DiscussMormonism.com

So you are a succesful professional and are bumped up gradually from elders Q pres, HP, bishop, stake pres, etc. You get called to the special "secret" day at the temple where someone washes your feet and says magic words. You made it, the Calling and Election Made Sure.

How is this not a secret combination? How is this not something the Book of Mormon has warned you, the faithful Mormon about? How is it not against your ingrained teachings?

Well?

Permit me the insolence of answering on such recipients' behalf, but I think there's a wide divide between a combination and a mere ordinance.

Dr. Shades wrote:Permit me the insolence of answering on such recipients' behalf, but I think there's a wide divide between a combination and a mere ordinance.

if it were a mere ordinance then why the secrecy? in the context of a ceremony it is a mere point of demarcation. It is once you align with the group, following the path of (usually) your family into the group that makes it a secret combination, with accompanying oaths and penalties that are "above" the rabble.

This is about class and bifurcation between the "unwashed" and the "chosen". I see your point that it might just be a traditional "king making" ceremony but one cannot say there is no fraternity that is created by the ceremony.

I have been reading a bit of Joseph Campbell lately and I think its giving me a different perspective.

Your thoughts Shades? Did I describe your thoughts accurately?

if it were a mere ordinance then why the secrecy?

If you knew anything at all about the New Testament, you'd know that Jesus himself demanded secrecy for some things.

Mercury wrote:So you are a succesful professional and are bumped up gradually from elders Q pres, HP, bishop, stake pres, etc. You get called to the special "secret" day at the temple where someone washes your feet and says magic words. You made it, the Calling and Election Made Sure.

How is this not a secret combination? How is this not something the Book of Mormon has warned you, the faithful Mormon about? How is it not against your ingrained teachings?

Well?

Let me just inform your well-wordedness that the Calling and Election Made Sure is by the voice of prophecy and must be spoken by the Lord unto your hearing the excellent voice declare that you have part and lot with him. See TPJS 298, 305

If the Heman-Woman-Haters-Club wants to give you what they insist is your second annointing that elevates your prestige among them it counts for nothing with God. I would think that there is worse than this in LDS elitism.

bcspace wrote:

if it were a mere ordinance then why the secrecy?

If you knew anything at all about the New Testament, you'd know that Jesus himself demanded secrecy for some things.

No, the Mormon interpretation of the New Testament includes secrecy. This interpretation of yours is necessary for your views on hokey temple ceremonies.

Nightlion wrote:

Mercury wrote:So you are a succesful professional and are bumped up gradually from elders Q pres, HP, bishop, stake pres, etc. You get called to the special "secret" day at the temple where someone washes your feet and says magic words. You made it, the Calling and Election Made Sure.

How is this not a secret combination? How is this not something the Book of Mormon has warned you, the faithful Mormon about? How is it not against your ingrained teachings?

Well?

Let me just inform your well-wordedness that the Calling and Election Made Sure is by the voice of prophecy and must be spoken by the Lord unto your hearing the excellent voice declare that you have part and lot with him. See TPJS 298, 305

If the Heman-Woman-Haters-Club wants to give you what they insist is your second annointing that elevates your prestige among them it counts for nothing with God. I would think that there is worse than this in LDS elitism.

You talk like a fundy

Mercury wrote:You talk like a fundy

He's the next prophet, merc. Or would be, if he could catch the eye of anyone important with his antics, and if anyone wanted to return to 1820. Neither is going to happen, but he keeps hoping. He's our resident fundie now, having taken over Gaz's spot.

harmony wrote:

Mercury wrote:You talk like a fundy

He's the next prophet, merc. Or would be, if he could catch the eye of anyone important with his antics, and if anyone wanted to return to 1820. Neither is going to happen, but he keeps hoping. He's our resident fundie now, having taken over Gaz's spot.

I miss Gaz. I really do, and not just because were both "Vegans".

26 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man marry a wife according to my word, and they are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, according to mine appointment, and he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant whatever, and all manner of blasphemies, and if they commit no murder wherein they shed innocent blood, yet they shall come forth in the first resurrection, and enter into their exaltation; but they shall be destroyed in the flesh, and shall be delivered unto the buffetings of Satan unto the day of redemption, saith the Lord God.

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 132:26)

I had done a paradigm on the subject a number of years ago. After a couple in our family got their CAEMS. I'll try to find it. Those that have been given this ordinance/promise can do no wrong so long as they don't blaspheme against the Holy Ghost (whatever that really means).

I reference the verse above because it may directly relate to John D. Lee's postumous full re-instatement of his temple blessings in the 1950's.

Evidently, John D. Lee did not shed any innocent blood.

murder of the guilty = justified, exaltation promised

murder of innocents = unjustified (but what does innocent really mean, right?)

Free passes, anyone? Aspire to this little club.