Comments about ‘Rising from ashes: Ground is broken for LDS Church's 2nd temple in Provo’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, May 12 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
jeb2nd
PROVO, UT

A most beautiful experience on this beaming saturday morning, overhadowed, however by a stunning violation of security protocol, i.e.the overflight of a single balloon. It was fun to watch it float over the ceremony, but in this crazy world, how easy someone could have dropped something into the crowd... Sad to even have to think about those things, but I hope it was 'under control"
concerned,
jb

InspectorC
Wasatch Front, UT

Can someone (ANYone!!?) please explain WHY the old, burned-out tabernacle shell is still standing, and WHY it has all of the bracing, scaffolding, tarping, window masking and other preservation measures that have been used??

Why wasn't it just demolished after the fire??? Are they planning to KEEP the old shell and "restore" it/transform it into the new temple? Otherwise, why was the old burned-out building even saved?

I'm confused! This might sound like a totally stupid question, but I just CANNOT figure out what in the world they're doing there... and NO news media has ever explained this issue (to the best of my knowledge.)

Esquire
Springville, UT

As a Utah Country native whose ancestors settled Provo, I still feel the sense of history and roots. I hope that the true historical character of Provo and surrounding towns will always be there. I am optimistic that this new temple will be a contribution.

A1994
Centerville, UT

@InspectorC

I think there is enough of the structure left standing that they are able to use the original walls. They are trying to restore as much of the original building as possible.

ulvegaard
Medical Lake, Washington

Of the many impressive things that Elder Holland said, one thing that really struck me was something about the Tabernacle would now rise from the ashes and become a temple of the Lord.

How truly profound. Isn't that how it is with all of us -- as we pass through the rigors and the heartaches of mortality, having been battered and torn and singed, then, we too will rise more glorious, like a temple to the Lord. We weep for those of our loved ones we have lost, I wept inside for the destruction of this building which I, along with many others, truly admired and had ties too. We will see our loved ones again -- but this time, in a much better condition than they ever were before.

ulvegaard
Medical Lake, Washington

To "Inspector C",

Why they have left the bracing and the walls in place. I'm not sure. Clearly, with the walls still in place, it would be irresponsible to remove the bracing ---

Initially, I don't think the First Presidency was sure what to do about the fire and the burnt out remains. They wanted options, and to ensure those options, the remaining walls were braced. Once they decided to rebuild the tabernacle as a temple, then it now falls under the responsibility of the bid winning firm to take charge of the construction, and where need be, demolition of the site. Such a project will include a booklet with codes and liability issues and so on and so forth. The firm which now takes over will consult with engineers and so forth on how best to proceed. But again, until that moment, the walls remain in place so that options are still available.

Rita52
ANN ARBOR, MI

@InspectorC. The DN has reported several times on the ongoing plans for the temple, with one of the latest saying "Church officials have previously announced that the new temple will be designed to reflect the original design of the Tabernacle." They have said that as much of the original structure will be maintained, especially the outer walls, which were, for the most part, undamaged in the fire. It's really not so hard to understand. The Church has done extensive architectural and archaeological studies of the building site, and apparently has determined that the outer walls are structurally sound and worthy of preservation. I think it's a wonderful thing that the Church has done so much to preserve the historicity of the site. Calm down. The Lord knows what He is doing.

snowman
Provo, UT

Hey InspectorC: It was explained quite clearly a few weeks after the fire. The building was one of the oldest building in Utah. It is an historical landmark. The church wanted to save as much as was possible so it would still have the hisotrical value. I think a temple was just what was needed.

Filo Doughboy
Bakersfield, CA

What does your statement mean, that this is "one of 29 announced by President Monson" during his four-year presidency? Has he authorized the building of 29 temples in four years?

Wow! Can you explain this statement, please? Thank you.

snowman
Provo, UT

Filo: That statement means just what it says. 29 temples have been announced in 4 years.

Capella
Bakersfield, CA

That means toooo many temples, tooo many poor in Utah and the Mormon world, yet still you persist with your focus on the elaborate dwellings for the privileged recommend holders.

That's what it means to non-LDS.

snowman
Provo, UT

Capella:If you are not Mormon why do you care. The money isn't coming out of your pocket.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments