Firsthand Accounts of the Second Anointing

[_moksha]

More of the same? Or do they actually believe in it?

Ask a question like that and Crocket will tell you that you are being anonymous.

[_Runtu]

More of the same? Or do they actually believe in it?

Ask a question like that and Crocket will tell you that you are being anonymous.

I just figure it must be incredibly disappointing to be an apostle. You've had your calling and election made sure and you're a special witness of Christ. You're supposed to have the right to personal ministry from Jesus. And nothing happens. It must take great faith to continue in that calling.

[_Sethbag]

I just figure it must be incredibly disappointing to be an apostle. You've had your calling and election made sure and you're a special witness of Christ. You're supposed to have the right to personal ministry from Jesus. And nothing happens. It must take great faith to continue in that calling.

It's a wonder what rationalization goes on in the mind of an apostle. They might well console themselves with the argument that they have such a strong "spiritual" witness of Jesus that it's as certain as a personal visitation would be. The last conference talk of Bruce R. McConkie comes to mind.

[_Maxrep]

I rather suspect that more members know about the possibility of getting one's "calling and election made sure", but vastly fewer would recognize it by the name "Second Anointing".

Agreed.

In addition to "Second Anointing", the CaEMS has also been referred to as "The more sure word of prophesy" as well as "Receiving the second comforter".

In the early days of the church, the CaEMS took place with great frequency. It was almost as if it were an extension of the first endowment. The meaning associated with it was somewhat abbreviated back then though. The portion of "Seeking the face of the lord" was not emphasized until later in the 1900's when the practice of extending the CaEMS was all but discontinued. My impression, and I could be off base, is that the invitation for the Second Anointing, takes place on an EXTREMELY limited basis.

My understanding of the endowment, which may not rise to Nehor's level :) , is that after the ordinance of the washing and anointing takes place, the couple, in a private setting, have the opportunity to receive a visitation from the second comforter. This means plainly that Jesus Christ will minister to them, and that they will see his face - it is an actual, physical visitation.

Sethbag, I'm putting my hand on the computer monitor right now in a prayer of faith.... Where am I supposed to send that check?

[_the road to hana]

My understanding of the endowment, which may not rise to Nehor's level :) , is that after the ordinance of the washing and anointing takes place, the couple, in a private setting, have the opportunity to receive a visitation from the second comforter. This means plainly that Jesus Christ will minister to them, and that they will see his face - it is an actual, physical visitation.

You've been drinking that same Kool-Aid that Charity mixes.

I don't doubt that in an experience like that, having the first part of the ritual, then repairing to a private sealing room, the intimacy and emotion of the moment would lead people to feel like they had had a profoundly spiritual experience, but the "visit from the Savior" stuff is an Faith-Promoting Rumor that even if it's not being personally experienced, none of them would publicly deny. Would people on the sidelines say the Emperor had no clothes, when everyone else is saying how exquisite they are?

[_Runtu]

It's a wonder what rationalization goes on in the mind of an apostle. They might well console themselves with the argument that they have such a strong "spiritual" witness of Jesus that it's as certain as a personal visitation would be. The last conference talk of Bruce R. McConkie comes to mind.

I remember that talk very well. I was on my mission, and several people were absolutely shocked to hear such a plain admission that a special witness of Christ had never actually seen Christ. But McConkie was sure in his testimony. But then so was I, and I suspect a lot of us exmos were just as sure.

[_truth dancer]

Hey Maxrep...

My impression, and I could be off base, is that the invitation for the Second Anointing, takes place on an EXTREMELY limited basis.

Just curious what gave you this impression. :-)

I would have thought the same thing until the CES director, now patriarch told me that "thousands and thousands" of members have had it done.

The more I learn the more I am finding that indeed lots of folks seem to have parents or relatives who have had their CaEMS.


:-)

~dancer~

[_Pokatator]

I see the church as a very well designed man-made pyramid scheme.

The "Calling and Election Made Sure" or Second Anointing seems no different than a conference cruise for achieving a marketing level in Amway or getting to ride on L. Ron Hubbard's boat.

It all strokes the Ego.

[_Alter Idem]

I read "Annointed One's" post and thought I'd give my opinion, for what it's worth.

I don't believe Annointed one actually had the experience. I think this is from someone's journal entry. Most likely, Annointed one is a grandchild or possibly a son or daughter who is has left the church and made this post using the journal entry as the basis for their claims.

Now, I don't say this because I don't think it's possible for it to actually be a true post, it's just that I have some doubts about this particular post and how it has been presented.

My reasons;

Many little things don't add up. The reason for leaving after just a couple of years is so sketchy and the reasons given were way too suspicious and sound odd.

The person gives the kind of details that a devout person would have felt comforable writing in their journal, but Annointed one, couldn't give intimate details..the kind that would have been "too sacred" for a devout person to write..he had to rely on already published accounts. This didn't make sense..if it really happened to him, and he is "telling all" why not actually tell it all? Why, because, the journal entry didn't include it.

All the concern about having to lie to the children did not ring true. LDS are used to recognizing a difference between being dishonest and respecting the "sacredness" of something..heck, how many of you have commented on the old "lying for the Lord" charge. This shouldn't be a problem. NO devout LDS person would have any discomfort at just saying "Dad and I are going to have a little weekend away..we'll be attending the temple and spending time together"...no big deal. Annointed one made it sound like this deception started the crack in his devotion to the faith. Just not plausible.

There are other things, but these were the ones that stuck out the most.

What I see could have happened is that the persons who actually received the ordinances died sometime during the last few years (not too hard since it's mostly elderly people who receive it) since it was performed and family was going through their personal effects. Someone read the journal, alerted other family members and "Annointed one" was one of those. "Annointed one" decided to use the information to publicize it and decided to do so in this way, thinking it would have more credibility than just saying they had read it in a journal.

So, my conclusion is that it did take place, but I think it is unlikely that it happened to the person who actually posted it.

[_Sethbag]

Sethbag, I'm putting my hand on the computer monitor right now in a prayer of faith.... Where am I supposed to send that check?

I'll PM you my PayPal information. ;-)