·

Subject:	My mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the Mormon temple in 1968..
Date:	May 17, 2007
Author:	befree

What were the old endowments and is she lying? I thought they did do that back then.

Subject:	Re: my mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the temple in 1968..
Date:	May 17 22:22
Author:	ExBP [Former Mormon Bishop]

She is not telling you the truth. It was in the endowment up to 1990. Also, ask her about the Oath of Vengeance that was taken out in the early 1900s:

"You and each of you do covenant and promise that you will pray and never cease to pray to Almighty God to avenge the blood of the prophets upon this nation, and that you will teach the same to your children and to your children's children unto the third and fourth generation."

Subject:	Re: my mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the temple in 1968..
Date:	May 17 22:23
Author:	SusieQ#1

Your mom didn't recognize what she was doing. It is not taken literally anyhow. I sure didn't recognize it as anything of the sort at the time either.

These are considered "death oaths" but nobody ever talked about them at the time and they still don't.

The typical response when mentioning anything in the temple, is to deny it. That keeps it sacred/secret.

The photo's and the dialog is all on line. You can show her, but she may still deny it.

Subject:	Dear Susie Q:
Date:	May 18 06:37
Author:	cdrn

Are you saying that we were stupid and didn't know what we were doing? Give me a break! It was very clear "or your life will be taken away." I knew exactly what I was doing and couldn't believe that they were asking me to do it!!! One time was enough to end my Temple visits! Scared the living daylights out of me and to this day.....I can't even talk about it. (LA Temple, March 1969, age 21.)

Subject:	Re: Dear Susie Q: - no, "darlin'" of course nobody is "stupid" it is a matter of interpretation
Date:	May 18 12:45
Author:	SusieQ#1

It was clear -- I knew it could not be taken literally -- my common sense said that it had to be figurative. That's the way I think. I didn't know that others took it literally. We didn't talk about it, so there was no way I would know...;-)

I just assumed that nobody went around killing people over revealing some temple stuff. No evidence that any such thing happened -- this was an old fashioned, traditional,1800s play in my mind.

People think differently, they interpret things differently, there are as many different understandings of Mormonism as there are Mormons.

It's OK to see it differently. It is not a reflection on anything right or wrong.

Subject:

She's a "Liar Liar pants on fire ".... some mom you have. n/t

Subject:

You're not a very charitable lot, are you - maybe she just forgot - not something I'd go out of my way to remember nt

Subject:

Max..."Forgot?" It was one of the most disturbing events of my life (1968 too). How could she forget? n/t

Subject:

Too afraid to talk about it is more likely n/t

Subject:

How could she forget promising something like THAT??? n/t

Subject:	Befree, your Mom just told you ....
Date:	May 17 22:28
Author:	Lovechild

an absolutely huge, "Lyin' fer the Lard", "faith-promoting" Whopper!!!

When you show her the stuff you find on the web about it, you can ask her if she thought the right way to keep you in the church was to lie to you

Subject:	Endowed 1978
Date:	May 17 22:33
Author:	nomorelies

There were three "penalties" specifically threatened and mimed (so to speak) for anyone divulging the names and signs of each covenant. The first signified slitting one's throat, the second a slashing motion across their chest, and the third across their bowels. I know it happened because I did it many times. D'oh.

Subject:	What web site is best and were there ever any lasp in what they did?,,
Date:	May 17 22:53
Author:	befree

or she was just completely lying!She did get off the phone pretty quickly after we talked about that.I didn't give in either I told her that whether she did it or not it is a part of the ceremony. She's been lying to me my whole life, I don't know why I was shocked when she did it this time.

Subject:	Not sure what web site
Date:	May 17 23:08
Author:	nomorelies

Others on here may have that info. All I know, is that I attended the temple starting in 1978 up until 2004. I remember acting out the penalties and I remember when they changed the ceremony. I wasn't aware there was going to be a change and only saw it first-hand at the temple. They removed the parts about the penalties and took out the protestant preacher who was working as a tool of satan among other things. My guess was that they were getting too many complaints and one of the main tenants of mormonism is to protect their public image.

Subject:	I was only 10 in 1968, but when I went to the temple in 1981.....
Date:	May 17 22:50
Author:	Tahoe Girl

the three death penalties were still in. Slitting the throat, slashing the chest, slashing the bowels. I did endowments in several other temples, and they all these penalties until the changes in 1990.

Subject:	To be honest, the full impact of the motions...
Date:	May 17 22:55
Author:	Deenie, the dreaded single adult

...didn't really register with me, the first time through. I was too creeped out by everything else, starting with the 'washing and anointing...'

She may never have even grasped the significance of what she was motioning with her hands when she said, "...suffer my life to be taken..." --but there's no mistaking those words!!

If you say them to her, though, she'll probably freak out...

:^)

Subject:	Re: my mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the temple in 1968..
Date:	May 17 23:03
Author:	Tom Donofrio

She is covering for her God. She was commanded to never reveal.......

Subject:	She really wasn't paying attention at all or she's lying.
Date:	May 17 23:06
Author:	larry

I went through in 1988 and was "lucky" enough to take part in the death oaths. It was removed in 1990.

Subject:	The fact is that they are not recognized as "death oaths" or as literal taking of one's life.
Date:	May 17 23:18
Author:	SusieQ#1

They are symbolic of the sacredness of the covenants.
I was paying attention, and I didn't know what they meant after doing them a couple hundred times.
They were no big deal, just part of the rituals that were only done in the temple.

It is important to understand that typically, Mormons would never consider those rituals "death oaths" in any literal sense and are not lying. I know I didn't think of them that way. I am sure others didn't either.

Subject:	Re: The fact is that they are not recognized as "death oaths" or as literal taking of one's life.
Date:	May 17 23:31
Author:	Baura

SusieQ#1 wrote:
> They are symbolic of the sacredness of the covenants.

> I was paying attention, and I didn't know what they meant after doing them a couple hundred times.

> They were no big deal, just part of the rituals that were only done in the temple.

>

There was the accompanying chant of "I _______ promise not to reveal this, the first token of the Aaronic Priesthood along with it's accompanying name, sign, and penalty; rather than do so I would suffer . . . [raise right hand with extended thumb, palm down with thumb tip under left ear] . . . my life . . . [draw thumb across throat to right ear] . . . to be taken [drop right hand to side]. The officiator mentioned that these movements symbolized ways the life could be taken.

Now those movements along with the "suffer my life to be taken" and being told that it symbolizes ways that life could be taken I think qualifies them as "death oaths." Now I'd agree that they were not expected to be taken seriously as "I realize that you will come and kill me if I divulge the secrets" oaths but the were clearly "symbolic" death oaths.

> It is important to understand that typically, Mormons would never consider those rituals "death oaths" in any literal sense and are not lying. I know I didn't think of them that way. I am sure others didn't either.

So it depends on how one asks the questions. If you ask "Did you agree to have your throat slit if you divulged the first token of the Aaronic Priesthood?" then an honest, but incomplete answer, could be "No."

If you ask "did you pantomime slitting your throat as part of the Endowment ceremony" then the only honest answer is "Yes."

Actually when we were children we used to do dismemberment oaths as part of our rituals. We'd say "Cross my heart, hope to die; stick a needle, in my eye." I don't think we were expected to be held to the literal oath however.

Subject:	Re: The fact is that they are not recognized as "death oaths" or as literal taking of one's life.
Date:	May 17 23:36
Author:	SusieQ#1

You beat me to the punch... I was looking for my list of oaths!
Thanks for posting those and explaining how it works for most believers.

We used to say the most outrageous things as kids and if we did something really "bad" -- we would say: "My mom's going to kill me when I get home"...of course, that is not literal!

Subject:	SusieQ, I will NEVER forget (1968) the chilling feeling of my own thumbnail slicing across my throat...
Date:	May 18 00:07
Author:	Crystal Song

...as I repeated the words "I would suffer my life to be taken" I nearly broke into tears! Telling someone that we didn't expect to be held to the literal oath is simply not the truth.

I was married (sealed) immediately after the endowments. (They did it that way in those days.) All I could think about for the rest of the day WASN'T my new marriage. It was "How could that ritual have been part of a ceremony created by God?"

Subject:	Re: SusieQ, I will NEVER forget (1968) the chilling feeling of my own thumbnail slicing across my throat...
Date:	May 18 01:24
Author:	SusieQ#1

I know I thought it was strange, but because of my theater and music background, it struck me as just a silly old fashioned play from the 1800's -- costumed in old fashioned outfits playing dress ups.
Very uncomfortable, but not literal, in my view.

It was shocking to a new convert, [1962] I didn't want to go back, but I finally did. I think I expected the rituals to be different each time, or else I never thought about it. More weird stuff, but I kept going back. I wanted to be part of the group, I was a newly wed in BYU Married Student Housing Wymount Terrace!

Subject:	The thing is that they at no point in the ceremony tell you that the oaths are not to be taken seriously.
Date:	May 18 02:59
Author:	Every Fiberman

When you go through the first time, it's extremely freaky. Your rational mind quickly tells you that, yeah, there are no reports of anyone being ritually murdered for revealing the signs and tokens of the endowment. But you have to figure it out for yourself. The only way to deal with it and remain a loyal cult member is to shut off your brain and not think about it. But then you've essentially cancelled out your own so-called temple blessings, namely greater knowledge and enlightenment.

The temple ritual is so idiotic that it leads to the opposite result of what it promises. It promises to lead you to greater knowledge and enlightenment and then presents you with nonsensical, childish secret-club handshakes and bloody oaths that you can only ignore or think about at only an extremely superficial level in order to keep from being profoundly disturbed.

There is only one way that such things reveal any kind of profound truth--and that is in the way that they reveal that the LDS Church is a hoax and a fraud.

Subject:	Went through in '81, the slit throat, slice open chest and disembowel self were all there.
Date:	May 17 23:20
Author:	Baura

Tell your mom you checked with many, MANY endowed persons who all said the three "suffer my life to be taken" penalties were there. Act them out for her and say, "nothing like this ever happened in the temple?"

If she says no then feel free to make the motions and say "suffer . . . my life . . . to be taken" while doing them around all sorts of TBMs. No one will be offended because there will be no tie in to Mormonism.

In fact if they were never part of the Temple ceremony then you and your mom can do them together at the next ward party. Ask her to go along. No harm since there's no connection to anything Mormon in them, right?

Subject:	I knew EXACTLY what they meant the first time I heard them
Date:	May 17 23:25
Author:	cl2

and I took them SERIOUSLY. I TRULY thought that if I were to divulge any of the temple secrets, I would suffer one of those deaths. The one that disturbed me the most was the disemboweling. I had read many books about England about disemboweling. THe death oaths were the things that shocked me the very most--NEXT TO the five points of being felt up.

Subject:	My Mom did that too.
Date:	May 17 23:25
Author:	Sam

My Mom called me a liar for saying there were these "penalties" in the temple before 1990. The thing is, I was there in the temple WITH HER and watched her perform them!

Subject:	Re: my mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the temple in 1968..
Date:	May 17 23:43
Author:	Crathes

The blood oaths mirror the Mason ritual, nearly word for work. At least the Masons took this out before the Mormons.

Subject:	Re: my mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the temple in 1968..
Date:	May 17 23:45
Author:	Balard123

Can you even begin to understand the mental gymnastics going on in her head as she looks you in the eye and say’s “I did no such thing” while thinking in her head “I am lying to you for your own good” god would be proud of me for keeping his oaths secret …I mean sacred…..this is right, this is right this ri………why?.....this is right this..

Subject:	You're Mom is correct
Date:	May 18 00:38
Author:	Semantics

She didn't ACTUALLY, LITERALLY Slit her throat and disembowel herself. I suspect that she's playing a word game with you. She could be trying to protect the church and the temple secrets by answering your question in a literal sense. Maybe you should rephrase the question.

Subject:	Exactly thinking the same thing
Date:	May 18 06:36
Author:	alex71va

I'd carefully rephrase the question to say, "Mom, did you ever do anything remotely similar to the following .... " and repeat word-for-word the action described in the accounts of what happened regularly in the temple.

Subject:	what we notice
Date:	May 18 02:09
Author:	RuthCa

The changes were in the late eighties or early nineties. If you mom went to the temple in the sixties, which now was say 40-47 years ago-

I'd "oh well" and get my info from more analytical people instead. I'd say your mom is just not that analytical about the old video or actors. Perhaps she was more interested in clothing or love or dancing or love
or music or buying another television set, or in you.

so she really never payed much attention to it. Perhaps she was serving up meals or planning to go to see friends in Relief Society back when it was in the morning midweek.
Or she was working at the telephone company or IBM or did taxes for a CPA and something else occupied her mind.

Some analytical people went through in the eighties- and then they analyzed the changes. Some people really don't notice the video or actress. They are lost in a reverie. Perhaps they are tactile, and notice the chair, the velvet on the chair; the satin on a bag, lace trimming touching a finger; a fringe on a curtain; lighting subdued or shadowed or glimmered; the taste of a tear or feeling tightness in your chest.

These are many of the things that some people notice. Perhaps your mom was one of those.

Others can analyze.

Subject:	Just a clarification for you...We didn't use the film in the '60s. There were live actors.
Date:	May 18 02:29
Author:	Anon

And frankly, this is not something that someone wouldn't notice. It was an action you had to make with your own hands and arms as you repeated the words...Very obvious and the meaning was very clear.

Subject:

LA Temple is next to Hollywood...we had the movie in the 60's and the occasional live session.n/t

Subject:	I don't know how anybody could deny the disembowelment and throat-slitting pantomimes...
Date:	May 18 02:46
Author:	Every Fiberman

They were the most disturbing part of the otherwise goofy and boring endowment ritual. In fact, if I had to single out one thing that started me down the road to "apostasy" (i.e., opening my eyes and realizing that Mormonism is a fraud), I would have to say that the bloody penalty oaths of the temple ceremony were the thing.

Hold your right extended hand parallel to the floor (palm facing downward). Raise it up level with the bottom of your left ear, so that your thumb is at the bottom of your ear lobe, then use that thumb to slowly draw a line from that ear lobe down across your throat until the thumb comes up to the level of the right ear lobe. You have now done the temple endowment throat-slitting penalty.

Who could forget something like that???? Act it out in front of your mother and see if it jogs her memory.

I immediately felt that something was wrong with the whole temple ceremony when I had to do those bloody pantomimes. What possible connection could they have with a faith system supposedly focused on love and eternal progression. Such oaths and bloody penalties were more suited to an initiation ritual of a violent gang or criminal conspiracy or secret fraternity.

Of course, they all made sense when I later learned about the Mormon-Masonry connection.

Sad to say, but your mother is lying.

Subject:	TBM DW also denied there being any death oaths....
Date:	May 18 05:13
Author:	dwindler

I once made the comment to dw that I was glad our post 1990 endowed children didn't have to experience the death oaths. To which she replied, " There were never any death oaths".

WTF? What temple was she attending?

Subject:	I'm gonna call her again tonight and tell her about all of this...
Date:	May 18 08:21
Author:	befree

Thanks for the ammo.I can't believe that she would not understand what she was doing and I know she all of a sudden got upset and ended the call so we'll see what she says tonight. thanks

Subject:

I slit my throat in the LA Temple in 1969. Psycho suddenly became my reality and obviously hers evidenced by amnesia. n/t.

Subject:	Re: my mom just said that she didn't slit her throat and disembowel herself in the temple in 1968..
Date:	May 18 09:24
Author:	Deanna Emberg

Maybe she denied it simply for the reason that she believes in her temple covenants and to reveal that part of the ceremony, even if it is no longer part of the temple now, would result in exactly that type of death. If I believed it (which I don't), I would probably respond the same way. In her mind, she's probably just keeping her covenants to not reveal the temple ceremony. Just like the rest of the church, obedience before truth. The whole reason I left the chuch. My personal values put truth way above obedience.

Go easy on mom - she might actually be scared to talk about the temple with you. Or maybe she's just embarassed that she used to participate in the temple.

Subject:	My mother denies it ever happened in the '40's.....
Date:	May 18 09:34
Author:	de nile

but she threw her garments in the trash before leaving for her honeymoon she was so disturbed by the whole thing.

Subject:

I did in 1988, and by hell had no clue it meant I'd slit my throat and disembowel myself if I revealed the thumb game n/t

ubject:	It was there in the 80s.
Date:	May 18 12:56
Author:	anon

My experience: Sad to say that I was very gullible when I went through. Prior to entering, I sucked in all the hype about the temple being the closest thing on earth to being in heaven that exists. I was stupid enough even to have in the back of my mind that I might see Jesus there and that he would erase all the things from my mind that were bugging me about "the one true church." That it would all make sense because I could gain knowledge right from the horse's mouth.

Needless to say, none of that happened. I was so shocked and horrified by the washing and annointing (maybe even mildly traumatized as it brought up some disturbing emotional stuff?) that honestly for a long time I couldn't remember anything else that happened after the initiatory. I did not go back. Over time, little snippets of the rest of it came back and I remembered the chanting and acting out performing our own grisly deaths if we talked about the temple outside the temple.

I am not going to pretend that I literally thought if I talked about it that the LDS church would send someone to kill me because I did not. However, I was very afraid to talk about it (and that irrational fear remained even for a limited amount of time after I left the church completely much later on). Mormonism is steeped in superstition. I most certainly initially thought that literally "something bad" might happen to me if I talked about it. I don't consider that just as completely "symbolic," and not to be taken literally. I did not think someone would literally show up at my house and kill me, but I did literally think "something bad" would happen...some kind of punishment from God (which could be any horrible thing, some things even worse than my own death).

Also, I know plenty of mormons who *do* take church things quite literally. For example, having sex with your significant other five minutes before your temple wedding is still "the sin next to murder." I don't know any mormons who think temple marriage and its accompanying license to finally have sex is "just symbolic." Drinking a cup of coffee is still absolutely breaking the WOW. The WOW is black and white, not just suggesting that one not overindulge in anything so it becomes a vice, but rather one cup of coffee, one beer literally makes you "unworthy," at least for temple attendance. So I think it's hard in that way to accurately suggest that most mormons do not think literally about what they are told by the church. In many cases, they are very literal in how they think.

I don't think one can paint all mormons with one brush. Some, like Susie Q, thought it was meant completely symbolically....that it was important not to break the promise, but nothing bad would actually happen if you did break that promise. Others may have thought their literal lives would be taken. Many, I suspect, were like me and just had a vague anxiety/feeling of vulnerability or threat implanted into their brains so that silence was more or less assured out of irrational fear.

Many things could be going on in your mom's mind:

She may be denying it because to talk about it outside the temple is still breaking the temple covenant, whether that part of the ceremony is still there or not. I'd go easy on my mom if I was in your situation. She might be frightened to talk about it or feel that she is putting herself at risk for being sort of "cursed" for lack of a better word.

I think it's possible to block things that disturb us out. I did not remember that part until it popped up in my mind sometime later in little pieces. As I said, in the immediate time period after going through, I could not remember anything but the washing and annointing. Everything else was completely blurred. Maybe there was some subconscious blocking of the memory on my part because it was disturbing and maybe I was so freaked out by the washing and annointing and also confused about why I was feeling so angry in the temple about having obviously been mislead about the temple experience, with used car salesman tactics being applied, that everything became sort of muddled in my mind.

Since that part was taken out over a decade ago, could she have forgotten it? I don't know how old your mom is, but with age sometimes memory fades (though it seems it's more common for short-term memory deficits to show up first rather than memory of distant events). Sometimes we want to forget things that were unpleasant, though.

But count me as one more who saw the oaths as part of the ceremony in person. They most certainly were there.

Subject:	The International House of Handshakes
Date:	May 19 17:32
Author:	esteban

So, what do you think was the worst part about the temple ceremonies, especially about the endowment? It's a toss up for me between total waste of time and embedded fear tactics.

I think the whole waste of time argument has some real validity though, I mean, from the moment you had to wrangle a sitter to the moment you got home, the whole thing was such a phenomenal waste of time and energy. And even when I was active I absolutely hated it.

But the lasting brain effect was more invasive. You can easily forget total wasted time, just toss it out of your brain and lament the fact you wasted your time. But the fear that really worked on me took much more brain time to figure out and decompress from. It's really tied to the garments and THAT whole waste of time, day and day out. Ugh!

I'm so glad and relieved that it's gone from my life!

e

Subject:	The worst part was the
Date:	May 19 17:39
Author:	flattopSF

Five-Points-Of-Fellowship-Grope-Grip at the veil with some old geezer who was three seconds from death and had the kind of projectile bad-breath that could drop a charging bull elephant at six hundred paces.

Is that a Chapstick™ in yer pocket, Gramps, or are ya just glad to grope…er, uh…see me?

I still have nightmares about that. The rest of the time I napped.

8^D

Subject:	Too Expensive (swear)
Date:	May 19 17:58
Author:	SuRReal

The worst part was paying 10% of my young family's gross income for the privilege of learning the secret passwords and handshakes. And wearing underwear that went down to my knees / having to see my hot wife in 19th century granny underwear instead of the cute little panties she wears now. Fuck that shit!

Subject:	The other worst thing....
Date:	May 19 18:12
Author:	Mr. Happy

Washing and annointings. "Nuf said. Never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined being naked under a "shield" while some guy touched me all over and then "helped" me into my garments. Before going through my father told me there would be a lot of "symbolism". Afterwards I asked why the washing & annointing couldn't be "symbolic". I guess it is now. Once again I was ahead of my time.

THEN...."Pay Lay Ale", pretending to slit various parts of my body, and secret handshakes that made me feel like I was being initiated into the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo with Gordo being the Grand Poobah.

Sheeeeesh, I couldn't wait to get the hell out of there and FORTUNATELY went back seldom over the next 25 years.

Subject:	The dull, pedestrian, uninspired nature of it all
Date:	May 19 19:01
Author:	Uncle Max

There was no art, no beauty, no joy, no revelation and no information worth having.

The pinnacle of Mo spirituality and it might just have been the Hokey Pokey - all together now, you put your right arm in.........

13. Non-Mormon and Garments	15. Temple Divorces
19. Feel Ugly in Temple Clothing?	32. The Changing Temple
33. First Time to the Temple	42. Washing and Anointings
44. Stopped wearing garments	66. Secret or Sacred?
127 Temple Marriage Ceremony	155 New Names Given in the Temple
165 Not allowed to the Temple Wedding	169 Can Temple Ordinances be Changed?
234 Changing Rules? Temple Marriages	238 She Can't Stand The Temple
243 Temple Hype Versus Reality	285 First Time to Temple II
288. Protestant Minister Pre-1990 Endowment	293 Excluded from Children's Wedding
301 Speaking Publicly about the Temple	306 Temples are Running out of Names
331 The Temple Endowment not Changed per Apologist	339 Temple Marriage vs. Traditional
359 Canceling a Temple Sealing	366 Naked Touching in the Temple?
371 Young Women Dress up in Mother's Temple Wedding Gown	382 Excluded from Children's Mormon Temple Wedding II
	475. My Father had to Pay $4000 to the Church to Attend My Wedding