The Salt Lake Temple II: The Cornerstone Ceremony

 Previously: A Sandy Foundation

Was Joseph Smith a Freemason?

Proof for his initiation into the lodge at Nauvoo hinges on very weak evidence. William Clayton, who once acted as a scribe for Joseph, was also a scribe for the Masons at the Nauvoo lodge. 

William Clayton is the only link historians use to frame Joseph Smith as the author of D&C Section 132.

Clayton is also the only link framing Joseph with membership in the Masonic lodge in Nauvoo. 

Here is how one author described this weak evidence linking Joseph to the craft:

To link Joseph to Freemasonry (in the short version), William Clayton (a scribe in the Masonic organization) ripped the pages from the Minute Book, and proceeded to created a second Minute Book that would include the records of Joseph joining the lodge. They claim that Clayton made an exact copy of the original Minute Book, but this would not explain why Heber (most likely) ripped the pages out in the first place. The second they did this, they are guilty of history-fixing. The claim that John Taylor deposited the founding documents (including the ripped-out pages of the original Minute Book) into the cornerstone of the Masonic temple, and they took William Clayton's fabricated version to Salt Lake City, where it remains today. Therein, Joseph is framed with Freemasonry. (Ronald Karren, The Exoneration of Emma, Joseph, and Hyrum, p. 269, emphasis added)

As a recent podcast has suggested, William Clayton was a far shadier character than we have been led to believe, and should not be a trusted source for historical documents. 

If Joseph Smith actually had been a Mason, or had studied the craft, his few comments that have been recorded on the subject reveal that he must've believed the fraternity was a counterfeit. 

Val Brinkerhoff recorded some of Joseph's comments in his book, The Secret Chamber. Here is how Joseph felt about secret organizations and secret oaths:

And again, I would further suggest the impropriety of the organization of bands or companies, by covenant or oaths, by penalties or secrecies...Pure friendship always becomes weakened the very moment you undertake to make it stronger by penal oaths and secrecy. (HC. vol. 3, p. 303)

"...there has been frauds and secret abominations and evil works of darkness going in leading the minds of the weak and unwary into confusion and distraction, and palming it all the time upon the presidency while mean time presidency were ignorant as well as innocent of these things, which were practicing in the church in our name. (Joseph Smith, Dec. 1838, Times and Seasons, vol. 1, no. 6, April 1840, quoted in The Secret Chamber, p. 169)

Do we take Joseph at his word or do we still believe what others have written about him?

And what about these versus from the Book of Mormon further warning us about secret signs and oaths? Do we ignore them too?

And it came to pass that they did have their signs, year, their secret signs and their secret words, and this that they might distinguish a brother who had entered into the covenant... (Helaman 2:32, RE)

And this excerpt from the Covenant of Christ makes it painstakingly clear that secret societies are wicked above all in God's eyes:

They formed a secret society, as they did long ago, a society God considers most corrupt and wicked of all. (CoC, Ether 3:17)

As you read what follows about the Salt Lake Temple cornerstone ceremony, carefully consider the content, and ask yourself the question: 

Did these strange ceremonies originate with Joseph Smith or Brigham Young?

What the LDS Church was doing with cornerstone ceremonies in 19th century Utah (and continued until 2023) is based upon Freemasonic ritual. I don't believe Joseph Smith had anything to do with it. But as always, I invite you to decide for yourself the truth of these matters.

To begin, let's examine the differences between the cornerstone ceremonies conducted for the Nauvoo and Salt Lake temples.

Ceremonial Sleight of Hand

According to LDS history, Brigham Young received the instructions for temple cornerstone ceremonies from Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon on April 6 of 1841. On that day we're told that a cornerstone ceremony was performed for the Nauvoo temple. You can read the entire account in History of Church, Volume 4, pp. 329-331. You can also read it online here, the source of the account is the "Times and Seasons", Vol. 2, No. 12, 376, April 15, 1841.

As far as we know there was not a revelation given to Joseph on the proper order of laying cornerstones. The account in the Times and Seasons does not specifically state that the ceremony had been revealed from God (and Joseph did not write it down elsewhere), so I'm not totally sure we can trust it as what actually happened. However, there are some very important differences between how Joseph allegedly conducted the cornerstone ceremony for the Nauvoo temple, and how Brigham conducted the ceremony for the Salt Lake temple.

In both ceremonies the architects laid the stones under the direction of certain entities in the Church. Here is a breakdown how Joseph organized the ceremony for the Nauvoo temple:

• Southeast Corner (First or Principal): laid under the direction of the First Presidency.
• Southwest Corner (Second): laid under the direction of the President of the High Priesthood.
• Northwest Corner (Third): superintended by the High Council as representatives of the Twelve (who were in Europe at the time).
• Northeast Corner (Fourth): superintended by the Bishops representing the lesser priesthood. 

Also important, were the words that each of the Church dignitaries declared after each stone was laid. The laying of the SE Corner was followed by these remarks from Joseph Smith:

This principal cornerstone, in presentation of the First Presidency, is now duly laid in honor of the great God; and may it remain there until the whole fabric is completed; and may the same be accomplished speedily; that the Saints may have a place to worship God; and the Son of Man have where to lay his head.

The SW corner was remarked upon by President Marks:

The second corner stone, of the Temple now building by the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, in honor to the great God, is duly laid, and may the same unanimity, that has been manifested on this occasion, continue, till the whole is completed; that peace may rest upon it to the laying of the top stone thereof, and the turning of the key thereof; that the Saints may participate in the blessings of Israel's God within its walls, and the glory of God rest upon the same; Amen.

The NW corner was remarked upon by Elias Higbee:

The third corner stone, in representation of the Twelve, is now duly laid; and as they are, in some measure the support of the church, so may this stone be a firm support to the corner, that the whole may be completed as before purposed, and according to the order of the Priesthood.

Finally, the NE corner was remarked upon by Bishop Whitney:

The fourth and last corner stone, expressive of the Lesser Priesthood, is now duly laid; and may the blessings before pronounced, with all others desirable, rest upon the same forever; Amen.

Important to note here is that the Church in Joseph's day did not have a hierarchy, and equality prevailed. There were no priesthood quorums that had authority over any others. Brigham Young changed all that through a coup d'etat and gave all power over the Church to the Twelve and the First Presidency. We can clearly see some symbolism of these changes in the way the cornerstone ceremony for the Salt Lake temple was conducted. 

Now, to avoid confusion, I want to clearly state here that I do not believe that the cornerstone ceremony performed in Salt Lake City on April 6 of 1853 was held for a new building which only had a foundation. I believe it was performed for a building that was already constructed. These cornerstone ceremonies date back to 1793 when Grand Master Benjamin Franklin conducted the ceremony for the Capitol Building in Washington D.C. The Freemasonic cornerstone ceremonies were performed, in my opinion, as a means for inheritors to claim existing buildings at the beginning of the reset. 

I believe Brigham Young became a Freemason in Boston and apprenticed under Albert Pike (this is only a theory and I have no evidence for this except for a letter written by Pike wherein he mentions Brigham Young's name; read the letter here). 

Heber Kimball was also a Freemason and held a high rank known as the Royal Arch. However, after being expelled from Nauvoo, I believe Brigham and Heber fell out of favor with the Freemasons and went rogue, and upon their arrival in Utah, established their own form of the Brotherhood. We can see elements of Freemasonic protocols in all the groundbreaking and cornerstone ceremonies held for many buildings in Utah, beginning with the first: the Salt Lake temple.

Here is how Brigham Young structured the cornerstone ceremony:

• Southeast Corner: laid by First Presidency and Church Patriarch, with oration offered by Brigham Young.
• Southwest Corner: laid by the Presiding Bishopric representing the lesser priesthood, with oration offered by Bishop Edward Hunter. 
• Northwest Corner: laid by the presidency of the high priests, the Stake Presidency, and the High Council, with oration by President John Young.
• Northeast Corner: laid by the the Twelve and representatives of the Seventies and Elders, with oration by Elder Parley P. Pratt.

Comparing the order with how Joseph organized the Nauvoo ceremony, we can clearly see the changes. Brigham kept the SE corner, or the principal cornerstone the same, as well as the SW corner. However, he inversed the NW and NE corners. This seemingly small change holds some significance in Freemasonry. 

The Twelve, the top of the hierarchy in the LDS Church under Brigham's organization (even higher than the First Presidency because the Twelve have the power to restructure that entity), laid the cornerstone for the Northeast corner. 

This is significant because according to Masonic protocols, the Northeast corner is symbolic of the Entered Apprentice, or first degree of Freemasonry (the apprentice is represented as emerging from the north, a place of darkness representing the profane, or those who are not initiated, the apprentice then enters the east, a place of light, the direction from which the sun rises each day).

However, there is no explanation for how the Freemasons came to honor the northeast corner as the preferred cornerstone. Only speculation and conjecture are available to explain this inclination, which leads me to believe that the Freemasons may have stolen this precept from another, possibly far more ancient, source. 

As it turns out, Brigham Young was actually much more favorable toward the southeast corner. On the day we are told that the cornerstone ceremony was held for the SLT, Brigham made this statement in the Tabernacle:

...The First Presidency proceeded to lay the south-east corner, to the lay the first stone, though it is customary to commence at the north-east corner--that is the beginning point most generally, I believe, in the world. At this side of the equator we commence at the south-east corner. We sometimes look for light, you know, brethren. You old men that have been through the mill pretty well, have you been inquiring after light--which way do you go? You will tell me you go to the east for light? So we commence by laying the stone on the south-east corner, because there is the most light. (JD 1:133)

Does the most light emanate from the southeast corner? Not exactly.

Brigham's statement here doesn't make sense when compared to how ancient temples were built and dedicated. The principle cornerstone would often be placed in the northeast corner, because on the summer solstice, the longest day of the year, the sun would first cross the northeast corner of a building that was facing east (the SLT faces east).

This is well illustrated by the following diagram, taken out of the book, Stellar Theology and Masonic Astronomy, look at the top-left figure:

As you can see, the sun rises in the northeast on June 21st, the longest day of the year, when the sun is in the constellation of Leo. This is when the sun is brightest and warmest, and shines the most light on the earth. On December 21st, the shortest day of the year, the sun rises in the southeast, and on this day the sun literally shines the least amount of light on the earth. 

This is how the ancients in the northern hemisphere would track the movements of the sun.

Consider the following commentary:

As temples always faced east, so as to catch the first rays of the rising sun, it is almost certain that the cornerstone also, for like religious reasons, would be laid in a line with the rising sun. The sun, as he arose on the longest day of the year, rejoicing in his pride and strength, would be a type of the new temple about to rise majestically from its foundations. On the contrary, to lay the cornerstone of the new solar temple in the southeastern line of the sun's decline and fall, at the winter solstice, or toward the north, the point of darkness, or yet toward Amenti, the western region of gloom and death, would, according to the teachings of astrology, be most unpropitious, if not sacrilegious. (Robert Hewitt Brown, Stellar Theology, p. 169)

Why would Brigham Young contradict the ancient order of things? Why would he go against what Freemasons believed and practiced about cornerstones?

Was Brigham trying to hide the fact that he had found an ancient solar temple? The Salt Lake Temple does, after fall, face east, and its northeast corner would be directly in the path of the rising sun on the summer solstice. (Interestingly enough, the Nauvoo temple actually faces west).

Did Brigham really learn this idea of the southeast corner from Joseph Smith, as he claimed? If he did there are not reliable historical sources verifying this as Joseph never published a revelation on the matter.

Just when I thought I had reached a dead end on the discrepancy between the northeast and southeast corners, I found a short paper written by a man named S. Brent Morris, a 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemason. Morris argues that Masonic preference for the northeast was derived at arbitrarily and that "its historical roots are rather shallow". Morris further explains that:

It was been widely assumed that the preference for the northeast corner came into modern Masonic fraternity through the medieval building guilds. Bernard E. Jones nicely summarized the historical position. "There may, of course, be a long-lost symbolism to account for the preference, but the records of the stone-laying ceremonies relating to notable medieval buildings do not support any such idea...," neither, in fact, do the earliest records of Masonic ritual. (Morris, The Northeast Corner)

Morris reveals that the oldest Masonic catechism dates back to the Edinburgh (Scotland) Register House Manuscript of 1696. It has the Master Mason placing his "mark on the work... upon the S.E. corner." Another document, The Dumbfries No. 4 Manuscript of ca., dated 1710, states that the the cornerstone of King Solomon's Temple was laid in the southeast corner. Morris claims that other documents (which he does not name) locate the cornerstones for both the 1793 U.S. Capitol (supposedly lost) and the 1798 University of North Carolina in the southeast corners. 

If what Morris is claiming is true, then the question we must ask is what did Brigham Young know?

What is the true significance of the southeast corner? 

It is interesting to note that neither Albert Pike, in his Morals and Dogma, nor Manly P. Hall, in his Secret Teachings of All Ages, mention cornerstones at all, let alone directional significance. The evolution of the northeast corner in modern Freemasonry seems to have emerged quite sporadically during the 18th and 19th centuries. Why did they suddenly incorporate this change into Masonic protocols? What were they attempting to hide or cover up?

Obviously, I don't have the answers. But in light of my discovery of Morris' short paper I find it extremely interesting that Brigham Young favored the southeast cornerstone, flipping the contemporary order of things on its proverbial head. 

Perhaps the following video (which I have shared before) can offer some more clues as to what the Freemasons were actually doing with cornerstone ceremonies:

For now, let's move on to a few more specifics of the cornerstone ceremony that Brigham Young followed in regard to the Salt Lake Temple.  

The Order and Procession of Masonic Cornerstone Ceremonies

The protocols for Masonic cornerstone ceremonies are laid out in a book written by Robert Macoy entitled, Worshipful Master's Assistant: The Encyclopedia of Useful Knowledge, published in 1885. In chapter III, Macoy gives a detailed description of how these ceremonies are supposed to be performed. He begins with the passage below offering a brief history of the practice:

From time immemorial, it has been the prerogative of the Masonic Society to lay ("plant") corner-stones of edifices, not only such as are intended strictly for Masonic purposes, but all constructions of a public character. The National Capitol at Washington, many State houses, custom houses, colleges, hospitals, asylums, public school buildings, piers of bridges, canal locks, post-offices, public wharfs, levees--each in its turn has been the subject of the ancient ceremonial about to be described. To expunge the history of Freemasonry from America would be to draw from twenty thousand edifices the corner-stones planted there by Masonic hands. (Macoy, Kissenger's Rare Reprints: The Laying of Masonic Cornerstones, p. 95, emphasis added)

We should be questioning why so many public officials allowed the Masons to conduct cornerstone ceremonies for buildings that seemingly had nothing to do with Freemasonry. Why would the Masons need to be involved in capitol buildings, state houses, colleges, custom houses, hospitals, asylums, and school buildings?

What was really going in with these ceremonies?

Notice that Macoy uses the word plant. Like so many words in the English language, plant has many definitions. In addition to burying something in the ground, it also means the following:

• To insert firmly
•  Introduce and establish new settlers in
• To station (someone) for a surreptitious or secret purpose
• To place (something) in a concealed place to mislead a later discoverer (see online etymology dictionary)

As we read through these definitions, we can see a pattern of human resets emerging. Hypothetically, after a destructive event happens and populations are destroyed, controlling survivors would need to "plant" new settlers by introducing them into different deserted areas. Surviving buildings would need to be renamed and repurposed. New leaders would be "stationed" in certain areas (like Brigham Young in Salt Lake City), and cornerstones in buildings would be rededicated by placing items inside that would "mislead later discoverers" (planting fake evidence).

Do you see how they are revealing their agenda in plain sight in the definition of a common word?

In an earlier post I quoted a book that was found in the archives of the University of California. It is worth repeating here. The author of the book, a 19th century historian, claimed that expansive infrastructure was built here in America long before Columbus arrived. He names the same type of buildings that are referenced in the quote above by Robert Macoy, which leads me to believe that the Masons were finding and repurposing buildings with these cornerstone ceremonies. 

The Americans had long before Columbus, large cities; built of stones, brick or wood, with walls, ditches, temples, palaces... (The American Nations, Vol 1; pp. 32-33)

Capitol buildings sure look like palaces to me. I quoted this author twice (with commentary) in my post on the Logan temple, near the end of the article.  

Another word that should raise alarm bells is founded.

Many old buildings were said to have been founded during the 19th century. Yet, we have been trained to assume that founded also means built, but this is simply not true. Here is the legal definition of the word founded:

Based upon; arising from, growing out of, or resting upon; as in the expressions "founded in fraud," "founded on a consideration", "founded on contract," and the like. (Online Law Dictionary)

As you can see, nothing in the word founded means constructed or built. If inheritors of these buildings wanted to legally build upon or improve them, they could, since whatever additions they were making were "based upon, growing out of, or resting upon" something else. 

After finishing these improvements or renovations they could say that they had constructed a building. Of course, this legal contract would be "founded in fraud."

Do you see how they use our very language to deceive us? 

Let's get back to Macoy. 

As we go through the cornerstone protocols, you’ll see that Brigham Young followed a semblance of these procedures in the SLT cornerstone ceremony. Keep in mind that this pattern was repeated in many of the old buildings said to have been constructed in Utah during both the 19th and 20th centuries, including the first three temples. 

Not all the details of the cornerstone ceremonies for every Utah building  are available in the historical documents, but when we look into the narratives of the first three temples, combined with all the other buildings I've covered in the "This is the Place Series", we can begin to see a complete picture of the Masonic cornerstone ritual. However, Brigham Young and his fellow leaders conducted the ceremonies according to their own whims, changing protocols and adding nuance to the procedures.  

The ceremony begins with an opening meeting (usually around 10 or 11 AM so that the formalities can be completed in time for the cornerstone to be dedicated at high noon), usually in another building or "lodge" that is close to where the cornerstone will be dedicated. This meeting is conducted under the authority of the Grand Master, who announces the order of the procession. The procession, or parade, is led by the Grand Marshal, and all proceedings are recorded by the Grand Secretary. 

On April 6th of 1853, Brigham Young, acting as Grand Master, opened the meeting and announced the proceedings in the Tabernacle (claimed by historians to have been the "Adobe Tabernacle" but I believe this meeting was held in the already-existing-large-domed Tabernacle that we're told was constructed by 1867). The meeting began at 10 AM, and after an opening prayer and hymn a sabbath day parade was staged.

According to Macoy, the procession can be organized a few different ways. Usually, the Grand Master will be proceeded by marching bands, Deacons, Templars (as in Knights Templars), the Grand Marshal, and the Royal Arch Masons. In the proceedings for a Grand Lodge, Macoy defines the order as follows:

• The Grand Tyler (or tiler, the leader of the outer guard of a Masonic lodge)
• The Grand Architect, with assistants bearing the Plumb, Level, and Square (in my post about the 1917 Church Administration Building, I’ve written more about the Masonic meaning of the plumb, level, and square. Anthon H. Lund followed Masonic protocol during the cornerstone ceremony for that building.)
• Five Master Masons, bearing the five Orders
• The Grand Deacons, with rods
• Grand Treasurers and Grand Secretaries
• Grand Wardens; past Grand Wardens
• Deputy Grand Master; past Deputy Grand Masters

The Grand Master conducts the ceremony. According to author Mark Henshaw, the procession for the Salt Lake Temple was arranged as follows:

A color guard took the lead carrying the United States flag; they also carried another blue-and-white flag featuring stars, stripes, and the embroidered words Kingdom of God across it. The Nauvoo Brass Band came next...

Next followed a twenty-piece band led by Dominico Ballo... Another military guard stepped in behind Ballo's band, and a small group of singers followed the soldiers. Then came Brigham and his counselors in the First Presidency, Heber C. Kimball and Willard Richards, along with "Uncle John" Smith, the presiding patriarch. The rest of the Church leaders fell in line after that--the Quorum of the Seventy, and other senior and local leaders. Nearing the end of the line came Truman Angell, the architect, and a number of workmen selected to represent their various classes of profession; a final military guard brought up the rear. (Forty Years, p. 105)

Brigham Young doesn't follow Macoy's protocols to the tee, but we can clearly see the pattern of civic, military, and religious leaders being involved in the ceremony. A Grand Marshal is not named for the SLT ceremony, but is for the Manti temple ceremony. His name was General W.S. Snow, called by the title, Marshal of the Day.

According to Macoy, the procession, moving "with perfect discipline and decorous silence", halts when it reaches the northeast cornerstone. The Grand Master, leading in reverse order, "proceeds to the platform and takes his station... the Grand Marshal proclaims silence...", and "if the proposed structure is for public use... a spokesman selected for the purpose will address the Grand Master... If the edifice is strictly for Masonic purposes, the Master of the Lodge having precedence will act as spokesman". Then a hymn will be sung by the choir. (See Macoy, p. 98)

Brigham Young led the procession first to southeast corner, where, we're told, the military separated the crowd from trenches dug for the foundation. The choir sang a hymn, and Thomas Bullock (appointed spokesman for Brigham Young) addressed the crowd, reminiscing about the Kirtland and Nauvoo temples and speaking of temple endowments. Bullock then dedicated the southeast corner stone of the temple, we're told. After which Heber Kimball (Royal Arch Mason) offered a prayer and another hymn ("The Temple" by Eliza R. Snow) was sung.  

The procession then marched to the southwest corner, where Edward Hunter, the presiding Bishop, delivered an oration. Then one of his counselors, Alfred Cordon, dedicated the cornerstone. Another prayer was offered and another hymn was sung. 

The "band played another martial tune" as the procession moved to the northwest corner, where John Young, president of the high priests quorum, delivered the oration and dedicated the cornerstone. Elder George B. Wallace offered the prayer, and the choir sang another hymn. 

The process repeated as the parade moved finally to the northeast corner, laid by Parly. P. Pratt of the Quorum of the Twelve, who then gave a long oration on work for the dead. Elder Orson Hyde offered the prayer, asking "for the construction to be 'speedily erected and finished'". (See Forty Years, p. 116)

An hour after the ceremony the congregation moved back to the Tabernacle to hear an address from Brigham Young, which is now found in the Journal of Discourses: 

I scarcely ever say much about revelations, or visions, but suffice it to say, five years ago last July I was here, and saw in the Spirit the temple not ten feet from where we have laid the chief cornerstone. I have not inquired what kind of temple we should build. Why? Because it was represented before me. I have never looked upon that ground, but the vision of it was there. I see it as plainly as if it was in reality before me. (JD, 1:133, emphasis added)

In my opinion, this statement is full of hidden truth. Brigham (or whoever is writing this history) is telling us in a round about way that the temple was already there... "as plainly as if it was in reality before" him. Every time he looks upon that spot, he sees the temple. This statement contradicts another statement Brigham made six weeks earlier at the groundbreaking ceremony in which he said that a revelation was not necessary to build a temple:

Some might query whether a revelation had been given to build a House of the Lord, but he is a wicked and slothful servant who doeth nothing but what his Lord commandeth, when he knoweth his Master's will. I know a Temple is needed and so do you; and when we know a thing, why do we need a revelation to compel us to do that thing? If the Lord and all the people want a revelation, I can give one concerning this Temple. In a few days I shall be able to give a plan on paper, and then if heaven or any good man on earth, will suggest my improvements, we will receive and adopt them. (Deseret News Weekly, February 14, 1853)

Which is it Brigham, did you get a revelation to build the temple or not? Remember, Brigham Young was not a visionary man. He was a Yankee Guesser. 

Even though Truman Angell was the architect, we're told that it was Brigham Young who drew up the original plan. Brigham was a carpenter, and certainly no architect, but in the narratives of each of the first four temples in Utah, Brigham is alluded to as the original drafter of each building, suggesting that they were drawn by revelation, with architects merely making suggestions or small changes.

However, I believe the "plan" Brigham is alluding to here (as well as the plans for the other three temples) was a plan for the renovation of an existing building. At the end of this post I will show you an article in LDS Living that mentions some of the changes made to the "original plans", and as you will see, the Salt Lake Temple used to appear much more "Tartarian" than it does today.

For now, let's dive into a little ancient history about cornerstone ceremonies, dating back to the Roman Empire, and conducted by none other than soothsayers. 

A Temple Raised on an Old Foundation

In the book Stellar Theology and Masonic Astronomy, the significance of cornerstone ceremonies and the importance of the northeast corner is expounded upon. Under the section The Northeast Corner and the Corner-Stone, the author begins with this introduction:

The ancients believed that the movements, conjunctions, and position of the heavenly bodies influenced not only the destiny of nations, but of individuals, and regulated all the affairs of life. Their temples were dedicated to the worship of the sun, and the whole process of their erection, from the laying of the first stone up to their completion, as well as the details of the architecture, had special reference to astrological conditions, and the movement of the sun in the zodiac, or his position at stated periods therein. (Stellar Theology, p. 166)

It is my belief that the SLT is an ancient edifice dedicated to sun worship. It's shape, position, sun, moon, and earth symbols carved into stone on the facade, and east-facing entrance are all clues that this may be the case.

Albert Pike, who we now know was at least acquainted with Brigham Young, made a statement in his book Morals and Dogma in which he explained that every Masonic lodge is indeed a temple:

Every Lodge is a temple, and as a whole, and in its details symbolic. The Universe itself supplied man with the model for the first temples reared to the Divinity. The arrangement of the Temple of Solomon, the symbolic ornaments which formed its chief decorations, and the dress of the High Priest, all had reference to the order of the Universe, as then understood. The Temple contained many emblems of the seasons--the sun, the moon, the planets, the constellations of Ursa Major and Minor, the zodiac, the elements, and the other parts of the world. (Morals and Dogma, Kindle Edition, Loc 131)

Did Brigham Young really understand the astronomical significance of the symbolism on the facade of the SLT? 

In all of the Journal of Discourses, there are no records of any talks in General Conference attempting to explain the astronomical symbolism carved onto the SLT exterior. There are only a few references made to Solomon's Temple, in one of which Brigham Young made an allusion to Hiram Abiff (see JD 19:220-21).

Pike's statement in Morals and Dogma is interesting. Yes, he most likely understood the astronomical significance of temples, but I question how many lodges/temples were actually "built" by the Freemasons. Did they just find many of these ancient sun-worship temples and simply re-purpose them while claiming them as their own? 

There are more missing pieces to this puzzle found in the book Stellar Theology that I quoted above. The author of this work, Robert Hewitt Brown, is a Masonic apologist. But if you ignore his friendly bias towards Freemasonry, there are massive clues to be uncovered in the book. For instance, Brown reveals that cornerstone ceremonies were ancient, and dates them back to the Roman Empire, where they were conducted by soothsayers. 

A soothsayer is a fortune teller, or "one who speaks truth" or "a candid advisor". The Book of Mormon categorizes soothsayers as a subgroup within the larger umbrella of witchcraft. Christ told the Nephites that in a future day among the Gentiles, witch crafts and soothsayers would be cut off from the land. Joseph Smith explained that soothsayers were among those who were possessed with false and lying spirits:

Having said so much upon the general principles without referring to the particular situation, power, and influence of the magicians of Egypt, the wizards and witches of the Jews, the oracles of the heathen, their necromancers, soothsayers, and astrologers, the maniacs or those possessed of devils in the apostle's days, we will notice and try to detect (so far as we have the scriptures for our aid) some few instances of the development of false spirits in more modern times, and in this our day. (Times and Seasons, 1 April 1842, quoted in T&C 147:10)

According to the History of Tacitus, soothsayers conducted Roman cornerstone ceremonies, and in order to please the gods, temples had to be built upon the ancient foundations of, well..., other temples.

The soothsayers, who were convened by him [Lucius Vestinus], advised that the ruins of the former shrine should be removed to the marshes, and a temple raised on an old foundation, for the gods would not permit a change in the ancient form. (History of Tacitus, quoted in Stellar Theology, p. 166)

Ancient form? What is he talking about? 

Were all temples built upon the foundations of other buildings? Is this some kind of universal law, or a massive deception/psyop to dupe us into believing that ancient buildings were rebuilt several times over on the same foundation?

(As a related side note, if you research any number of historic buildings in major cities, especially churches, cathedrals, and capitol buildings, you will find that many of them are said to have been destroyed by fire and rebuilt several times during the last 100 to 200 years. The more buildings you research the more predictable the narratives become.)

Tacitus further expounds upon the cornerstone ceremony, a grand celebration, featuring soldiers in uniform, a procession with live music, accompanied by priests, magistrates, knights, senators, and ordinary citizens with their frolicking children. Roman gods such as Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva were invoked with animal sacrifices and honored in prayers asking them to "prosper the undertaking" (this phrase is also found on the back of the 1 dollar bill, in Latin: annuit coeptis). The cornerstone was bound with wreaths and cords, and ferried to the site by the participants. The soothsayers had the final words, enjoining "that neither stone nor gold which had been applied to other uses should profane the building". (See Stellar Theology, p. 167)

Ancient cornerstone ceremonies, eerily reminiscent of the 19th century rituals performed by Brigham Young in Utah, were employed for buildings that were built upon existing foundations? 

Interestingly, the word foundation means "the act of founding", and found means "to discover." 

After quoting Tacitus, Brown then proceeds with his own commentary, stating that the Roman ceremony was probably derived from Egypt, and that all ancient temples were dedicated to the sun. These sun-worship temples faced east, with the NE and SE Cornerstones situated in a position that placed them directly in the path of the rising sun during both the winter and summer solstices. 

Thus, both the NE and SE corners, as well as the pillars named Jachin and Boaz, were each there own solstitial point; the distance between these two points was measured in degrees and made the front of a temple the chord of an arc (a portion of circumference between two points; a chord is also a group of musical notes played in harmonic consonance; ancient architecture was built to resonate with the musical scale). 

The chord of the arc is shown below between points A and B:

The spacing between the cornerstones at the front of the temple would depend upon the latitude of the location of the building site. The length of which would increase the farther north the building was located. To accommodate temples in the northern hemisphere, the buildings would have to be constructed in the shape of a double cube or an oblong square. 

An oblong square is simply a rectangle, a four-sided structure with one pair of its sides longer than the other pair, like the building pictured below:

Often, my research leaves me with more questions than answers. With my recent discovery of this description of ancient cornerstone ceremonies, a new list of questions concerning the origin of the SLT come to mind:

• Did Brigham Young discover an ancient solar temple, fully built and preserved, in 1847 when he arrived in Utah?
• Did Brigham find only an ancient foundation (of sandstone and granite) and begin the construction of a new edifice on top of it that would take forty years?
• Does this account for the anomalies in the historical records that attempt to explain the origins of the temple foundation?
• Or, was the confusion surrounding the foundation deliberately inserted into the narrative to parallel the "ancient form" we read about in Tacitus' account?

As always, I don't know the answers. All I know for sure is that the stories we're told by the LDS Church don't add up. 

More Clues from LDS Living Magazine

A 2018 article in LDS Living reveals some of the original architectural plans for the Salt Lake Temple. It is entitled:

What the Salt Lake Temple Might Have Looked Like

These original plans are very interesting to say the least. If they would have been implemented the temple would appear much more "Tartarian" than it does today, which leads me to believe that they may have found the temple adorned with these strange details and removed them when the building was repurposed.

In this first photo, taken from the article, we can see that they had plans to carve Saturn stones onto each buttress, as well as faces in the sunstones. We're told that they did not implement these designs because of the difficulty of carving granite. 

I wonder whose idea it was to include Saturn stones (the article doesn't specify)? 

Saturn has been associated with Satan and darkness for centuries. The Romans worshipped a god named Saturnalia, the Greeks called him Kronos (or Chronos; where we get our modern word chronology), the Egyptians associated him with Osiris. 

Saturn has had many names throughout the centuries: the Dark Lord, the Lord of the Rings, Father Time, the Father of the gods, etc. 

Saturn is the god of punishment and control. Today Saturn is venerated by the black robes worn by judges, as well as the square hats ands tassels used in graduation ceremonies. The planet is represented by the hexagon, the Star of David (Remphan), and the cube. Saturn even has his own day of week, Saturday, or Saturn's day.

(For more on the history of Saturn, I wrote about it here and here.)

Would a supposed Christian religion really adorn a building with such graven images?

Or, were these Saturn stones there when the pioneers showed up in 1847 and subsequently removed?

This next photo is a rendition of the statues that were originally in the empty niches we see by the front entrance of the temple today: 

We are told in the article that the niches were designed to hold statues of Joseph and Hyrum, and that actual statues were added to the niches some twenty years after the temple was completed. These statues, we're told, were relocated to other places in temple square later.

This story is highly suspect to me. Why would they venerate Joseph and Hyrum with these statues? Joseph Smith never got any credit in Utah until the 1990s, when they changed the name of the Hotel Utah to the Joseph Smith Memorial Building. Literally everything else in Utah was named after or associated with Brigham Young. 

Furthermore, why would they mold these graven images of mortal men and place them at the temple entrance? LDS scriptures are replete with warnings against making graven images of any kind; why would they ignore these verses when constructing their temple to the Most High God?

Here we can see the one of the empty niches today:

No doubt that countless brides and grooms and their families have taken photos at this very spot. I wonder if any of them were ever curious about these empty statue niches appearing in the background of their wedding albums? 

I wonder what kind of graven images were initially found in these niches? Was it griffins, dragons, lions, wyverns, or any other number of gargoyles that we see on old world buildings today?

Now we come to something otherworldly. The original plans also included:

Carved faces at the top of each of the 22 columns in the Celestial Room.

What? 

Can you imagine having all these faces staring at you after finishing an endowment session in the SLT celestial room? 

Creepy to say the least. And reminiscent of so many faces that we see in, and on, old world buildings today. Here a few from my personal photo album.

This first one I took at a hotel in New Orleans:

 This one is from the inside of a cathedral in Boston:

These are from the Salt Lake City County Building:

And this one is from the room in the Salt Lake City Capitol Building where politicians meet today:

Do you see the lion with the inverted pentagram on his chest? 

I'll get into the symbolism of these pentagrams in a later post. We can find inverted pentagrams all over the SLT temple, at least before renovations began in 2020:

Original plans called for even more pentagrams in the windows:

Here is another original plan for some of the windows: 

This one shows 21 circle and square symbols under one inverted pentagram above the keystone. The keystone represents the Royal Arch, or the highest portion of the Zodiac where the sun is found during the summer solstice. It represents strength and is often associated with lions and kings. The circle in the center of the arch represents the sun in this position of strength.

To read for the LDS Living article for yourself, click here.

I find it interesting timing that this article was released only one year prior to the announcement of the plans for the temple renovations in 2019. 

If some of these details existed in (and on) the SLT when the pioneers arrived in 1847, then what else have they removed from this building?

What did they remove during the 1960s renovations?

Indeed, what have they removed since renovations began in 2020?

I suppose we'll never know. 

Thanks for joining me for part II on the SLT. 

In the next post I'll be getting into the history of the story about covering up the temple foundation at the end of the 1850s, its reemergence in 1867, the occupation of Johnston's army in Utah, and how it actually bolstered Brigham Young's power over the LDS people. 

In meantime, if you want to learn more about Masonic rituals that have been exposed to the public, I suggest checking out the archived book below:

Morgan's Freemasonry: Exposed and Explained

And here are some new photos I have come across of the Salt Lake Temple and the no-longer-existing Saltair Pavilion:

Here you can see the old wall that appears to be falling apart and in the process of being torn down. Notice how mature the trees are. There is no date for this photo but it appears as if we are looking at an ancient temple. And where are the other buildings that were supposed to have been built before the temple?

This one is dated in 1892, the year the capstone ceremony was performed for the temple. Notice how built out the city is for this early time period. Look at the primitive scaffolding next to the spire looking like old world tech. (I will get into the capstone ceremony in a later post)

The rest of the photos are of the Saltair Pavilion (A Moorish temple) and resort that burned down in the 1920s, rebuilt and then burned down again in the 50s and 70s. It was said have been built in three months by the LDS Church in 1893, during winter time of course. The resort was ran by Nephi Clayton, William Clayton's son. I wrote about the Saltair in this post.