Note: This article is
chapter one from the author’s book A Ready Reply.
MASONRY AND THE
Michael T. Griffith
1994
@All Rights Reserved
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions
"Didn't
Joseph Smith borrow from Masonry when he composed the LDS temple endowment
ceremony?"
"How
can the Mormon temple be inspired when it contains Masonic elements?"
"How
can you explain the resemblances between Masonry and the LDS temple?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numerous
anti‑Mormon books and pamphlets have been written that document parallels
between Masonry and the Mormon temple.
These parallels consist of two general types: similarities between
Masonic ritual and LDS temple ceremonies (especially the endowment ceremony),
and parallels between Masonic symbols and Mormon temple symbolism.
In
addition, anti-Mormons point to the 1990 introduction of a new version of the
temple endowment as evidence against the ceremony because it does not contain
some of the Masonic elements and other items from the previous version. They insist that if the endowment were
inspired, no changes could be made in it.
What do
the Masonic parallels and the changes in the endowment prove? According to the critics, the parallels prove
that LDS temple ceremonies and symbolism are occultic and Satanic,
and were for the most part plagiarized from Masonry, while the changes
supposedly show the endowment to be a man‑made product subject to the
opinions and whims of the Mormon leadership.
Anti‑LDS
critics believe their case on the Masonic parallels is strengthened by the fact
that Joseph Smith and several other early Mormon officials became Masons during
the Nauvoo period.
Borrowing
from Masonry
I am
perfectly willing to grant that Joseph Smith borrowed from masonry in preparing
the symbolism and ordinances of the temple.
However, I do not accept the anti‑Mormon conclusion that this
borrowing summarily invalidates the temple and its ceremonies. Logically and historically speaking, the
temple's symbolism and ordinances are not automatically discredited because
Joseph employed some Masonic elements to express the sacred rites and concepts
that the Lord revealed to him.
There is
evidence that Masonic ritual is derived from earlier sources that contained
remnants of true temple worship. This
evidence includes similarities between elements of Masonic ritual and certain
early Christian initiation rites. Anti‑Mormons
avoid any discussion in this area.
Critics
also tend to ignore the fact that Joseph Smith assigned new meanings to
virtually all of the Masonic elements he used and placed them in Christ‑centered
contexts far removed from their original setting.
In doing
so, Joseph Smith was not alone. In
similar fashion, the ancient Hebrews employed many pagan religious designs and
texts, and assigned new meanings and contexts to them. So did the early Christians.
For
example, scholars have pointed out that the very design of Solomon's temple was
"characteristically Phoenician" and "somewhat reminiscent of
Babylonian shrines" (
Moreover,
the Mosaic tabernacle was "very close in most essentials" to various
pagan Egyptian portable structures, including the Egyptian "Tent of Purification"
(Kitchen 9‑13; Reisner and Smith 13‑17; McDowell 110‑111). And yet, according to Exodus 25‑30, it
was Yahweh Himself who instructed the Israelites on how to build the
tabernacle.
As is
well known, there are numerous striking similarities between the Law of Moses
and various earlier pagan legal codes, such as the Code of Eshnunna, the
Code of Lipit‑Ishtar, and the Code of Hammurabi (Harrison 59‑61;
Pritchard 162‑169). Even the
literary format of the Law, as it is presented in the book of Exodus, parallels
the format used in earlier pagan codes of the ancient Near East (Achtemeier
1985:549). Virtually all Bible scholars
have noted that the Law of Moses seems to have been patterned after pagan
codes. Does this mean the Law was not
inspired? If we were to follow anti‑Mormon
reasoning, we could very well answer in the affirmative. But many scholars disagree and note that
there are also differences between the Mosaic Law and the pagan codes.
One of
the most popular symbolic types of the resurrection among the early Christians
was the phoenix bird, a pagan symbol. I
quote Robin Lane Fox:
Among pagan men of letters, the phoenix had long exerted a
particular influence. It created itself
from its own ashes and united the mystery of a home in
References
to the phoenix are widespread in early Christian literature (Fox 639‑641;
Roberts and Donaldson 1:12, 3:554, 7:324, 441).
In fact,
the early church used several representations that were either used by pagans
or acceptable to them. Christians of all
persuasions might be interested to know that the image of the Good Shepherd carrying
his sheep was a pagan symbol, as were other images that the ancient church
employed. I quote Henry Chadwick:
. .
. before the end of the second century Christians were
freely expressing their faith in artistic terms. Tertullian mentions cups on which there were
representations of the Good Shepherd carrying his sheep. Clement of
Another
conventional pagan symbol which the Christians adopted was the Orante (also
called Orans), a veiled female figure with her hands uplifted in prayer
(Chadwick 278; Snyder 19-20). The Orante
had long been used as a pagan cultural symbol, and it appeared on Roman coins
and in sepulchral art.
The point
is that the ancient saints used pagan symbols that could be given new,
Christian meanings. I again quote Chadwick:
Early
Christian paintings first appear not in churches but as funerary decoration in
the Roman catacombs. The style of
painting is not dissimilar to that found on many ordinary pagan houses at
So what
does all of this mean? Do we therefore
reject Solomon's temple? Do we repudiate
the Mosaic tabernacle? Do we spurn the Law of Moses? Do we denounce the early Christians? After
all, surely God would not allow true prophets to use such repugnant pagan stuff
to build sacred structures or to express His sacred truths? Right? Of course not. The plain fact of the matter is that prophets
of God have frequently drawn on the symbols and literature of their cultural
environment to express sacred truth.
The
Changes in the
The anti‑Mormon
view of the changes in the endowment is based primarily on a fundamentalist
understanding of scripture and of how God interacts with His prophets. Anti‑Mormons are scandalized that
modern LDS prophets would claim the authority to alter a ceremony which was
allegedly revealed by God to the Prophet Joseph Smith.
However,
the anti‑Mormon position is unreasonable in light of the fact that Bible
prophets exercised similar authority with regard to scripture and to certain
revealed ceremonies.
If anti‑LDS
critics are disturbed by the changes in the endowment, are they equally upset
over the well‑known fact that Mark and Luke deliberately downplayed
Pilate's role in Jesus' execution in order to avoid offending their Roman
audience? To this day, Jewish critics
assail Mark and Luke on this point (Levine 26‑27; Cohn 164‑190).
Are anti‑Mormons
shocked that the authors of the New Testament Gospels took the liberty of omitting
or correcting items from each other's writings that might have seemed offensive
or inconsistent to their readers? Some
Bible commentators consider this to be proof that the Gospels aren't inspired,
while other scholars more correctly see this as clear evidence that the ancient
Christians simply did not have a fundamentalist view of scripture (Levine 25‑28,
65‑93; Wilson 32‑50, 137‑139; Cohn; Achtemeier 1980:57‑75;
Barr 1‑50, 98‑147; Davis; Abraham).
If anti‑LDS
critics see the changes in the endowment as evidence against the temple, do
they similarly call into question the ancient Hebrew faith because of the
changes in Hebrew worship which Ezekiel was obliged to make as a result of the
Babylonian captivity? Because of these
changes, the Hebrews ceased to observe certain "eternal" rites which
Jehovah had previously commanded them to observe (Harrison 267‑268;
Achtemeier 1985:80, 305‑306, 1014, and the scriptural passages cited
therein).
Joseph
Smith's View of Masonry and the Differences Between
Masonry and the Endowment
Two
relevant topics that rarely if ever receive serious consideration in anti‑Mormon
literature are (1) Joseph Smith's view of Masonry, and (2) the many differences
between the endowment and Masonic ritual.
Anti‑LDS critics often avoid the fact that Joseph Smith saw
Masonic ritual as a corrupt form of a true original. And anti-Mormons are virtually silent on the
numerous differences between Masonry and LDS temple rites. I think it would be useful at this point to
quote what some other LDS writers have said on these subjects. Eugene Seaich:
The
relationship between Freemasonry and the LDS temple Endowment has long been a
matter of speculation amongst students of Mormon history. Joseph Smith was of the opinion that Masonic
ritual was a corrupt form of the original Priesthood; but since the Masons
themselves make no claim to have existed prior to the time of the great
cathedral builders, anti‑Mormons have argued that similarities between
the two must be the result of deliberate plagiarism on the part of the
Church. Very seldom, however, do they
think to ask whether Masonic ritual itself might be derived from earlier
sources, particularly traditions surviving from the
More
remarkable still is that the Prophet not only claimed to recognize in Masonry
survivals of ancient temple practice, but that he dared to correct what he
found, offering in its place what he said was the uncorrupt prototype. Thus, while Mormon temple ritual indeed bears
some resemblance to Freemasonry, it also differs in significant points, showing
that Joseph Smith had his own ideas about the proper form of the original. Today it is becoming possible to compare his
insights with newly recovered material dealing at first hand with early temple
traditions. (1984:1)
If
the Freemasons happened to pick up surviving fragments of ... [the] ancient
temple scheme, it is only proof that such worship actually existed on the earth
at one time. The famous Mystery Plays of
the Middle Ages also preserved elements of the temple
scheme, with their cycles of didactic [instructional] OT stories repeated on
major holy days for the edification and instruction of the masses. "Every man," for example, was but
another "Adam" or "
We
have no idea how many different ways God may employ to inspire men to the work
he intends them to perform; but it is undoubtedly providential that Joseph
Smith came into contact with both the Book of Abraham facsimiles and
Freemasonry at a time when he was required to restore the original temple
scheme in all its detail. . . . Joseph Smith knew far more than the Masons,
whose rites are but scattered clues to a larger, more perfect picture.
(1983:75)
Ian Barber:
As
revealed to the prophet, the endowment ordinance, as Mormons have realized from
the beginning, was at least partially influenced by the ritual language of
Masonry with which Joseph was intimately familiar. Recent analysis confirms that the effect on
Joseph Smith and the early Mormons of Freemasonry as an important culture
contributor is undeniable. . . .
I
trust that . . . the reader is well aware of the plausibility‑‑in
fact, the necessity‑‑of God using a local and familiar cultural
medium through which to reveal truth. As
Elizabethan English (personally comfortable to Joseph and to his contemporaries
as "scriptural language") provided the medium for the new
revelations, so masonry provided an organizational model on which a divine and
holy ritual (the endowment) could be readily assimilated and understood. That there are resemblances . . . only
validates the scripturally sound principle that God's commandments are given
after the manner of the "weakness of men." . . . Thus Heber C.
Kimball wrote to Parley P. Pratt in
To
those who know both the endowment and the masonic order, it is quite apparent
that the latter provides only certain superficial aspects of the form of the
LDS temple rite, and certainly little of the deep and intricate theological
truths. . . . (G/4‑H/1)
Early Christian Evidence
The
striking resemblance between the temple endowment and the early Christian rite
of initiation is strong evidence that Joseph Smith did indeed restore the
original ancient temple scheme.
The
ancient Christian initiation rite appears to have been a conflation of the
temple endowment with the ordinance of baptism.
Non‑members were not permitted to view the rite, and in most cases
it was not administered to a person until he or she had been a believer for at
least one year. The rite was sometimes
referred to as "the mystery," and the things involved therein were on
occasion called "the mysteries."
During
the rite of initiation, the candidate could be taught certain "higher
teachings" which were reserved only for members who were deemed ready and
worthy to receive them. Extra‑scriptural
higher teachings are mentioned by several early Christian bishops and
apologists. For example, Clement of
Alexandria (A.D. 150‑215), a prominent theologian in the early church and
head of the Christian academy in Alexandria, stated that these higher teachings
were not included in Christ's public preaching but were transmitted unwritten
by the apostles and were given only to church members who were qualified to
receive them (MaGill 47). Clement
declared that these sacred teachings were the key to entering into the
"highest sphere" of heaven (MaGill 47).
The rite
of initiation also included the administering of sacred signs and tokens,
Garden‑of‑Eden scenes in the background, the rebuking of Satan with
upraised arm, the wearing of sacred white clothing (some of which had markings
identical to those on LDS temple garments), and the anointing of various parts
of the body with oil.
Of
course, the sacred nature of the temple prevents me from explaining the
significance of these items in relation to the endowment. However, suffice it to say that any Latter‑day
Saint who has been to the temple will immediately see the significance of these
things.
For those
who would like to learn more about the early Christian rite of initiation and
the extra‑scriptural higher teachings which accompanied it, I would
suggest they consult the research that has been done on this subject by Seaich
(1983:56‑75; 1984), Stephen E. Robinson (96‑103), Hugh Nibley,
Blake Ostler, William Hamblin, Roger J. Adams, and Darrick Evenson (71‑101).
Conclusion
When
discussing Mormonism and Masonry, anti‑LDS critics fail to deal with
evidence which qualifies or disproves their arguments. Many of the criticisms they advance against
the temple can also be made against ancient Hebrew and early Christian worship.
Anti‑Mormons
have yet to explain the impressive parallels between the LDS endowment ceremony
and the early Christian rite of initiation.
The early church's initiation rite provides evidence for the divine
origin of the LDS temple endowment.
Joseph
Smith saw in Masonry remnants of the original temple scheme. He therefore thought it appropriate and
helpful to employ some Masonic elements to express the true original as it had
been revealed to him by the Lord. This
in no way detracts from the beauty and inspiration of the temple.
In
employing Masonic elements, the Prophet Joseph assigned new meanings to almost
all of them and placed them in theological contexts far removed from their
original setting.
Although
there are some similarities between Masonry and the Mormon temple, there are
also many differences. Furthermore,
Masonic ritual does not possess the intricate theological depth that is present
in LDS temple ceremonies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Michael T. Griffith holds a Master’s degree in Theology from The
Catholic Distance University, a Graduate Certificate in Ancient and Classical
History from American Military University, a Bachelor’s degree in Liberal Arts
from Excelsior College, and two Associate in Applied Science degrees from the
Community College of the Air Force. He
also holds an Advanced Certificate of Civil War Studies and a Certifcate of
Civil War Studies from
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Achtemeier, Paul, editor.
HARPER'S BIBLE DICTIONARY.
1985.
-----. THE INSPIRATION OF
SCRIPTURE.
Adams,
Roger J. THE
ICONOGRAPHY OF EARLY CHRISTIAN INITIATION.
Alcalay,
Reuben. THE COMPLETE
HEBREW-ENGLISH DICTIONARY.
Anderson, Bernhard W, editor. CREATION IN THE OLD
TESTAMENT.
Anderson,
Richard Lloyd. UNDERSTANDING
PAUL.
Angus, S. THE MYSTERY
RELIGIONS: A STUDY IN THE RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY.
Arrington, Leonard J. and
Bacchiocchi,
Samuele. WINE IN THE BIBLE.
Barber,
Ian. WHAT MORMONISM ISN'T: A RESPONSE TO
THE RESEARCH OF JERALD AND SANDRA TANNER.
Barker,
James L. APOSTASY FROM
THE
Barker,
William P. WHO'S WHO IN CHURCH HISTORY.
Barlow,
Phillip. "Unorthodox Orthodoxy: The
Idea of Deification in Christian History."
In SUNSTONE, September/October 1983. 13-18.
Barr,
James. BEYOND FUNDAMENTALISM: BIBLICAL
FOUNDATIONS FOR EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANITY.
-----. HOLY SCRIPTURE: CANON, AUTHORITY,
CRITICISM.
Barrett,
Ivan J. JOSEPH SMITH
AND THE RESTORATION. Revised Edition.
Barth,
Markus. EPHESIANS 1-3. The Anchor Bible. Garden City,
Beitzal,
Barry. "The Right
of the Firstborn in the Old Testament." In W.C. Kaiser and R.F. Youngblood, editors, A TRIBUTE TO GLEASON
ARCHER: ESSAYS ON THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Benz, Ernst
W. "Imago Dei: Man in the Image of
God." In Truman Madsen, editor,
REFLECTIONS ON MORMONISM: JUDAEO-CHRISTIAN PARALLELS.
Black,
Matthew. THE SCROLLS
AND CHRISTIAN ORIGINS.
Brown,
Raymond E. THE
EPISTLES OF JOHN. The Anchor Bible.
Garden City,
-----, and Joseph Fitzmyer, and Roland Murphy, editors. THE JEROME BIBLICAL
COMMENTARY. Two
Volumes.
Brown,
Bruce,
F.F. THE BOOKS AND THE
PARCHMENTS. Third
Edition. Westwood, New Jersay:
Fleming H. Revell Company, 1963.
Buchanan,
George Wesley. TO THE
HEBREWS. The
Anchor Bible. Garden City,
Carson,
D.A., editor. FROM SABBATH TO LORD'S
DAY: A BIBLICAL, HISTORICAL, AND THEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION.
Carver,
James. "Answering An Ex-Mormon Critic."Mormon
Miscellaneous Response Series.
Cherbonnier,
Craig,
William L. KNOWING THE
TRUTH ABOUT THE RESURRECTION.
Chadwick,
Henry. THE EARLY
CHURCH. Penguin
Books Edition.
Eissfeldt,
Otto. "El and
Yahweh." In
JOURNAL OF SEMITIC STUDIES, volume 1, 1956. 25-37.
Eusebius. THE HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FROM CHRIST TO
Evenson,
Darrick. THE
GAINSAYERS.
Falwell,
Jerry, executive editor.
Fiorenza,
Elisabeth S. "1
Corinthians." In James L. Mays, editor, HARPER'S BIBLE COMMENTARY.
Foerster,
Werner. THEOLOGICAL
DICTIONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 9 volumes.
Fox,
Frangopoulos,
Athanasios S. OUR
ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN FAITH.
Furnish,
Victor Paul. "The
Letter of Paul to the Colossians."
In Charles Laymon, editor, THE INTERPRETER'S
ONE-VOLUME COMMENTARY ON THE BIBLE.
-----. II CORINTHIANS. The Anchor Bible. Garden City,
Geisler,
Norman. THE
Gonzalez,
Justo L. A HISTORY OF
CHRISTIAN THOUGHT. Volume 1.
Grant,
Robert M. GODS AND THE
ONE GOD.
Griggs, C.
Wilfred, editor. APOCRYPHAL
WRITINGS AND THE LATTER-DAY SAINTS.
-----. "The Origin and
Formation of the Corpus of Apocryphal Literature." In C. Wilfred Griggs,
editor, APOCRYPHAL WRITINGS AND THE LATTER-DAY SAINTS.
Gunkel,
Hermann. "The Influence of
Babylonian Mythology Upon the Biblical Creation
Story." In
Bernhard W. Anderson, editor, CREATION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.
25-52.
Hamblin,
William. "Aspects
of an Early Christian Initiation Ritual." In John Lundquist and
Stephen Ricks, editors, BY STUDY AND ALSO BY FAITH. Volume 1.
Hamerton-Kelly, R.G.
PRE-EXISTENCE, WISDOM, AND THE SON OF MAN.
Hayman,
Peter. "Monotheism--A
Misused Word in Jewish Studies?"
In the JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES, Spring 1991. 1-15.
Hoskisson,
Paul. "Another
Significance of the Golden Calf Motif." In John Welch, editor,
TINKLING CYMBALS.
Hanson,
Paul. "War,
Peace, and Justice in Early
Hurtado, Larry
W. ONE GOD, ONE LORD: EARLY CHRISTIAN
DEVOTION AND ANCIENT JEWISH MONOTHEISM.
Jackson,
Kent P. "'Watch and Remember': The
New Testament and the Great Apostasy."
In John M. Lundquist and Stephen Ricks, editors, BY
STUDY AND ALSO BY FAITH. Volume 1.
Jerome. THE HOMILIES OF
Jones,
Edward T. "A
Comparative Study of Ascension Motifs in World Religions." In Spencer J. Palmer, editor,
DEITY AND DEATH (Provo, Utah:
Brigham Young University, Religious Studies Center, 1978). 89-99.
Kee, Howard
Clark. JESUS AND GOD'S
NEW PEOPLE.
Kelly,
J.N.D. EARLY CHRISTIAN
DOCTRINES. Revised
Edition.
Kimball,
Spencer W. FAITH PRECEDES THE
MIRACLE.
Klausner,
Joseph. THE MESSIANIC
IDEA IN
Kluger, Rivkah Scharf.
SATAN IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. Translated by Hildegard
Nagel.
Lemche,
Niels Peter. ANCIENT
Magill,
Frank N. MASTERPIECES
OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE.
Martin,
Ralph P. WORSHIP IN THE EARLY
CHURCH.
Mays, James L., general editor. HARPER'S BIBLE COMMENTARY.
McConkie,
Bruce R. DOCTRINAL NEW
TESTAMENT COMMENTARY. Volume 1.
-----. THE PROMISED MESSIAH.
McConkie,
Joseph Fielding. HIS NAME SHALL BE
JOSEPH: ANCIENT PROPHECIES OF THE LATTER-DAY SEER.
-----. "Joseph Smith as Found
in Ancient Manuscripts." In Monte S. Nyman,
editor, ISAIAH AND THE PROPHETS.
-----. "Premortal Existence,
Foreordinations, and Heavenly Councils." In C. Wilfred Griggs, editor, APOCRYPHAL
WRITINGS AND THE LATTER-DAY
SAINTS.
1986. 173-198.
-----, and Robert F. Millet.
SUSTAINING AND DEFENDING THE FAITH.
McDowell,
Josh. THE RESURRECTION
FACTOR.
Meservy,
Keith. "Discoveries
at
-----. "Ezekiel's
Sticks." In
the ENSIGN, September 1977. 22-27.
Migne,
J.P., editor. PATROLOGIAE GRAECA. 161 volumes.
Millet, Robert
L. BY GRACE ARE WE SAVED.
-----, and Joseph Fielding McConkie. SUSTAINING AND DEFENDING THE FAITH.
-----, and Joseph Fielding McConkie. THE LIFE BEYOND.
Milne, Mary
K. "