Talk:Mormonism and Freemasonry

message: This article is really a mess. Anonymous posters throw in information in the most illogical places and do so without citing sources. Or they post new information in front of a citation. This article is an embarrassment.kerfuffle (talk) 15:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dog's Breakfast

message: I added "differences" and changed "parrellels" to "similarities" and mentioned a few differences between LDS temple worship and that of the masons. I think this adds balance to the article. I also added a few citation requests. Ryancormack (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Differences added etc

message: This article is .. well, for lack of better nomenclature, pretty damn bad.  I've never seen so many point forms used in an article, can someone with extensive knowledge in the subject perhaps extrapolate and iron out this mess? Jachin 11:00, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Terrible spelling and grammar in places as well.  If I knew more on the subject I'd fix it up, and may attempt to do so anyway after a bit of research. Osgoodelawyer 20:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Quality

message: *Just a friendly note: "Tuesday, 15.—I officiated as grand chaplain at the installation of the Nauvoo Lodge of Free Masons..." conflicts with "Wednesday, March 16.—I was with the Masonic Lodge and rose to the sublime degree." in that it would be impossible for Smith to officiate as grand chaplain (or reg Chaplain in a reg Lodge, for that matter) w/o actually yet being a Freemason. Grye 19:52, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is provision to be made a Mason at sight, but it doesn't require the degrees to be worked.  However, the usual procedure to be a Grand Chaplain usually requires being a Master Mason first (I believe the usual requirement of being a Past Master to hold a Grand Lodge position does not apply to Chaplains, but I could be mistaken).  In any case, while this is not illegal, it is certainly weird (Smith was a Grand Lodge officer pro tem without even being a Mason), and might point to a mistaken recollection on Smith's part, although no one writing about Smith even from a Masonic POV has addressed that particular issue. MSJapan 21:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds not legal on several counts, but legal or no, if it happened, &/or is in his journal, I'd say put it in, carefully noted as such. Grye 21:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

text: "The minutes of Nauvoo Lodge for Tuesday, March 15, 1842, shows Grand Master Abraham Jonas (Illinois Grand Master) opened the lodge in the 3rd degree of Masonry and conducted a public installation of Nauvoo Lodge "at the grove near the Temple." The minutes then go on to show that both Joseph Smith, Jr., and Sidney Rigdon "were duly initiated Entered Apprentice Masons during the day." The record for Wednesday, March 16, ceremonies again lists the two candidates and shows that they were made fellowcraft and Master Masons at sight. The first five Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and Lorenzo Snow were all made Masons in Nauvoo Lodge. Also practically every member of the hierarchy was or became a Mason shortly after the Prophet was raised to the degree of Master Mason." See The Mormon Church and Freemasonry
It is a longstanding Masonic tradition that a Grand Master at his discretion has the authority to make a man a Master Mason on sight. If Grand Master Jonas was indeed in Nauvoo in March 1842, it may be reasonable to assume that Smith et al. were so raised and were legitimate and regular Master Masons as a result.
It is also well-known that there was a great deal of anti-Mormon sentiment in the Masonic community of the day. Smith was murdered in 1844 by a mob that included several Masons. It is quite likely that there was considerable pressure on the Grand Lodge of Illinois to revoke the charters of the Nauvoo Lodges at some point. 
Indeed, the Grand Lodge of Utah was founded in 1872 as an openly anti-Mormon organization. According to a Masonic source (the aforementioned article) more than any other organization it is responsible for the assertions that the LDS temple ceremonies were essentially ripoffs of earlier Masonic rituals. The Grand Lodge of Utah officially held this position until 1984. --Faustus37 05:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

text: That's not what happened in 1984.  What happened in 1984 was that the Grand Lodge of Utah finally realized how unmasonic it was to prohibit one religion from being part of the fraternity when the fraternity is explicitly not a religion.  The Grand Lodge of Utah was alone among all other grand lodges in prohibiting Mormons from entering the fraternity and there were LDS Masons in all the surrounding jurisdictions.  --Taivo (talk) 10:26, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on J. Smith's Masonry 

message: I think he (Hyrum) was a Mason, but there's no citations  anywhere . Please add him w/ citations to Talk:List of Freemasons/citation, then add him to List of Freemasons. Also, when this is done, it would be apropriate to add cat:freemasons to his article page. Note: Heber C. Kimball's article's section's existance is rather nice... Grye
:According to an article published by the Grand Lodge of California in 2001, "An older son (of Joseph Smith Sr.), Hyrum Smith, was a member of Mount Moriah Lodge No. 112, Palmyra New York." See The Mormon Church and Freemasonry --Faustus37 05:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on H. Smith's Masonry 

message: "Similarities include handshakes, oaths, aprons, beehives, continual reference to breast plate, Urim & Thummim and Melchizedek priest."
From which direction are the similarities?  It's not specified.  Furthermore, half that stuff doesn't appear in Masonry at all, and some of what does is not restricted to Masonry. So, the section doesn't make sense, and from the Melchizedek Priesthood article on WP, that itself is either a Christian or LDS concept. MSJapan 06:54, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They don't appear in Masonry at all, so we don't relate to it in the slightest.  In fact, I hadn't heard of them at all prior to seeing them here. MSJapan 21:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm pretty sure that the beehive isn't actually secret, to either discipline, so I'd think most things written about it would be OK. The Handshakes, aprons, Oaths, & the rest seem OK as-is. Like MSJapan, I know nothing of Urim & Thummim and Melchizedek, not to say I shouldn't... Grye 21:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Urim and Thummim were two stones Joseph Smith said he used in translating the Book of Mormon.  Is there a parallel to that in Masonic history?  Epachamo 00:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that I am aware of, at least from a historical standpoint.  There's  obviously a connection to stones (it being called Masonry and all), but there's no mystical purpose or hidden secrets in said stones. MSJapan 00:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarities section.... 

message: The introduction is longer than the rest of the article, there is no way to attribute what information came from what book, and some of the material is outright wrong, and contradicts material in other, more well-researched WP articles. MSJapan 21:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Ardenn 21:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Badly needs a rewrite.... 

message: I suggest we eliminate this wording entirely:  'Like a shell within a shell within a shell. It is interesting to note that the "Book of Mormon" which has many many books in it, also contains one called "the Book of Mormon" thereby creating a shell within a shell.'
I have seen it on poor comparison websites before, and it just seems like an entirely bizarre stretch to compare two things that aren't the same.  I could just as easily use that logic to say that The Lord of the Rings is Masonic because it has three books creating a progression of three degrees, and that is obviously a nonsensical connection.  Even the proposed connection is poor, nine arches within each other, does not parallel to one Book of Mormon inside of another Book of Mormon, there would have to be nine.
209.40.69.13 18:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obvious Speculative Nonsense 

message: I have decided to do a major revamping of this article and have thought of the following outline:
* Introduction
* Pre-Nauvoo era (1800-1840)
* Nauvoo era (1840-1846)
* Pioneer era (1846-????)
* Freemasonry and Modern Mormonism (???? - 2006)
* Theological Parallels, with appropriate sub-sections
* External Links
* Notes
* References
In the Introduction there would be a brief explanation about the two movements, with a synopsis on the influence each has had on the other.  The next four sections would discuss the history the two have had with each other.  I put suggested dates for the different eras.  Their is a definite difference in relationship between Freemasonry during the pioneer era and the modern day era, but I'm have trouble pinning it down to a specific date or event.  It seems the change was gradual.  Any suggestions?
The theological parallels section would include sensitive and appropriate similarities between the two.
These seems to be the most logical divisions.  Any suggestions or critisism would be most welcome.  Epachamo 15:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite Outline

message: I have a real problem with the following line (from "Similarities between Mormon worship and Freemasonry"): Both groups hold such symbols as sacred and insist (until relatively recently on pain of death) on secrecy.  From the Masonic side, this statement is totally inaccurate.  1) Freemasons do NOT hold such symbols (or any symbols) as "sacred" - that is a word that has a religious meaning, which is not appropriate in discussing Freemasonry as it is not a religion. 2)Freemasonry has never insisted on secrecy... yes, the fraternity has "secrets" (its handshakes, passwords, and other recognitions signals), and Masons promise to keep them such... but to say that the fraternity insists on secrecy is not accurate.  After all, these "secrets" have been written about and exposed since the early 1700s... If a Mason wishes to expose them yet again, it really does not harm the fraternity in any way.  It is especially wrong to say that any such insistance is (or was) "on pain of death".  I assume the statement is alluding to the so called "bloody penalties" contained in the Masonic Obligations. However, if you read any of the various exposés of Masonic ritual you will see that these penalties are symbolic, internal penalties - they are things that a thoughtful Mason would be willing to have happen to him, rather than something which would actually occur.  The obligations date back to the Middle Ages, when it was very common for promises and oaths to contain such horrifying penalties (they are actually fairly mundain by Medieval standards)... In context of the times, it was a fancy way of saying "I really, really mean it".  Today we say "Cross my heart and hope to die," or "May God strike me dead."  In short, Freemasonry has never insisted on secrecy, and (especially) never insisted on secrecy "on pain of death". Blueboar 12:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sacred and secret? - no 

message: If there's no official prohibition on either side for membership (a cited fact), there's nothing from which controversy can arise.  Similarly, if there's no official statement of prohibition, LeFevre's "strong discouragement" isn't doctrine or practice.  Therefore, there is no justification for either cat. MSJapan 19:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rm of cats 

message: It appears to me that this article is the result of 4 years of bickering and arguing over the supposed truth. What you have left as an "article" is merely slightly more than a stub with a few misguided citations thrown in. From what I can tell, Storm Rider has been the sort of mediator, though I'm still uncertain of his stance. While on the other hand you have what appears to be various people who "have seen the light" so to speak, claiming to have been involved in both "rituals" of the Mormons and the Masons, and thus have the only clear and true understanding. Pardon the tone of my words, as I think this whole article to be a joke. Until someone takes the time to actually write an article that presents BOTH sides of the story equally (which has already been done..not here) then it will remain as such.
Joseph Smith borrowed some ideas to convey a point he felt called to share...so what? Get over it! That doesn't mean Mormons are Masons, or the reverse of that. The LDS church has stated over and over again that various religions (with respect to the fact that Masons consider themselves a fraternity...I consider them as such, similar to the Elks or Knights of Columbus) have parts, or multiple parts of the truth (as seen from the LDS perspective). This in itself says quite plainly (without tinted glasses trying to sway the crowd) that it is completely plausible that the original ideals were borrowed (stolen, plagiarized, whatever). So why all the bickering? Let's just come to an agreement that it was borrowed, developed over time, which resulted in changes (not cover ups). And we can all go about being happy :)
Oh, and by the way...the link to the Free Mason website..you know, the one where it claims the Masons have an article about their link to Mormons...It doesn't work, says the article does not exist.Infero Veritas (talk) 19:57, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  So...Let me get this straight... 

message: Joseph Smith did not become a mason until Nauvoo.  Should this not be pointed out.  To say "Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", or however we explain what he founded, "was a freemason", implies when he founded the Church he was a freemason.  However, since he would not become a freemason until about a decade later, the order seems to be ignored.Johnpacklambert (talk) 18:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably also worth noting that in the period around 1830, he was probably anti-Mason, based on the treatment of secret societies in the Book of Mormon. --8.11.254.188 (talk) 22:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joseph Smith not a mason when the Church was founded 

message: This issue does not neccesarily change the validity of the quote from History of The Church.  However, since much of that work was compiled after Joseph's death he had many ghost authors.  Even at that, only part of it comes from his journals (often written by scribes, sometimes from his dictation, but in many cases not), other parts are based on other peoples journals (with the references to Joseph made first person), other documents available and some is based on reminiscences written down several years after events.  My point is that it is not a journal, so we should not call it such in the article.  Its use as a source I support, we just need to properly identify it.Johnpacklambert (talk) 19:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the Church not a journal 

message: I find it highly unlikely that the Worshipful Master recently instated in the lodge in Illinois was the first Mormon WM since Nauvoo. Masonry does not ask what religion its members belong to, and I'm sure there are many WMs who have come and gone who were members of the Church without anyone ever realizing it. I'm not even sure how this particular WMs religious affiliation would have made it in to the lodge minutes, since discussion of religion is forbidden in the lodge.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptPostMod (talk • contribs) 19:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dog's Breakfast

message: This article isn't neutral in its present form.  It is entirely too POV and, especially in the Similarities/Differences sections, it sounds more like, "sure, but...." in its wording and choice of references.  This is a difficult topic to deal with for two reasons--the secrecy of the LDS temple rites and the secrecy of the Freemason rituals.  It is therefore important that sources from both sides of the issue need to be fairly used.  Reliable sources here become critical.  Right now, there is no balance in the discussion.  That's why I've added the POV tag for now.  This article can be improved and there are neutral sources available out there.  (Taivo (talk) 14:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag 

message: This is a pointless section and is only apologetic in nature, "A religion is different than a fraternity".  Duh.  It's not encyclopedic in nature.  Yes, there are many differences between a trout and a lion.  That's not interesting or relevant to the fact that they share similarities (a backbone, a heart, etc.).  It should be removed.  (Taivo (talk) 15:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Differences" section 

message: I made an edit to this section, the quote referenced is from Times and Seasons, Volume 5, No 13. The line said:
"It is recorded that he ran towards the open window with both hands above his head, palms forward, and proclaimed, "Oh Lord my God."
However, Times and Seasons mentions nothing of "palms forward", it says:
"...and were then shot to death, while, with uplifted hands they gave such signs of distress as would have commanded the interposition and benevolence of Savages or Pagans.  They were both Masons in good standing.  Ye brethren of "the mystic tie" what think ye!  Where is our good Master Joseph and Hyrum?  Is there a pagan, heathen, or savage nation on the globe that would not be moved on this great occasion, as the trees of the forest are moved by a mighty wind?  Joseph's last exclamation was "O Lord my God!""
So I changed it to read:
"It is recorded that he ran towards the open window with uplifted hands, and proclaimed, "Oh Lord my God.""  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.55.28 (talk) 23:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Masonic distress when Joseph was killed 

message: More than 2/3 of this talk page is more than 2 years old; does anyone object to the older material being archived? -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 19:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that might be a good idea.... I came to the talk page looking for the source of the 11/2009 Dispute Tag, and I'm STILL not entirely sure why the tag is up there.  It seems the discussion(s) stalled quite a long time ago.  White Whirlwind  咨  00:45, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive? 

message: Gentlemen, I have made some simple cleanup such as standardizing everything as Latter-Day Saints (not Latter Day or Latter-day). I also did what I could to eliminate reference to the "LDS Church" as I believe that there is no such church. In some places, I changed it to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I also made some changes in hyphenation some work on parallelism.200.1.183.219 (talk) 21:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The good faith efforts are appreciated, but you should familiarize yourself with WP:MOSLDS. That is the style guide used for most wikipedia articles on this subject. --FyzixFighter (talk) 01:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some Simple Cleanup 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Mormonism and Freemasonry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cephasministry.com/mormon_is_there_no_help.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100607065736/http://koffordbooks.com/forthcoming.shtml to http://www.koffordbooks.com/forthcoming.shtml
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130202091515/http://signaturebooks.com/2010/02/quorum-of-the-anointed/ to http://signaturebooks.com/2010/02/quorum-of-the-anointed/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613164041/http://content.lib.utah.edu/u/?%2Fdialogue%2C20139 to http://content.lib.utah.edu/u?%2Fdialogue%2C20139
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613164041/http://content.lib.utah.edu/u/?%2Fdialogue%2C20139 to http://content.lib.utah.edu/u?%2Fdialogue%2C20139
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613164218/http://content.lib.utah.edu/u/?%2Fdialogue%2C16999 to http://content.lib.utah.edu/u?%2Fdialogue%2C16999
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: See commentary on Chateau's article from the British Columbia and Yukon Grand Lodge site. 
Recommend removal and replacing with better sources.
Deaddebate (talk) 15:53, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chateau Citation doesn't meet [[WP:RS]]  

message: I recommend we change the name of this article to "Freemasonry and the Latter Day Saint Movement" to be more in line with Wikipedia MOS.  Any thoughts or objections? Epachamo (talk) 00:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I am in agreement. Edohi1991 (talk) 18:54, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename Article to Freemasonry and the Latter Day Saint Movement