Tuesday, August 4, 2009

New Restorationist Sect Chartered: The Church Of The Firstborn Westwood Claims The LDS Church's Temple Endowment Ceremony Is Wrong


A new breakaway LDS Restorationist group is in business. The Church of the Firstborn Westwood has been granted corporate status by the State of California. Their primary grievance is that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not present the Temple Endowment in the same way as Joseph Smith intended, so they believe they have been "called out" from among the LDS people to "restore" the original ordinance. And they're looking to build a temple...in Utah. So far, there's been no reaction from the mainstream LDS Church, and there's unlikely to be any reaction. Pictured at left, the church's Prophet-Leader, Dr. Randall Larsen

Their full press release, posted HERE and also published on Pravanue.com, has been cross-posted below:

For_Immediate_Release:

(Free-Press-Release.com) August 3, 2009 --
The Church of the Firstborn Westwood, a break-off from the LDS Church, was today granted corporate status by the State of California. The new and well-financed church plans to build Mormon Temples worldwide starting in Utah and California. The purpose will be “to present the Temple Endowment untampered as the Prophet Joseph intended.” The church currently has a 30 million dollar budget to build one Temple in Utah. Representatives are looking at potential sites near Salt Lake City.

To learn more visit the church's yahoo group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Church_of_the_Firstborn_Westwood

Church spokesperson Louisa Beaman answered the following questions about the new church:

Q: How do you regard the LDS church​ and LDS leaders?
A: Our view is that the LDS Church is tasked with teaching first principles to the world at large along with administering the first saving ordinances such as Baptism for the remission of sins to those who request this work. Unfortunately, the LDS church has rejected the Temple Endowment as restored by the Prophet Joseph Smith so the Father has taken the Keys to direct the administration of this blessing away from the LDS leaders and has given those Keys to a people called out of the LDS people.

As the prophet Joseph tells us “the ordinances must be kept in the very way God has appointed, otherwise their priesthood will prove a cursing instead of a blessing.” The LDS leaders have rejected “major indexical gestures” in the temple ordinances. This rejection disqualifies those leaders from holding the directing keys to those ordinances inasmuch as "they obey not mine ordinances" thus saith the Lord. For example the initiatory washing of parts of the body cannot be performed as a “symbolic only” washing any more than Baptism by immersion could be performed without the total immersion of the person in the waters of baptism. The “indexical gesture” of washing each part of the body is lost--the “indexical gesture” essential to making the covenant is lost.

In addition LDS leaders have rejected the law of adoption restored by the prophet Joseph. This sealing ordinance is essential to connecting those of this generation back through the Prophet Joseph to Peter and Jesus and our progenitors in the Priesthood back to Adam. According to Brigham Young this ordinance is the means to make us lawful heirs “to bring us back to God.”

The Priesthood that was restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith is greater than the LDS Church and thus the Priesthood directs other organizations not connected with the LDS Church. The Church of the Firstborn Westwood is a Priesthood organization or Holy Order that by revelation from the Father is now commissioned to direct the administration of the Father's Temple ordinances.

Q: What is the source of your authority to found the Church of the Firstborn Westwood?
A: Our prophet Randall Larsen holds the keys of the Priesthood by Lineage and by blood.

###

For more information:
2355 Westwood Blvd 166 Los Angeles, CA 90064-2109


The LDS Endowment website provides a history of the practice of initiatory washing. Originally, initiates were presented to the washing room nude. Water and oil were generously applied while the initiate sat in a tub. Sometime in the early twentieth century, it became customary for initiates to wear a "shield," a sleeveless robe open at the sides. The shield preserved modesty while allowing officiators to touch the various parts of the body named in the rite. At this time, the washing and anointing became more symbolic: officiators merely dabbed a little water and oil on each part of the body while the initiate sat on a stool, clothed in the shield. The temple garment was placed on the initiate under the shield following the washing and anointing.

Despite the increased modesty, the twentieth-century initiatory remained a physically intimate rite, requiring officiators to touch initiates on the center of the sternum (while blessing the "breast"), on the lower back near the kidney (while blessing the "vitals and bowels") and on the side near the hip (while blessing the "loins"). These gestures were facilitated by the shield's being open at the sides.

Beginning in 2005, initiates were instructed to clothe themselves in the garment in the privacy of their locker, before being presented at the washing room. This means that they are clothed throughout the initiatory. As before 2005, initiates wear a shield during the initiatory, but this is now worn over the garment. But the 2005 revision eliminated the touching of the various body parts. Officiators pronounce the same blessings as before, but they do so while laying hands on the initiate's head. The washing and anointing have thus become even more symbolic than in the twentieth century, with water and oil being applied only to the forehead or crown. Because officiators no longer wash or anoint other parts of the initiate's body (which is covered by the garment), the shield is now closed at the sides.

Consequently, if the Westwood sect wants to restore the endowment exactly as Joseph Smith envisioned it, I would assume they would want people to undergo it stark naked, and have the applicable body parts actually touched, washed, and anointed. This practice has actually alienated a few LDS people in the past; some who eventually left the Church cited this practice as a cause of their departure.

Update August 6th: Regarding the modesty issue, in a comment, Dr. Randall Larsen stated, "I have no objection to providing for modesty (shields will be used) or economy of motion (pre-1990 washing and not bathtub bathing). We are seeking revelation on whether to use the long garment in the temple (ankle length)".

The editor of the pro-LDS SpamLDS website, Greg West, is understandably a bit skeptical of this group, asking "I wonder how long it'll be before they're publishing anti-Mormon literature?" Mind you, I don't normally like to start religious wars with Restorationist sects on this blog, since the LDS Church itself was once persecuted, but one has to wonder why they're breaking away from the mainstream LDS Church over this issue. I could understand them breaking away if they actually had some serious differences with the mainstream LDS, but over an Endowment ceremony?

This seems like an example of the scriptural verse about "assuming a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof". This is Talmudic.

As for the Westwood Prophet-Leader Randall Larsen, research indicates that this appears to be the same Randall Larsen who is the personnel manager for Randall Larsen Management (same street address, although city erroneously identified as Honolulu) and Randall Larsen Productions. Politically, he identifies himself as a liberal.

10 comments:

randall said...

Comment from Randall Larsen, Prophet Leader of the Church of the Firstborn Westwood.

Thanks for the writeup and explanation of temple endowment changes.

Those changes are not our only beef with the leaders of the LDS church.

In addition the leaders have neglected the law of adoption or sealing of PH holders to a line connected with the Prophet Joseph.
According to Brigham Young this is essential to "bring us back to God" as legal heirs. It constitutes sealing to our progenitors in the Priesthood Joseph, Peter, Jesus, Moses, Elijah
and the list in D&C 84:6-17 back to Adam the first to hold the keys to spirtual blessings.

In addition I Randall Larsen claim the birthright to hold the keys of the fulness of the Priesthood by lineage and by blood. I(D&C section 84:6-17). The claim traces back through an adopted son of Brigham Young (Joshua Sawyer Holman), Brigham Young, Brigham Young's father John Young, the Prophet Joseph, Peter, and Jesus connecting through Jesus to our progenitors in the Priesthood Moses and Elias. We note that Brigham Young disclosed the fact that he was the adopted birthright son of the Prophet Joseph at a family meeting attended by many of the LDS twelve apostles in February 1847:
“I am entitled to the Keys of the Priesthood according to linage [I am my fathers
son] & Blood [my father is adopted to Joseph Smith who had the birthright to the
presiding Keys by blood]. So is Brother H. C. Kimball & many others [who have
been adopted to Joseph's birthright line] Have taken Kingly power & grades of
the Priesthood. This we would have taught in the Temple if time had permitted.
Joseph Smith was entitled to the Keys of the Priesthood according to Blood.
Still He was the [p.132] fourth son. But when we get another Temple built then
we will teach you concerning those things.

Suffice it to say that I will extend the Chain of the Pristhood [by adoption]
back through the Apostolic dispensation [Peter] to Father Adam just as soon as I
can get a temple built [a temple is needed to perform adoptions since its a
higher ordinance than the sealing of a man to a woman or 2nd anointings].”

In addition July 20, 2009 I received a revelation that the keys
of the Priesthood had been given to me. Since this is a thus saith the Lord revelation it is binding
on the LDS people and on the world.

quote:

A Revelation recorded August 4, 2009 7:00 P.M. Thus saith the Lord:

1.Inasmuch as the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints obey not mine ordinances, I appoint my servant Randall Larsen to hold
and to exercisethe Keys of the fulness of the Priesthood and the Keys of the
Kingdom.

endquote

Joseph Smith
If anything should have been suggested by us, or any names mentioned, except by
commandment, or thus saith the Lord, we do not consider it binding.

DHC3:295; MFP1:94

From Doctrine and Covenants 52:

14 And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be
deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the
nations—
15 Wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted
of me if he obey mine ordinances.
16 He that speaketh, whose spirit is contrite, whose language is meek and
edifieth, the same is of God if he obey mine ordinances.
17 And again, he that trembleth under my power shall be made strong, and shall
bring forth fruits of praise and wisdom, according to the revelations and truths
which I have given you.
18 And again, he that is overcome and bringeth not forth fruits, even
according to this pattern, is not of me.
19 Wherefore, by this pattern ye shall know the spirits in all cases under the
whole heavens.
20 And the days have come; according to men's faith it shall be done unto
them.
21 Behold, this commandment is given unto all the elders whom I have chosen.

warm regards,

Randall Larsen

randall said...

Fact vs. Fancy readers,

This link purports to give the endowment changes that were made April of 1990.

http://www.lds-mormon.com/compare.shtml

The church surveyed members prior to making these purported changes. One reason give for the changes was a report by Elder Pace that some people had been teased as children with the penalties and that they went crazy seeing the penalties when they went through the temple for the 1st time. Also there was the feeling that the penalties just weren't nice for a person's wedding day.

I point out that the making of the
covenant requires that one swear by his life. Without the penalties the indexical gesture is not there. Few know that when they bow their head to say yes they are swearing by their head so there are still some penalty oaths in there. However, the ordinances are not given the way God intended. As the prophet Joseph tells us “the ordinances must be kept in the very way God has appointed, otherwise their priesthood will prove a cursing instead of a blessing.”

I have no objection to providing for modesty (shields will be used) or economy of motion (pre-1990 washing and not bathtub bathing).
We are seeking revelation on whether to use the long garment in the temple (ankle length).

To learn more join the yahoo group
at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Church_of_the_Firstborn_Westwood

Thanks,

randall larsen, prophet leader

Jack Mormon said...

Randall - Thank you for your response. In particular, I appreciate you further defining how you would change the temple ceremony, and your willingness to respect the newer traditions of modesty.

While as a "TBM" (doctrinally, if not necessarily in practice), I cannot sanction what you're doing, I think your story should be told without unnecessary hysteria and the predictable cries of "apostasy" that might come forth from some people. We have too many religious wars as it is.

In the long run, each person must find his or her road to Christ. The Father is the ultimate Judge.

randall said...

Jack Mormon and subcribers,

Thanks for your tolerant attitute.

See Moroni's prediction for the norm.

Mormon 8:36 "And I know that ye do walk in the pride of your hearts; and there are none save a few only who do not lift themselves up in the pride of their hearts, unto the wearing of very fine apparel, unto envying, and strifes, and malice, and persecutions, and all manner of iniquities; and your churches, yea, even every one, have become polluted because of the pride of your hearts."

Here is some more information why
the Father commands the law of adoption be restored. According to Alvin R. Dyer "sealing is involvement in law."

Alvin R. Dyer, BYU studies, Vol 10, No. 1 p.7

"You will notice that when Moroni appeared to the Prophet Joseph Smith, he
said that the priesthood of Elijah would be revealed which would turn the
hearts of the fathers to the children and the children to the fathers. Now
if you want to take the time to analyze that prophecy in Malachi, it is
precisely the very thing we are talking about. We will become associated
with the teachings of all the fathers from the beginning. Now how does that
apply? Well, for example, take the law of consecration. That is what
father (Enoch) would teach us. In other words we would become bound to the
Patriarch Enoch through the involvement of the law of consecration. Take
for further example the keys given to Abraham, which have to do with
receiving the gospel and having the leaven of the the house of Israel spread
unto other people, and particularly unto the gentiles. ...The keys of
salvation which Adam holds, for example, require us to understand and be
obedient [the law of obedience and sacrifice] in order to be sealed to Adam.
Sealing means involvement, or living by or making a covenant concerning the
laws or the principles which he taught or was called upon to give unto his
children. So when you say that the children will be turned to the fathers
and the fathers to the children, you see, it is more than just a direct
blood-line descent. It means all of the fathers in the Priesthood and
involvement with the various keys and powers of the Patriarchal order as I
understand it."

Brigham Young didn't think it was necessary to do all the work for our dead before linking up to our
progenitors in the priesthood:

Susan Staker, Waiting for World's End, p.109 (WW Journal)

Brigham Young
"Before I close I will answer one question that has been asked me repetedly. Should I have A father Dead that has never herd this gospel, [p.110] would it be required of me to redeem him & have him adopted unto some mans family And I be adopted unto my Father? I answer No. If we have to attend the ordinances of redemption for our dead relatives we then become their saviors & were we to wait to redeem our dead relatives before we Could link the Chain of the Priesthood we would never accomplish it."

More from Brigham at Family Meeting
Feb 1847:

Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 3, p. 132
"Suffice it to say that I will extend the Chain of the Pristhood back through the Apostolic dispensation to Father Adam just as soon as I can get a temple built. Jesus could have restored the order of the Pristhood in his day & brought in the Mil-lenium if the people would have harkened to his instructions but they rebelled & would not, & it was for this cause that Jesus told them that all the Blood that had Been shed from Righteous Abel down to Zechariah the Prophet should be required at there hands."

So those that oppose the work of the law of adoption may have the blood and sins of this generation on their heads (if they are aware).

To learn more join the yahoo group.
There are lots of interesting files (Cubit2 Temple Architecture and Geometry), photos (Navuoo Apron, Pic of Dome of the Holy of Holies taken from inside the Holy of Holies in the Salt Lake temple.)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Church_of_the_Firstborn_Westwood

thanks again for your tolerance,

Randall Larsen, Prophet Leader

Anonymous said...

Randall,

I do agree with your assessment of the current LDS leadership; however, your advertising of your organization based on the budget you have and your doctor's degree sounds quite wordly, even more than what the LDS does nowadays. Maybe you are just trying to "beat the devil at his own game", who knows.

Based on your criteria for temple attendance, a Black LDS member can enter your temple. What do you think about the priesthood ban?

Also, you place a lot of emphasis on the law of adoption. Have you lived this law? Do you have a patriarchal father who you love and obey as Christ did and does to our Father?

Now, tell us, is your Louisa Beaman the same plural wife of prophet Joseph Smith?

Thanks in advance,

Carlos

randall said...

An anonymous commentor wrote:

Randall,

I do agree with your assessment of the current LDS leadership; however, your advertising of your organization based on the budget you have and your doctor's degree sounds quite wordly, even more than what the LDS does nowadays. Maybe you are just trying to "beat the devil at his own game", who knows.

Based on your criteria for temple attendance, a Black LDS member can enter your temple. What do you think about the priesthood ban?

Also, you place a lot of emphasis on the law of adoption. Have you lived this law? Do you have a patriarchal father who you love and obey as Christ did and does to our Father?

Now, tell us, is your Louisa Beaman the same plural wife of prophet Joseph Smith?

Thanks in advance,

Carlos

Carlos,

I support making the opportunity of
priesthood available to all worthy
male members. Brigham Young said in the Journal of Discourses the the millenium had begun (thus allowing this since othets had the opportunity and didn't take it).

I in fact prophesied the lifting of the ban at a Young Special Interest Fast and testimony meeting the week Pres. Kimball's revelation was announced. I told those at that meeting to listen carefully to the radio and television news that week because there would be an announcement from
the Prophet that the church about how the church would have some colors that it is now missing. I had not the slightest doubt in my prophesy since I had received a messenger verifying Pres. Kimballs
revelation.

Yes we are trying to beat the devil at his own game there have been an number of coup d'etat's in the mormon church since Brigham's time. His efforts to influence things from beyond the grave have
failed for the most part.

I don't need to access the law of adoption myself anymore since I am the heir of the keys of the Priesthood by lineage (to Joshua Sawyer Holman) Brigham Young and his father John Young to the Prophet Joseph who has the birthright by Blood (heir of his Father the Eldest son of Ephraim).

Louisa Beman is an alias for our
spokesperson whose real name is
Carlee W. She is a descedant of
an early LDS apostle but not a wife
of Joseph that I know of.

warm regards,

randall larsen

Anonymous said...

Just what version of the endowment do you think is the ritual that Joseph Smith would approve: the Joseph Smith 1842-43 version; the Brigham Young 1845-46 version; the Brigham Young 1877 version; the George F. Richards 1925 version; the 1990 Version? And, what version do you follow?

randall said...

Anonymous,

I am happy with the pre-april 1990 endowment with penalties (although not specific verbally). The penalties represent certain geometric ratios which are part of the essential instruction.

One melchizedek ratio is Phi the golden mean 1.618 approx. Phi squared is 2.617924 times 6/5 is good approximation of PI 3.1415. 6/5 shown in the Aaronic PH.

I would restore the proper robe shifting. Starting with the robe on the right shoulder and shifting it with each degree (as Joseph did).

See the illustration mentioned below on the Church's yahoo group photos section you may join web only and have your email hidden:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Church_of_the_Firstborn_Westwood/

They used to shift the robe 3 or 4 times in the endowment house. 3 times starting on the right shoulder 2nd Aaronic degree. In 1922 Richards recommended dropping one shift of the robe the meanings put on the robe shift now are incorrect due to Richad's tampering: continued

randall said...

Anonymous,

Continued.

"Taken from the minutes of a meeting at the office of the First Presidency. Presidents Grant, Penrose and Ivins being present. I represented having discussed with associates in the temple the advisability of instituting a change in the procedure of placing the Endowment Robes on the individuals receiving endowments the present method being to first place the robe on the right shoulder, subsequently change it to the left shoulder, and later again back to the right shoulder. The proposed change would be to place the robe first on the Left shoulder, and retain it there until after the Second Token of the Aaronic Priesthood has been given, then to change it to the Right shoulder, in conformity with the giving of the Tokens of the Melchizedek Priesthood, thus obviating one of the changes heretofore made, and more effectively indicating transition from the lower to the higher orders of the Priesthood."

Earler confusion existed about the robe shifting:

David John Buerger, The Mysteries of Godliness; p.117 - 118
David H. Cannon, present in the St. George temple at its dedication
in 1877, later recalled such notions: "at that time it was thot that the
endowment was to be administered in two degrees, the first degree
to include the Aaronic Priesthood only and that when the second
token of the Aaronic Priesthood was given the robe would be on the
right shoulder and that when the applicant had received the higher or
Melkesedic Priesthood the robe would be on the left shoulder."51
Despite such apparent consensus, advocated by George Q. Cannon
as late as 14 January 1894,52 this two-stage endowment was never
implemented.

Contra Toscano and others the robe is positioned over the operative mark/pillar NOT the mark that is displayd on the other side of the robe (Mormon urban legend). When the robe is on your left side you are officiating in the compass (spiritual things). When the robe is on your right side you are officiating in the square(or box) temporal things. I checked this with the oldest knock off of the temple ceremonies the Egyptian Endowment. See the vignette from Lanzone on the church's site photos. The two ladies behind Osiris are Isis with the winnowing fork (above her head) temporal things like the harvest of wheat, and Nepthys with a foot washing bowl or royal basket above her head (spiritual things) Note the Maat feather Nepthys only has the Maat feather (sanctification) above the Ank on her hand. This signifies she is justified (and sanctified).

Isis has her right hand raised to the square. Nephthys has her left hand raised to the square. Notice that in the opposite hand each lady holds an Ank. The ank symbolizes the navel string. In our temple clothes it's the bow tied in the sash. The bow is always on the opposite side of the robe. So the robe is on the left shoulder for Nephthys or Yachin (compass/spiritual) and on the right shoulder for Isis or Boaz

So like Isis the young Elder Melchizedek holds only a portion of the kingly grades of the Priesthood of the Son of God so he wears the robe on the right shoulder. He has the sickle to cut down or harvest the wheat sheaf. Isis has the winnowing fork to separate the wheat from the chaff.

The sickle shape is a lunar motif. In several of the moon's 15 waxing days (or 15 waning days) it takes on a crescent moon shape. Priesthood holders are encouraged to magnify (make larger) their callings by obeying the ordinances of the temple and the law in full face or power in all of its bearings on the face of the earth. Thus the priesthood holder will advance toward a “moon” in full face or power.

Also in this Vignette the serpent represents the veil with the serpent god Sia introducing at the veil. Note the knives to deal with imposters.

I prefer the 1931 endowment
because its the most correct. Penalties are specifically given in the Kingly grades of Priesthood
spoken of by Brigham Young not all
are covenants by one's life.

hope this helps,

Dr. Randall Larsen

randall said...

Anonymous,

Oops I mispoke the degree that reflects 6/5 hands held higher than 5 heads is the 2nd Melchizedek degree. See Peter Tomkins book
unfortunately named (as Nibley said)
Secrets of the Great Pyramid.

More info on the Geometry of the Salt Lake Temple Holy of Holies on
the Church's website

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Church_of_the_Firstborn_Westwood/

warm regards,