• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mormon Temples - Sacred or Secret?

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
I'm well aware of cameras in dressing room common areas - I'm talking about where the person actually disrobes. If there are cameras then, more than likely the company is violating state law.

Not to go off topic too much but no they are not violating state law.(at least not in my state)..They post signs that the dressing "rooms"(not just the common areas) are being "monitored'. The dressing rooms at "Dillards" are not your 'private" property..and you are made full aware if you choose to undress its not "private" therefore no violation.Its no different than say if I tell you .."Im recording this conversation" and you choose with that knowledge to continue with the conversation.You are aware its not "private" so there is no violation.(actually in Texas all you need is "one party consent" for audio)Havent you ever been on the phone..lets say with your credit card comapany..and a recording comes on that says .."this call may be being monitored for quality assurance"?

Heck..I have an account at Charles Schwab and Ameritrade..All calls are recorded and they tell you up front..there is a beep about every 15 seconds to remind you..

Anyway with the dressing rooms you are "informed" you may be being viewed..and then you have the "choice" to undress in there or not.

So I usually buy my clothes and bring them home to try on..and bring them back it they dont fit..Other times I say ..what the heck..who cares.."depends upon my mood".:D

Love

Dallas
 

Truid

Member
You know, that reminds me of a "friend" (I use the word very loosely) I once had. She had a very unpleasant habit of coming up to me and saying, "No offense but..." and then saying something very offensive like, "your daughter sure is ugly." When someone admits that they know that something they are about to do is going to offend someone else and then goes ahead and does it anyway, I'd say the point is to offend.
OR, it could be that there "intent" is to be brutally honest with you and they know it could hurt a little, they want you to know their true motivation is to help not hurt (or offend) you. Usually, when someone wants to offend another person, they don't pre-qualify the offense. They just come right out and do it.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
OR, it could be that there "intent" is to be brutally honest with you and they know it could hurt a little, they want you to know their true motivation is to help not hurt (or offend) you. Usually, when someone wants to offend another person, they don't pre-qualify the offense. They just come right out and do it.
I think it depends on the person. This particular woman used to do this constantly. "No offense but..." followed by an offensive statement is just a pathetic attempt to excuse oneself for rude behavior.
 

Bawb

Satan
b4 this, idk that mormons id rituals...it makes me interested, liek i need to no wut they do...but, i respect they want it secret, because i don't go around and tell everyone about my satanic rituals do i?At fact, i usually try to keep the fact i'm satanist secret,a bunch of people tried to beat me up for ti, i ran tho :D
 

misanthropic_clown

Active Member
I think it depends on the person. This particular woman used to do this constantly. "No offense but..." followed by an offensive statement is just a pathetic attempt to excuse oneself for rude behavior.

It's generally a coward's way of dishing out criticism, because of course you are the one being unreasonable if you take offense at what they say. I had a manager who did it quite a lot. I guess it was his quick-fix way at making 'constructive' criticism.
 

Sententia

Well-Known Member
You know, that reminds me of a "friend" (I use the word very loosely) I once had. She had a very unpleasant habit of coming up to me and saying, "No offense but..." and then saying something very offensive like, "your daughter sure is ugly." When someone admits that they know that something they are about to do is going to offend someone else and then goes ahead and does it anyway, I'd say the point is to offend.


E.G.: YouTube - Sam Harris at Idea CIty '05

Sometimes when people say I don't mean to offend you they are attempting to present information and their thoughts in a way they believe you will find offensive. They are not trying to offend you by following this thought pattern and figuring out this one issue but they know you might be offended. So set aside your emotional response and give me the benefit of the doubt here...

I am not going to say something for the purpose of offending you. If you take offense then I can't help that. I am not saying what I am saying for the sole purpose of offending you.

I am just trying to explain this one little concept. Some people use it inappropiately and your characterization of it reminds me of someone who walks up to you and says I don't mean to hurt you and then punches you in the nose. Then a doctor trying to draw blood says I don't mean to hurt you and you scoff at him and say yeah right... thats exactly what you intend to do....

Its a generalization and not fit for all. I'm sorry your one friend uses this saying improperly.
 

ripplecutbuddha

LDS Newbie..to this *****
LDS Temple ceremonies, for the most part are hidden from the outside world. In other words, if you want to know what goes on inside one of their temples, you'd have to become a member of the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints, and after a year of service and showing yourself to be "worthy" be given a temple recommend. Outside of that, no active "true blue Mormon" is going to tell you the details of their ceremonies because these rituals are so "sacred" to them.

But, what I don't understand is WHY they refuse to admit that it was meant to be kept secet, and that the word "secret" is accurate in describing it.

First of all, any time a new temple is built, the general public is allowed to tour the temple during an open house. The San Diego temple had an open house that lasted for nearly two months because of the high traffic. Also, whenever a temple is renovated, there is a brief open house before the building is re-dedicated.

The temple, in the eyes of the LDS Member, is the most sacred place on earth. We build them as literal houses of God. As such, they are far more important than the average meetinghouse, which is always open to the public.

The ceremonies that take place in the temples deal with biblical doctrines. It's the setting and purpose of the ceremonies that make them special. As has been mentioned earlier, all the ceremonies can be found on the internet if that's what you really want to know. What you need to remember is that knowing the ceremonies will not give you a true picture of what takes place in a temple during the ceremony itself.

Most everyone knows what happens at a wedding, but participating in such a ceremony makes it special in a way that cannot be described merely by the process itself.

The reason we resent the word 'secret' is that it implies that we, as temple-going Mormons, don't want anyone else to know what's going on. Nothing could be further from the truth. The General Authorities have always said that it is every member's duty to be worthy of temple attendance. That doesn't sound like it's a well-kept secret, if the leaders want 13,000,000 people to know all about it. The fact that any member that's been worthy for a year since joining adds to that.

The temple is a special place, of course there are standards that must be met in order for attendance. Every religion on earth has minimum standards set for membership; are they being too exclusive? The LDS Church has stadards set for membership. It takes a higher standard to be worthy of entering the most sacred buildings in the LDS Church. It's only common sense.
 

blackout

Violet.
The temple is a special place, of course there are standards that must be met in order for attendance. Every religion on earth has minimum standards set for membership; are they being too exclusive? The LDS Church has stadards set for membership. It takes a higher standard to be worthy of entering the most sacred buildings in the LDS Church. It's only common sense.

Standards are measurable requirements. That's common sense yes.

But why people like/need to extend that into issues of "worth"...
or "worthiness" I do not know.

If I am in a "private" jazz ensemble...
(ie... not an open jam session)
and jazz requires that one must be able to improvise...
and you are a musician who cannot meet that requirement...
does not know how to improvise... or play from jazz chord symbols...
you cannot enter in to the sacred improvisitory space
NOT because you are "unworthy"...
but because you (presently) lack a necessairy "requirement" for participation.
(and still, even in an open jam session...
you would be UNABLE to enter in, to the deeper musical playing experience there)

If you are an improvising musician who doesn't actively engage with...
or listen sensitively to ... what's being played by everyone else...
you may not be invited to private sessions again.
NOT because you are "unworthy",
but because, again, you do not meet the "requirements" of the SHARED sacred improvisatory space.

On a HIGHER level... a "professional" level... and a "soul" level...
more and more, will not be able to enter in to the sacred improvisatory space.
And yet STILL it is not a matter of "worthiness"...
but STANDARDS, and "requirements".

Even if (I percieve) that a person is nosy and obnoxious
in the sacred space of my home...
while I would certainly not invite or welcome them back again,
STILL I would not cast aspursions on their "worthiness".

I simply have certain requirements for entry into my sacred space,
that they are unable to meet.
My home is sacred and private as well,
and deserves protection from nosy outsiders.
This notion I understand and respect full well.
 
Last edited:
The answer is - both. The Mormon Church is perfectly entitled to keep its religious rituals secret with one single proviso, that nothing that takes place breaks the statute laws of the land.

I posted the following elsewhere on this forum in order to try to explain why these ritual secrets are so important to those who practice them:

Rituals - ceremonies of birth, death, marriage, initiation, healing, harvest, or religious observance - are found in all known cultures, and appear to have been performed for tens of thousands of years. They speak to people's core emotions and reveal values that a society holds dearest. Because their expression is conventional and obligatory, they join the individual in solidarity with the group. As such, they are part of a society's "essential constitution". (SOURCE: INTRODUCTION TO THE LEGAL FUNCTION OF RITUAL, by Geoffrey P. Miller, Comfort Professor of Law, New York University)
He references P. Stuyvesant and William T. Stuyvesant III Comfort Professor of Law at New York University and Victor Turner's reference book, The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (1969)

I hope that this promotes tolerance and understanding.
 
Last edited:

Just_me_Mike

Well-Known Member
The answer is - both. The Mormon Church is perfectly entitled to keep its religious rituals secret with one single proviso, that nothing that takes place breaks the statute laws of the land.
I hope that this promotes tolerance and understanding.
You know that is only a few shades different than cult type thinking.

By stating such a thing as you have, you are resorting to the oldest trick in the book.

"What we do in secret is our business as long as it doesn't break any laws", so I ask you who is it that gets to decide if what they practice is lawful if it is kept secret, and furthermore, whos to say if the laws aren't getting loosely translated to justify ill concieved rituals?

How can something secret be properly monitored?

Are you implying trust in this situation?
 

blackout

Violet.
I would join the ToS if there were a Pylon anywhere near me.

and "FreeMasons" only tell their "secrets" to men....
 

MoonShadow1

Freshman Member
I have mixed feelings on it, myself.

My knee-jerk reaction is to wonder what they're hiding. Secrecy in general raises my hackles.

However, I can also understand the sentiment that part of holiness is mystery. There are some things that are diminished by rationality and the harsh light of day.

Greeting's,

It is an interesting concept. As we are all aware "Secrecy" remains an "Peculiarity" and an essential mainstay of many religions, fraternities and so on........

The Mormon Church appears to be much in focus at this particular point in our history. Based on my personal observations their dedication to Mormon principals
and teachings are legendary. I can attest that LDS church members in my particular area are highly respected and most desirable neighbors.;)

I agree 100% with Storm's assessment :bow: : Of Understanding That Part Of Holiness Is Mystery............................. It appears that Celtic Peoples also embraced the principal secrecy in much rituals regarding their reverence for all of nature as the essential provider and sustained of life.

I am simply stating that secrecy and or mystery is a common thread that is woven into so many religions and Pagan ceremonies..... That it should in no wise appear out of the ordinary or ominious to any one in 2009.....................:)

I am in hope that Storm may contribute additional information regarding the historical significance of mystery and or secrecy not only of LDS's but perhaps other religions also :shout............................. Thanks M/S 1
 
Top