was the result of a local JS led treasure dig. They even put a door on this thing for a while. Pretty fun and crazy. 

[blueglass]

4 hours ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

I've been to this cave since they redug it! I don't believe they think this is related to the silver mine. Wasn't that on Stowell's land or someplace distant from Palmyra? This cave is within a mile or two of hill Cumorah, and it was the result of a local JS led treasure dig. They even put a door on this thing for a while. Pretty fun and crazy. 

I think you're right.  Miner's hill and the location of the silver mine dig are not related.  Vogel's paper lists 18 different treasure digging sites, and the Miner's hill was where Joseph was helping William Stafford.  "Jo. [Jr.] could see in his peep stone what there was in that cave," and that "young [smith] could ... see a man sitting in a gold chair. Old [smith] said he was king i.e. the man in the chair; a king of one of the... [Indian] <tribes> who was shut in there in the time of one of their bigbattles."24  Saunders interview with William Kelley, 17Sept1884.  Lorenzo Saunders is interesting because he was the one that led the search parties all over the hill cumorah a few days after Joseph Smith retrieved the plates to look for the stone box, or any hole with fresh dirt where he may have retrieved the plates.  Looks like the location of the silver mine digs were on the property of Jacob Skinner near the base of mt. oquago.  about 1000ft northeast of the current Hale home LDS visitor's center (41.95724, -75.6367). 

Edited March 15, 2017 by blueglass
map of diggings

[theplains]

On 12/03/2017 at 7:10 PM, Benjamin Seeker said:

For those who know, JS is clearly referencing the Nauvoo endowment, which would be given to a number of saints before JS' death. A more exciting insight, going back to the background I laid out above, is that JS correlates "the keys of the kingdom," a phrase used in both comments, and the ability to "detect false spirits and personages from true" or the ability to "detect everything false." 

Do you mean the hand-shake test of D&C 129?

Thanks,
Jim

[Benjamin Seeker]

On 3/26/2017 at 0:13 AM, theplains said:

Do you mean the hand-shake test of D&C 129?

Thanks,
Jim

Not exactly. The teachings in D&C 129 on handshaking are only one part of JS' teachings on discerning true messengers from false. Those who have been to the temple will pick up on what I'm talking about

[clarkgoble]

On 4/8/2017 at 11:23 PM, Benjamin Seeker said:

Not exactly. The teachings in D&C 129 on handshaking are only one part of JS' teachings on discerning true messengers from false. Those who have been to the temple will pick up on what I'm talking about

It goes a little beyond that due to the idea that spirits can't shake hands. So while people bring up (and ridicule) the shaking of hands the real point is just that God will send a resurrected being to do things while Satan's angels aren't. It's really just on requiring tangibility as a kind of proof of authenticity.

The hand shake in general going back first to masonry (and Joseph repurposed a lot of elements from masonry) was a kind of token of recognition. That was used by literal masonic guilds to tell who was or wasn't a member of a guild. In pre-modern times knowing who was authorized was rather important. Not just for who was or wasn't part of a guild. (Presumably to know who was trained in the appropriate skills but also as a way to prevent competition) It also was important for ambassadors and more importantly letters from authority. Without some way of telling what was authorized or not countefeits were rather easy.

While that was changing in Joseph's day, the same concerns were present. In these days when communication is so swift and easy we forget just how difficult a problem it was in pre-modern times.

 

[Benjamin Seeker]

5 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

It goes a little beyond that due to the idea that spirits can't shake hands. So while people bring up (and ridicule) the shaking of hands the real point is just that God will send a resurrected being to do things while Satan's angels aren't. It's really just on requiring tangibility as a kind of proof of authenticity.

The hand shake in general going back first to masonry (and Joseph repurposed a lot of elements from masonry) was a kind of token of recognition. That was used by literal masonic guilds to tell who was or wasn't a member of a guild. In pre-modern times knowing who was authorized was rather important. Not just for who was or wasn't part of a guild. (Presumably to know who was trained in the appropriate skills but also as a way to prevent competition) It also was important for ambassadors and more importantly letters from authority. Without some way of telling what was authorized or not countefeits were rather easy.

While that was changing in Joseph's day, the same concerns were present. In these days when communication is so swift and easy we forget just how difficult a problem it was in pre-modern times.

 

That's a great observation about the masonic connection. I really like that, as the handshake recognition is used very similarly to masonry in the endowment, which is what I was alluding to and what Jim asked about. Now I have to go and see if 19th century masonic use ever called the handshakes or any modes of recognition keys...

[Benjamin Seeker]

As usual the connection is relevant, and as is common in Mormonism of the 1829 through the mid 30s, the most relevant connection comes from Royal Arch Masonry.

Here is the Mackey encyclopedia entry for key:

Quote

"The Key," says Doctor Oliver (Landmarks I, page 180), "is one of the most important symbols of Freemasonry. It bears the appearance of a common metal instrument, confined to the performance of one simple act. But the well-instructed brother beholds in it the symbol which teaches him to keep a tongue of good report, and to abstain from the debasing vices of slander and defamation." Among the ancients the key was a symbol of silence and circumspection; and thus Sophocles alludes to it in the Oedipus Coloneus (line 105), where he makes the chorus speak of "the golden key which had come upon the tongue of the ministering Hierophant in the mysteries of Eleusis—Callimachus says that the Priestess of Ceres bore a key as the ensign of her mystic office. The key was in the Mysteries of Isis a hieroglyphic of the opening or disclosing of the heart and conscience, in the kingdom of death, for trial and Judgment.

In the old instructions of Freemasonry the key was an important symbol, and Doctor Oliver regrets that it has been abandoned in the modern system. In the ceremonies of the First Degree, in the eighteenth century allusion is made to a key by whose help the secrets of Freemasonry are to be obtained, which key "is said to hang and not to lie, because it is always to hang in a brother's defense and not to lie to his prejudge." It was said, too, to hang "by the thread of life at the entrance, " and was closely connected with the heart, because the tongue "ought to utter nothing but what the heart dictates." And, finally, this key is described as being "composed of no metal, but a tongue of good report." In the ceremonies of the Masters Degree in the Adonhiramite Rite, we find this catechism (in the Recueil Précieu:, page 87):

What do you conceal?
All the secrets which have been intrusted to me.
Where do you conceal them?
In the heart.
Have you a key to gain entrance there?
Yes, Right Worshipful.
Where do you keep it?
In a box of coral which opens and shuts only with ivory teeth.
Of what metal is it composed?
Of none. It is a tongue obedient to reason, which knows only how to speak well of those of whom it speaks in their absence as in their presence.

All of this shows that the key as a symbol was formerly equivalent to the modern symbol of the "instructive tongue," which, however, with almost the same interpretation, has now been transferred to the Second or Fellow-Craft's Degree. The key, however, is still preserved as a symbol of secrecy in the Royal Arch Degree; and it is also presented to us in the same sense in the ivory key of the Secret Master, or Fourth Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. In many of the German Lodges an ivory key is made a part of the Masonic clothing of each Brother, to remind him that he should lock up or conceal the secrets of Freemasonry in his heart. But among the ancients the key was also a symbol of power; and thus among the Greeks the title of Kxeiaouxos~ or key-bearer, was bestowed upon one holding high office; and with the Romans, the keys are given to the bride on the day of marriage, as a token that the authority of the house was bestowed upon her; and if afterward divorced, they were taken from her, as a symbol of the deprivation of her office, Among the Hebrews the key was used in the same sense. "As the robe and the baldric," says Lowth (Israel, part ii, section 4), "were the ensigns of power and authority, so likewise was the key the mark of office, either sacred or civil." Thus in Isaiah (xxii, 22), it is said: "The key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulders; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open" Our Savior expressed a similar idea when he said to Saint Peter, "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." It is in reference to this interpretation of the symbol, and not that of secrecy, that the key has been adopted as the official jewel of the Treasurer of a Lodge, because he has the purse, the source of power, under his command.

This use of key is very similar to JS' application of the term "keys of the kingdom" to describe what was given in the Nauvoo endowment. They control the flow of knowledge and keep them within a limited circle. Thanks Clark, for sending me down that path.

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

That's a great observation about the masonic connection. I really like that, as the handshake recognition is used very similarly to masonry in the endowment, which is what I was alluding to and what Jim asked about. Now I have to go and see if 19th century masonic use ever called the handshakes or any modes of recognition keys...

The general thought is that the handshakes come out of actual guild use by masons prior to it becoming a speculative movement in Scotland with the injection of a healthy dose of renaissance views of esoterica.

Of course many groups did the same sorts of things and not all trace their origins to the creation of speculative masonry at the end of the 16th century. So you see it in various types of mystic Judaism well before the rise of the masons - and indeed masonry partook heavily of Christian Cabalism as well as hermeticism and the rediscovery of ancient texts on the art of memory as well as various pagan texts that all came out during the renaissance. While people point to masonry as the source this says little unless one looks to all the texts that appeared during the renaissance and contributed to what made masonry possible. 12th century Jewish Kabbalism in Spain contributed to this as did earlier traditions of Merkebah mysticism and pagan mysticism. So for instance Origin notes that the Orphans would show symbols as they pass through the levels of heaven. (Contra Celsum 6:27) Scholem suggests that the term semeion as entry-token is part of the concept of the seal. So in Hekhalot texts in the ascents the rabbis would show seals to the gate keepers to pass from one level to the next. This is so common in gnostic, Jewish, and pagan texts that it's hard to believe the rise of speculative mason didn't make use of it. The original tokens of masonry may have been practical identifications of working masons but as it was transformed into speculative masonry they took this mystic connotation.

This is one reason why, when critics point to the 19th century context of masonry they're kind of missing the point. The real interesting stuff is in the non-Christian medieval era up through the renaissance. Especially with pagan figures like Bruno but also to the beginnings of modernism where figures like Newton, Boyle and Descartes had feet in both traditions. From a Mormon perspective the most interesting stuff is what survives in the diaspora era Judaism. Although one should also note that not only did renaissance figures like Bruno make heavy use of pagan philosophers and religion like the neoplatonic theurgy of Proculus and Iamblichus but so too did a lot of medieval Jewish mystics especially in the crucial era of the 12th and 13th centuries. While many know of the Zohar that originates during this period many of the other writings of Rabbi Gikatilla are quite interesting here.

[clarkgoble]

One should note that Stevenson's, The Origins of Freemasonry is generally thought to be the best actual history of the movement. He sees from very early on in the 16th century not only the influence of renaissance ideas such as Rosicurcianism but explicit connection to the art of memory. Indeed he sees the structure of speculative masonry largely as arising out of making a memory palace. While the Art of Memory was useful to learn to use mnemonic tricks to memorize prodigious amounts of material it was also seen in the renaissance as being a microcosm of the entire universe and tied to various platonic conceptions. During the renaissance various neoplatonic expansions of the art of memory tied to mysticism in platonic theurgy and similar to the mysticism in hekhalot or merkevah mysticism in Judaism and to a degree gnosticism. Stevenson finds it very plausible that Schaw got this from Giodorno Bruno's revival of paganism and injected it into masonry. While Bruno is very important here the other figure one can't dismiss is Robert Fludd who did a lot of work on memory palaces or temples. 

While they're somewhat dated now Francis Yates' The Art of Memory, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, and The Rosicrucian Enlightenment are all worth reading. So too is Paolo Rossi's Logic and the Art of Memory: The Quest for a Universal Language.

[probablyHagoth7]

On 3/14/2017 at 10:02 AM, Benjamin Seeker said:

...For example, he says that the square and compass symbols of Masonry are displayed on the front page of the gold plates. This phrase, "What have you got in your hand," is also a Masonic element...So, at least one of the elements that make this story so clearly linked to the endowment to the modern temple-going Mormon, may instead be a reflection of Masonry...

Or, freemasonry is simply a fragmented relic of Nephite temple practices brought to Europe 2000 years ago by Nephite/Ammonite colonists, and restored to America 400 years ago by their decendants....awaiting further restoration through Joseph...precisely as he said. 

[clarkgoble]

On 4/13/2017 at 11:56 AM, probablyHagoth7 said:

Or, freemasonry is simply a fragmented relic of Nephite temple practices brought to Europe 2000 years ago by Nephite/Ammonite colonists, and restored to America 400 years ago by their decendants....awaiting further restoration through Joseph...precisely as he said. 

I confess I find that extremely unlikely. In any case, some burden of proof showing how this is plausible is necessary. (And no a few similarities between Roman shorthand that's common to many glyphs doesn't establish the likelihood of Nephite influence here) Especially when the evidence is reasonably strong for Giordano Bruno starting masonry in English in the mid 16th century out of the art of memory, gnosticism, cabalism, and newly repopularize neoplatonic texts.

Explaining why Joseph changed what he did from Royal Arch Masonry is a different matter. But explaining Masonry itself while incomplete seems to have good explanations already.

Edited April 15, 2017 by clarkgoble