LDS Inc buys Kirtland Temple from Mormon rivals for $192 million

[drumdude]

It would be a great opportunity for a new temple ceremony, perhaps the Third Anointing? To make one’s calling and election made double secret probation sure?

[Doctor Steuss]

Chances are 100% that the Church will eventually make the Kirtland temple a functioning temple (although, the way things are going, there will not be many members left in the U.S. in 15 years). The Church will build a visitor's center on the grounds which will be open to the public. Problem solved.

I personally don't think so. At least not if there are even a handful of non-members that tour the site annually. It makes far more sense to keep it a tourist site, even for just a handful of non-member referrals a year, than undergo the massive expense (legal, material, etc.) to convert it to a functional temple.

One of the primary purposes of LDS historical sites (beyond member testimony pilgrimages) is to generate leads for missionaries. Almost any tour of a historical site ends with a push to fill out a form with your personal information for missionary contact. At least every one I've ever been on (the last was Brigham's house in St. George about 6 years ago).

[Kishkumen]

The CoC website has this FAQ:

Will we still have access to the Kirtland and Nauvoo historic sites in the future?

Yes. Beginning March 25, 2024, public access will remain for the Kirtland Temple, the Joseph Smith Family Homestead, the Mansion House, the Red Brick Store, and the Nauvoo House. We have a specific contractual agreement with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that extends for fifteen years. Beyond the contractual agreement we have received confirmation of the intention of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that they plan to continue to make these sites available to the public at no charge.

Community of Christ and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have maintained a collaborative relationship over the years. We have received assurance that this spirit of collaboration will continue with the same hospitality into the future.

Provisions have been made for Community of Christ groups to have exclusive special meetings or gatherings in Kirtland or Nauvoo. These exclusive events must be scheduled in advance through Community of Christ. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will provide opportunity for up to six meetings or gatherings per year. These meetings or gatherings will be consistent with what is done for their own membership.

Beyond the contractual agreement . . . meaning no contractual agreement, and the LDS Church is not bound by anything. That said, I hope the LDS Church does preserve the integrity of these sites and not create the usual slick visitor center proselyting trap they do elsewhere.

[Doctor Scratch]

I do wonder why the money wasn't used to build the FARMS ziggurat. Alternatively, FARMS could have purchased the Kirtland temple, moved it by truck to Provo, and contracted with E. C. Construction Company to reconstruct the temple into a ziggurat. (I suspect that D. Peterson would have been hired to handle the water witching on the property.)

A very helpful post, Tom--thank you. It seems to me that this is yet another one of those instances where "the mask drops," and we can see how contemptuous the Mopologists are towards other faiths. Dr. Peterson's ridicule of the Strangites--e.g., wanting to cast Pee-Wee Herman as James Strang in his film--was bad enough, and now here he is, openly admitting that he would have liked to have essentially "bought out" a crucial piece of CoC history. He's practically giddy, in fact! He and Midgley have been saying negative things about the CoC for decades--dismissing it as a second-rate, overly liberal "shadow" of the True Church, and now he's publicly gloating--exultant, even--about a key piece of their history getting taken away. Quite shameful, if you ask me.

And by the way: Which Church leader do you think it was that upbraided Dr. Peterson and FARMS for offering to buy the temple?

[Tom]

I do wonder why the money wasn't used to build the FARMS ziggurat. Alternatively, FARMS could have purchased the Kirtland temple, moved it by truck to Provo, and contracted with E. C. Construction Company to reconstruct the temple into a ziggurat. (I suspect that D. Peterson would have been hired to handle the water witching on the property.)

A very helpful post, Tom--thank you. It seems to me that this is yet another one of those instances where "the mask drops," and we can see how contemptuous the Mopologists are towards other faiths. Dr. Peterson's ridicule of the Strangites--e.g., wanting to cast Pee-Wee Herman as James Strang in his film--was bad enough, and now here he is, openly admitting that he would have liked to have essentially "bought out" a crucial piece of CoC history. He's practically giddy, in fact! He and Midgley have been saying negative things about the CoC for decades--dismissing it as a second-rate, overly liberal "shadow" of the True Church, and now he's publicly gloating--exultant, even--about a key piece of their history getting taken away. Quite shameful, if you ask me.

And by the way: Which Church leader do you think it was that upbraided Dr. Peterson and FARMS for offering to buy the temple?

Thank you for your comments and question, Doctor Scratch.

I feel prompted to ask several questions about the detail regarding the church leader:

A prominent leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, now deceased, somehow heard of that idea all the way up in Salt Lake City, and called down to tell us that it was inappropriate for a rogue band of scholars to own a temple.

Just how did a “prominent leader” learn of the Proprietor’s “half-serious suggestion” that FARMS make an offer to buy the Kirtland temple? Was his suggestion more serious than he indicates in his post? Did FARMS “leak like a sieve”?

I don’t know the identity of the church leader, but I hope it was either Elder Packer or Elder Maxwell.

[Markk]

I did a Google search and looked at the floor plan for the Temple. I was surprised at how small it is. The floor area of the Temple is about 15,000 sq. feet, in comparison to the SLC Temple of over 250,000 sq. feet. The San Diego Temple is over 70,000 sq. feet. The Redlands Temple, which is a few miles from where I live is just over 17,000 sq. feet and is a small Temple by LDS standards.

In looking at the Kirtland Temple design and purpose narrative, it was not designed for actual Temple ordinances. It is three stories. The first story is for services and worship...basically a chapel, but with a pulpit at each end. From what I gather the pews can be used in both directions.

The 2nd story also has pews and was used for the school of the prophets.

The 3rd story, at least half of it was used for high school during the day, and for quorum meetings at night...the other half was Joseph's office.

What I am getting at, because the Temple is on the historic register, it is simply not even close to having enough sq. footage to serve as a full service temple and still keep it's historic nature. It does not even have a baptismal font.

If the church were to remove the pews, build walls and corridors, etc. It would no longer be historical. I just can't see it happen, nor would I doubt that the church would ruin the original design and fabric of the Temple.

Also if the CoC has done previous restoration and seismic upgrades, and received government monies such as tax credits, then there is absolutely no way this could happen.

My guess is that they will restore the Temple in its original condition. And it will be a flagship for the church in regards to Temple PR.

Also, if you do a google map search you can see there is plenty of room for a full service Temple nearby. Also if you look at the visitor center's parking lot condition and roof...the Temple may need the same TLC, which show the CoC just does not have the means to give the building what it deserves in regard to restoration and preservation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7KLlPPw33M

[yellowstone123]

I don’t think the plan will be to covert the Kirtland temple into a functioning temple for the modern endowment. The temple is a National Historic Landmark and likely will be preserved as is.

Being on the register as a National Landmark does not necessarily mean it can't be used as a Temple, in fact I am almost certain it could. I just wonder if it was part of the sales agreement between the two parties? I have been in Historic preservation for almost three decades and have worked on several California Missions, most recently the San Gabriel Mission after a fire, and they hold services most everyday there and it is part of the LA diocese.

But you're correct that holding a service and converting are two different things. Once on the register the site is bound by the Secretary of Interior Guidelines for historic preservation. Which means that other than for fire, life, safety...it is almost impossible to change anything for adaptive reuse. But, it does not mean they cannot build a Temple for use, next to it on the same property or close by.

Fourth grade was great in California in the late 60s. We studied how Spain came over by boat and brought Christianity and steel weapons. Father Serra built all these missions or started towns: San Diego, San Juan Capistrano, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara etc. Every California school kid knew who father Serra was, Brigham Young, not so much. We took a big yellow bus to a mission. We made missions with plaster paris. As one got older, we learned lot of harm was caused by Spain to indigenous peoples. Later at a non Catholic or Protestant church we hear basically the same story but the California teachers that taught us used something called evidence. We went to the missions, the weapons were still around. I loved California and loved our missions.

[Tom]

Peterson claims credit…

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... r-day.html

I feel inspired to quote the Proprietor's post:

For its first several years, the old Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, or FARMS — the forerunner of what then became the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship and, organizationally speaking, of the post-2012 Maxwell Institute — was a fairly humble little operation running on a shoestring budget.

Then we received a huge donation, several orders of magnitude greater than anything we had ever received before.

The big question was what to do with it.

As I pondered FARMS’ history tonight (while sipping on a hot cup of home-brewed peppermint Postum), I was reminded of FARMS’ announcement in its June 1995 newsletter that the Ashtons had established a “significant” FARMS endowment. See “Major Endowment Will Support New FARMS Projects,” Insights: An Ancient Window, 15/3 (June 1995): 6.

Of course, 1995 was many years after FARMS’ “first several years.”

[Markk]

Being on the register as a National Landmark does not necessarily mean it can't be used as a Temple, in fact I am almost certain it could. I just wonder if it was part of the sales agreement between the two parties? I have been in Historic preservation for almost three decades and have worked on several California Missions, most recently the San Gabriel Mission after a fire, and they hold services most everyday there and it is part of the LA diocese.

But you're correct that holding a service and converting are two different things. Once on the register the site is bound by the Secretary of Interior Guidelines for historic preservation. Which means that other than for fire, life, safety...it is almost impossible to change anything for adaptive reuse. But, it does not mean they cannot build a Temple for use, next to it on the same property or close by.

Fourth grade was great in California in the late 60s. We studied how Spain came over by boat and brought Christianity and steel weapons. Father Serra built all these missions or started towns: San Diego, San Juan Capistrano, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara etc. Every California school kid knew who father Serra was, Brigham Young, not so much. We took a big yellow bus to a mission. We made missions with plaster paris. As one got older, we learned lot of harm was caused by Spain to indigenous peoples. Later at a non Catholic or Protestant church we hear basically the same story but the California teachers that taught us used something called evidence. We went to the missions, the weapons were still around. I loved California and loved our missions.

Yeah me too, even my kids did the Mission models. I have been blessed to be a part of restoration of some of the Missions and out buildings. What was really cool is at the most resent restoration/reconstruction, I got fairly close with the "father." He was so real.

I restored an out building (home) at the San Juan Capistrano Mission many years ago, named the Montanez Adobe. It is maybe 400 or 500 square feet, two rooms with a dirt floor, and a whole family lived there. Montanez was a Carpenter at the Mission and raised his family there. It just blows your mind when you work on these historic places how these folks lived. Many times I get a "hallowed feeling" that is indescribable. On the other hand I have been restoring a project for the past 3 years that has a different kind of history; here they filmed the Jackie Cooper classic "Treasure Island," the Bette Midler classic "Beaches," and this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUFSB2plwzM

[Imwashingmypirate]

For its first several years, the old Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, or FARMS — the forerunner of what then became the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship and, organizationally speaking, of the post-2012 Maxwell Institute — was a fairly humble little operation running on a shoestring budget.

Then we received a huge donation, several orders of magnitude greater than anything we had ever received before.

The big question was what to do with it.

One suggestion, advanced only half-seriously, was to make an offer to purchase the Kirtland Temple from the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, also now known as the Community of Christ. I was the one who made the suggestion.

We knew that they were in financial difficulties, and we had watched as they had distanced themselves more and more from Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. More to the point, one of their officials — a paid employee, not one of their ecclesiastical leaders — had actually approached us for a donation to cover much-needed repairs to the building. (He had apparently gotten wind of the huge donation.)

So I suggested, half in jest, that we offer to buy it altogether.

A prominent leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, now deceased, somehow heard of that idea all the way up in Salt Lake City, and called down to tell us that it was inappropriate for a rogue band of scholars to own a temple. But, of course, we were fully aware of that. My idea, to the extent that it was serious at all, wasn’t that we would own it. My thought, rather, was that the Reorganized Church might not want to sell the Kirtland Temple directly to the Utah Church, but that, as a face-saving measure, they might perhaps be willing to sell it to a third party. And, if we were that third party, my notion (again only half serious, if that) was that we would immediately turn around the next day and transfer ownership of the temple in Kirtland to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its proper custodian.

I, too, didn’t think it appropriate for private people or a private organization to own a temple. But, I thought, if we needed more money in order to complete the transaction, we would be able to raise the necessary sum within twenty-four to thirty-six hours at the most. There would be such enthusiasm among the membership that it would be an easy pitch. In fact, I doubted that a pitch would even be required at all.

Nothing came of the matter, of course. But I’ve never lost my hope that, someday, the Kirtland Temple, where so many important events had occurred and where so many divine manifestations had been received, would again belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Sometimes we shouldn't think out loud when so many people are watching.