Comments on: Temple ceremony, the stabilizer for mystical enthusiasm

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 01:02:57 +0000

Perhaps one of the great commentaries about the endowment can be found in What is an Endowment?. Concerning the idea that the deceased "can't move on", see the post Ann Booth's Vision of David W. Patten.

By: Ray

Ray — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 18:06:14 +0000

I think ordinances for the dead are more for us to turn our hearts to our fathers (and mothers) than for the dead (to be saved because of our work for them), and I think those ordinances are absolutely critical for us in this day and age to accomplish the type of vision Joseph had of the sealed community of Christ / Kingdom of God, but that is for a different post.

By: Valoel

Valoel — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:14:17 +0000

I agree that it would be very unbalanced for someone to only do temple work for the dead (if that is the reason they go), and to ignore suffering completely in the real world around them. While those types of questions are interesting, the real world is rarely so all-or-nothing.

I sometimes consider temple work (beyond your own) possibly being symbolic in nature. I also think the idea that spirits of the deceased can’t “move on,” or are trapped until their temple work is done is not accurate. Right off the top of my head, I can think of the vision Joseph Smith had of his brother Alvin in the Celestial Kingdom. His brother died before the development of the Church and the ordinances. So how did Alvin get there without being baptized and receiving his other ordinances? I ask the question implying the time factor is not relevant, not that ordinances are irrelevant.

It might be an interesting study to research the origin of that idea, and to see what leaders ever taught it. I would guess Joseph F. Smith as the originator (D&C 138, not added until 1918).

Anyone out there know the history of that idea?

By: AdamF

AdamF — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:01:26 +0000

I’m with Ray on this one. I do think that service is important, and can sometimes make a difference, although often it seems that that difference is only temporary. Really though, many of us have time and money for both. We can find a balance.

By: Ray

Ray — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 15:28:25 +0000

James, everyone needs to catch a glimpse of eternity occasionally. I would agree that service in the community is more important than 24 hour/day service in the temple, but balancing both is the better option in my mind. I think a couple of hours per month (or quarter or year, depending on proximity) to contemplate one’s place with God isn’t too much to tip the balance.

By: James

James — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:14:13 +0000

“Members of the LDS Church today often go to the temple when they have a pressing personal need to connect with the divine, when they seek answers or feel they need spiritual help and guidance.”

I think the above gives many members a lot of comfort.

My wife daughter and me were driving home the other night a long day making Shoe Box’s for a Christian Aid group that goes out to children in third world countries. We were discussing temple work on the way home and how that helps our ancestors and how that is service and how they are waiting for that work to done so they can move on. Being the Heretic that I am I said wouldn’t God be happier if we spent those hours doing Service that makes some times a huge difference in the life of the living now. God can surely make them comfortable until the millennium!

Just curious what your views are?

By: Ray

Ray — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 02:05:16 +0000

valoel, I just want to say that I really like this post and agree with what you have presented. Perhaps what I love most about Joseph’s prophetic vision is encapsulated in the grand journey presented in the temple – and the idea that the Garden of Eden and the Celestial Kingdom both are only two hours from my home.