Of course they are. No one else would be that dum dee dum dum.
When I went to the temple for my annointings, I had no idea in hell what this term meant. Then someone threw in the term that we were to receive our washing and annointings. What?? I pictured an annointing as, you know, what happened when you had a blessing when you were sick where the oil was placed on your head with a prayer being said.
I pictured this as not being so bad. But what was this washing stuff? It did not sound good. And, it was not good. It was weird and crazy to have this sweet senile lady averting her eyes from mine and saying some mumbo jumbo in places that she should not be saying mumbo jumbo.
This was so, well, out there and uncomfortable. I wanted to run.
The officiator merely states that he/she annoints and touches you on the side of your abdomen just above the hip. After literally dozens of W&A sessions, nobody has ever even come close to my genitalia. Also, the training is very clear how and what you touch.
This reminds me of the scene from the show Friends where Chandler was subjected to "cupping" by Joey's tailor. How would you know that was the incorrect procedure?
Can you please state the very first time you went to the temple and received such anointing? Because that is not what is claimed used to be done, regularly.
I'd like to get a clear read on the year they changed the ritual to avoid actual touching in the loin and groin areas. Too many people had it happen to them in LDS temples, to simply discount that it was never, ever done.
I'd like to know WHEN it was done, and when it STOPPED being done.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2014 12:27PM by bookratt.
Ok. That may explain it, as the posters discussing it here and elsewhere on the internet, all seem to be talking about 1991 anointings, and those done in prior years.
What year were other temple rituals changed so drastically? Was it 1991, or prior?
Out of the sexual molestation cases I bothered to read involving the church, none, of them where ever close to having the event occur within the walls of the temple.
If genitals were touched during the W&A session I would be inclined to think it was because the old codger had failing motor skills, was working long hours and should of been at home, resting, and enjoying a hobby instead of working in the temple spouting off mumbo jumbo meaningless phrases for a corporation's ritual.
I am not saying that sexual molestation is an impossibility in the temple from 1900 to present day it's just that no evidence has been presented that I am aware of. I'm not a lawyer and do not actively monitor court cases. If some case was submitted to the court system involving a claim like that I'm sure it would of made a headline within the last 100 years.
in the temple. Often, they were told they should have expected to have their genitals handles. Sometimes they pretended they weren't bothered because they thought this was routine.
Didn't happen to you, but it did happen to others. Avoiding lawsuits is why the ritual had to be revised.
I think the church sent out a survey to collect feedback from the saints because of the low temple attendance pre 1990. The top 15 then reported the findings to Jesus because he didn't know about it.
Then the changes came down. So, it's likely that touching people in the genital area may have occurred. I'm just saying I myself have not read an official report introduced to the court system that likely accelerated the change. The PACER system is expensive when requesting documents.
If any old timers know of a case, read a case, seen with your own eyes, and that the case was settled out of court or whatever that would be interesting.
Rumor is that because of abuse under the guise of washing and anointing in the temple is why they changed it so you no longer do washing and anointing naked.
Up until 1931 the washings and anointings were a full-on bath. Initiates were fully naked and washed from head to toe while standing in a large bathtub that could hold up to three at a time. Consecrated oil and perfumes were then poured over the initiates and allowed to drain into the tub. Men officiators washed men initiates, and women officiators washed women. In 1932, the full-on bath was replaced with the shield and the officiator's one finger touch on specific parts of the body.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2014 05:03PM by builderbob.
My DW is still working on her transition, and the other day told me she never was comfortable with the temple. On her initial visit the old lady touched her nipple and it creeped her out big time. We never did go back and do washings etc.. She also told me how much she hated garments when we first got married - no more short shorts or tank top while working the yard.
We made it over that hurdle and last summer she worked in the yard in a tank top and waved at the ward members.
Glad I never went to the temple. Reaction would be to kick that old anointment-man.
It makes you wonder about the early temple rituals. Was "washing" done with oil or 'lubricant', maybe your own fluids... by [old or young] the same or opposite sex? Maybe the purpose of the temple is/ was to keep "outsiders" out and perform these "rituals"/ sex acts?
I had my endowments in August 1968 prior to going on my mission. I do remember being naked under a piece of cloth or robe but don't remember specifically what anyone did or said to me.
The whole temple thing really was never my favorite part of being a mormon and in all my years of activity, I didn't go much either.
My wife (now ex) didn't care much for it either but of course, like all good Mormons, we didn't ever discuss it. That may have lead to an earlier exit for both of us, although she's still active.
When the old man touched me on the front of my abdomen, right above my privates, I was startled and jumped up, shocked and offended.
No apology. Just "please sit down."
When I realized I was going around the carousel again, this time with oil, I put both hands on my abdomen etc. and the old man touched just above my iliac crest.
My Bishop had given me a speech to prepare me. He failed.
It's a rather unusual experience. When I went through nobody touched my junk. The closest was just below the belly button.
It's more plausible if you had an erection at the time of being anointed that a temple work might have reached in going for below the belly button and bumped into your staff.
I can't see how anyone would be "excited" during that process.