What did you learn in the temple today, honey?

[deacon blues]

When I first went through the temple in the 1970's I had a lot of false hopes built up by such comments as "The temple is the Lord's University," "You'll learn the whole purpose of life." and "Every time I go to the temple I learn something new."
When I went through the temple I was expecting to LEARN something like "why did God concoct this weird plan that kind of makes sense, but not really. They had me out the front door before I could stop and ask, "What happened?" Sadly the temple doors closed down all discussion of what was really going on. I couldn't stop and ask, "what were those weird penalties all about," etc.
So not only do you not learn anything but handshakes and new names, but you can't even talk about it.
Is that any way for a reasonable God to teach his children?

[alas]

I learned my first time through that I was not really a child of God, just the spouse of a child of God. He would inherit, and I was just the wife. I inherited nothing in my own name, and just got what my husband shared with me.

That is not to say that I actually comprehended that on the first time through. It was just what the heck just happened, and boy that treats men and women differently and what the heck it is all supposed to mean. But I felt the emotional jolt of it, even if I could not put into words that the temple ceremony made me the daughter in law of God. But I came out feeling like something gut punched me and I wasn’t really a child of God, but when I tried to verbalize it, I got gas lit by my own husband. “Oh, of course that isn’t what it means.” And it took me going back over and over to convince myself to believe the real words I was hearing in the temple and not what I was taught outside the temple. Husband and wives equal partners? Nope, I give myself to him and he owns me as property. I have no claim on him, just if he wants me he calls me by my secret (not so secret, because every woman going through that day knows it, so every man being married that day does too.) new name. I have zero “rights” in this marriage, and must obey him as he is supposed to obey God. It does not say obey him *IF* he obeys God, but “as”. I Covenant to obey him as he convents to obey God. Absolute obedience. That is what it actually said back in 1970. But all the women talk as if it says that I only obey him *IF* he obeys God.

Anyway, I learned I was worthless to God because I am female and he only cares about his sons. And if the son cares about his wife, fine. If not, then she is nothing. Might as well have been totally evil as have your husband not care about you, cause if he fails to call you into the CK, you just don’t get to go.

[Hagoth]

Anyway, I learned I was worthless to God because I am female and he only cares about his sons. And if the son cares about his wife, fine. If not, then she is nothing. Might as well have been totally evil as have your husband not care about you, cause if he fails to call you into the CK, you just don’t get to go.

That's a great point. I hope you appreciate how that is used against men too. Drink a cup of tea and condemn your entire family to loneliness in a lesser kingdom. Or just have them taken away "and given to another." Even if you wake up and realize your wife isn't property, Elohim is still going to take her away and make her someone else's property.

They have tried to soften the obedience to husbands language lately to make it appear otherwise. I guess my question is, was it incorrect back when Alas and I did the hokey-pokey, and now it's more correct? Was it really the will of God back then, or is it his will now? Or maybe it will finally be his will in a few years from now? Are women who made vows 100 years ago still obligated by those vows, or will they get to click the new user agreement box? What about women who were posthumously sealed to church leaders with no say in the matter?

Or is everything still the same under the hood and the church has just been pressured by critics into giving it a false veneer of greater equality, just to keep women attending? I haven't heard any changes about men not still being the priesthood authorities in the afterlife and women being be eternal spirit baby factories. Or women being subject to polygamous afterlife marriages, regardless of how they feel about it.

To the OP, my wife's poor friend has to report to her husband a new thing she learned every time she goes to the temple. And she goes a lot. What an unnecessary burden that must be. Seems kind of abusive to me.

[Mayan_Elephant]

To the OP, my wife's poor friend has to report to her husband a new thing she learned every time she goes to the temple. And she goes a lot. What an unnecessary burden that must be. Seems kind of abusive to me.

This is something that is a huge interest to me. Not abuse, and not the temple, and not learning. But the conditions and how they play out and how they are applied.

What is the most honest and authentic and true answer to the question in the title? Well, obviously, it is, "not a g**d**** thing." That is the truth, with the exception of about the first three visits. After that, if you are still learning, you are either ridiculous or slow.

So, what are the conditions then? The conditions applied to honey are that she not be real, that she not make herself or authenticity a priority. She has to shamelessly fake it for the benefit of someone or something else. Now, does it help her in a way to not be authentic and give away her own authenticity or intellectual independence? It may. Maybe she gets great shoes out of the deal. Hell if I know. But whatever control she has by not being in control, is a trade off she is making.

To some extent, we all D-bag it like this. Situationally, we all like being liked, even if it is just being liked for how we dress or what we drive or what groups approve our posts. Conditioning that sort of selfless and shameless imitation, or fakeassery, like the OP describes, is, to put it in alas's and other's words, abusive. Though, y'all know me by now. Authentically speaking, it is abusive AF.

[Ghost]

I took the learn something new every time thing to mean that you'd gain insights into your own life, as opposed to some new secret of the universe. I probably steered myself toward this understanding out of necessity for things to make sense, and I did find that if I mostly ignored what was going on or looked for small moments that would trigger thoughts about how I could improve myself or things I might need to focus on, I did often learn new things in a way.

I used to kind of wish that the temple experience was more about a quiet environment where "revelation" was more likely and less about staying busy. When I was a temple worker for a few years, I did have that quiet contemplative experience at times and it was nice. Maybe it came close to what people get out of meditation, which I've never tried.

[RubinHighlander]

I learnt I was in a cult!
But I couldn't call my dad because he's the one that got me into that mess. So I marched to that drum for much of my life.



But we both eventually escaped, thanks to the tender noodles of the FSM and other cosmic forces of good.

[wtfluff]

...
What is the most honest and authentic and true answer to the question in the title?
...

I've had this discussion during Sunday School at the St. Judas 1st ward.

Some of us have come to the conclusion that we did learn something in the Polygamy Palace LARP: How to change the fake Masonic costume from one shoulder to the next in the quickest way possible, and without any part or piece of the costume accidentally falling on the floor so as to avoid the wrath of the old dude in the white suit watching over the hokey-pokey.

Did I learn something new about the quick-change dance each time I attended? Maybe.

Did I EVER learn anything that actually helps improve life in reality? NO.

[moksha]

Why did Monty Python get to claim the Ministry of Walks, rather than being incorporated into the Temple ceremony?

[Cnsl1]

I learned a lot in the temple.

The first time through, I learned that it was a bit underwhelming and weird. I didn't learn anything new, really, except my new name and that pregnancy was painful for women because Eve ate the fruit first, but the second time I learned that Eve was the smarter one after all.

Then I learned shortcuts on how to change my robe from one shoulder to the other and not to tie my sash very tight the first time through. Then I learned how to do the costume flip pretty fast.

I also learned you can't just sit in the celestial room all day. And you can't talk very much with your friends in there.

I also learned that absolutely nobody ever takes Peter up on his offer to leave the session after it first starts.

Things I never learned:

If that's the true order of prayer, why do we only do it in the temple and what about that silly stand around in a circle with your elbow on a shoulder silliness while repeating a prayer makes it a true order?

How come Peter James and John can do the secret hand shake before they're born?

Ok then if all of it is symbolic, why do we have to repeat the passcodes perfectly?

Oh I did also learn that if you repeated the final long passcode quickly and confidently, you could make mistakes and the eager beaver with the mallet would never know.

Also.. why don't the guys smile when they are giving the tokens away? I thought this was the happy place.

[Just This Guy]

One thing that stood out to be when I first got my endowment in 2000 pre-mission, was just how much of a let down it was. It is hyped to such extent about how amazing it all was and i came out thinking that I had pretty much heard everything already and there was very little that was actually new.

Of course, Initiatory was super uncomfortable. I have never done that again.

As I would go back off and on. it was usually the same. Hoping for further light and knowledge and failing to find it.

Eventually when I got married, DW didn't like the endowment, but she couldn't articulate way. we ended up only going a small number of times. At the time we attributed it to the fact the temple was a 2.5 hour drive away, so super inconvenient to go to. After we both left, she was able to say just how uncomfortable it made her.

In a way it is all setup to be underwhelming. It is super hyped before hand. It's kinda like the Star Wars prequels. Nothing can live up to the hype that they put out for it. Between creepy and touchy old men* in Initiatory and a ceremony that is 80% a re-hash of stuff you have gotten countless times before, you are guaranteed to be disappointed. I do wonder if that is the plan. They want you to feel like it didn't live up to the hype and they can then tell you that it is your fault for being underwhelmed. The only solution is to keep going until you are not underwhelmed. In the mean time, put MORE time, energy, and money into supporting the very people who disappointed you.

*I can't and won't try to speak on what Initiatory is like for women. I just know I hated it.

[Red Ryder]

*I can't and won't try to speak on what Initiatory is like for women. I just know I hated it.

Did you get the celestial wiener grab too?

…and to think that was a normal part of the initiatory until 2005??? Like why in the world would anyone keep going and doing this on their own free will????????

I’ve been exactly one time! One time….

[wtfluff]

One thing that stood out to be when I first got my endowment in 2000 pre-mission, was just how much of a let down it was.
...

Yeah, I remember this too. I thought I was gonna learn the secrets of the universe the first time through.

Though it's been a L-O-N-G time, I do remember thinking the first time through: "That's It???" Of course there were lots of other thoughts, the the disappointment was huge.

And then I drank the Kool Aide and believed that there were lots of secrets to be learned, and went back over, and over, and over...

[alas]

I think now, it would be pretty underwhelming, pre 1990 it was too creepy to be underwhelming. I mean, for those of us who went through the first time when the penalties were still part of it, that was not underwhelming, but WTF. I hereby pledge to slit my throat rather than reveal……

My first time through I felt like I had just been initiated into the Gadianton robbers. After growing up hearing about the evils of secret combinations and being warned about any time any one asks you to swear to secrecy at the forfeit of your life, then those very people who warned you about how evil the Gadianton robbers were because of their secret oaths and combinations, then those very people who taught you how evil it was, they initiate you into a secret combination. THAT was not underwhelming at all.

And back then the sexism was much more blatant. That was also not underwhelming, but nauseating. Oh, so I am not really a child of God. Only males are actually children of God. Us females are just in laws. Not even in laws that God likes. Now that whole thing is kind of blurred and obfuscated.

But girls grow up in a world of “I hope they call me on a mission” and we have to learn to sort what applies to us as females and what only applies to the boys. I mean, I remember one lesson in primary where the teacher was rapturously describing how marvelous it was that *any child in the Mormon church, just anybody” could grow up to be prophet. I really hated to break it to her, but in her class of 14 girls and one boy, there was only one who could grow up to be prophet, the one boy. It was so stupid because things were often like that. And we girls had to sort out when things like “all men” meant all humans and when it just meant men. The teacher would read a scripture that said “men” and we were just sort of supposed to know if it meant mankind, or men. “Men are that they might have joy” of course, silly, that applies to you. And “men” to be ordained, no silly that doesn’t mean you. So, this in the temple was just one more thing like that. Being taught that “I am a child of God” doesn’t mean everybody silly. It just means the males, just like the song, “I hope they call me on a mission,” does not apply to girls, just boys. And that lesson on “anybody” could grow up to be prophet didn’t mean any body, just anybody male. Why was I not more surprised to find out that MEN inherit everything the Lord has, and of course his wife (wives) share those blessings with him.

[Hagoth]

I took the learn something new every time thing to mean that you'd gain insights into your own life...

But in reality, that's the LAST thing they want. What you're supposed to "learn" is additional conditioning about your lowly place in the chain of authority. Once you start to catch glimpses of your real self, outside of the church-dictated self, it's all over. How do I know? Look at where you are now!

[Hagoth]

Why did Monty Python get to claim the Ministry of Walks, rather than being incorporated into the Temple ceremony?

That's Britain's intentional rebellion against The International House of Handshakes. It harkens back to resentments about the way tea was disrespected in Boston Harbor.

[moksha]

That's Britain's intentional rebellion against The International House of Handshakes. It harkens back to resentments about the way tea was disrespected in Boston Harbor.

Can't help but think if those British gentlemen who made the Masonic ceremony had added a once-over-back-hop step, it would not only be part of the LDS signs and signals but an essential part of the nude clogging ceremony in the Temple.

[wtfluff]

[Just This Guy]

*I can't and won't try to speak on what Initiatory is like for women. I just know I hated it.

Did you get the celestial wiener grab too?

…and to think that was a normal part of the initiatory until 2005??? Like why in the world would anyone keep going and doing this on their own free will????????

I’ve been exactly one time! One time….

That was part of it. Also, due to a schedule issue, I got brought in just before shift change and it took them a while to get everyone together. So I got to hang around in nothing but the poncho for almost an hour. I'll give my dad credit, he pushed the staff to get their act together.

[nibbler]

I'll start off with a tangent. What is the policy for when a person is eligible to receive their endowment and is that policy different for men and women?

Back in the day when I received my endowment, women generally couldn't receive their endowment unless they were getting married or serving a mission. The policy could have been the exact same for men, if so I was unaware, the only reason I was getting my endowment was because I was about to serve a mission.

I wonder whether that policy has changed. Can people get their endowment simply because they want to or is it still a process where you can only get the endowment because you're doing something else that requires it (mission/marriage)?

I've never really thought of it before but the culture talks up the temple and temple ordinances are presented as required in order to make it into best heaven. Access to the ordinance is a method that could be used to incentivize people to jump through some hoops they might not otherwise jump through.

Want more kids on missions? Dangle the most spiritual thing to have ever happened, the thing that's talked up every Sunday, the thing that gets people oohing and aahing during conference, the very pinnacle of our religion... no silly, not Jesus, the temple; dangle access to the temple out there in front of kids. All they have to do to enter that magical place is serve that mission. Get out ahead of your peers and be the first to get into the cool kids club!

It's a cynical take. I'm good for those.

[nibbler]

I'm a convert, so I wasn't bone-weary of the Sunday School lessons by the time I went to the temple for my endowments. Sure, it was just a retelling of everything you hear during Sunday School, but it didn't elicit the, "not this again" reaction that it would elicit from me today.

I 110% bought into the hype of it all. I literally believed I was learning what I needed to learn to be allowed into heaven. The excitement of getting out from under the weight of not having an ordinance that was required for my salvation helped smooth over a lot of the rough patches and oddities of the temple ceremony. I also had some of that excitement about getting into the cool kids club that I mentioned in my other post.

I was warned ahead of time the initiatory would be uncomfortable. It was. Add me to the one and done club. I understand it's changed several times since I've done it, but I'm still not inclined to ever do it again. It left a lasting bad impression.

When I went through there was a very strong implication that parts of the endowment were literal. You better get the exact wording of the presentation at the veil correct, word for word, don't mess up by omitting the word "the" or sticking an extra "the" in someplace where it didn't belong. The literalness of the presentation at the veil got extended out to everything, which would later lead to the common question about Peter, James, and John having a body.

After leaving the temple I felt more special, which is probably the entire purpose of the temple. I also distinctly remember feeling like I was reentering the lone and dreary world when exiting the temple doors. Like I said, I bought into everything fully.

The temple was far enough away to where I only went once before my mission started. The MTC was where I got to go often, the expectation was that we go once a week on p-day. That's were I really started to get paranoid about memorizing the presentation at the veil. You sit through two hours of presentation to get a window of about 5 minutes to practice reciting the lines you need to convince the angles standing outside of club heaven to let you in. That paranoia alone drove a lot of my temple attendance post-mission. Gotta memorize that presentation and you only get one small window to even hear the words so you have to go back several times.

I was told people learned something new every time they went, so that's what I did. The temple can be a self-fulfilling prophecy that way. If you go in expecting to learn something new it increases your odds of squeezing a little more blood out of the temple turnip. Initially learning something new was measured in small progress with memorizing the veil presentation. Afterwards it became straining at symbolic gnats to create meaning wherever I could find it.

In one of my last visits I learned it's painful sitting on top of so much MST3K gold and not being able to whisper it to the person sitting next to you.