Note:  In 1990 the Mormon church radically changed its secret temple ceremony by removing the motions of slashing one's throat and stomach.  Mormons would make a motion with their right hand and with the palm facing the floor to slash their own throat or to cut open their "bowels" if they were to ever reveal the secrets in the temple.  It also removed in 1990 the Protestant minister who appears as a hireling of Satan.  It appears now (Jan. 2005) the Mormon church has changed the eternal ordinance of the endowment by removing the naked touching.  A Mormon, in the initiatory phase of the temple endowment, is wearing only a sheet (called a shield) open on the sides and an ordinance worker of the same sex touches the participant near the loins, stomach, breasts and mouth for the ceremonial washing.   This recent change is not yet officially confirmed  by the Mormon Church.

[Note:  For more information on naked touching in Mormon temples see Short Topic 366  Naked Touching in the Temple?

Subject: DETAILS: No more naked touching in the temple = APOSTASY (minor edits from original post)
Date: Jan 19 19:07 2005
Author: Deconstructor

"We explained briefly the Apostasy and the Restoration: that there is vast evidence and history of an apostasy from the doctrine taught by Jesus and his Apostles, that the organization of the original Church became corrupted, and sacred ordinances were changed to suit the convenience of men..."
- Apostle David B. Haight, “Joseph Smith the Prophet,” Ensign, Nov. 1979, 22

Based on some information I believe is reliable, we now have an idea of the January 18th changes to the temple ordinances.

In summary, here's what, in my opinion, changed in the temple initiatory ordinance:

1. Before, temple patrons had to get naked and then put on a poncho (called a "shield") that was completely open on the sides, then walk to the initiatory area to begin the ordinance

Now, temple patrons must put on garments (one-piece style) in the locker area before even starting the initiatory ordinance.

2. The poncho "shield" has been changed into a dress-like piece of clothing that is sewn shut on both sides all the way down to the ankles. Patrons must put this new dress-like shield over the garments before beginning the initiatory ordinance.

3. A new part has been added to the initiatory ordinance... Then, temple patrons are told that "in our day" you are washed and anointed "only symbolically."

Now, the priesthood ordinance giver only touches the forehead, then places his/her hands on the head to pronounce the ordinance words.   Now, the priesthood ordinance giver only places a little oil on the head as he/she speaks the words of the ordinance.

Now, since temple patrons are already wearing their garments [Mormon Underwear see Short Topic 13. Non-Mormon and Garments    44. Stopped wearing garments]  before the ordinance begins, the priesthood ordinance giver ends the ordinance by telling the patron that their garments are now "authorized" and must be worn for the rest of his/her life.

Keep in mind that this is not the first time the initiatory ordinance has changed. Descriptions of the early initiatory ordinance in the Nauvoo Temple include references to a bathtub where the temple patron was literally washed, as described in Exodus 40:12-13. In the excellent book "The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship author David John Buerger writes:

"The earliest accounts of the Nauvoo temple endowment indicate that initiatory washings followed a literal Old Testament model of actual bathing. Large tubs of water are specified in the separate men's and women's rooms. The anointing was performed by liberally pouring consecrated oil from a horn over the head and allowing it to run over the whole body."
- The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship, page 81

The Salt Lake Temple also used to have large tubs for the washing part of the ordinance. A 1893 article in Engineering Magazine titled "Architecture," on page 100 referred to the "largest bath-tub ever made," exhibited at the World's Columbian Exposition of 1893 by the Standard Manufacturing Company, which had manufactured twelve of them on special order for the LDS church, for use in the Mormon temple in Salt Lake City.
- The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship, Appendix 2

Those who would say these are not changes to the ordinance, should consider how the church defines changes to other gospel ordinances. As just one example, here's what a church prophet taught in regards to priests not kneeling while blessing the sacrament:

"...those who administer the sacrament will kneel when asking the blessing. It is not that this form is absolutely essential to the acceptance of this ordinance by the Lord; but it is in accordance with the word of the Lord which was given for our guidance; and where it is possible to follow the written word, in the spirit in which it is given, it is always better to do so. Indeed, by doing so we will avoid a serious wrong, that might eventually grow out of a disregard for the rules that the Lord has established, for it might lead to a changing, to some extent, of the ordinances of the house of God. It is necessary that we should pay proper attention and care to carrying out the purposes of the Lord in the manner which He has already revealed. And this may be extended to other matters of our religion. One of the charges brought against the children of Israel, and mentioned by the prophets in the latter times, was that 'they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.' That is really the complaint against the world today, and it is not meet that we should indulge in any such things."
- The Prophet Joseph F.Smith, Collected Discourses Vol.3, p. 308-309

The changes made to the initiatory ordinance are akin to changing baptism from total immersion to a light sprinkle - a change that the Mormon Church uses to accuse other churches of apostasy:

"[Apostate Churches] have changed many of the ordinances. For instance, they no longer baptize as Jesus was baptized when he went to John to be baptized of him."
- Apostle LeGrand Richards, “The Things of God and Man,” Ensign, Nov. 1977, 21

"[Jesus Christ] instituted baptism to set forth this glorious thing unto men. But by degrees, yielding, as was supposed, to necessity, men depart from this manner of administering the ordinance of baptism for the remission of sins, until water sprinkled or poured upon the candidate was held to be sufficient for baptism. Whenever they did that, wherever they did it, they departed from the order established by the Son of God, they changed an ordinance of the Gospel."
- Apostle B. H. Roberts, Collected Discourses Vol. 5, p.385

"The Prophet Isaiah saw the period of time when the earth should reel to and fro like a drunken man; and he saw that glorious day when the Lord of Hosts shall be about to reign in Zion and Jerusalem. And among other things he saw in vision was that the earth became defiled under the inhabitants thereof; "because," says the Prophet, "they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant." Plainly showing that they were to be a corrupt, people; a people who, for instance, would change the ordinance of baptism, from immersion to sprinkling or pouring, or doing it away altogether, and in the same manner changing the various ordinances of the Gospel from the original form in which the Lord revealed them. He says, through the mouth of His Prophet, that the people who should be guilty of this great wickedness should be visited with fire."
- The Apostle Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, p.11-12

"For a century we have tried to show to the world from the scriptures that baptism is necessary to man's salvation; that baptism signifies immersion and that immersion was the only form of baptism known and practiced in the primitive Church until several centuries A. D., and that the changing of the mode of baptism from immersion to pouring or sprinkling is apostasy and fulfils the prediction of Isaiah with respect to the last times, "The earth, also, is defiled under the inhabitants thereof, because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant."
- Apostle George F. Richards, Conference Report, April 1930, p.76

"The law of baptism was instituted as the means by which men were to gain admission into the Church of God our Father in the earth. The mode is indicated by the word from which "baptism" is derived, and when this ordinance is administered in any other way we know it is incorrect. There is no other way than by immersion for the remission of sins. We may be challenged on this point, but the language itself concerning the mode of baptism clearly defines the way by which men are to be brought into the Church, and no other way could be considered. So we stand, as a church, absolutely sure of our ground. Men have changed the ordinance, but our Eternal Father's plan never changes. His language pointed out the mode in the beginning. It will be so in the end."
- Apostle Samuel O. Bennion, Conference Report, October 1934, p.18

"Now, what have the Christians got that the Latter-day Saints have not got? Has the holy Catholic Church got faith in Jesus that we have not got? Not a particle that is true and pure. But as for the ordinances of the House of God, we say, and we say it boldly, and here is the standard of our faith—the Old and New Testament—that the mother church and all her daughters have transgressed the laws, every one of them; they have changed almost every ordinance of the House of God; and not only so, but like the children of Israel in olden days, they have broken the covenants made with the fathers. We are bold to say this and we will take this book—the Bible in which Jews and Gentiles believe for our standard and proof."

"Has the holy Catholic Church the ordinance of baptism? So they say. What do you say Latter-day Saints? We say they have not. There is but one mode of baptism and that is by being immersed in the water that the subject may come forth out of the water, in comparison like a child at its birth—struggling for breath—emerging into another element. This is the figure that Jesus gave us. Jesus and others were baptized of John, and the disciples of Jesus baptized more; but none of them were baptized by pouring, sprinkling, kneeling, or face foremost, but they were immersed in the water and came forth out of the water."

"Have they the Sacrament? Yes, so they say. "Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to the disciples, and said, 'Take, eat, this is my body.' And he took the cup, and gave thanks and gave it to them saying, 'Drink ye all of it.'" Now, I leave it to all whether they carry out this ordinance or not."
- Brigham Young, The Essential Brigham Young, p.196

Let us not forget, the restoration of the church includes the promise that ordinances will not change:

From August 2001 Ensign (page 22), in big bold print above a large colorful portrait of Joseph Smith:

"The Prophet Joseph Smith taught, "Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed.""

To back up the Joseph Smith quote used in the August 2001 issue of the Ensign Magazine:

"Now the purpose in Himself in the winding up scene of the last dispensation is that all things pertaining to that dispensation should be conducted precisely in accordance with the preceding dispensations.... He set the temple ordinances to be the same forever and ever and set Adam to watch over them, to reveal them from heaven to man, or to send angels to reveal them."
- The Prophet Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol.4, p. 208

"...build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein. For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.... And verily I say unto you, let this house be built unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein... For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fulness of times. And I will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it shall be built."
- Jesus Christ Himself, Doctrine and Covenants 124:27-28, 40-42

"...the endowments have never changed and can never change; as I understand it; it has been so testified, and that Joseph Smith Jr., himself was the founder of the endowments."
- Senator Reed Smoot, Reed Smoot Case, vol. 3, p. 185

"...God is unchangeable, the same yesterday, today and forever... The great mistake made down through the ages by teachers of Christianity, is that they have supposed they could place their own private interpretation upon scriptures, allow their own personal convenience to become a controlling factor, and change the basis of Christian law and practice to suit themselves. This is apostacy."
- The Prophet's Message, Church News, June 5, 1965

"As temple work progresses, some members wonder if the ordinances can be changed or adjusted. These ordinances have been provided by revelation, and are in the hands of the First Presidency. Thus, the temple is protected from tampering."
- W. Grant Bangerter, executive director of the Temple Department and a member of the First Quorum of Seventy, Deseret News, Church Section, January 16, 1982

"No jot, iota, or tittle of the temple rites is otherwise than uplifting and sanctifying. In every detail the endowment ceremony contributes to covenants of morality of life, consecration of person to high ideals, devotion to truth, patriotism to nation, and allegiance to God."
- Apostle James E. Talmage, The House of the Lord, 1968, p. 84

"The Gospel can not possibly be changed.... the saving principles must ever be the same. They can never change.... the Gospel must always be the same in all of its parts.... no one can change the Gospel... if they attempt to do so, they only set up a man-made system which is not the Gospel, but is merely a reflection of their own views.... if we substitute 'any other Gospel,' there is no salvation in it.... the Lord and His Gospel remain the same--always."
- The Prophet's Message, Church News, June 5, 1965

Subject: CONFIRMED: Temple Ordinance Changed Jan 16th, 2005
Date: Jan 17 23:21 2005
Author: Deconstructor

I was visiting with my TBM [Mormon] uncle tonight. He is a temple worker at the Jordan River Temple.

He was talking in front of me with my TBM mother. Out of the blue he mentioned that he attended a special meeting at the temple Sunday morning. He got as far as saying that the church has "changed the anointing ordinance" so that there's no more touching. Then my aunt came running in, and interrupted him by saying "you not supposed to talk about it!"

[Note:  For more information on naked touching in Mormon temples see Short Topic 366 Naked Touching in the Temple? ]

It was an awkward moment, but it did confirm that the church has just made another round of changes.

Wait! If one word or act of an ordinance is changed, then it's wrong. It's just like messing up the words of the sacrament or not getting someone completely under the water in baptism.

The temple ordinances can never change! If they do (like altering baptism) then it's a sign of church apostasy:

From August 2001 Ensign (page 22), in big bold print above a large colorful portrait of Joseph Smith:

"The Prophet Joseph Smith taught, "Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed.""

To back up the Joseph Smith quote used in the August 2001 issue of the Ensign Magazine:

"Now the purpose in Himself in the winding up scene of the last dispensation is that all things pertaining to that dispensation should be conducted precisely in accordance with the preceding dispensations.... He set the temple ordinances to be the same forever and ever and set Adam to watch over them, to reveal them from heaven to man, or to send angels to reveal them."
- The Prophet Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol.4, p. 208

"...the endowments have never changed and can never change; as I understand it; it has been so testified, and that Joseph Smith Jr., himself was the founder of the endowments."
- Senator Reed Smoot, Reed Smoot Case, vol. 3, p. 185

"...God is unchangeable, the same yesterday, today and forever... The great mistake made down through the ages by teachers of Christianity, is that they have supposed they could place their own private interpretation upon scriptures, allow their own personal convenience to become a controlling factor, and change the basis of Christian law and practice to suit themselves. This is apostacy."
- The Prophet's Message, Church News, June 5, 1965

"As temple work progresses, some members wonder if the ordinances can be changed or adjusted. These ordinances have been provided by revelation, and are in the hands of the First Presidency. Thus, the temple is protected from tampering."
- W. Grant Bangerter, executive director of the Temple Department and a member of the First Quorum of Seventy, Deseret News, Church Section, January 16, 1982

"No jot, iota, or tittle of the temple rites is otherwise than uplifting and sanctifying. In every detail the endowment ceremony contributes to covenants of morality of life, consecration of person to high ideals, devotion to truth, patriotism to nation, and allegiance to God."
- Apostle James E. Talmage, The House of the Lord, 1968, p. 84

"...build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein. For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.... And verily I say unto you, let this house be built unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein... For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fulness of times. And I will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it shall be built."
- Jesus Christ Himself, Doctrine and Covenants 124:27-28, 40-42

"The Gospel can not possibly be changed.... the saving principles must ever be the same. They can never change.... the Gospel must always be the same in all of its parts.... no one can change the Gospel... if they attempt to do so, they only set up a man-made system which is not the Gospel, but is merely a reflection of their own views.... if we substitute 'any other Gospel,' there is no salvation in it.... the Lord and His Gospel remain the same--always."
- The Prophet's Message, Church News, June 5, 1965

But have the temple ordinances changed since they were "revealed" in perfect form to Joseph Smith?

http://www.i4m.com/think/temples/temple_changes.htm

Subject: The obvious reason is to avoid allegations of inappropriate touching, in this litigious age. 

Subject: Re: CONFIRMED: Temple Ordinance Changed Jan 16th, 2005
Date: Jan 17 23:39
Author: Lisa

All we have to do is believe that God passed these changes down to us. And that's all we need to know. As I have heard it said. I wonder though, if there is no touching, what will sub for the washing and anointing? I asked once if they couldn't just touch our foreheads, like in the catholic faith. Oh I do hope this is true and there is no nudity beyond getting into the garments. Just in time for my endowment lol. Happy happy! :-)

Subject: Ah yes, but changes can be explained by ' current revelation'
Date: Jan 17 23:45
Author: Observer

Mormons don't really have a problem with changes to what were supposed to have been divine words. My TBM brother explains that the Lord keeps the church current by updating and changing to suit the times. He would probably argue that while the words, touching etc are changed, this is only adjusting at the edges and that the central intent remains the same. Brigham Young rewrote/rearranged the endowment in his time and nobody said a word - after all, the prophet can virtually do as he likes, in this regard.

Subject: If that is the case then why...
Date: Jan 18 01:15
Author: candy

don't they stop using the lame KJV Bible and use something that is a little easier to understand and more fun to read? Oh wait...maybe that is because if the people read the Bible and understood it they might see that there is no need for the BOM and Mormonism!

Subject: Re: CONFIRMED: Temple Ordinance Changed Jan 16th, 2005
Date: Jan 17 23:48
Author: anon

This just confirms, once again, that morg leadership studies this board in order to see which way the wind blows.

I guess all the people here complaining about naked touching in the temple have had some effect.

Now let's see if we can do the same thing for tithes and tithing settlement.

Subject: Since I was ex'd the Mormon Church has changed so much...
Date: Jan 17 23:48
Author: wings

I was ex'd in 1978
The Black PH was one of my issues,...now it is changed.

The Temple weirdness of slashing and the put down of other religions leaders as the devil was one of my issues...now it is changed.

The idea of garments being magical (one piece models)..now are 2 piece....again change.

Being told to vote for certain political issues in SM was one of my issues...now it is changed.

( Yes, there are more "mainstream" changes,...but, that will do).

NOW...no more washing and anointing?


I probably would not be ex'd today for reading Brodie as in the past. Hell, I am so glad I am out of that bondage.

And this does not even touch on the history or DNA issues.

Crazy cult.

Subject: But hearing your uncle's conversation isn't exactly confirmation.
Date: Jan 17 23:55
Author: knownot

Don't get me wrong: I totally believe you. But can anyone else confirm this change?

Subject: Someone needs to go through and confirm this.
Date: Jan 18 00:03
Author: Tyson Dunn

Anyone still got a temple recommend who would be up for a round of washing and anointing? I think that would be the best way to figure this out.

Tyson

Subject: FINE! I'LL GO BUT I'M NOT GOING TO LIKE IT!
Date: Jan 18 03:42
Author: I'll reveal it when I return and report

Jeesh...the things I do for you people. If I do this and find out that that the change hasn't taken place yet and some old geezer gets to put his wrinkled old fingers on me over and over (and over) again, I'm NEVER going to forgive Deconstructor.

Sure, laugh all you want. YOU'RE not the one that's going to go through it.

Ewww....I'm shuddering just thinking about it. I haven't done washings and annointings in AT LEAST 16 years.

Subject: Yup. and a few years down the line ...
Date: Jan 18 00:24
Author: Skunk Puppet

some recently endowed person ("endowee" ??) will say, "They never actually touched your naked body during the annointing ordinance. Ewwww! That's just a lie the anti-mormons made up."

Subject: Yup yup yup
Date: Jan 18 00:34
Author: Susan I/S

and come here and troll about how we lie. Sigh. Well, I guess I am glad they did it though. So many people were creeped out by it.

Subject: Slightly off topic, but...
Date: Jan 18 00:54
Author: anon for this

all of this reminds me of a guy in my ward. He went to the temple some time ago for the first time in a number of years to do washings and annointings. The ordinance worker told him to go into the changing room and put on the shield, and then come back out to begin.

Well, it had been a while, and he wasn't sure what the "shield" was (the shield is actually a large white sheet looking thing to cover your whole body). So, he took a look in the clothing he had, and the only thing that seemed to resemble a shield in any way was a green apron with fig leaves sewed on it...

So, he put the apron over his naked butt and walked out of the changing area. I guess he was walking the length of the hall with nothing on but this apron covering his genitals and his bare butt showing for everyone to see.

The ordinance workers had to run to where he was and "educate" him about the shield.

Subject: Re: CONFIRMED: Temple Ordinance Changed Jan 16th, 2005
Date: Jan 18 00:58
Author: SamueltheLamanite

When I used to attend the seattle temple weekly in late 1990's. I didn't do washings & annointings. Just once.

I had forgotten how things were done as I initially went to the temple in Oct 1986.

but in Seattle, I still remember the initiatory prayers and the dipping of fingers in oil and touching my head, abdomen, back. hip knee etc.

I wasn't creeped out about it, considered it a sacred experience to be doing that for and behalf of a deceased person.

though at the time, I was involved in cosmetology and massage therapy. Doing everything within those skills that I could do for my own clients. And one esthetician friend of mine had tested some wax on my legs. So I often wonder how it was for the male temple worker to see a man without hairy legs?? never did ask him.

In Seattle I had to wear a white robe with open sides so the man, temple worker could touch my body per prayers and such.

then I'd step over into another cubicle and step into a garment, I'd have to zip up the garment though.

Once I got lazy and didn't zip up the front of the garment and the worker said to please zip up. I'd hate to think that some poor soul is running around in eternity with an open garment / robe !! :oP I had to zip up, being careful to not catch my penis in the zipper, and then undress out of the garment and then.. start all over again.

All in all, it was about 4 cublicles I went round and round and round in. 4 cubicles per name. oh.. and this witness to each cubicle event. a silent man. just standing there and watching.

So now what??? If these changes are true I can't imagine how. If I ever do go back to the temple it will be interesting to see how things are now.

personally I don't mind being touched, can tell alot about someone regarding how they touch me.

what got me mad in the late 1990's was that seattle was starting to take temple reservations to attend.

someone like me just off the street couldn't go in and do a session or two just for the hell of it anymore.

But i miss those days sometimes.

Subject: "changed the anointing ordinance" so that there's no more touching
Date: Jan 18 01:45
Author: SusieQ#1

Finally they are wising up.

This perverted ritual is a an abomination!

Isn't it amazing that people had to leave Mormonism to talk about the perverse, despicable washing and anointing ceremonies to get the church's attention!!

Obviously, this board played heavily into this change. It sure is not discussed anywhere else with any honesty!
Of course, they could not admit that !

I hope they read my posts on: The Role of Women in Mormonism and the Washing and Anointing Ceremony that I have reposted several times over the past several years and sent to Dr. Laura! I do not know how many hard copies are out there!

Now, nobody else will be subjected to this denigrating debasing ritual.

For myself, I am grateful for this change as I have grandchildren who will probably go to the temple to be married.

The next change, must be that temple marriage thing. They are going to have to have a ceremony for all the family, Mormon or not, in some part of a temple, then the "sealing" done in a separate room.

Of course, they could do it like they do in England where a magistrate/registrar (or whatever they are called) must attend a Mormon wedding in their chapels (or where ever they are held) for it to be considered legal, then the couple can go to the temple (with their "worthy" family and friends) for the sealing. It can be on the same day or a different day.

I would like to know exactly how the "anointing ordinance" is changed. Are they ditching those tunic/sheets also?
Surely there is no need to get undressed anymore!

This is not the Mormonism I lived back in the 60's to 80's!!

They changed the temple garment, I am told. Now the ordinances in the temple are changed!

Of course, all TBM's will maintain that nothing changed, it is still the same ordinance, just the way it is done is changed, or some other fallacious argument!

It will probably hit the SLC newspapers like the other changes in 1990!!

Subject: Mormons believe the last thing they were told.
Date: Jan 18 04:30
Author: Harry

Thank you Decon - well done!

One time a Christian asked me questions about what Mormons believe.

I finally told him, "Mormons believe the last thing they were told."

The answer did not satisfy him particularly, but I hope I made clear with other words that we don't have a given set of beliefs in the way he was expecting to find - its all how the GA organizes and presents it.

Sad to say - Mormons aren't going to be bothered by this, although it should be a major wake up call.

I don't mean to imply your work is not worthwhile as it serves wonderful purpose.

Only if this is what the GA wants it will be fine with the laity. Such is life in the thralldom.

Subject: Primacy Recency at it Best!
Date: Jan 18 04:50
Author: Dohickey

You are really naive if you think this change will even create a ripple among the TBM faithful. If Brigham Young can teach that Adam was our God for 40 years and get away with it...this is child's play. A TBM will always believe that the Prophet (meaning God himself) has the right to change any doctrine any time he pleases...that is how revelation is supposed to work. Never mind previous prophets, including Joseph Smith himself taught that the ceremony should always remain the same! I do love your comment, "Mormons believe the last thing they were told." Perfect!

Subject: Changes in the Initiatory- From a Temple Worker's Perspective
Date: Jan 23 22:24
Author: Gunga Ga Gunga
M
My mom and SIL both work in our local temple. They were discussing the changes in the initiatory at lunch today. DM says that it is proof of continuing revelation from the prophet since the number of people who have been doing initiatories are down.  SIL says that she dreads doing initiatories because of the inappropriate touching that happens but that she blocks it out of her mind when she has to do them. She said that she imagines that she is in another place and that way it is easier to deal with.

I said, "Do you really think that Pres. Hinckley received revelation about this or do you think it has to do with a bigger problem the church has in regards to lawsuits from recent converts who were never told about the ordinance in their temple prep class? I mean, before you went to the temple did you learn about oli and water being rubbed on your body by strangers? Did you learn about secret passwords and handshakes?" I could tell they were both uncomfortable with my questions so I asked, "Is it because it is too sacred or too secret? Why do you think so many converts never come back to church after attending the temple for the first time? Because it creeps them out."

Mom said, "I heard that there may have been a lawsuit over the initiatories but if that's the case, then the Lord is pretty smart. If we haven't been doing them right in the first place, then he allowed the church to be sued in order for us to change the ceremony so that it would be more pleasing to him and be done correctly. If you look at it with the big picture in mind then it all makes sense. Thank goodness we have a prophet who can receive revelation from the Lord so he can correct the mistakes of past prophets."

I sat there dumbfounded. Did she actually believe this stuff. I looked at my wife and she gave me 'the look' so I stopped my questions. I only said, "Well, if that's what you believe then I hope you're right. By the way, I knew about the change way before you did. In fact, I knew the new wording and about the gunny sack shields a few weeks ago. Isn't is marvelous? If you want to know more, you can find details online."

SIL said, "It doesn't matter what you knew or how you knew it. What matters is that we know that we will be blessed for following the Prophet, even if he is wrong. We just have to have faith in him not to lead the church astray."

Did she really understand what she was saying? Are they that dense that they believe that the Lord would allow the church to be sued in order to change a ceremony that was flawed? And that the Hinkster actually spoke with God in order to learn how to change it? How stupid do they sound? I swear that I would love to slap some sense into them but realize that to them I am an apostate who is into anti-Mormon literature and that anything I say can't be trusted or be confirmed to be truthful.

Stupid Cult!!!

Subject: Your post proves there is no reasoning with a Morgbot.
Date: Jan 23 22:58
Author: Lara C

Geez, she admitted that she "imagines she is in another place?"

And I thought the TBMs who did it really enjoyed it.

This freaks me out.

Maybe she sings, "Follow the Prophet, follow the prophet" to herself.

Wow.

Subject: Mormon mental compartment hermetically sealed shut !
Date: Jan 23 23:16
Author: SusieQ#1

This is the most accurate description (amazing it is admitted) of how the TBM mind must work to keep the person just inside of sanity:

SIL says that she dreads doing initiatories because of the inappropriate touching that happens but that she blocks it out of her mind when she has to do them. She said that she imagines that she is in another place and that way it is easier to deal with.


The rest of the statements are just barely inside of sanity also because they have that "Isn't it wonderful, isn't it marvelous" TBM compartment in their brain hermetically sealed shut and no common sense (if it was so common more people would have it) and reason and logic could get in!

On the other hand, that is insanity. Pure and simple. What was I thinking!

Subject: At what point do they do a re-think ? Is it ever likely ?
Date: Jan 23 23:20
Author: I Stand All Amazed

I do not mean to dis your mom but did I read this right ? She is saying on the one hand that god revealed the mechanics of the changes to Hinkley BUT sent the message that a change was required through a series of legal actions ? WOW!!! That reminds me of hamster-wheel thinking.

Subject: Just a question...
Date: Jan 23 23:28
Author: AGrant

Mom said:
"I heard that there may have been a lawsuit over the initiatories but if that's the case, then the Lord is pretty smart. If we haven't been doing them right in the first place, then he allowed the church to be sued in order for us to change the ceremony so that it would be more pleasing to him and be done correctly. If you look at it with the big picture in mind then it all makes sense. Thank goodness we have a prophet who can receive revelation from the Lord so he can correct the mistakes of past prophets."

So.....
Why can't this prophet be wrong if the last one was and
what happened to the "perfect" ordinances the church received in the beginning?

Sounds like she plays a game of twisting the facts to fit her conviction. Just the nature of the beast.

Subject: The implication of their reasoning is that sometimes ordinary plaintiffs, their attorneys and the courts....
Date: Jan 23 23:41
Author: Perry Noid

may get inspiration from god before the great Mormon prophet does. That really inspires confidence in Mormon leadership.

This idea that anything done by the Mormon church and its leaderhip is, by definition, the absolute will of god is exactly the kind of thinking that leads to people lining up to drink arsenic-enriched Kool-Aid.

Subject: Ahhhh the wonders of Continuing Revelation©
Date: Jan 23 23:45
Author: jennyfoo

The concept of Continuing Revelation© is one of the most CONVENIENT I've ever run across. It provides a belief loophole in that whatever changes the church makes can be attributed to Continuing Revelation©. It does not matter what other "prophets" have said since there is a new one that receives Continuing Revelation©. Whichever founding "prophet" came up with this concept was a genius! I sure wish that I could claim the power of Continuing Revelation© so that I could never be wrong too :)

And a question for you Gunga, did they get that glazed-over Morg look when talking about it? You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

Subject: TEMPLE CHANGES: Likely reasons they took out naked touching
Date: Jan 24 14:54 2005
Author: Deconstructor

Although I know for a fact that people at Church HQ monitor this board, I don't think anything we say here would drive temple ordinance changes.

We can only speculate. However, I think there are three likely scenarios behind the recent ordinance changes. I don't know which it is, but it's probably one or more of these:

- Child Molester Defense?
Perhaps some church member/missionary/leader has molested children under the guise of "doing what is done in the temple." We know from recent cases involving primary teachers that they inapproriately touched the children during the class's opening prayer. Imagine if now a defense lawyer is threatening to defend his client based on an argument that this touching was taught by the church to the defendant in the temple. Or perhaps the mere threat of involving the washing and anointing ceremony in the case is behind this.

- Lawsuit Against Temple Naked Touching?
Perhaps someone has filed a lawsuit directly against the practice of the naked touching in the temple. Perhaps as a plea bargain to settle a sexual harassment case, the church agreed to remove the naked touching from the ordinance in exchange for silence and case dismissal.

- Public Relations Survey?
Perhaps in a campaign to increase temple attendance, the church did a survey of the members and found that the most objectionable aspect of temple attendance is the naked touching. So in response to the survey, the church changed the ordinance to increase temple attendance.

- Upcoming Media Exposure?
PBS's Frontline program is working on a 3-hour documentary on the Mormon Church. Perhaps Frontline caught wind of the naked touching during the anointing ordinance, so the church is making changes now to minimize the damage control.

A couple of thoughts on which scenarios are more likely:

- The church would have to feel very threatened to make such a temple change, because there is risk that making the change would trigger negative media attention. The church must be hoping (and praying) that the change doesn't get media attention now. So far, they've been lucky.

- Doing a survey on gospel ordinances is very dangerous for the church, because simply doing the survey is admitting that church leaders are not inspired enough from God to know what do do. The church took a lot of heat when they changed the temple back in 1990 after conducting a survey. Would they really be stupid enough to do it again?

- Temple workers were told of the changes only a day before they happened. Temple workers were quickly sewing up the shields the day the changes took affect. This indicates that the changes were not well planned in advance. If this happened due to PR campaign, you'd think they would have taken time to plan it all out and be prepared.

- The timing is off for this to be a Public Relations move. If you recall, the temple changes in 1990 were right after General Conference in April, to give the church a full six months of forgetting before the next conference. That has PR Move plan written all over it. This one does not.

Maybe we'll never know the real reason why the church would dare change a gospel ordinance that they've declared was unchangeable. Imagine if they changed baptism to sprinkling!

It's very convenient that the church is sworn to secrecy about what goes on in the temple. It makes them completely unaccountable (even to the membership) for what they do.

For a summary of the changes made on January 18th, 2005:
http://www.i4m.com/think/temples/temple_ordinance.htm

Subject: PLEASE let it be upcoming media exposure!!!
Date: Jan 24 15:05
Author: knownot

I'd pay money to see that episode of Frontline if it does actually contain any temple ceremony exposure.

Ahhh, can you just imagine a national show like that documenting ANYTHING that happens inside the temple? This sort of scenario keeps the GAs and pawn TBMs up at night, I'm sure of it. They would be absolutely livid.

Subject: Historical precedents...
Date: Jan 25 02:08
Author: Genghis Kane
Mail Address: 
... for changes in the Temple Ceremonies.

1 - Money lost through Government interference (Polygamy, Treason)
2 - Money lost through doctrinal inconvenience (Priesthood ban on Blacks)
3 - Money lost through disgruntled members? (Changes pertaining to wives obeying their husbands and five points of fellowship)

I suspect the latest is more of #3. Perhaps Bishops, Stake Presidents, and Temple Presidents, etc. were surveyed for most common concerns brought up by members preventing participation in specific temple ordinances. Or perhaps someone did threaten a lawsuit and was dissuaded by a "convenient revelation" to change the outward manner of the ordinance. ;-)