In January 2008 I published a post on this board about my Second Anointing experience. https://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon508.htm

Now, 10 years and 8 months later Hans and Birgitta Mattsson confirm that they had received the SA and give details which are similar to mine, in an interview with John Dehlin. https://www.mormonstories.org/podcast/truth-seeking/

To my knowledge, we are the only ones who have gone public on this ordinance.

I am grateful to Hans and Birgitta for sharing their experiences.

So happy to hear the Mattsons went public as well. It was your description that made me realize my brother had the Second Annointing after he finished being MP and then went on to be Area General Authority or whatever they call it now. The mysterious Sunday they had to be in SLC but wouldn't talk about, and then the weird way they acted after--suddenly benevolent which is way out of his character range. Wasn't hard to put two and two together once I knew they were handing the SA's out like popcorn.


When I was in Aaronic priesthood we had a teacher who was studying to be an Institute teacher and in his classes they were studying all the crazy stuff now labeled "anti." Lots about Joseph's crazy ways. Devils attacking people. I knew it all but because it was presented that way, in priesthood, I was more or less inoculated against thinking it suspect. We were still proud to be peculiar and the weirder the better.


The teacher used to talk often of the second anointing, or Calling and Election Made Sure as he called it, but always framing it as extremely rare and more like a heavenly visit to do with the Holy Ghost than a run of the mill ordination. He made it sound like maybe only a handful of people on the planet would ever get one. So when I read your account about the part where they asked you to nominate others my jaw hit the floor. That is the smoking gun right there that shoots holes in it all. Nominate others??? What?

Thanks Tom. Cannot tell you how much I appreciate all you have shared. And thanks for the link.

Even McConkie did that. He portrayed it as basically a spiritual experience, not something administered by the church. That mattered to me. I had believed that there was a point at which the church was no longer involved and there was a seamless transition to events in the spirit world, including visitations by Jesus.

Learning that the 2A was decided upon and implemented by human men (from The Mysteries of Godliness by Buerger) was deeply upsetting. It was yet more evidence that there is no connection between the earthly church and the heavens, no "hand-off" as it were to Jesus. It was another example, like the failure of prophets to prophesy, of the inability of the church to penetrate the spirit world.

The one thing Buerger got wrong was his assumption that the ordinance is very rare now. My experience was a lot like Done & Done's, for when I told a close relative (ex-SP, ex-MP, and a bit more) that the ordinance was secret and almost never occurred, he responded with an unusually firm "I wouldn't be so sure about that" and went on to describe it in detail. He did not say explicitly he and his wife had experienced it, but he came very close.

When I mentioned this conversation to another relative, closer to my age but already a relatively high church leader, he said that our common relative had spoken unequivocally about having gotten the 2A. Our feeling was that the older man had shared his experience with the younger relative and leader because the latter was clearly heading up fast through the ranks.

So yes, I am confident that my relative has undergone the 2A. And I have other relatives who have been MPs or higher, so I believe there are multiple couples in my 2nd-degree family who have had it.

He made veiled allusions when speaking of having your calling and election made sure as well.

Tom, thank you.

Did anyone ask that you sign a no-disclosure agreement?

Grant Palmer, in an interview with Dehlin, made mention of a 3rd and 4th anointing, to become a member of the godhead, and then to become a god. Have you heard of that?

No NDA presented or signed. I guess they never thought anyone would disclose it.

I have not heard mention of a 3rd or 4th anointing and cannot see the necessity for such. In the SA you are ordained to become a god and a member of a godhead, so unless there is something higher, I do not see the point. However, nothing would surprise me.

I like to refer to myself as a "Level X Operating Cretin." I commune with Xenu, face to face, you know!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/20/2018 04:07PM by caffiend.

As the population of 2'nd annointees grows, the really special Special People will require additional elevation - hence the need for 3rd and 4th Annointing, etc.

Something like Karate belts which have associated degrees.

You are onto something there. Very prophetic.

Another carrot on another stick. Always got to have the carrot.

Twenty-two levels starting with Silver Producer and finishing with Founders Crown Ambassador. This is a MLM stock-in-trade to keep the troops striving for the next step up. At some point, the steps become the only goal and become interchangeable with the intrinsic purpose of the organization. With Mormons, this is cooked in from the start.

As hawkers at baseball games used to shout out, "You can't tell your players without a program!" Nobody would know you were a general unless you had stars on your shoulder; your specialness isn't immediately (or ever otherwise) apparent. Being double-secret special is any interesting twist on this.


https://www.amway.com.au/media/PDF/ANZ/amway/1703090301/amway-business-pin-levels-2016-anz.pdf

Wow anway sure has changed pins since I was duped inti joining 40 years ago.

I was never good at it. I think the highest I made was Talc.

Echo Elder Berry -

Can't thank Tom enough for his courage to expose ChurchCo for what it is. His incredible interview is found on Mormon Stories. I believe this is the most important interview that John Dehlin has done to date. Listening to Tom's interview is simply a must.

I continue to find it so strikingly ironic that ChurchCo continues to claim it's divine nature (e.g. only true church on the earth and the one and only church of Jesus Christ) and comprehensive embodiment of truth for all mankind and yet it is absolutely FILTHY ROTTEN at it's roots - those roots being the devilish sexual predator Joseph Smith, Jr. and associated charlatan accomplices. Smith didn't create the con on his own - he had help.

tamboruco Wrote:

> (The only true church on the earth and the one
> and only church of Jesus Christ)... > and yet it is
> absolutely FILTHY ROTTEN at it's roots - those
> roots being the devilish sexual predator Joseph > Smith, Jr. and associated charlatan accomplices. > Smith didn't create the con on his own - he had help.

Help came from Europe-trained Freemasonic agents who recruited those charlatan accomplices who sought out and found their witch-clan puppet Holy Joe.

Their main case officer and scrutator was likely the counterfeiter who sometimes went by the name Luman Walters.

Mormon origins reek of The Illuminist Lodge.

You can't make this stuff up.

Well, I guess you can.

Tom, heartfelt thanks to sharing your journey with us. I surmise that more Second Annointees will come forward as the great apostasy picks up steam.

For example, over at the other major exmo forum that rhymes with "dreadit" there are now over 92K subscribers and of late averaging about one thousand new a week. This may drop off or increase? It will be fun to see if General Confrunz generates more.

To think that the church once believed the internet would help its cause. . .

Thank you, Tom.

Tom Phillips Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am grateful to Hans and Birgitta for sharing
> their experiences.

I'm grateful to you for sharing yours.

It is a curious thing that only 3 people have ever divulged that they had it and what it entails.

Who knows if there will be more. This isn't a large group of people but still the number of dissenters to their Scientological equivalent of an Operating Thetan Grand Poobah seems terribly small.

Mormonism seems an even tighter onion to peel.

:)

I'm sure you've been asked before but do you think having received the 2nd Anointing has helped prevent you and Hans from being church disciplined (ex'd)? Or is it simply that neither of you have been "anti" enough to justify being church disciplined?

Maybe you have but I was thinking neither of you have.

They can't do no wrong no more so they can't be ex'd. It is against their own rules.

I, too, would like to thank you Tom Philips. I was barely studying my way out, and my sister came over to my house, and went into my office, and said, "You have to read this!" We read your post, and re-read it, and we both sat there with our jaw dropped. As bizarre as it read, we knew you were telling the truth. Several of our relatives have had the SA, I'm sure. For example, we're sure our two cousins who were mission presidents, then temple presidents, and went on to be higher up in the church, on the General board, and our uncle, who was General Sunday School Superintendent for many years. They did have an aura of holiness about them. These relatives are members of a prominent SLC GA family, dating back to Joseph Smith's first members, EVEN the very first "apostates" who left their mother Church of England to join the neighborhood polygamous cult.

After all these years--it still blows my mind!

Only you, one of the "chosen" could tell your story. I have tried to explain the Second Anointing to others, and they don't believe me!

exminion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...the neighborhood polygamous cult.


Sounds like an interesting band. You got them on vinyl?

lol

I was not surprised in the least when I read about the 2nd A because I found the MormonCult to be elitist even as a child attending with my friends. There seemed to be certain last names that were in the power positions along with that person's relatives. Cliques were the name of the game with whispering and secrets happening continually. Seemed to me that bishops and stake presidents were born at their birth.

One friend in particular had a Father who everyone seemed to know and I noticed grown-ups going out of their way to give attention to this friend. I myself was starved for grown-up attention so this stood out to me.

The way he talked about it, you could easily get the idea that he was also talking about a certain body part that rhymes with Nick.

The way Briggy talked about it, some men would have very big priesthoods, evidenced by the size of their posterity. Polygamy was really about who could get the biggest harem put together, another sign of great status. The more souls you could get sealed into your family, the bigger your kingdom in the next life. (Didn't really matter if you neglected them and/or treated most of them like dogsh*t in this life.)

I read the things that the "great" Mormon leaders said and taught in the past and most of it is so childish I can't help but laugh at the ridiculousness of it all. TBH, I don't think the modern leaders, like Hinckley, Monson, Nelson, etc. even really believe in any of the nonsense that past prophets preached. I think they just believe in the organization. They believe it's useful to them.

When everyone is special no one will be special.

Ah. But not that many more will get get the S.A. because these are the last days. Really. It's going to be all over at any minute. Really. I swear. You can trust me on this. Like, for sure.

Joseph Smith was always manipulating people to go along with his schemes and do his bidding by making up ever newer and better promises from God.

I suspect that at some point during the early days of the secret polygamy club (centered around the Nauvoo temple after it was built), the already promised blessings and status guarantees were not enough to calm the hesitant, the nervous and the increasinly skeptical members of the club.

What do you promise to someone when you've already promised them that they're on the path to heaven, conditional upon them staying on the path and meeting all challenges along the way? You promise them that they now have a guarantee that they'll get there. No more conditions.

And I wouldn't be surprised if there were even more after that, such as the 3rd and 4th mentioned by Tom Phillips above. For Joe, the only thing that mattered was to maintain his power and control. A few hours of quality acting, pretending to get a rev elation from God promising whatever it took, didn't cost Joe anything really, as long as he was dealing with sufficiently gullible people.

When I was learning of Tom's Second Anointing,I was a True Blue. The 2nd Anointing bothered me, but I managed to put it out of my mind. At the time I was listening to Hans and Birgitta, I rejoiced that I had finally "got it" and left the church several years ago. I don't have to worry about the stupidness of this ordinance. All I have to do is laugh.

Did you hear other Mormons talking about it when you were still in?

I have dropped into conversation with two sister a couple of times how older brother has had the S.A. I have no doubt. I wanted to see what they would say. If they even knew what it was.

I get no reaction whatsoever. It's not like it's ignored. It's like I never said it. Like the HG stopped my words from even getting to their ears. Weird.

back in 1970-71 from a roommate who was into "The mysteries of Godliness."

While in the vintage LTM - Language Training Mission housed in the old Knight-Mangum Hall we were talking about the SA in whispers during study groups or after hours. I remember some gung-ho RM (returned missionary) who was a paid instructor discussing this and me so envious of the depth of his spirituality and thirsting after more of the same.

Wow, has my perspective on this secret cult crap changed over the years!

During one of my rare moments discussing the church with my super-conservative hyoer-Mormon sister, I mentioned the 2A in terms of indicating that the temple endowment does nothing for the average members; one had to be a friend, relative, or business/church associate of a senior church leader and put forward to receive the 2A, and that that's what is meant at the beginning of the endowment session where the officiator announces that if you are true and faithful, the day may come in which you are called up and made kings and queens, priests and priestesses of the most high God, whereas now you are only anointed to become such. It turns out that she had never heard of the "second anointment"/"second endowment," and --not surprisingly-- thought it was all so much anti-Mormon bull-Shiz. And, as usual, I got wrapped around the axle with my argument that, if I were throwing money and personal time at some organization of any kind, I'd demand to know every detail about it, whereas most Mormons choose to know less and less.

For those who want to stay Mormon, "Less truly is More."

Thanks for linking to the Mattsson's "Mormon Stories" interview with John Dehlin. I especially appreciated part 2 where Birgitta tells of her experience in sacrament meeting where she gets her priorities straight and goes home to Hans to be with and comfort him instead of continuing to serve the lying parasitical money grubbing corporation that tries to pass itself off as "the truth".

Same here.

It looks to me like some people revealing that they had the SA would be problematic for the church. First of all, the church must record somewhere who has and has not had the SA, date of ceremony, etc. Most Bishops and Stake Presidents don't even know for sure that the SA even exists. Is your having had the SA recorded somewhere in your membership records? Who at church headquarters would even see those records? Some computer programmer had to create those fields in the church membership records program if those fields are there.

If you come out publicly against some church policy, the church probably leans on your Bishop and Stake President to take some action against you. But I doubt the leaders in Salt Lake would admit that the SA exists enough to ask your local leaders to excommunicate you for revealing that you had it to others. How would they hold that discussion with a Bishop or Stake President who doesn't know that the ceremony even took place for anyone alive today? This goes back to the fact that your having had the SA probably isn't in your church membership records that were sent to your Bishop. And then, how would the leaders in SL tell the Bishop that even though you were guaranteed exaltation, that he and the Stake President's court are supposed to excommunicate you? What do they tell the High Council members that you did? Would the church lie to your Bishop and to the whole High Council, to deny that you had the SA while pushing at the same time to excommunicate you? Probably not because that lie is too likely to backfire on them later, or at least to damage the faith of the Bishop and the high council members. Plus, at least one or more of them will talk about it later to others (another faith damaging urban legend).

So what happens? Guys like Tom Philip's get a pass. Even if he does come out against the church publicly, do they really want what he is going to say at his church court, to go public when he makes it public? Probably not. So he gets a pass on everything he does. It's not because they can't excommunicate him. It's because he is capable of inflicting damages on the church that the church leaders aren't willing to tolerate, if they can avoid it. It's better for them to just pretend that he doesn't exist and to not validate anything he says by even acknowledging that he said it. No one even knows how much damage Tom could do to the church if he wanted to. Even the church leaders can only speculate about that.

Tom could probably do more damage to the church than the rest of all of us combined could do. All he has to do is turn turn up the embarrassment on the church as high as he possibly can and keep it there for as long as he can, while talking about his ordination to the Godhood and guarantee of exaltation (and what that means from a Mormon context), and to be very public as he does it. Tom could question the facts about church history, and about the words of several church prophets, some of which are shameful and some of which are factually wrong. He could talk about all of the BYU scholars who were excommunicated for bringing up the historical facts. He could talk about the blacks and the priesthood, not the stories told in essays, but the real truth of the docterines. If he sticks to facts that are true, they won't be able to discipline him without facing consequences that they won't be willing to face. It won't be that they can't excommunicate him because he was guaranteed his exaltation. It'll be that they can't excommunicate him without potentially losing, millions of church members in the process, and causing un-repairable damage to the church's public image in the process.

You've got a choice Tom. You don't have to sell your tokens for money or to win a lawsuit to expose the fraud of Mormonism. Most church members (not to mention the rest of the world) don't even know that you exist. Why is that? Why sit back and do nothing?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/16/2018 08:06AM by azsteve.

Um, you think he's sitting back doing nothing? Have you been paying attention here for the last decade?

Ton sued the church for fraud in British courts.

Tom

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You've got a choice Tom. You don't have to sell
> your tokens for money or to win a lawsuit to
> expose the fraud of Mormonism. Most church members
> (not to mention the rest of the world) don't even
> know that you exist. Why is that? Why sit back and
> do nothing?

I think this is pretty harsh. I found a google group once which was a UK Ward that Tom knew people in. It was a source of pain. Asking former members to mount a front against the common enemy with little regard for what they would have to go through seems insensitive.

I am not saying that Tom is doing nothing. His lawsuit in the UK was amazing. Tom has done a lot of good by exposing the church for its bad behavior and false claims. But I have never seem him on a major network TV channel, exposing the fact that the Mormon church ordained him a God after first putting him through a ceremony where they threatened to slit his throat open (podcast yes, prime time TV no). I have never seen Tom proclaim publicly that the church has no authority to excommunicate him. How much attention would a catholic priest get if he claimed publicly that the catholic church ordained him to be a God, and if he said publicly that the pope has no authority to excommunicate him. Answer: none if he kept quiet about it, and primetime TV news if he really worked it.

Tom has said publicly that the church has refused to answer his questions, and he has accused them of fraud, which he did accuse them of, in court. These types of claims can always be interpreted by outsiders as possibly being just a mis-understanding, or due to the faults of individual men. If you dare them publicly to excommunicate you while exposing their biggest secrets, the church has to react and they will lose anyway you look at it, if they can't win, which they can't win in Tom's case. They'll just have to take the public virtual beatings, as much as Tom can heap on to them. He could play-up the God thing by claiming half seriously that he is a God now. The church breeds narcissism. Tom might even take-on that persona to make his point, and then get real to discuss how ridiculous the whole thing is. That would be a lot better than acting as though there might have simply been an mistake in understanding and that the church won't answer his questions about it.

Do you seriously believe some prominent TV channel would have any interest in learning about an obscure ritual in an obscure social class in an obscure church? There are probably 25 people in the world that would pay to see that.

LD$ Inc must have its caste system.
Keep those "I'm better than you" annointings coming.

Thanks Tom. I didn't know about this. I'll have to check it out.

SpongeBob

Is there a written transcript of the Mattsson's interview I could read?

Back in the earlier part of the twentieth century the church actually issued certificates for those that had received the second anointing. I have a photocopy of one buried somewhere.
I believe it is dated sometime in the 1920s.

So Hans and Brigetta resigned their membership and are no longer members because the church refused to bless children of Lgbtq parents. Tom has not.
Can they excommunicated members who have had 2nd annointing? Yes. 70s and apostles have been exd, anyone where the publicity of the son demands the ultimate censure.

World media isn't interested in a story about Tom being guaranteed godhood. Or about his ill advised assertion in his lawsuit about Adam and Eve.
World media IS interested in massive financial fraud by wealthy right wing fundamentalist religious groups!
Tom's UK court case was thrown out by the senior London magistrate!
Why? The 1st magistrate thought there was a case to answer for against the church! The 2nd judge clearly disagreed! It took 3 months for the 1st magistrate to fully understand the case and the possibility of fraud. The 2nd magistrate took just 1 week of deliberation to decide!
The fraud case obviously had merit for it to proceed to summons and hearings!
So why hasn't it been pursued further and with much more vigour?

I'll never forget the last sacrament meeting we attended in our ward. The stake presidency were the speakers. The 1st counselor got up and spoke. He is one of the most arrogant individuals I've ever known. He spoke about how in the previous week, the stake presidency and the bishops went to a "special" meeting in the Salt Lake temple and that it was ONLY for them. He repeated that statement 2 more times. He hinted that it was about the 2nd anointing. Then he went on to say how special his children were because their PB's said they would all be alive and whisked up in the air at the 2nd coming. I didn't realize just how tall High Horses can get! He must've needed at least a 30 or 40 foot ladder!

VQ,

That doesn't sound quite right. Bishops are well below the level at which people get the 2A, and frankly so too are counselors in a stake presidency. The 2A is given to couples, one couple at a time, so the notion of a group participating doesn't sound right.

Whatever meeting it was in the temple was not for the 2A.

Area Presidents make recommendations to the First Presidency which are coordinated by their secretary. In my day that was F. Michael Watson (later became a GA). He maintained the list, deleted whom he thought should not be on it, and presented the final list to the FP.

I was asked by my Area President, Harold G. Hillam, for 2 recommendations. I do not think all SA recipients are asked to nominate others, but I could be wrong. At the time I took my nominations to be very sacred and asked for time to fast about it. How wrong I was.

I believe you've found more heaven here on earth than TSCC could guarantee. Hope your both well. M.W.

Absolutely true M.W. We are both very happy and wish you and your family well.