From: jwindley%asylum.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Subject: Why Mormon temple ceremonies are secret
Date: 9 Apr 92 22:06:01 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

Both Steve Dyer and John Muelhausen raised essentially the same
question: why is the LDS temple endowment ceremony secret?  For years,
the Church's rejoinder was that they were "sacred, not secret."  I
hope to elaborate on that a bit.

The Priesthood endowment ceremony, as it is officially known, has many
purposes.  First, it symbolically portrays the extent of man's
existence, from before the creation of the world to his entrance into
the presence of God after resurrection.  Second, it explains in detail
the role of God, Jesus, and other persons in the creation of the
world, and in the execution of God's plan for our exaltation, which
hinges upon the atonement of Jesus Christ for the redemption of our
sins.  Third, participants covenant to obey the commandments of God,
to abstain from unholy practices, to consecrate our time, talents, and
energies to the building up of the kingdom of God, and to remain
sexually chaste.

The last point is important.  In return for our pledge of adherence to
these high moral standards, God gives us information which, in the
words of Brigham Young, "enable [us] to pass by the angels which stand
as sentinels" in the various kingdoms on our way to the highest of the
degrees of glory where God dwells.  It is this information which is
guarded by the obligations of silence.  It is considered a violation
of such obligations to discuss this information in any degree of
detail outside of the temple.

The "garment of the holy priesthood" worn by those who have assumed
these convenants serves to remind them of their obligation to obey God
and to shun evil, according to their promises in the temple.

But why can't everyone know this?  As I see the situation, it is for
much the same reason that Jesus taught in parables.  LDS believe that
we will be judged on what we do versus what we know.  If one knows to
do good and doesn't do it then this is sin, and the individual is
culpable.  But if one transgresses in ignorance of the law, then he
cannot be held responsible for it.

Those who were sufficiently in tune with God understood Jesus' parables
and the message behind them.  They were then held responsible for
adhering to the morals thus expressed.  But those who "had not ears to
hear" heard nothing but clever stories, and as such remained unbound
to a law they could neither understand nor obey.

But when alone with his disciples (those already committed to his
service) he had no need for parables.  He taught them plainly, not
mincing his words.  And after his resurrection he came back and taught
them further, the details of which teachings are unknown to us readers
of the Bible.  These lessons did not take place in the Jerusalem
temple courts, or in the marketplace, or by the sea.  Rather they
occurred in the wilderness, the upper rooms -- away from the crowd.
Why?  So that Jesus could teach plainly and not hold less adamant
hearers of his word responsible for such unveiled knowledge.  He spoke
only to those he felt confident would be able to hear, understand, and
do what he said.

Newcomers and students of Mormonism often have the feeling that the
temple ceremonies are alien to Christianity.  This is understandable
in light of backgrounds in traditional Christianity.

In the early church, hidden knowlege was not an unknown phenomenon.
In _Clementine Recognitions_, Peter tells a new Christian that he must
not aspire too soon to doctrines he cannot bear, that there was a body
of knowlege known only to the faithful and it was not to be shared
among the world at large.  Other references, which I posted several
months ago, clearly suggest that there was in the earliest days of the
church a bona fide collection of hidden knowledge that was not to be
revealed except to those who showed themselves obedient and
trustworthy.  In the interests of brevity I won't delve into a history
of hidden knowledge in Judaism and Christianity, but the studious will
be able to satisfy themselves.

Even in the early Christian church it was common to exclude
non-Christians from the rites of the eucharist, and from other
Christian practices due to the sacred and special nature of these
procedures. 

I don't mean to force historical or religious interpretation on
anyone.  I simply interpret these events to support my belief that the
rites of the temple and the knowlege therein expounded are not a
Mormon addition to Christianity.

The propriety of confidentiality in other contexts, such as
doctor-patient relations, has been frequently discussed here.  I'm
sure most people don't want their sex lives described in detail by Dan
Rather on the news.  But this is only tangentially applicable.

We believe that great responsibility comes with the knowlege we learn
in the temple.  God essentially gives us what we need in order to
enter into his presence.  As a result, he expects us to behave as if
that's where we belonged.  To this end, he gives us that information
only upon the condition that we make solemn covenants to live as best
we can to certain moral standards.  Those who receive this information
are bound to abide by the obligations of obedience which accompany it,
whether they received it legitimately in the temple, or illegitimately
through their own deception or that of another.

It is important to us that this information be received only by those
who are prepared to receive it, and who are willing to assume the
responsibility of knowing it.  The covenants of obedience and so forth
are instigated toward that end -- to assist the temple patron to live
a life that an inhabitant of heaven would live.

Anyone on earth can know this information.  First, one must be
baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Males
must then be ordained to the Priesthood.  After doing one's best to
live the commandments of Jesus Christ for a year, one can participate
in the temple endowment ceremony and covenant with God to live as a
Christian at all times and in all places.  Then one receives the
information which allows him to enter back into the presence of God
after death.

Though available to all, the process by which one prepares for the
temple endowment is not by any means easy.  But it is not trivial
information that is being received, so the preparation is
commensurately non-trivial.

Now I don't expect a large portion of readers to agree with the views
herein presented.  I can understand the opinion of those who are happy
with the religion they have chosen, or with the their absence of
religion.  All we Mormons ask is the privilege of practicing our
religion as we wish, without well-intentioned but insensitive people
displaying our most reverent and solemn practices to the unsympathetic
public, even under the pretense of saving us from ourselves.

Cicero wrote that among mankind's greatest mistakes was the attempt to
compel others to live and think as we do.  John Muelhausen made the
statement that people aren't going to change unless they are shown the
problems with what they accept.  It is my experience that such
"problems" rarely exist outside the eye of the beholder.  It is a far
better thing to show a more desirable way, and let people decide for
themselves if there is a problem with what they accept.  If there be
none, then maybe the better way is not better.  I'm much more
receptive to someone who says "This is what I believe" rather than
someone who says "You're wrong."
--------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Jay Windley                     | jwindley@asylum.utah.edu
Department of Computer Science  +---------------------------------------
Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City   | "I have detailed files."  -- T2
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc