It's difficult to comment as a non-religious person who sees the Mormon religion as a cult, but this overdone and rather cold opulence would not inspire me if I were religious. I feel no warmth, no soul, it's all pomp and show. The first picture made me feel that this could be an overdone version of the White House.

I am not going to comment at this point because I wanted to hear what other people had to say, divorced or not from a religious context.

It is certainly a lovely structure lit up at night. The interior makes me think of all the many interminable business conferences I've sat in at Ritz Carltons.

I'm not religious, but I do prefer the Quaker way of things, where funds are put to more practical uses. I don't think grand ornate structures enlighten as much as intimidate.

Just read this in the comments: 'I’m worried that Mormons ‘in good standing’ will be disappointed by the "level of finish" in heaven compared to the architecture and interiors in this place!'

Good point! As architecture goes, this is stunning. Reminiscent of some portions of The White House.

It's beautiful, IMO, and I love the reproductions of historic Philly Federal architecture.

When the Mormon Temple was built in Orlando they had a brief period when the general public could come in for a tour (maybe two weeks). After that period, everything was ripped out and replaced (I know textiles for sure, but can't remember if furniture, flooring, etc. was also removed) so that it would be "pure" again. What a waste of money!

Donna

A little too much beige for me. I really like the floral on the settees in the celestial room. Is it just me or would you expect a celestial room to have a lot more blue?

I do love grand/ornate public spaces. I wish there was a good excuse for them.

It looks more like a fancy hotel than a place of worship. And as impersonal as a hotel, as well.

Uhh, I think the "Motel 6" of churches surely has to go to the Quakers.

I lived in Dallas when the new church was built there, and always regretted not visiting before it was dedicated. I worked for Marriott Hotels at the time (the Marriotts are LDS) and we had many church members stay with us when they came to visit the church.

(My old iPad here is so slow loading the pictures, I may have to go visit it in person if I want to see what it looks like.)

scoutfinch, I don't think your post was off-topic, really. I had heard the "removal of finishes" thing after the public viewing thing before, and I assumed it was an urban legend. In any case I can't imagine the disposal of the interior of this place...

I am a practicing Roman Catholic and a current Philadelphian, so 1) I can't judge any faith on the ornateness of their places of worship and 2) this building has be be put in the context of Philadelphia.

This is splitting hairs, but the interior is more Colonial or Georgian than it is Federal, so it is more elaborate and English in origin than American Federal which is much like this, also based in Greek Classicism but a little more spare, with simpler details.

But as Scoutfinch has said this temple is influenced by local Philadelphia architecture, and even some of the oldest Catholic churches in Philadelphia have architectural details like this on the interior, which are generally more associated with Protestant churches. The old Philadelphia churches of various denominations that have Georgian or Federal interiors are simpler probably mostly because the United States was a new country, and they didn't have the budget more than anything else (Speaking from the Catholic point of view where simplicity was not part of the vocabulary when it came to places of worship at least until Vatican II.)

So, in my opinion, they got the interior architectural details right, and the furniture is right.

As a general critique of all 21st century architecture done in the classical style, I would say my criticisms of the building are that perhaps the symmetry is too exact, and that the rooms as a whole seem overlit, especially for a church. (This again may be my Catholic experience where often the altar is brightly lit but the body of the church itself is not).

They were really big on symmetry in the Georgian and Federal periods to the extent of putting in false doors and "covered over windows" that were never there to begin with, but there is a certain amount of imperfection to much of the historical architecture in Philadelphia, where the symmetry may be just a little off kilter, and I think that gives it a little life.

All public buildings and many new construction residences are way over-lighted for my taste, and the temple seems as if it would actually be hot inside with all that lighting.

But overall I like it a lot and think the interior architecture is authentic and handsome. The furniture arrangement is probably strictly prescribed by function so there isn't going to be much spontaneity there, but that's a given for purpose built spaces.

There is a plainer meeting house for worship right across the street from this one as well. Apparently that will remain open to the public.

And I think the "Motel 6 of churches" has to go to the struggling small evangelical or store-front Baptist churches of many cities. Quaker austerity is way too elegant for Motel Six.

Thanks for your comments, scoutfinch. They were thoughtful and appropriate for this thread.

My husband and I (we are Presbyterians) visited Nauvoo, Illinois, several years ago just to explore and learn more about the Mormon religion. It was an interesting experience, and we especially enjoyed an evening performance by students from BYU.

And I think the "Motel 6 of churches" has to go to the struggling small evangelical or store-front Baptist churches of many cities. Quaker austerity is way too elegant for Motel Six.

Ideally elegant, often "deferred maintenance" but true, not usually store-front.

This is what a typical LDS chapel looks like. This is where we hold our weekly meetings, and yes they are all open to anyone of any faith. I'm a convert to the church and we have many friends of other faiths, as well as my entire Irish Catholic family, who have attended our services when one of our babies was blessed or a child baptized. Temples like the one in Philadelphia are used for weddings and other ordinances and after they are dedicated are considered sacred and only open to members of our faith. When my niece was married a few months ago in the temple they also had a ceremony in a park for her DH's family who are not of our faith.

Until I visited the newly built temple in San Diego several years ago, having been raised Catholic, always thought Catholic churches were the most ornate. I always wondered 'why' it was that way, not to mention the maintenance(not the simple things taken care of by the congregation)costs, although that was probably part of the Sunday collection. Is there some sort of 'church competition' of who has the biggest and the best, or are the Catholic churches simply thought of as 'smaller versions' of the Vatican? FYI, no longer a practicing Catholic, but can respect it's teachings.

I didn't read the article but did read both front page articles in the Inquirer this morning. Biggest criticisms that I saw were about the placement of the buildings (there are three in the complex) and how they do not add to the community much at all. The exteriors and the placement seem to set the buildings apart as aloof and cold, Which is sad.

I'm looking forward to visiting the Temple, I think we have a month before they close it to non-worshippers. I thought the photographs were beautiful, it indeed is a little cold and reminiscent of a up-scale hotel. I appreciate the fact that they made a concerted effort to incorporate Philadelphia historic details in the building and I found it interesting to learn that Joseph Smith was baptized in Harmony, Susquehanna County in upstate PA.

I have 2 Friends Meeting Houses within 3 miles of my home and another 3 within 10 miles - which isn't unusual since so many of the early settlers of my little town were members of the Society of Friends and we still have many Quakers here. I've only been in the 2 closest to me and find them simple but comforting - DDIL is Quaker and I must admit that their austerity is at times a refreshing change from the opulence and at times garishness of the many RC churches that I have attended.

I live here, and I work several days a week a few blocks from the site, and I really don't understand the "contribution to the community" comments. The site is immediately next to the surface feeders of a submerged expressway and most of the site was bleak looking parking lots before they built on the site. There is no "community" there. The Vine St. Expressway killed all that 30+ years ago.

I think it is beautiful.

Ah, I'm new to town, and just saying what was in the paper. It is difficult to set anything into such a site. Was on the Vine St Xway a couple of weeks ago. pretty bleak.

I toured the San Diego Mormon temple when it was new. Yes, we had to wear paper booties, although I think ours were blue, not white.

From what I remember from that tour, the temples are less about a central sanctuary (what you generally think of when you think of a church interior--lots of pews and an altar) and more about a series of smaller rooms designed for the types of activities, rituals, and ceremonies that are done at the temple (as opposed to the neighborhood Mormon church). If it looks like a conference center, I think that is because the temple functions lend themselves to that kind of layout, rather than what you'd expect at, say, a Catholic cathedral.

For what it's worth, I grew up in an area with a large Mormon population and had many Mormon friends as a kid. While the Mormon community seemed more tight-knit than your typical Protestant or Catholic community, it hardly rises to the level of a cult. The kids wend to public school and everyone engaged with the greater community. If they thought that they were going to be saved and I was going to burn in hell (and I'm sure they did), they never said so to my face. The Mormon kids I knew were mostly good students, hard working and well behaved (there were a few rowdy ones). Yes, there are loony Mormon practicing polygamy in the wilds of Utah, but there are lots of loony Christians doing lots of loony "Christian" stuff in other parts of the country. Neither group of loonies is representative of their religion as a whole.

Edited to add: I just realized that in my 2nd to last sentence I drew a comparison between Mormons and Christians, as if Mormons didn't believe in Jesus Christ. I should have said "loony mainstream Christians."

sushi I know you were just reporting the article. :) I've seen similar comments and I am not sure what the commentator's expectations must be for an individual builder. There is no existing streetscape to engage on most of the perimeter and I am not sure LDS should be expected to create one from scratch when there is little possible further development of more in the future.

The millwork is gorgeous, or at least to my untrained fast eye, it looks so. The chandy's too. The tile angle and the carpeting, all that BLUE: in the window and pool, and the sofa's and palms, all yuck. Too many styles going on and no style.

Actually all the free standing furniture is perfectly in period with the style of the building (not the theater seating) and the carpet is a toned down interpretation of the period, and the diagonal checkerboard floor is period Philadelphia. It's probably the most stylistically consistent newly built historic revival styled interior I've seen in a long time. It's really all done in a single style. (With some purpose built things related to ceremony excepted).

(That doesn't mean you have to like it).

Does this really look like a neighborhood that has a community to engage?

The temple is behind where the stoplight is

The meeting house is in this parking lot, and the first low white building the the background has been empty for years.

And this is standing between the new temple and meeting house and looking the other way. Across four lanes of feeder traffic separated by six lanes of semi submerged expressway. The curved building is part of a university health system, or was. It may be something else now.

I currently live in an area that has quite a lot of Mormons and most of them attend the public schools with my kids. I agree with the comments made by Cawaps. My son earned his Eagle Scout with the local Mormon Scout Troop ... their troop is open to any faith, color, nationality and from my observation at some events, even a few gay boys.

The reason we joined this troop is that they expect the Church members to step up and run the Scout program ... it is an amazingly well organized one and one that produces a high number of Eagle Scouts. Probably due to it being a good preparation for the boys when they head out for their missionary assignments.

I am not religious, but I joked with my husband that if we had moved to the area when the kids were little, that I would have considered joining the Mormon church to take advantage of the amazing support and connections that they provide for their members. They are also very prepared to take care of themselves during major emergencies and natural disasters, which seems like a common sense and wise thing to do!

I too am LDS. I appreciate the thread, having not seen it before and the comments about the style etc. I know very little about style and architecture so it is really interesting to hear people talk about the different parts of the temple and explain what they are.

One of my first thoughts about seeing the pictures is "this is a little different", but I really couldn't put my finger on much. The one big place I could was the material on the couches in the celestial room - generally the fabric is more subdued. They sometimes have a pattern, but more of a monotone pattern. The red, green and blue flowers stand out here knowing what many other rooms look like. The blue chair in the same room is really unusual.

The carpet in the sealing room is different than I have seen in the more recent temples. It looks more like a quilt pattern. In most of the new temple I have been in they do a carpet carving. Usually longer lines in a design. It's hard to see it most pictures, but I love it in person. You can see a little bit in this picture: https://c7.staticflickr.com/7/6169/6182188974_d98477c6df.jpg I learned a little while ago that for many of the temple and man and his son come in and draw a line with a black sharpie and then cut out where the line was. Really quite a talent. Anyway, the Pennsylvania temple has quite a different look than the more sleek lines.

----

If they thought that they were going to be saved and I was going to burn in hell (and I'm sure they did), they never said so to my face.

No, they didn't. lol out view of hell means that a person has to know they are doing wrong and do it anyway to get there. So if you are a basically good person in another church you won't make it to hell.

The rugs are modern interpretations of historic carpet patterns of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, various Trellis, Tile, and Diaper patterns. The drapery in the instruction room is a type of thing that was often mimicked in wallpaper--Physick house has a room papered in swag pattern paper.

Reading Pal's comments, and rereading the article, it is obvious that they thoughtfully pulled from Philadelphia's architecture and history for the design. Which is nice, and probably the exception rather than the rule when it comes to designing non-residential buildings.

Good to know that at least someone thinks I won't burn in hell.

I originally intended to view the building purely objectively as new construction in a historical style (which, imo, is often done poorly). But since 1) I was linking to a site that identified what it was, and 2) had I posted a number of the pictures that have obvious but maybe obscure ceremonial purposes (but not identified what it was), it pretty much turned into a discussion of the building in its religious context.

But completely out of context and only evaluated as new construction in a historical style, I think they did an "authentic" job, with the exception of the heavily commercial lighting style.

seagrass, oh wow! Totally Job's Daughters, only our Masonic Hall wasn't quite as upscale, but very reminiscent (former Second and Fifth Messenger).

I do like the creamy wall/trim color. Overall, it's nice, but not my cup of tea for a worship space. I don't quite understand Mormonism, but I don't think of it as a cult and find most Mormons to be very nice people.

ETA: "revolting" is the last thing I'd call the Vatican.

Didn't want to explain myself..but the Vatican really disturbed me. Too much opulence for a religion that preys on the poor.

If you think Catholicism preys on the poor, seagrass, then I gather any style to decorate the Vatican would have disturbed you. I suppose you think the church's building and staffing thousands of Catholic schools ( largely for poor immigrants) and hospitals is preying on the poor.

I really don't want this to turn into a thing about religion. The post is about a building.

Late to the thread, and am trying to view it in the context of a building. To this rube, my first impression was of it being unusually over lit. Even a Ritz Carlton (a great reference) usually isn't this lit (and has even bolder versions of the patterns Pal referenced). The lighting in the ceilings and the extensive use of uplights seems intended to draw the eye upward. I was wondering if this was the effect in real life or is it just the photos that seem to emphasize it.

As far as the remarks re "overlit" go, these look like pro photos. Most pros bring in stage lights and/or Photoshop afterwards to lighten up and show more detail.

If you have ever been to Hearst Castle and tried to shoot photographs, even with the best equipment it will NEVER come out as well as the photos done for the guidebook photos. They bring in a ton of supplemental lighting to do the shoot and then immediately take it all down.

Have to say as a Buddhist I was pretty shocked to hear the LDS described as "a cult". I thought we'd gotten past most of the public displays of intolerance but I guess recent events have shown differently. How very, very sad.

This is the Mormon temple in Oakland, CA. It's always lit up at night and is absolutely beautiful up on the hillside. It's taken from the very top of the Oakland hills, looking down towards the SF Bay. Those are the San Bruno mountains against the sky, with the Pacific Ocean behind them.