(Chris Detrick/The Salt Lake Tribune)
Posted on 01/20/2006 10:28:11 AM PST by TFFKAMM
Dan Brown clearly enjoys playing with legends, history, symbols and secrets. And readers' minds. In his best-selling novel, The Da Vinci Code, Brown wove all these - real and imagined - into a breathless mystery about Christianity, Mary Magdalene and the Divine Feminine that has spawned an industry of de-coders eager to separate fact from fiction.
Now that he has turned his attention to the mysteries of Freemasonry, the centuries-old fraternal order, the new book also might deal with Mormonism.
But rather than announce the Da Vinci sequel in a news release, Brown embedded tantalizing clues to its subject on the book's jacket. Written in typeface that is slightly larger and bolder than the rest (it requires a magnifying glass to find them all) are the words: is there no help for the widows son.
"O Lord, my God, is there no help for the widow's son?" was used historically as a Masonic distress call, but when journalist David Shugarts plugged it into Google, the first hit was a 1974 speech given by an LDS Institute of Religion teacher, Reed C. Durham, at the University of Utah.
Joseph Smith, the founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, reportedly began to utter the call as he fell from a second story window after being fatally shot by a mob in a Carthage, Ill., jail in 1844, Durham said.
In an electrifying presidential address to the Mormon History Association meeting in Nauvoo, Ill., he traced close parallels between Smith's account of digging gold plates out of a New York hillside and Masonic tales of Enoch and buried treasure. Smith wore a "Jupiter talisman," or what his wife called "his Masonic jewel," and LDS temple ceremonies bear a striking resemblance to Masonic rituals, he said.
The
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
The Winding Staircase, like all Masonic symbols, is illustrative of discipline and doctrine, and opens to us a wide field of moral and speculative inquiry. (Chris Detrick/The Salt Lake Tribune)
|
|
|
|
||
|
||
speech was so controversial that Durham's superiors in the LDS Educational System forced him to issue a public apology.
The speech was never published but was surreptitiously taped and has floated around on the Internet for years.
It may have also caught Brown's attention, Shugarts speculates, and may provide one plot twist in Brown's next book, tentatively titled The Solomon Key. Brown confirmed in a speech last year that the book's mystery will be set in Washington, D.C., where many architectural features were drawn from Masonry, and will feature the same lead character, Harvard-professor-turned-detective Robert Langdom.
Getting a jump on the novel's historical context, Shugarts has written Secrets of the Widow's Son: The Mysteries Surrounding the Sequel to The Da Vinci Code.
He provides a broad history of Mormonism, including its brush with Masonry in the 19th century. It also offers nuggets about Masonic history such as these: At least eight signers of the Declaration of Independence were Masons, as were 13 U.S. presidents including George Washington. A Freemason released Paul Revere from British custody on the night of his famous ride, after he determined that Revere was a Mason. Mozart's "Magic Flute" and Rudyard Kipling's The Man Who Would Be King were written as Masonic allegories.
The Washington Monument and a similar monument on Bunker Hill in Boston, were not just coincidentally shaped like an Egyptian obelisks, but intentionally designed to honor Masonic allusions to ancient Egyptian mystical wisdom.
Much of the symbolism is mathematical, even geometrical, which could explain why the fraternity has attracted rationalists such as Voltaire, Goethe, Benjamin Franklin and Mark Twain.
"We've heard from Masons
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
One of the rooms in the Temple. The Salt Lake Masonic Temple was completed in 1927 and was built in 1 year, 3 months, and 22 days. The architect of the temple was Carl W. Scott and George W Welch. (Chris Detrick/The Salt Lake Tribune)
|
|
|
|
||
|
||
that they feel that [Brown is] going to do them justice," says Dan Burstein, who wrote the introduction to Shugarts' book. "He seems to be favorably disposed to thinking of Masons as an important historical underground movement, pushing the world towards democracy and enlightenment."
Today there are nearly 2 million Masons in the United States, with 2,250 members in 29 Utah lodges.
"We have a lot of Mormons who are Masons in this state, but we don't know exactly how many," says Ridgley Gilmour, Grand Master of Utah Masonic Lodge. "Anyone with a belief in God can petition to join but we don't ask what religion they are."
Gilmour was adamant the Masonry is not a "secret society," but a fraternal order with large-scale charitable giving built on deeply held American values of family, God and country.
"The only secrets we have are little signs and passwords which we use because it's an ancient custom, and, frankly, it's fun,'' Gilmour says.
It remains to be seen how much Mormon history will feature in the novel, (Brown's wife reportedly was raised in the LDS Church) but if the reaction to Durham's 1974 speech is any indication, any link between the two could be controversial in Utah.
For his part, Nicholas S. Literski, an active Mormon and Mason living in Nauvoo, thinks Latter-day Saints misunderstand the similarities. But they are significant.
"Everybody wants to obsess over supposed similarities in ritual," he says. "But that's just one aspect. Everything about Joseph and his family was tied into Masonic legends."
The Mormon connection: Smith's father, Joseph Smith Sr. joined a Masonic lodge when the family moved to Palmyra,
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|||||
N.Y., in 1816. Later, Smith's brother Hyrum also joined. From them, Smith heard the story of a lost sacred word that was engraved upon a triangular plate of pure gold. The word was the name of God.
It makes sense that he would go searching for such treasure in the large American Indian burial mounds near his home, says Literski, author of the forthcoming book, Method Infinite: Freemasonry and the Mormon Restoration.
And when Smith reported finding an ancient record written on plates of gold, he used "distinctively Masonic language to describe the experience," Literski says.
The church, which claimed to restore ancient truths of Christianity lost through the ages, attracted many members of the Masonic fraternity who traced their own roots back centuries and had similar esoteric teachings.
By the 1840s, many Mormon leaders in Nauvoo, including Smith and apostles Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball, became Masons and organized a lodge there under the auspices of the Grand Lodge of Illinois. It wasn't long before nearly every male member of the church in the area had joined. At the same time, Smith introduced LDS temple rituals that included secret handshakes, signs and symbols like the all-seeing eye, the compass and square (tools of the mason's trade) and the sun, moon and stars that echoed Masonry.
Soon, though, other Masons felt that the Mormons were dominating the fraternity. In 1842, the Nauvoo Lodge was suspended. Many Mormons believed that Masons contributed to the murder of their prophet.
Antagonisms built up between the two groups. In Utah in 1860, Masonic lodges were established but they prohibited Mormons from joining. At the same time, Young forbade Mormons from joining and refused to allow any Mason to hold
priesthood leadership positions in the church, Literski says.
It wasn't until 1984 that LDS President Spencer W. Kimball removed the prohibition against Latter-day Saints becoming Freemasons. Later that year, the Grand Lodge of Utah removed its own ban on Mormon membership so that, in the ensuing years, many Latter-day Saint men have returned to this part of their heritage.
In the novelist's mind: Shugarts says it was not his intention to be a plot spoiler for Brown's sequel. He couldn't do that if he wanted. But he did offer a primer on Masonry and Mormonism for those who will want to explore, as they did with Da Vinci, just how much of what Brown writes is really history.
"I had to push out in every direction possible," Shugarts said in a phone interview from his Connecticut home. "I read five books about Mormon history and thousands of Internet Web sites. I tried to be thorough and fair."
Though he only dedicated four or five pages to Mormons in a 200-page book, he's already heard from unhappy Latter-day Saints who accuse him of misreading or a biased approach to LDS history, a charge he rejects.
"Prior to embarking on my research, I had no particular opinion of Joseph Smith or the details of the founding of the [LDS ]Church," he wrote to one critic. "But I had met a few Mormons and they always impressed me as fine people. After delving into the story of Joseph Smith, I understood a lot more about LDS. I remain impressed that Mormons are fine people."
It will be interesting to see if Brown sees them that way as well. Literski isn't worried.
"He'll weave a good conspiracy," Literski says, "but no matter how inventive Dan Brown gets in terms of the connection, he will fall short of just how deep
that story does go."
Even in Smith's day, there were Masons who believed the legends were historical truth and saw Freemasonry as a deeply spiritual, mystical quest. Other, more sophisticated members, discounted the old stories, wanting to refocus it along the lines of a charitable and benevolent institution.
The Smiths were about as far into mysticism as you can get, Literski says. "Joseph was rebuilding Solomon's temple with all the legendary baggage that came along with that."
Seeing the relationship between the two groups forces Mormons like Literski to revise his ideas about how God interacts with a prophet.
"You cannot understand what is going on in Joseph's mind unless you can know what he is seeing, hearing, feeling and touching," he says. "That gives me a stronger position of faith than would this idea that revelation is ex nihilo. Joseph was not a puppet."
---
Contact Peggy Fletcher Stack at pstack@sltrib.com or 801-257-8725. Send comments on this article to religioneditor@sltrib.com.
>>Simple question- How does the Book of Mormon square with
>>the final statement in Revelations?
A simple answer: Who cares? The book of Deuteronomy ends with a similar warning. The book of revelations was written before many of the other gospels, do we throw them out too? Books of scripture were separate books. (Kind of like the Nancy Drew series.) They were separate until compiled into a collection or Biblia (See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02543a.htm) The order they were placed in was subject to debate, until a “logical” solution was reached (Revelations was last because no one understood it.)
Um, Does that answer your question?
You mean were not Orthodox?
What does being "Orthodox" have to do with it?
If I believed the same as you do, I would go to your church.
Christ was a Jew, but he wasn't an Orthodox Jew. That is why he was Crucified.
Well actually it is the reference to Paul Bunyon and his Blue Ox. --- Wait that was a reference by me.
Oh well --- any old legend will do, --- Whatever it takes.
>> Mormons don't generally consider themselves Christians. They are Mormons.
Ask a Mormon… I guess you did, we are Christians.
“Christianity is the name given to that definite system of religious belief and practice which was taught by Jesus Christ in the country of Palestine, during the reign of the Roman Emperor, Tiberius, and was promulgated, after its Founder's death, for the acceptance of the whole world, by certain chosen men among His followers. According to the accepted chronology, these began their mission on the day of Pentecost, A.D. 29, which day is regarded, accordingly, as the birthday of the Christian Church.”
See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm
Oh well, at least there are enough people here, who can and will refute whatever peculiar things that Brown has decided to say about the Mason.
The peculiar things have already been refuted. That is why they have started making the smear by saying "legend has it..."
Anyone can make up a "legend" and since they made it up and knows what it is supposed to mean, they claim that you can't refute it.
It does no good to try to clarify anything. They don't want to hear it. They just want to stir things up.
>>you may well consider yourself same - however, LDS refusal to accept Christian
>>creeds accepted by all other Christian denominations certainly draws that into question
Protestant refusal to accept Catholic creeds accepted by all Catholics drew into question their Christianity by the Catholic church. Same story different actors, we say were Christians, but that is not good enough for you.
I went to the Methodist church several times while growing up (I liked to see what everyone else was doing) so, I'll say it in your language: I confess Jesus Christ to be my savior and redeemer, the only name under heaven through which mankind (myself included) can be saved. (Yes I mean Jesus Christ who was born of Mary, a virgin, in Bethlehem.) I truly believe what I have just read as do all the Mormons I know. If that isn’t good enough for you, I ask, who are you? Why should I care? Jesus is my Judge and I will have no other before him.
you may well consider yourself same - however, LDS refusal to accept Christian creeds accepted by all other Christian denominations certainly draws that into question
Dan(9698)
I read something like this on another post
Book of Mormon and the Bible fit nicely togather,
The Book of Mormon just does not agree with mainstream adaptation of the Bible!
That ridiculous "LEGEND HAS IT..." can be refuted, since anything made up, can and must be refuted by actual Masons, who know that no such "legend" exists. But yes, some people here refuse to take the facts of things, no matter how proven they are. An example of this is the Illuminati, which hasn't existed for centuries, but they use the "legend has it" as refutation. Silly sods...............
I don't recall ever hearing that he was excommunicated, so he was a "mormon" when he was executed.
He answered to a different Judge, and it is not for you or I to judge. He was Judged by Him who's judgement is just.
"A member in good standing like you should be able to gain access to records....In May 1961, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints posthumously reinstated Lee's membership in the church.
"It has been determined that he was not necessarily the
cause of the massacre, but a scapegoat. The one man that
took responsibility for the WHOLE Church...AND that
includes YOU it seems."
Proof? ...The reasons for the massacre are complex, but center around a wartime hysteria that had built up in Utah with the announcement in July 1857 that a federal army was en route to Utah to put down an alleged Mormon rebellion. Rumors also circulated that members of the Fancher party had stolen from the Mormons, poisoned their reservoirs, and boasted of their role in the assassination of Joseph Smith.
After the massacre, John D. Lee remained an active leader in Mormon affairs in southern Utah. However, by the late 1860s, questions about the massacre became more and more difficult to avoid, and in October 1870 Brigham Young excommunicated Lee from the Mormon Church for his role in the affair. Lee was the only one so punished and would later maintain that he became a scapegoat to take the public pressure off the more responsible Mormon leaders.
Visit this Utah history website http://www.media.utah.edu/UHE/l/LEE,JOHN.html
I'm sure however that even a historical site is not enough for you....You want the LDS rendition....Here it is...from the Church Apolegetics site FAIR http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/conf/2003SesG.html
...So it's okay now to talk about this but let's be honest, for years and years, this was a subject that we just didn't talk about and when we did we either said, 'Well that was John D. Lee and a bunch of renegade Indians,' or we'd try to ascribe it to some external force rather than to face the fact that some 50 Mormons taking orders from local ecclesiastical leaders actually went out and tricked these 120 people out of their encampment with a white flag and then proceeded to murder them in cold blood with the exception of 17 small children.
So it's a very, very hard thing to discuss especially if you're a Mormon and especially as I know some of you are descended from people who were involved in this.
The Church had a university in England run the Bible, the Book of Mormon and other scriptures through a computer program that analyzes and makes cross references to each other. The result is published in our scriptures as footnotes on the pages where the reference appears.
They do fit together and complement each other.
They had it done in England because BYU nor any other US university had the software to do the comparisons.
It certainly was not controlled by the Church, and you can get a copy of the scriptures with the foot notes in a book store.
There you go again making up legends. This is taught and discussed in Church History classes that are taught to High School aged students in Seminary class.
There is nothing in Church History that is not discussed at length.
That mormon bashing wasn't years ago. It still happens quite a bit. As I recall the last time I encountered it her at FR was fairly recently, within the past couple of months.
IF you would have followed the associated link it would have lead you to the Church site FAIR. Go back and try it again...It was a quote in the article.
Perhaps you are very afraid.
What they try to do is act like the Democrats and just open their mouth and let it spew out.
People have grown weary of trying to correct the "legends" and so the bashing is shorter lived.
I am weary of trying to discuss anything with Mormon Bashers.
It accomplishes nothing. If they want to learn what the church teaches, there are many books that were written by officials of the church who explain the doctrines.
All too often that phrase is just another way of saying: "In my opinion..."
And we all know that old phrase about opinions. ;-)
Dude, that was so wrong. Mormons DO INDEED consider themselves Christian. What you my be confused about is that Mormons don't condiser themselves Protestant or Catholic. The reason being that a protestant denomination is a split from the Catholic church. The Mormons don't consider theselves a split off of anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
