Table of Contents
Book
16 Chapters
Items in the BMC Archive are made publicly available for non-commercial, private use. Inclusion within the BMC Archive does not imply endorsement. Items do not represent the official views of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or of Book of Mormon Central.
The Kirtland Temple stands at the head of a line of temples constructed by followers of Joseph Smith. Each time they moved, the Saints initiated plans for building temples, plans that were not always realized. In each case, the temple was to be the focal point of the larger city plan. For example, Joseph Smith's “Plat of the City of Zion,” which accompanied the Independence Temple plans, shows twenty-four temples forming a complex in the center of the city. Just what one would do with twenty-four temples was not specified, but given that the Kirtland Temple was to be a “house of learning . . . [and] a house of order” (D&C 88:119), educational and administrative uses can be understood as part of the temple functions. Furthermore, the dimensions and arrangement given in Doctrine and Covenants 94 for the Kirtland printing house are the same as those given for the Kirtland Temple, and both buildings are called, simply, “houses.” These similarities imply that if the printing house had been built as originally envisioned, it would have been considered a temple, also. These various functions may explain part of the need for multiple “temples” at what the Saints hoped would be the eventual headquarters of the Church. Thus Joseph Smith's designation of twenty- four temples may refer to an administrative center not unlike the building complexes that serve in Salt Lake City as the headquarters of the LDS Church and in Independence, Missouri, of the RLDS Church.1
After being forced out of Jackson County, Missouri, the intended site of the Independence Temple, the Saints laid and dedicated the cornerstone for a new temple in Far West, Missouri. The Saints also began to raise funds for construction.2 However, persecution in this area rapidly overtook the Mormon communities, and the plans were never realized.
The next temple built, and the only other temple fully designed under the leadership of Joseph Smith, was the Nauvoo Temple, which was begun in 1841 and completed in 1846. The Nauvoo Temple plans called for a building about 128 feet by 88 feet, approximately a 60 percent increase over the dimensions of the Kirtland Temple. Because of the building’s increased size, the interstitial spaces between floors to each side of the arched ceiling were tall enough to hold a series of offices. The Nauvoo Temple was built of cut limestone, not rubble sandstone plastered over to look like cut stone. The general plan established in Kirtland was followed in Nauvoo, with the proportion of length to breadth roughly the same in both temples and as were the two large congregational spaces and sets of double pulpits intended for each space. This time, however, Joseph Smith could capitalize on the skills of a trained architect, William Weeks, who produced several preliminary renderings (fig. 9-2). Owing to the skill of Weeks, the original design of the Nauvoo Temple was not a combination of several architectural styles but was a far more coherent composition in the Greek Revival style.3
Specific elements in the Nauvoo Temple design can be attributed directly to Joseph Smith. The sun and moon motifs on the capitals and bases of the pilasters certainly were done under his direction. In addition, the preliminary concept of Gothic arches in the pediment window recalls the specification of “gothic tops” for the windows in Kirtland. Happily, this Gothic detailing was eliminated in final designs, as it does not blend well with the boldly articulated Greek Revival shell. Joseph directed that the pediment be replaced with a full attic story on the facade to provide additional office space (fig. 9-3). Having commissioned the construction of one temple and various schoolhouses, offices, and homes, Joseph began to voice aesthetic opinions as well. Despite the architect’s objections, Joseph was determined to include round windows in place of the semicircular ones on the side elevation.4
The construction of the Nauvoo Temple was radically different from that of the Kirtland Temple. Weeks's detailed drawings eliminated the errors in design that can result from overlooking structural spaces. Furthermore, the initial construction phases were not marked by scarcity of materials and workers as they were in Kirtland although there were some problems. Truman Angell recalled that the foundations were “much botched” by the committee that began construction.5 But this problem seems to have resulted from a lack of communication between the committee and the architect and not from a lack of architectural expertise.
The larger Nauvoo Temple was also designed for a more elaborate series of functions. Because baptisms on behalf of the dead had been instituted, the basement was provided with a large baptismal font instead of a dirt crawl space. Like its Solomonic counterpart, this font sat on the backs of twelve oxen.6
A key functional difference between the Kirtland and Nauvoo Temples is the provision for the expanded endowment ceremony, which was initiated in Nauvoo. This ceremony portrays the history of the earth from the Creation up to the establishment of God’s law on earth. In the endowment, faithful Saints make personal promises to God. Prior to the completion of the Nauvoo Temple, Joseph Smith conducted endowments and sealings with close associates in an upper room of his red brick store. Joseph Smith was murdered before the Nauvoo Temple was completed, and Brigham Young later continued these ceremonies in the temple. The temple endowment marks a point of departure between the LDS and RLDS Churches. The RLDS Church rejects much of the doctrine, including temple ceremonies, that the LDS Church believes Joseph Smith established in Nauvoo.
The endowment ceremony was conducted in the Nauvoo Temple in the long central area of the attic that was flanked by offices.7 Unlike the roof of the Kirtland Temple, whose king-post trusses divided the attic space into five separate areas, the Nauvoo Temple roof was framed with a queen-post truss, which leaves the central portion of the attic undivided. Curtains organized the large attic space into cubicles sized appropriately for the endowment, eliminating the need to divide up the larger congregational spaces in the rooms below.8 An unusual access complication was thus created: the basement and attic had precisely defined functions that were not open to public viewing, while the two main congregational spaces (the upper one of which was never finished) were intended for public meetings.
The awkwardness of this division was never realized, however, because the Nauvoo Temple was still incomplete when the Saints were driven out of the city.9 Most of the Saints left under duress in February 1846, while a skeleton crew of carpenters and joiners under the supervision of Truman Angell finished the structure10—the commitment to complete the temple against all odds, originally demonstrated in Kirtland, was fully evident in Nauvoo. The temple was finally dedicated in a secret session on April 30, 1846, and in a public session the following day. It must have been with some emotion that Wilford Woodruff (who later became the fourth president of the LDS Church), Orson Hyde, and Joseph Young, along with Angell and his crew, closed the doors after the dedication ceremonies and essentially abandoned the temple on which they had worked so long and hard. The crew then joined the ten thousand Saints and their leaders who had already settled on the banks of the Missouri River and were making preparations for the trek west.
The Nauvoo Temple survived the following summer but must have sustained substantial superficial damage when the city was attacked by the “Carthage guerrillas” in September and the remaining six hundred Saints were driven across the Mississippi River. The extent of such damage is largely a moot point as an arsonist’s fire gutted the structure in November 1848. The blackened walls were leveled by a tornado in May 1850, and in later years, local inhabitants used the site as a quarry.
The next temple employing the Kirtland pattern of two stacked congregational rooms was the Salt Lake Temple, whose site was designated July 28, 1847, only four days after Brigham Young arrived in the Salt Lake Valley. This temple became the first to function as a city’s focal point, a function envisioned in 1833 by Joseph Smith in his “Plat of the City of Zion.”11 When William Weeks found conditions in the frontier religious community not to his liking, Truman Angell, who had finished major portions of the temple in Kirtland and supervised the final phase of construction in Nauvoo, became the official architect of the Salt Lake Temple.
Originally designed to follow the basic pattern established in Kirtland, the Salt Lake Temple was to have had two main congregational spaces, each provided with sets of pulpits at each end.12 Similar to that of the Nauvoo Temple, the plan for the Salt Lake Temple included a baptismal font in the basement and offices in the mezzanine floors beside the arched ceilings of the main spaces. A departure from the pattern was necessary, however, because the roof pitch was not high enough for additional rooms in the attic to be used for temple ceremonies. The original intent seems to have been to use either one of the main rooms or the mezzanine offices for temple ceremonies.
An obvious difference between the Salt Lake Temple and the Kirtland and Nauvoo Temples is the multiple towers at each end representing offices in the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods. However, the most significant difference from the Kirtland-Nauvoo tradition is the Salt Lake Temple’s radical change in style. Rather than employ current architectural fashion (relative to the skills of available craftsmen), the Salt Lake Temple follows a nonacademic design best described as castellated Gothic. The Gothic period is characterized by decorative battlements, or crenellations, on the roof parapet and by squared towers topped by pointed spires. A rather successful design composition, the temple’s thick stone walls beautifully communicate its pioneer heritage, while the castellations perhaps reflect an unconscious desire to defend it against the fate that befell the Nauvoo Temple (fig. 9-4).13
The temple’s unique design is generally attributed to Truman Angell, for he drew the initial designs and plans (fig. 9-5). However, the design’s attribution is more complex than is generally conceded. First, the heavy, massive wall buttresses are very different from the lighter, more planar ornament used by Angell in the Kirtland Temple. Second, the overall proportions of the Salt Lake Temple are more pleasing than are those of other buildings designed by Truman Angell, for example, Angell’s plans for a state capitol in Fillmore, Utah, and for a temple in St. George, Utah. These two structures are awkwardly designed and reflect the work of someone with little training in aesthetic composition. The oversized, stilted dome of the Fillmore capitol and the squat, undersized spire designed (but never built) for the St. George Temple show that Angell’s main skill was in working with his hands and not in designing. On the other hand, the Salt Lake Temple design with its sturdy, but well-proportioned, towers bespeaks a sensitive aesthetic eye, although one that was academically untrained. The person who had painted and glazed the Kirtland Temple, who had succeeded Joseph Smith as a prophet and who directly supervised Angell’s work—Brigham Young—is surely the one who envisioned the very successful design of the Salt Lake Temple.
One of Angell’s assistants, William Ward, described the beginnings of Brigham Young’s involvement in the temple’s design:
Brigham Young drew upon a slate in the architect’s office a sketch, and said to Truman O. Angell: “There will be three towers on the east, representing the President and his two Counselors; also three similar towers on the west representing the Presiding Bishop and his two Counselors; the towers on the east the Melchisedek priesthood, those on the west the Aaronic preisthood [sic]. The center towers will be higher than those on the sides, and the west towers a little lower than those on the east end. The hody of the building will be between these and pillars will be necessary to support the floors.” Angell... drew the following vertical section according to Brigham’s instructions. ... The second story like the first. The construction of the roof was left to Mr. Angell.14
The most immediate source for the Salt Lake Temple's Gothic style would have been the Early English period of architecture. In 1856, Brigham Young sent Angell to England on a mission partly to study architecture. Angell described the purpose of that mission in his diary:
I am now makeing ready for a visit to Europe my ame [aim] will be to vissit the works of men a preaching as I go at the same time visit [?] the old cathed- erals &c&c and seek to improve the art of building if the experence can be got more extenelly then at home.15
Howe'ver, this mission to England occurred two years after the initial design of the Salt Lake Temple was published in 18’4. Not only was it impossible for this trip to have any effect on the style chosen for the initial design of the Salt Lake Temple, but Angell also remained singularly unimpressed with the architecture he saw. On the other hand, Brigham Young had seen English cathedrals firsthand during his 1840 mission to England fourteen years before the public announcement of the Salt Lake Temple's design.
Ward states that he never heard any discussion of style between Brigham Young and Truman Angell, and he implies that the choice of a Gothic style was Angell's.16 However, the differences in experience between the President and the architect indicate Brigham Young was certainly the source of the temple's style.17 Brigham Young would have been primarily responsible for the overall style and composition of the Salt Lake Temple, while Angell would have worked out the details and benefited from Brigham Young's craftsman's eye.
While the choice of the Gothic style certainly reflected the temple's cultural associations with the great cathedrals of Europe, the Salt Lake Temple does not replicate any building from England or anywhere else. Both Brigham Young and Angell sought to create a building that did not copy the buildings of the religious world that had rejected them.18
Another major difference between the Kirtland and the Salt Lake Temples was a heightened concern for permanence. During the construction of the Kirtland Temple, Church members optimistically prepared for the establishment of the New Jerusalem and the imminent return of Jesus Christ. While the object of their preparation had not changed, the general perception of its time frame had. The Saints expected the Salt Lake Temple to last not only until a distant Second Coming, but also through the thousand years of the Millennium.19
Due to this expectation of longevity and probably due to the observation of settlements and cracks in the Kirtland Temple, particular care was taken with the foundations of the Salt Lake Temple. In 1858 the foundations were covered over to hide them from the approaching Johnston's army, a disciplinary force sent to curb the “rebellion” reported by the territorial governor, who apparently was frustrated by Brigham Young's de facto power.20 When the foundations were uncovered several years later, the red sandstone had cracked. As a consequence, the upper sections of the foundation were torn out and replaced with more durable granite blocks. At one point, Brigham Young championed the use of adobe for the structure, arguing that over time it would solidify into a solid rock mass.21 Fortunately, he was overruled by others, and a hard, durable granite was eventually chosen.
During the construction of the Salt Lake Temple, another temple was built in St. George, Utah. Begun in 1871 and dedicated in 1877, this smaller structure was built rapidly, in contrast to the Sait Lake Temple, whose hewn granite blocks required tremendous amounts of time to prepare. Like the Kirtland Temple, the St. George Temple was built of a rough local stone and then plastered over. Obviously this building technique recalled Artemus Millett’s contribution at Kirtland. However, at St. George no lines were painted on the temple’s surface to imitate cut stone. Instead, its architect, Truman Angell, leaned heavily on his experience from the Salt Lake Temple design, employing similar stepped wall buttresses, window patterns, and a castellated parapet. The brilliant white stucco covering provides a dramatic contrast with the red cliffs that surround St. George, and the light and shadow of the buttresses handsomely articulates the surface of the temple.
However, as was mentioned previously, the overall proportioning of the building is awkward at best. Angell, who loved to work with his hands, could replicate ornament from pattern books with great skill but could not deal effectively with overall design. The short, stubby spire in the original design (as well as the original cupola (fig. 9-1), which was replaced with a taller, more elegant cupola after being struck by lightning) looks like it was proportioned to fit on the sheet of paper on which the plan was drawn rather than designed to provide an effective accent to the vertical wall buttresses (fig. 9-6).
The interior arrangement of the St. George Temple is virtually identical to that of the previous completed temples, having two large rooms with arched ceilings (fig. 9-7). The St. George Temple’s lower roof pitch does not allow for attic rooms. To accommodate the temple ceremonies, a light framework to hold curtains was erected in the center of the large open room.22 But the St. George Temple was the last to preserve the internal arrangement developed in Kirtland. The Salt Lake Temple interior was modified before completion (as were the interiors of the Logan and Manti Temples) to provide four separate rooms that could be occupied in succession as the endowment ceremony progressed.
However, all the nineteenth-century temples (as well as larger twentiethcentury ones) continue the Kirtland tradition of an upper court, now called a solemn assembly room. These rooms retain the multiple pulpits placed at each end of the hall. However, no curtains are provided in the solemn assembly rooms, and in several of the temples, the lower ceilings above the side seating areas have been replaced with a balcony to provide additional seating.
As of 1996, approximately sixty temples are built or planned by the LDS Church. The introduction of audiovisual media in the temple ceremony greatly changed the physical requirements of temple plans. As a consequence, temples built after World War II share only formal imagery with the early temples. However, temples continue to be the focal point of Latter-day Saint worship, serving as physical symbols of the Latter-day Saint faith. Temples and the RLDS Church
The temple-building tradition of the RLDS Church has been markedly different from that of the LDS Church since the RLDS Church rejects postKirtland Temple doctrine.23 When the RLDS Church established their headquarters in Independence, Missouri, they had to deal with the plot of land dedicated by Joseph Smith for the construction of the Independence Temple. This plot was designated as the point of “gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion. . . . The city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation” (D&C 84:2, 4). The persecutions in Independence and surrounding counties from 1833 through 1839 had prevented the fulfilment of this command, but by inference, establishing the New Jerusalem required building a temple there.
In 1968, President W. Wallace Smith received a revelation instructing the RLDS Church to build the Independence Temple.24 The 1968 revelation concerning the temple was not without controversy since the adoption of temples had been one of the outward differences that distinguished the RLDS and LDS Churches from each other. However, one of the provisions added to the revelation fatly states that no “secret ordinances,” referring to ceremonies such as those in LDS temples, would be performed in the temple.25
The architectural plans were unveiled twenty years later. Much like the Kirtland Temple, the twentieth-century RLDS Temple in Independence serves as a general administrative center, educational center, and headquarters for the first presidency. In contrast to the unusual spire and strikingly beautiful sanctuary interior, the office wing attached to the sanctuary directly relates to the function of the attic offices in the Kirtland Temple.
The architectural form of the RLDS Independence Temple reflects the contemporary stance of the church towards its historical past. Designed by the well-known architectural firm of Hellmuth, Obata, and Kassabaum, the temple, with its conchlike spiral above the sanctuary, represents a complete stylistic break from LDS temple architecture and the Kirtland Temple form (fig. 9-8). In spite of the RLDS Church’s tendency to divide into traditional and progressive camps—the former wishing to emphasize Joseph Smith Jr.’s role in the history of the Church, the latter desiring to align itself more closely with mainstream Protestantism—the design managed to appeal to all. The mere presence of a temple appeals to the traditionalists, while the unusual design appeals to the progressives. Although the temple’s functional role in the RLDS Church is still evolving, it seems clear that the Temple in Independence will not be the first of a series, as in LDS tradition, but rather will remain the sole RLDS temple.
Book
16 Chapters
© 2024 Scripture Central: A Non-Profit Organization. All rights reserved. Registered 501(c)(3). EIN: 20-5294264