On John Ratcliff's blog, one of the commentors on a recent post of his made a speculative statement about Brigham Young (the second president of the Mormon church) which I found to be a rather unstudied and inaccurate statement.
In order to not hijack Brother Ratcliff's thread, I'd like to move this particular discussion over to this blog so that his thread can remain on-topic. Yes, this subject has been done over and over in many places. But here it is again.
First, I'd like to refer anyone to read The Mormon Church and Freemasonry by Terry Chateau. From my point of view, having experienced both groups thoroughly, and studied and poured over the history of both ad nauseum, I find Terry's treatment of the subject to be mostly accurate, however basic it is.
Next, I'd like to point out that this post is intended for Freemasons, which is why I posted it on my Masonic blog. I hope not to draw in a large Mormon crowd to this post. To those Mormons who do show up, and who aren't either Masons or true scholars of Masonic history, I would rather see you over at one of my other, religious themed, blogs. I don't mean any harm by this, but I'm just trying to keep the noise level down on this post except for those who have direct experience in the subject.
In spite of my experience level, at this point, my opinion is one desirous of historical accuracy and indifference on the subject.
Well, thats it for now!
Steps to the Endowment.
1 year ago