Tags

Share this Episode

Comments 80

    1. John,

      I have e-mailed you before about this: I really do feel you should stretch your wings beyond North America more and seek out those in Europe who have also experienced similar to your other podcast interviewees.

      The issues which you address and discuss in your podcasts are not peculiar to North American members, but also members who fall outside of these borders. I do feel, in order to highlight the significance of disillusion, disenfranchisement and drive forward the seriousness of church prevarication and evasion and accountability at the very top, you need to interview more Europeans; it may, in time, cause a greater stir among the leadership!

      I know many members in the UK who are on the fringe and are without a voice, but are seeking redress and transparency from the church. I too have felt like this – even while serving as a Bishop – but am now in a better place.

      Please do consider this and thanks for all the work you have done so far in providing a voice for so many.

      Sincerely,

      Andy.

      1. I’m enjoying Tom’s story again, having already listened to it when you first provided the link. Fascinating! Let me second Andy’s appeal for more non-North American voices. These episodes and the ones with Hans Mattson both suggest that there are many stories “across the pond” in Europe as well as other non US and Canada countries.

        Thanks for all you do, John!

    2. Thank you so much for doing this interview.
      As a fellow unbeliever who chose truth over belief at all costs, it’s nice to hear someone who went through similar feelings. It’s a lonely road I’ve started just a few months ago. It’s cost me my marriage.

      Thanks again.

    3. Hello to you Mr. Phillips,

      Thank you for granting this interview to Mormon Stories. I come from pioneer stock actually from Coalville Leicestershire, and had a chance to travel around the U.K. as a teen. My ancestor founded Coalville, UT in 1859 and was called as a seventy. He was also called to practice Polygamy, but refused, according to family legend, and was subsequently excommunicated. Though your story takes place across an ocean, it reminded me so much of this one. Some of this family line have chosen the church, others have not. At least this grandfather provided them with an example and a choice, as you have with your children. I feel growing up around family for whom the church was not a priority may have freed me to decide for myself.

      I am grateful to you for sharing this story as an example to other church members who have strong examples of men in high callings, such as my husband. Anyone can examine these issues and decide for themselves, and should.

      I hope you see this, I thought about contacting someone to get this personal message to you, but thought this may be easier.
      Thank you again,

      Whitney

    4. WOW! Tom, I just listened to your interview with John Dehlin on Mormonstories. I feel I know you. I have so much respect for you! You touched me with your words, to say the least! Your telling of the Second Anointing was very touching!

      I love your integrity! You are genuine! Yeah, you have “Truth and Integrity!”

      How are you doing? I think about you often, as I have been traveling a similar path, whereby my wife has put the ‘Church’ before me in our marriage and has caused me much sorrow and pain. Your discussion about not having the opportunity to discuss anything about the church from the standpoint of questioning it is very familiar! Yeah, when it comes to ‘The Church,’ there is no discussion for those who have been lead down the path of “No Questions about the Mormon Church!” That is a sad story that is being repeated over and over and over. I just wish the Mormon Church would see the pain and suffering it, the Mormon Church, is causing to countless numbers of marriages and families and fix the problem by telling the truth and not just keep spinning lies as gospel!

      You are an “Honorable and Very Fine Man!” I guess what I have come to is that, and this is a Dale quote, “The Fear Of Death And What Follows Death is a powerful driving force that has been used by Religions since the dawning of time and is used to control humans.” The Mormon Church uses this issue, “The Fear Of Death And What Follows Death” very masterfully to control faithful members. You, Tom, found the truth and questioned the control that the Mormon Church has over its subjects. And what you questioned came from the Mormon Church itself . . . Historical documents, Papyrus etc. . . . Not anti-Mormon stuff.

      As a scientist, the most powerful lie that has been exposed was the Book of Abraham when the papyrus was discovered and translated. But even more telling was the response by Dr. Robert Ritner, “Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham” — A Response, which put the issue to bed that there is NO MISSING PAPYRUS nor is there another meaning of the word, “Translate!” Dr. Ritner analyses of the Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar, which is a document that is in the Mormon Church’s historical vaults, clarifies the issue of missing scrolls and the meaning of the word “Translate.” It, the Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar has been made public so we can see, as Dr. Ritner puts forth, just how Joseph Smith TRANSLATED the papyrus. The bottom line is “PERIOD!” There are no missing scrolls of papyrus and any fuzzy meaning for the word “translation.” These questions have been put to bed. The bottom line is that the Book of Abraham has been scientifically proven to be false.

      God bless you. I wish your children could see the ‘gem’ they have in you as their father!! Maybe they will . . . let’s hope! Yeah, and maybe your wife will have an honest discussion about the church.

      P.S. John, since you held this podcast all these years, why don’t you have an update interview with Tom. Yeah, I think this podcast should have been released in 2008. With that not possible as 2008 is time gone by, I believe a new interview would be warranted.

    5. Thanks for the post John. Absolutely inspiring. I learnt a new definition, NOM! For those confused and wrestling with the issues raised by Tom, I have personally found them quite simple to reconcile. Priesthood authority is a fiction invented by man to justify dominion over others, be they gay, female, ‘apostate’or any of a myriad of conditions categorised as such. The ‘second anointing’ is a crock which serves to reinforce judgemental and self righteous behaviours many TBMs adopt. The card over which no ‘doctrinal’ or historical sophistry will ever trump is that of the drive for tithes and offerings. If one follows the money trail, all the denials and apologies make sense. Mormonism may have germinated from a desire to pursue teenage girls and married women, but once it shifted to the Utah basin the driving force became financial gain. Apostates and truth seekers that threaten this treasure are doomed.

    6. Dear Tom,

      My husband and I (stk presidency, stk RS pres) have listened together to your superb interview, pausing for discussion, reflection, evaluation. Thank you for your honesty and humility. We were touched by the integrity you continued to show, despite the cost. Your loss of family support is unbelievably sad to us both, but hopefully there is peace in knowing that you followed the truth where it led you, and that the truth will reunite you with your loved ones in the not-too-distant future. We admire you, we salute you, we thank you.

      Very warmly,
      A+M

    7. Dear Mr Phillips;
      wishing you the very best. you have not idea how much your interview had helped me to get more knowledge on some issues and questions I’ve been having. I only wish that your family specially your wife could see your integrity and support what it seems, feels, sounds, to be right to be true.

    8. As I read all the accounts from members who have decided for one reason or another to leave the Church, I understand the rational, since the 1970s I have been familiar with Sandra and Gerald Tanner’s anti church writings and many others of the same ilk. I am aware of all the arguments used against the Church. I would simply say this: “Then again they called the man that was blind, and said to him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner. He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that whereas I was blind, now I see!
      I have been a member since 1963 and not only has the church blessed and changed my life, but I have seen so many lives changed and blessed by joining the church; lives that in some cases were in ruins. One can spend ones life trying to dig out the ‘truth’, I have seen many try to do so, in the process they lose their faith, sometimes their marriage, and usually, there former happiness; a light goes out in them.
      I challenge anyone to go and find a better Church, with better teachings, better success in holding on to and training youth, better programs to cover all aspects and needs of ones life. Better, more experienced, dedicated leaders, who give wise, solid, tried and tested councel to every age in the family. Yes you can jump off the good ship Zion, but where will you swim to?

      Geoffrey Dunning. England

      1. … I swam to freedom …

        … freedom to discover the awesome gifts I was born with … and freedom to grow into the highest and best version of what I was created to become …

        Thank you for your post, Sir Geoffrey.

        You made me appreciate my freedom even more deeply, because I used to be … you.

  1. Where do I find out more about “I recently received notice of my own pending disciplinary council”? When is it? Are you going to attend? What is the charge, apostasy? I have been planning on resigning when you are excommunicated and would like to stay informed so I can time my letter of resignation appropriately.

  2. Very glad you decided to post this! I think its very pertinent information that people deserve to know, and Tom is a very brave and great man for being willing to expose his personal life for the benefit of those seeking truth.

  3. I’m wondering my if you know if any black people have received the second endowment. And thanks for the things you post, it’s all very interesting.

  4. “Joseph Smith introduced the second anointing the same day, September 28, 1843, that women were introduced to the endowment….nineteen men and seventeen women received their second anointing in the short span of nine months before Smith’s death. He introduced it to trusted followers as the ‘fulness of the priesthood,’ saying it fulfilled the promise of the first anointing in confirming their appointments as kings and priests, queens and priestesses in the next life. The second anointing was said to be the ‘crowning ordinance’ of the Restoration, a ritual that ‘seal[ed] their exaltation upon them while they are yet in this life.’

    “After Smith’s death, Brigham Young increased the number of second anointings and opened the ordinance to plural wives. Before the temple closed in February 1846, a total of 603 second anointings had been performed, nine of which were by proxy for the dead. Then the ritual was curtailed for over three decades until 694 anointings were ultimately performed in the Endowment House before its closure in 1889.

    “In 1884, President John Taylor let it be known that he alone would ‘designate the parties who should receive these ordinances.’ He allowed recommendations from families for deceased ancestors but not for the living. Understandably, those who acted as proxies for the dead had to have already received the ordinance themselves.

    “President Taylor’s successor, Wilford Woodruff, continued to discourage individuals from requesting the ordinance, for themselves or for their ‘faithful aged,’ preferring ‘that their names should be presented by their bishop and stake president,’ he wrote. In 1901 bishops were told not to make recommendations, reserving the responsibility to stake presidents. President Lorenzo Snow decided that only those who had gathered to Utah were worthy to receive the highest ordinance—not only among the living, but also among the dead unless they had desired to immigrate but had been prevented from doing so.

    “In 1926 stake presidents were asked to stop recommending individuals, as the Church presidency now reserved the right to do so to members of the Quorum of the Twelve. Because most members were not personally known to the apostles, recommendations were usually made when members of the hierarchy visited stakes and heard about individuals from stake presidents.

    “In time, [George F.] Richards would become so distraught that the ordinance had fallen into disuse, he wrote the First Presidency and Twelve in 1949 that he could not bring himself ‘to feel that the Lord is pleased with us in
    neglecting such an important and sacred endowment.’ Up to that time, 32,901 second anointings had been performed throughout the Church, but during the last twelve years, Richards pointed out, there had been only eight.

    “The second anointing continues to be performed on a limited basis. In 1966, the First Presidency ‘went over a list of the Brethren of the General Authorities who have not had their second anointings.’ David O. McKay asked Joseph Fielding Smith ‘to officiate at these ordinances in behalf of these Brethren.’ David Buerger interviewed three temple presidents who confirmed that the ordinance is still being performed, although it remains shrouded in secrecy. And as Buerger concluded, ‘the current official policy initiated by Heber J. Grant suggests that Church authorities now feel that the second anointing is not required for exaltation.’”

    (2011-03-22). The Development of LDS Temple Worship, 1846-2000: A Documentary History (Kindle Locations 653-663). Signature Books. Kindle Edition.

  5. You mention the following:

    “Over the past few years, we have received reports of several LDS Church members (specifically in Europe) who have lost their LDS faith AFTER receiving their Second Anointing.”

    I’d love to hear stories of the other members too!

  6. Upfront, I haven’t listened to all the segments-just #3 family fallout. I am well aware and acknowledge the problems with church historicity for many years now. I support and validate people’s decision to leave the church over these issues. But, I also support and validate those adults who remain–even those who choose to remain ignorant. I think this is where I may depart from Tom. I feel each individual, my adult children included, must walk their own paths. If they have a desire to know, they have the tools available to them. I don’t burden my adult children with the burdens I’ve carried several years now. For sure, if they came to me I would be honest with them. But I also don’t keep up a “front.” I’ve just living my life as authentically as possible. Some who are well aware of the issues will remain because they still find value, kinship or whatever or a way to live the Gospel through the church, at least for a time.

    I think what might make it difficult for Tom and his associations is the level of passion/anger I hear as he talks about these issues. I am not questioning whether his anger is valid. No doubt it is valid. Just that it might be an impediment in his personal associations.

    All the best Tom. I am very sorry for all you’ve suffered.

    1. I find myself to be in a very similar position as you. My “ignorance” is merely my way of balancing my happiness with the happiness of those that I love.

  7. John, this podcast is one of my top-5 of all time. I think it deserves a spot in the “Best of mormon stories” category. I thought Tom was genuine and honest throughout the interview and was very candid and respectful as to the ordinance itself. It was hearbreaking for me to hear the reaction Elder Holland had to his honest questions and after reading their email exchange I would say that’s when my testimony truly vanished.

    What was eye-opening to me was when he was asked to “recommend” others that should receive the ordinance. Where did divine inspiration go? and ok, I get it… ward callings aren’t inspired but given to those who fit the bill best. But a second anointing??? this took the little wind I had left in me. Thanks for posting John!

  8. ““Second Anointing” is regularly being administered by LDS Church apostles to elite friends, family, and leaders (mostly stake presidents, temple presidents, mission presidents, and LDS general authorities, along with their wives).”

    I love this description John… ELITE et al. That’s what Mormonism has been since it’s inception. That’s how members fell for polygamy. Idolizing MEN and then being invited to participate in X,Y or Z and become elite TOO.

    Take 10 couples who have received their “second anointing” and put them in a room with 10 couples who have not received that “ordinance” and observe… I guarantee you’ll be able to tell within a short period of time who believes they are superior to the rest of the group.

    At the highest levels of leadership Mormonism celebrates the least traits of Jesus Christ. Secrecy. Exclusivity. Idolizing men. Showing preference for seniority. Traits contrary to the teachings of the Savior.

    Big Tom Phillips fan here. Nice job John posting this up. The work done and shared with the listeners of Mormon Stories would never have been complete without the release of this interview on this flagship website.

    DT

    1. I have to wholeheartedly agree, DT. I think this is one of the least analyzed group psychology issues and explanations for why the church is appealing to some. It appealed to me when I was a participant, but only when I step outside the boundaries of the church and really see the connection between all human beings does it become clear that God’s true church cannot possible be so exclusive. God would not be smug, in my opinion.

      1. Have any Second Anointees seen Christ?

        Well, maybe if after they get their feet washed, if they also get their brains washed sparkling clean … with every last trace of any connection to Reality rinsed away, then maybe they will “see” Christ … in the same way Joseph Smith “saw” Christ hovering up there in the air with His Dad.

        Even if Jesus were alive and well, I feel confident that the last door He would ever darken would be a LD$ Inc temple. Jesus might, however, enjoy shopping at the City Creek Mall. That could happen.

        Maybe Jesus would go for one of these:

        http://www.spreadshirt.com/coffee-jesus-C3376A18415638?gclid=Cj0KEQjw-tSrBRCk8bzDiO__gbwBEiQAk-D31ZxiZdMCL25d8foM_xl1UM4Q6yqiuRTWiT4Ouh3hjq4aAqqR8P8HAQ&ef_id=U3GyiAAABGt-iX1i%3A20150609001452%3As

  9. Thanks for sharing your story! I left the LDS faith 3 years ago and fortunately my kids were raised to ask questions and find their own answers. My oldest left after attending BYU and majoring in archeology. My other 3 left because they had questions and sought out their own answers. It has certainly not been an easy transition but I cannot believe the freedom that comes from living an authentic life! My heart hurts for my family, all of whom are actively involved in the church, but my voice is silent to them. I know any type of conversation of my beliefs will never be welcome or accepted. As I say, ignorance to reality equals a happy life…right???

  10. I found this interview last year on YouTube. It’s absolutley fascinating, so glad you decided to post it on Mormon Stories. I really respect Tom Phillips, integrity causing some people to have to suffer the most extraordinary situations. I thank him for fighting for the truth, I thank him for having the courage to do so, and for exposing this ordinance, among other things. He’s a very brave man.

  11. I’m not sure if my last comment posted so I am trying again. If this is a repeat, please delete.

    Thank you so much Tom for posting your story.

    Some thoughts:

    1. It is disturbing how the church uses this false endowment to control its highly ranked members.

    2. On one hand, the wife giving the blessing is certainly a sign that the church DOES believe women have their own divinity and priesthood.

    On the other hand, it is disturbing that the wife gives her husband a blessing and the husband doesn’t bless her. Is she turning over her spiritual gifts to him? I think there is something sexist about this.

    3. I have left the church, but part of me is still tied to the church because of the good people I have met in it. I hope these TBMs and maybe even the church can walk away from lies, fear, black-and-white thinking, and false doctrine into light and love.

  12. It’s most refreshing to hear clear thinking truths about the fraud of Mormonism from someone who rose so high and whom with a clear conscience can explain why it is a fraud. I am sorry that it has cost him so much, but his actions will benefit thousands and his sacrifice will not go unnoticed or unappreciated.

  13. Tom,

    What an riveting and amazing story. I have so much admiration for you. Thank you for standing up and speaking the truth, for asking the hard questions and taking a principled stand. You have definitely paid a steep price, but you have helped so many people.

    Integrity. Curiosity. Honesty.

    You are an authentic person. My best wishes to you in all of your pursuits! And Thank You.

  14. When we discover new truths (even if they are things like those discovered by this good man), it is unwise to expect others to learn them right away and be as smart as we. We could make a list of questions to be answered by a believer in Santa Claus (How do reindeer fly?) The loss of our little friend is not worth getting such an answer. All religions are superstitions. Of course they are not “true.” They are not “about” truth, yet they can be very valuable, as we see in the first part of this interview. We can keep these valuable things even after we lose the superstition. At the very least, we can remain comfortable with other people’s keeping these valuable things. The error here is in thinking religion “should” be about truth even after we have learned that it is not about truth. In the middle parts of this interview, we see a man immersed in science. That “is” about truth, but my science friends have never given my family the services that my religion has. They are two different things. Having been in physics for 50 years now, I have many “science” friends, but I also have many “naive” religious friends who have been of great value to me. I have known the Church was not “true” for at least 30 of those years, but I also know there is not “more true” Church to take its place in my life. What makes this difficult is that these religions keep SAYING they are about truth. Whether they are lying or in error, either way, they are incorrect. We (most of us) do not feel guilty about lying about Santa Claus. Most children learn the truth of it at a reasonably young age. (I know a wonderful retarded woman who still believes into her 50’s.) Does this really matter? How good it is is what matters. For science, how true it is is what matters. Use both.

    1. Please don’t use the “R” word. It’s incredibly offensive. YOU ALSO can’t compare Santa Claus and faith in a religious belief. Those are not good examples.

    2. So you are saying – that being superstitious and delusional creates value? Well it certainly does for those few elites who financially and socially benefit.

      “When one person suffers from delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called religion.” — Robert Pirsig

  15. I am Robert Sackley’s grand-son. I appreciate the kind words said about him. Thank you. That was quite the insight about my grandfather, one that I did not know about! I am even more proud of him now.

  16. Just listened to all five parts …wow. Thanks John for this mind-blowing interview. I was not aware of how widespread “second anointings” were among church leadership; now I understand why area authorities, temple presidents, and stake presidents exuded that special twisted smugness. I hope that Tom has moved beyond the church in the intervening three years and has found peace and a new partner. Let us know how he’s doing, if you’re at liberty.

  17. As an ex-Mormon who believes LDS theology is nothing more than fiction, my heart goes out to Tom. I understand how he feels betrayed, and anger for the many years he devoted to the church under false pretenses.

    It saddens me to hear that Tom’s family relationships have suffered as a result of his disbelief.

    That said, I wonder if it is reasonable for Tom to expect that his believing family members would be willing to consider the facts he has discovered about the church with open minds? My experience has been that change has to come from within and that the most logical arguments in the world won’t sway people from existing convictions. If anything, arguing just pushes people further into defending what they believe (regardless of how senseless it may be).

    Sometimes ex-Mormons have to just keep their silence and accept that their dear relatives are going to continue in their faith. As hard as it might be to do, we just have to love our families, even supporting them in the practice of Mormonism, and just hope that a day will come when someone will come and ask serious questions about their religion with a true to desire to learn.

  18. Helen Mar Kimball Whitney wrote this from her fathers journal. Here is proof that women not only held the Priesthood, but also practiced it. Sister Elizabeth Ann Whitney received the second anointing from Joseph Smith.

    I [Helen Whitney] find many things mentioned in my father’s [Heber C. Kimball’s] journal which I remember as I read them, and they bring to my mind other incidents which had it not been for his record, would probably have been buried in oblivion. I will copy a few as they were written by his own hand in 1845. He says:
    “On the morning of the 18th of June [1845], I [Heber C. Kimbvall] went to John Taylor’s to read history. President Brigham Young, George A. Smith, John Taylor and myself–Brother Ezra Benson read for us. The same morning Phineas Young and Charles Shumway returned home from their western mission. At four o’clock they came in where the brethren were reading, and we stopped to listen to a letter from Brother Dunham, and they gave to us a history of their travels. They have had some difficulties, but all will work right in the end.”
    Next day he writes, “I and others of the Twelve were sent for by Sister Jennetta Richards (Brother Willard’s wife,) to meet there and pray for her, as she felt that she could not live long. We also prayed for my wife, who is very sick, and offered up prayer for Bishop Whitney, who has gone to St. Louis, that he may be prospered.”
    The same day, he writes, “Brigham Young, George A. Smith, and myself went to the temple to see how things were progressing. The rafters were mostly on, all things going well. Returned home and found Sister Whitney. She anointed my wife and sang in tongues; I also sang and the Lord blessed us. June the 20th [1845], I again met with my brethren to read history–were in that part which describes the persecutions in Jackson County, Missouri. We stopped reading at two o’clock in the afternoon. I found my wife worse–sent for Sister Whitney. We clothed ourselves according to the order of the holy priesthood and anointed and prayed for her. The Lord heard us, for she was better and had a good night’s rest. The Lord shall have the glory. All is quiet in our city.”

  19. Thank you for posting this podcast. It reminded me of when I read his account of the second anointing many years ago, when he had done so anonymously. I recall some frustration as it is difficult to ascertain the credibility of the factual allegations without knowing the source. I had initially thought about commenting regarding that part as it has be a source of thought for many years as I compare and contrast the examples I have from other sources. But alas I thing I have too little information to add to or diminish his words on that topic.
    I would like to second the words of Chuck’s earlier comment and add my own take on this issue. One of my favorite movies (12 Monkeys) addresses the issue of truth and science and has some superb quotes that summarize some basic misconceptions regarding truth and science. Here is the site: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114746/quotes
    I particularly like Goines explaining crazy with the example of Semmelweis (a pioneer in germ theory and committed to insane asylum at age 47) and germs. You believe in germs don’t you?
    Science is a dialog between man and nature. Ilya Prigogine
    Truth, or at least scientific truth is made by men in our effort to understand and interact with the universe around us. I particularly like the work Thomas S. Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions ) in there he sets out two principles which Mr. Philips either does not understand or does not accept.
    Coherence: One of the aims of science is to find models that will account for as many observations as possible within a coherent framework.
    Incommensurability: According to Kuhn, the scientific paradigms preceding and succeeding a paradigm shift are so different that their theories are incommensurable — the new paradigm cannot be proven or disproven by the rules of the old paradigm, and vice versa.
    First of all Mr. Phillips asserts that science leads to truth. It does not do that. It leads to understanding of nature and our interactions with it. Truth is something much more elusive. All of the “science” referred to by Mr. Phillips are models which encapsulate the majority of the experiences and observations of the leading scientist in their respective fields. As they, and others, make new observations and have new experiences those models will be adapted or changed to enclose those new observations. If the change is significant enough that is a paradigm shift.
    Science is models, not laws or truth, much the same way words are not the things or the actions themselves. They help us understands and relate to the universe outside of ourselves but are not fundamental truths/things in themselves. Therefore, the correct statement is that those things he brings up are not necessarily ‘false’ but do not fit in the current scientific paradigm. While I would agree that we could generally treat them as incorrect because they have little or no tangible support “science” does not prove that they are false in the absolute way he does. There have been eons of scientists who have operated under different paradigms. They were not “false” because their ideas do not fit in our modern paradigms. He also appeals to authority (i.e. the Smithsonian) which is a logical error. It does not matter what his sources were, it is irrelevant to the truth. If they were mentioned to give reference and proper credit to the sources of his assertions, as I have done above, that is ok but in a few places he seems to assert that the source of information adds veracity to his claims, which it does not.
    Secondly he is trying to apply rules of the current scientific paradigm to disprove the BOM which arguably is not even within any scientific paradigm or is at least written from an understanding of a previous scientific paradigm. For example: Mr. Phillips asserts that Mr. Smith asserted that Lamenites were progenitors of Native Americans which is false according to our current archeological and DNA paradigm, therefore Mr. Smith was false and therefore not a prophet, BOM not “true”… The problem is that Mr. Smith lived at a time where at least one of the scientific paradigms regarding the native people of the America’s (someone with more knowledge of archeological paradigms than I may be able to better define this) was that Native Americans were descendants of Israelites. The Clovis First had not yet been developed let alone abandoned. “I think we are on the edge of a paradigm shift now, we’re past the Clovis-first model. We have robust evidence of people here before Clovis that is in a secure geological context and well-dated. Now we can seriously sit down and develop a new model for the peopling of the Americas.” Michael Waters Texas A&M University in College Station (2011). I do not propose, as the LDS apologist do, that there may be new evidence discovered to support Mr. Smith. Rather I rest on the proposition that according to incommensurability using a current paradigm against the theories of an earlier one does not prove or disprove them.
    I suspect that Mr. Phillips would accuse me, as he did Mr. Holland and other apologists, of not an answering the question but just a side stepping to avoid the question. My response to that is: I cannot answer an invalid question. Any answer I give is false because the premise and structure of the question itself is invalid. I suppose a simplified response is something along the lines of: Look Mr. Phillips, Mr. Smith lived in a time and place where it was a commonly held belief that the people native to America were descendants of Israelites. To fault him for following the commonly held belief at the time is an unfair attack as it would have required him to have knowledge of things which were unknown at the time. Even if he were “translating” if he came across a place, name or concept he had has no experience with he has no choice but to insert something he knows. To which I suspect Mr. Phillips would say “God” could have told him. I personally believe that any “God” must work within certain parameters, one of which is the understanding and experience of those he speaks to. I reject notions that “God” can create anything, even ideas, ex nihilo. If he could create ideas and thoughts ex nihilo he could create us sinless, with a perfect understanding of all things… Therefore, the concepts of modern archeology, anthropology and many other sciences were literally inconceivable to Mr. Smith and therefore “God” had no way to tell him the “truth” any more than he could tell me about the physics at work inside a black hole. I am comfortable in stating that we simply do not yet understand enough about the universe to understand those forces in a meaningful way. Even the greatest minds of our generation struggle with those concepts; but, I also expect that within the next 150 years it will be taught to teenagers and be considered basic science. An extension of this concept is that as we become more enlightened god can use that new knowledge to lead us to a more perfect understanding of the universe. Which we can then use for the perfection and immortality of all of mankind and our own salvation or doggedly cling to our previously lesser understanding and damnation. Or, in the Mormon vernacular line upon line precept upon precept.
    Finally I would give the words of Rene Descartes: “Thus the diversity of our opinions does not arise from the fact that some people are more rational than others, but simply that we conduct out thoughts along different lines and do not consider the same things.” While I would that Mr. Phillips family were willing to ponder and discuss the issues that Mr. Phillips raises and talk with him about it, so that the love and consideration that was once there could return, that does not lead to the conclusion that they are not themselves equally rational or “brain washed.” They choose to ponder and discuss the things which bring themselves happiness and comfort in this life. I would that everyone would do that, so long as it does not also impose harm on others, I think there would be much less strife and fighting in this world. To condemn them or others like them is a violence and hypocritical. Why would you take a beloved possession from someone because you dislike it or find it undesirable? If you wish them to leave the possession behind you must provide an alternative that is discernibly more desirable. That is what L.D.S. missionaries do, they find those with less attractive social or religious notions/options and show them something more desirable. Even if the church continues to embrace some incomplete ideas, to the extent that it does in fact bring people more happiness and joy than they otherwise would have that is a good thing. I think the Givens’ more eloquently stated this concept when talking about those who have doubts about the church but stay having the lament from John 6:68 “…Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.”
    Mr. Phillips, if you do not have something more desirable then you have nothing to offer and you should return to them and allow them to have their peace. I emphasize more because although there may be other arguably equal paths to happiness the harm that comes from the struggle to change paths is simply not worth it if the outcome is merely equal and you will never convince them to make the journey. Would your grandson be happier in school, if he made more money, if he went to a different church…why are you insisting that your definition of happiness be imposed upon him? Where is you pride and rejoicing that he has embraced a path and is diligently following it? Rather than extolling the virtues of moderns science and your perceptions of truth show them a more perfect way, I know there is one and I suspect you do too, but it is not the one you are pointing them towards.

    If you have not already, read Thomas Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions )
    Coherence: One of the aims of science is to find models that will account for as many observations as possible within a coherent framework.
    Incommensurability: According to Kuhn, the scientific paradigms preceding and succeeding a paradigm shift are so different that their theories are incommensurable — the new paradigm cannot be proven or disproven by the rules of the old paradigm, and vice versa.

    Since the time of Joseph Smith there have been several paradigm shifts in the various sciences and theology. I would argue that Joseph Smith was part if a very distinct religious paradigm shift, but that is for another time and place. My point is two fold. 1) What we now call science will go through future paradigm shifts. Wether or not and rather or not mormon teachings

    1. So “truth” is really scientifically unknowable. Your lengthy diatribe reminds me of the oft stated syllogistic fallacy that there are “those whom are ever learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.” Those types argue that real truth only comes through Godly inspiration or revelation, like for example, the Adam God revelation.

      Do you believe that there are Germs? If so, how did you learn of that unknowable? By revelation? If not, have you ever taken an antibiotic?

      1. I apologize if my previous post sounded as a diatribe to you. I certainly did not want to give that tone. I choose to write as I did in respect for the time and efforts that Mr. Phillips went to in order to do this interview and present his concerns. To disagree with some of his positions with a quip would not have been appropriate nor polite. I do believe in germ theory and avoid the use of antibiotics, unless necessary, because I also believe in evolution. I subscribe to stoicism and existentialism and so choose to take your acknowledgement that I do ascend to the premises that truth is, as a practical matter, unknowable as a compliment of my ability to convey my intended meaning. I could not decipher what point you wanted to make with the phrase you quoted nor which of the syllogistic fallacies you assert it violates. Of course it has been about 20 years since I have more than casually analyzed phrases for logical fallacies.

        I am following up on your post because you grouped me, presumably based on my above posting, with those that assert that some god is the source of “truth.” I thought I had clearly stated I reject the premises that any god can give people thoughts (truth) that they did not already have the basis for which I think also precludes the gods from being the only source of truth. So, to the extent that I may have been unclear unclear I will try and explain myself more briefly and in a different way.

        I suggest that the scientific model method of considering our perceptions of reality is successful in describing reality because it overcomes the fundamental flaw with human perception and understanding which is that all choices are made in the emotional centers of the brain. As a result in choosing one proposition over another we are stating our feelings about it, which may or may not reflect reality. If those same propositions about reality are considered as mere models (analogies) of reality, we do not make them an absolute declaration about reality itself, the brain considers it as a possibility and the conclusions about them are not mandated by our feelings, because no choice has been made. So long as we consider them only as to how well they explain previous experiences and predict future observations they can be easily adopted, modified or abandoned as a function of utility because there is no emotional attachment. The pitfall in it is that they must always be considered as probabilities because as soon as one limits them to being true or false that can only resolved by a choice which are statements of emotion and objectivity is lost.

        I suggest that this principle is also the secret of religion. If I like a proposition about reality and only consider it as true or false I will always believe it to be true no matter how objectively absurd it is. This is the cause and solution for Mr. Phillips’ concerns. The choice to believe something is true or false is always emotional. His family will never change their decision about the church being true or false based on logical premises. Choices are simply not made that way. Employing rationality to make a choice merely delays choice until the rational centers of the brain are too tired to continue and the emotional centers step in and make the choice.
        His family believes the church to be true because it makes them happy and/or the idea of not having the church scares them. The hurt he feels if from the fact that they are more emotionally attached (in a positive way) to the church than they are to him. They likely are similarly dismayed that he is more emotionally attached (in a negative way) towards the church than he is positively emotionally attached to them. The only way for the divide to be bridged is for one of them to give up their emotional attachment towards the church. This need not be a complete change of position but one or the other must decide that the truth or falseness of the church is not important enough to declare it either way. To view it as merely a model of reality, which can be effective for some things and ineffective for others, but ultimately neither true nor false.
        In context of this discussion: Regarding the truth or falseness of the BOM. It could be considered in terms of a historical document and conclude that it does not encompass the observations in that area and is an extremely poor model. However, a model for how to experiencing the Holy (numinous), it might be concluded that based on his family’s experience it is a good model for that purpose. Is it irrational to think of things in this way? That is the question which he will have to decide. I submit it is the best way to consider things. If you replace BOM in the above example with Bohr’s atomic model the result is a model which is inaccurate in describing the actual movement of electrons in an atom but is very predictive of atomic bonds. Is it true or false? Neither because it is a model so I do not need to choose but if I do choose the human mind required me to adopt both (all) of the propositions that it encompasses. If I decide that Bohr’s atomic model is true I maintain the utility for predicting atomic bonds and have an inaccurate concept of electron movement or if I decide it is false I do not have an inaccurate concept of electron movement but loose a useful tool in prediction atomic bonds.

        Call it what you will, it works. Is it more important to feel good about something and be tied to it with all of the consequences or feel noting towards it and be free?

    2. Your 10,831 Character, 1,872 word thingy is very difficult to read. Go outside. Get some fresh air. Return and then edit. I’d love to understand what it is you’re trying to say…

      Pardon me if I smell troll. It’s just that everytime I cross a bridge like this I think something is going to try and eat me.

  20. I found this podcast a few years ago and appreciate Tom and John for recording it. I am especially grateful to Tom for being so truthful as I cannot imagine how difficult this story was to tell.

    I am listening to it again since it has been released on Mormon Stories. It truly is an amazing story and all non members and members should take the time to listen to it.

  21. Thanks Tom and John! So much bravery here. It’s wonderful to know that I’m not alone in my search for “truth and integrity.” For so long I’ve felt crazy for doubting LDS scripture and church history. I completely empathize with Tom’s search and his struggle to understand. Way to go, guys.

  22. Dear Tom Phillips,

    So … lemme get this straight. The Brethren are handing out NRTTH’s (Non-Revokable Tickets To Heaven) when not a one of THEM could pass a Lie Detector Test to save their own soul. Go figure.

    Well, Tom, you gotta admit that “finding out” when you did was far better than waking up in the Spirit World after your death and discovering that neither Jesus Christ nor Joseph Smith are anywhere to be found … and that your NRTTH is really a counterfeit ticket to nowhere. Think of all the poor saps who died still believing they had priority boarding on a rocket to Kolob that existed only in the imagination of a very clever scam artist.

    Now that you are a free man, Tom, there are some exciting discoveries awaiting your attention:

    For a non-religious, awe inspiring glimpse into the Spirit Realm, check out “Journey of Souls” by Michael Newton, and then his later books. This relatively recent information pretty much renders religions and prophets obsolete. It also offers detailed perspective on Planet Earth, the origin of souls and the human race like you’ve never seen before. Michael Newton completely demolishes the notion that religions and churches are the only source of “spiritual” information. Read the reviews on amazon for a better preview, then see if your interest gets piqued.

    Cudos to you for your honesty and courage, Tom. You are a member of a very Elite Club … those who received their Second Anointing and later determined it was probably the biggest insult of their life.

    Thank you, thank you … for your gift to a world in need of real gifts.

  23. Tom,

    You are my hero and one bad m f er!
    I sincerely wish that you and I were friends 🙂 please know that your honest and emotional words will always reside within me. Thank you. I hope beyond comprehension that you will gain back members of your family. The odds are in your favor so never give up. Much Love

  24. I listened to this when it was posted I believe on Tom’s website. There seems to be more here though. Is this a longer version?

  25. I listened to this hoping there’d be some explanation for the October Surprise debacle. It seems some explanation ought to be made regarding it. That represents the exact opposite of what Tom wanted to preach in this interview–love and concern. Even though I listened, I was not impressed with the continued bellyaching about his family and the victimhood status he’s cemented himself in.

    Ah well, I’m sure this post won’t make the cut as Open Stories tries to control the narrative and repeat dogma instead of promoting open discussion. But I figured I”d say it anyway. Peace to you.

  26. This interview really makes the Mormon church look like a joke. Let me get this straight. When Tom had the 2nd anointing he was given his calling election made sure. He’s guaranteed the top spot in the celestial kingdom or rather he will become a God. The only thing that can take that away is Tom denying God of his sure existence(basically have a face to face conversation with Jesus)or murdering someone. From listening to the podcast I didn’t get the impression that Tom meet Jesus so that means he can’t be a son of perdition. If all this Mormon stuff is true then I would think Jeffery Holland would be perplex that Tom didn’t get the chance to meet our Savior. The question Tom should have ask Holland is if he has conversed with Jesus after he had his calling election made sure.

    1. I did discuss this with a GA and was told to lie by saying ‘The Brethren have asked us not to discuss such sacred matters’. If I answered in that way, it would obviously infer that I had seen him. That is what GAs are instructed to do – to lie.

      Tom

  27. Tom, thank you for doing this interview. You are very brave and i really respect your intentions and truthfulness. I hope that your family will open their hearts to you again. I really enjoyed your likening of being a norm to that of staying in the klu klux klan. I’m going to use that analogy, so I now have a way to explain my reasons for never going to church again to my own family. Back when you did this interview in 2012 my then 9 year old son came home from church very sad because his teacher had taught him about the curse of Cain. My son said it sounds wrong and it feels racist. My husband, his father, has dark skin and he’s a non-member. I was so embarrassed of myself because never before had I ever thought twice about this teaching being offensive and degrading. I was so proud of my son for seeing through this falsehood and so surprised and disgusted with myself that I had been blind. I had called my husband “godless” I had accused him of not understanding spirituality, faith, or the importance of a religious community. I had worried at night that my choice to marry a nonmember would lead our children down a path of sorrow, and then suddenly it became clear that I was the one allowing my children to learn dangerous principles and that I had been brain washed. I have since apologized and my sweet husband forgave me and we are so happy now raising our family with no religion. I hope that your family will see your long suffering and see your love for them. It is so freeing to let go of being judgmental.

  28. Beautiful! Thank you for asking questions. Thank you for being an advocate for truth. Thank you for having the courage to share. What a blessing in so many ways.

    1. John I am proud of you that you have the courage to share something that will upset a lot of Mormons which I believe is true. I haven’t Listened to this interview but I have read his story online
      Thank you for addressing important issues that have been hidden and come from the foundation of the Church –and Joseph Smith
      This is A very important issue!
      Now that you have nothing to loose you can be totally open about the most disturbing things the church has done
      I hope you will tackle other topics just as you have this one —telling the truth
      You are truly a crusader for truth-there is so much to tell and so many people that need to hear
      Thank you again for your courage

  29. thank you for the podcast. in our family, there is a mixture of believers and non-believers and though it has been initially challenging, it is becoming easier. In the ideal world, one we all seek for, our belief system or personal ideology( so long as they do not bring harm to others) should not hinder our relationships, especially with those closest to us. I find it the deepest of ironies that members feel anger over loved ones’ choices to disbelieve. Relgion and ideologies can do this though, this is their nature. ( i said CAN) They consume us, foster within us a sort of absolutism and….fear. Fear that we might not be right, fear of others having also some truth and in Tom’s case, fear on the part of his family that it might bring damnation and separation from the family. Truer forms of religion i think would free us of these fears and bring a sense of the deepest of love to our hearts…not self-righteous indignation like with Brother Holland. Religion truly lived brings love and that is the objective of most religions we find.

  30. Tom,
    I feel for you, I really do. I understand your desire to maintain your integrity with the truthfulness of the Mormon church, and your desire to explain yourself to your wife and children. It must be so frustrating.
    I can’t imagine how your children must have felt when you told them the church was false. I think you said one of them even fainted. Another one said, “Get out.” The emotional pain they felt must have been excruciating.

    You said you were converted in 1969 when you were married and had one child. That means you never spent your formative years singing primary songs, reading scriptures every night, family prayers, youth dances, EFY, seminary, Sunday school or two years on a mission. All these things your children did before the age of 25 – before their brains were fully developed. Your children have undergone extensive brainwashing… And not to be rude, but at your hands. You, yes you, are responsible for shaping their minds. So when you told them it was all false, you literally blew their minds.

    I’m not diminishing your conversion, but frankly you never underwent the “autosuggestion” and brainwashing your children experienced. That is why it was “easier” for your brain to absorb the truth. I’m not saying it was easy for you to reject Joseph Smith’s rendition of 19th century Christian fan fiction (the BOM), but it made it possible. Your children will need a MUCH longer deprogramming gradient to rewire their brains. Possibly even decades. The cognitive dissonance they are experiencing is paralyzing. Please have compassion for them.

    I suggest you put the missionary tools to work: build on common beliefs. Do not speak in absolutes, like: The church is false.

    You have to realize the church employs a sophisticated hypnosis program on its youth. Before the age of 8 our brainwaves are in the Alpha state or lower (delta below the age of 2, and theta between 2 and 5). That is why children are so teachable. So when they get up and say: “I know the church is true…” in testimony meeting they are giving themselves autosuggestion… Slick!!

    So be patient. Your children have been “hypnotized” into believing Mormonism in a way you were never exposed to.

    And as far as Jeff Holland is concerned. Have compassion on him. He means well, but is blinded by his hubris.

    There is only one thing that matters in this life: how you treat other people. Period.

    Good luck on your journey for truth and happiness. It takes great courage to do the right thing. Stand by your convictions and keep your integrity.

    1. Cudos to “The Light” for some unusually insightful and very useful/helpful wisdom for Tom. It is indeed criminal how The Brethren infect defenseless Mormon babies (via complicit parents) with life-destroying, mind control programming … knowing full well the messaging is lies upon lies. I do think you are cutting Jeffrey excessive slack, however. He is an adult and fully responsible for his behavior and for the serial, sum total of the thousands of life choices he has made for himself … and shows no sign of correcting. He is leveraging his position of real power and influence over crippled, compromised minds to harm lots of people and cause massive, unnecessary suffering, including countless suicides. His upcoming karmic reward adventure will eventually get his attention.

    2. I agree the church is pretty good with hypnotic methods. However, mistakes are made from time to time. For example, in the song “Follow the Prophet” it says, “…don’t go astray.” This includes what we call an imbedded command. This command is “…go astray.” So, whether or not you want your children to stay in the church, every parent wants their children to be on the right path. In my opinion, this song is one of the most dangerous songs used in the church today.

  31. This “Second Anointing” temple ordinance is intriguing! Many years ago I was approached by an old elderly friend who is now deceased. He wanted to tell me something in secrecy that I had to promise I would never reveal to anyone else throughout my lifetime. I agreed to his request and during our discussions, he revealed a personal knowledge of a secret organization within the LDS hierarchy that he referred to as the “Third Anointing Society” that he claimed was an extremely special temple ordainment offered very few individuals within the church that guaranteed unimaginable exaltation in the kingdom of God and absolution of all sin for any acts of mortal indiscretion these individuals may need to pursue for the discreet preservation of the priesthood, including blood atonement. Through all the years since I agreed to meet with this friend and listen to his story, I’ve always discounted its legitimacy.

    So now . . . . If I may be so bold, I’d like to ask Grandpa Chuck: “If there is indeed a Second Anointing temple ordinance, then what would be the mathematical probability that there may also be a Third Anointing ordinance?” And if so, perhaps Orrin Porter Rockwell may have been one of the first church members to have received this level of exaltation!

  32. John I would really like someone (podcast) to talk more in depth about the second anointing—the history and what it means –and the practice today. Its so bizarre and presumptious that they think they are perfect and beyond sin–and better than the humble little person unknown by the leaders. Was there ever a second annointing for a single unmarried woman? Also why hasn’t Tom been excommunicated?
    I think it is because of the second anointing

    Also I would like to hear A podcast about the source of the Book of Mormon. Specifically books written around the time of Joseph Smith about very similar stories. It was those stories that I believe gave Joseph Smith many of his ideas and made it clear to me it was a fabrication
    Please continue to give us information about the church that we can know the truth and make our own conclusions–even though I realize it is not true I am still surprised at the horrible lies it has taught and how it has twisted my thinking
    Thank you

  33. I would love to hear how Tom is doing now, a few years after this podcast is recorded. I listened to it about a year and a half ago and again now. My heart goes out to him and I sincerely hope he is well and even happier!

  34. Tom
    I heard your story a couple months ago on Mormom Think and enjoyed listening to it again. You have done an articulate job of expressing very abstract spiritual abuse at its deepest level. Thank you. I have also just dowloaded your 4 audio books “The Mormon Dilusion.” Your study and presentation of historical facts with careful footnotes is excellent and your attention to detail without embelishment is appreciated. Whether intentional or not I will also say that your British satire at times has me laughing out loud at the absurdity of what we allow our minds to hang onto as “sacred” and of God. The twists and turns to make the obsure, untrue and outrageous assertions the Church spins fit into some kind of resonance within our minds and beings shows the remarkable complexity of our survival instincts. The divide with your family has got to be painful no matter how it is viewed and for that please accept my sincerest wishes for as much peace in your heart as is possible.

  35. While working in a temple on a remodel I had an experience that led me to discover the small locked (unlocked and open at the time) room off the sealing room in the temple where they keep whatever items they use for this ordinance (they were locked away in the temple president’s office at the time). This was my first introduction to this ordinance being performed in the temple. Having access to temple blueprints around the world, I found that each and every temple has this small room with cabinets and a sink off of one of the sealing rooms.
    I determined at the time that I wanted to work to make my calling and election sure and receive the second anointing. I started searching on the web to find everything I could about the second comforter, the second anointing, washing of the feet, etc., and that is when I discovered Tom Phillips. This was the beginning of my end in Mormonism, though I didn’t know it at the time. About six months later I lost my faith and belief. As difficult as this has been, I agree wholeheartedly with Tom Phillips in this interview when he says, “I have never been happier!” Thank you so much for this very interesting and informative interview.

  36. Great interview and chemistry between you two! Would love to hear a more recent interview with Tom about the Thomas Monson law suit.

  37. Are there other accounts of individuals who have come forward and admitted receiving the second anointing? I’d be very interested to read those and learn more. If they exist, anyone know where I can read about them?

    1. Hi Heather,

      I know of others who have left after receiving the SA, but none to my knowledge have spoken of it, nor even admitted it.

      Maybe it has a strong hold on people. I certainly went through months of nightmares about being a son of perdition.

      Best wishes to you in your journey,
      Tom

  38. I finally got through all these podcasts and I just wanted to say thanks so much for your story and your courage. I loved the way you said things and it’s clear you are a person who tries hard and has a good heart. I’m sorry for your struggles and especially with your family. I have a good friend who has recently “lost” his family in the same way and he said it was very hard for him to listen to your story, and thank you for sharing it so that he doesn’t feel so alone. Thank you for sticking up for truth and for paving the way for those who follow! 🙂

  39. I heard about the second anointing ceremony years ago in the 1950’s-60’s before I left the church. I was raised in Orem-Provo area. After I went through the Manti Temple in 1962 for endowments and marriage, I never really bought into the temple ritual. It seemed farcical and ridiculous although I subsequently went with husband through the SLC temple, and Oakland temple. I left in 1970–was shunned by family and friends. I made a new life and have worked very hard raising a child by myself. I have never regretted leaving the church. It is so much easier now with the internet to get information than it was in 1970. Thanks for your posting. See my story on Youtube: Edy Meredith Testimony

  40. MSM are ridiculed for being claimers of “truth” yet as I read the comments I see dozens of truth claims. “welcome to the truth Tom”, “you are speaking the truth”, “I’m glad you have found the truth”, “You dont know the truth but I want you to tell me the truth Elder Holland”, “the BOM isn’t true and that is what is true”, “my kids haven’t been told the truth and I just want them to know its untrue”, “I’ve now discovered the truth and can’t believe MSM think they have the truth”, “I’ve felt the spirit a thousand times in my life and what they are feeling is no different than what they feel when they read a book of fiction”, “scientist know whats true and not people who have prayed and felt something they feel is true”. etc, etc, etc. MSM need to stop doing it too and claiming your truth is wrong.
    If your “truth” feeds you and nourishes you and inspires you to do good and love others, than run with that truth. If your truth discovery makes you angry at others truth then………..
    John is always a pro. Was interesting but another case of “I’ve found the truth and can’t believe they think its true”.

  41. A false claim is not truth.

    Correlated Church History is packed with false claims.

    There is a very long list. See cesletter.org for examples.

    You can feel “fed and nourished” by inspiring fiction. Much of the inspiring literature of human history is fiction. A problem arises when you make up a story (fiction) and then attempt with all of your might, mind and strength to convince others your fiction is historical fact. That is what Joseph Smith did.

    Joseph Smith was a liar, a fraud, and a con-artist. He was admittedly very talented at his chosen craft. World-class, to be sure.

    The Church is simply not true. That is a fact. The Church is NOT what it claims … with a straight face … to be.

  42. I was just reading a life sketch of my great grandfather and found out that he (and presumably both of his wives) received the 2nd anointing in 1930. That’s pretty interesting to me #1 because I’ve known about the 2nd anointing for many, many years but never realized I had any personal connection to it, #2 Because 1930 is very much a low point in terms of second anointings and very, very few were being administered in that time period, so it is interesting that that one took place during that time period (and #3 Because my great grandparents were old pioneers and had established a large polygamous family in Southern Utah starting in about 1875, but at best was a slightly prominent community member. He was by no means a State President or a Bishop, and certainly not a General Authority. He and his wives were called a missionaries to the St. George Temple at the time of the 2nd anointing.

    My point being, they were probably some of the very last who received the ordinance as–what it seems it was initially conceived as–members who had lived long, ordinary lives of membership and service. Sort of a capstone of a life lived in the Church, that was available to many if not all. Whereas nowadays it seems restricted to a small number of high leadership only.

    Per David John Buerger’s article, the period from 1930-1942 there were as few as eight 2nd anointings–making one that happened during this time period to an “ordinary person” interesting indeed: “At least one of these candidates was not approved until December 1942 when he recorded in his journal, ‘I have anxiously looked forward to this action. The records show that there have been 32,495 such blessings administered in the Church and that during the last 12 years there have been but 8 administrations. Thirteen of the 32 General Authorities have not had theirs and at least two others who have had them with their first wives have later wives not yet anointed to their husbands.'”

    FYI the reporter calls the ceremony the “second endowments” and the date of Spring 1930 could possibly be slightly off–just based on the reported ordination to High Priest by Joseph F. Smith in 1920 in the same document. (Joseph F. Smith died in 1918; the date might be wrong or it might have been Joseph Fielding Smith, who was an apostle in 1920.)

  43. I realize this is a necro -comments thread, but I cant help myself.
    ——————————————————————————–
    Apostle Jeffrey-R-floppy-jowls-Holland should have said :
    “Hey Tom, I’m not meant to say this, but I had a conversation with Jesus in the Temple , he said these are trials of faith”

    Why not!? If you’re in the business of deception, than surely anything goes!
    Problem solved and Tom would still be a member, albeit with a more severe bout of cognitive dissonance.
    He would also maintain the love and respect of his family of whom he unfortunately indoctrinated into a cult.

    The wonderful thing with religion is, they are nearly all immune from criticism when they get to a certain size.
    With that in mind, they should get people to culturally identify as being Mormon.
    Identifying as ‘Mormon’ needs to be as viral (or contagious) as adopting a fad diet, or spreading a social media challenge.

    This could be achieved in various ways, but not limited to:
    – dropping anything that is seen as a prohibitive barrier to joining the church;
    -making member’s religious commitments less reliant on ‘works’,
    – announce a plan to colonize a planet or moon in 50 years (it doesnt even have to be real people will do it).
    – make new doctrines based on what popularism, e.g. cannabis is good etc

    You know, Islam never became the force it is, until Mohammed decided to starting robbing caravans, raping, pilliaging and murdering, two decades later!
    Clearly people join religions not just for truth (substantive reasons), but for their idea of fun (functional reasons)!

    That’s all I got for now, I’m serious by the way, dont delete this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.