Rome Temple

Public forum for topics that don't fit into the other categories.
User avatar
felixfabulous
Posts: 111
Joined: 10 Jul 2018, 07:13

Rome Temple

Post by felixfabulous » 11 Mar 2019, 12:05

I've had a really mixed reaction to the Rome temple and wanted to see if anyone felt the same way. On the positive side, I think it's really cool that: 1. We built a temple in Rome; 2. Pres. Nelson met with the Pope and 3. That all the Q15 went over there (photo with all the apostle statutes was powerful). Anytime that we do something that unites members around the world and creates excitement makes the Church exciting.

But, I'm conflicted. The rumor is that we spent $1B on this project. A distant relative of mine worked on it and it was a nightmare, tangled up in red tape for years. This seems like so much money and so many resources to build a temple where we don't have that many members and the Church is shrinking. The whole purpose of the temple seems to be like a flagship store in retail, where it's a lot about advertising and image and probably won't be all that busy as a temple. So, did we just build a $1B temple in Rome because we could and thought it would be cool? Would Jesus do that?

User avatar
On Own Now
Posts: 1736
Joined: 18 Jan 2012, 12:45

Re: Rome Temple

Post by On Own Now » 11 Mar 2019, 13:02

felixfabulous wrote:
11 Mar 2019, 12:05
The rumor is that we spent $1B on this project.
In the interest of not furthering rumors, I'd say that the likelihood of this temple costing the Church $1B is extremely remote. Just by way of comparison, the opened-in-2016 US Bank Stadium where the Vikings play in downtown Minneapolis cost that amount. It's a beautiful, glass-enclosed stadium with a large seating capacity. The Rome Temple does sit on a multi-use site, but the interior square footage of the temple is relatively small. It's almost exactly half the size of the Las Vegas Temple and of the Portland Temple. It is about the same size as the Fort Collins, CO, Cedar City, UT, and Tucson, AZ Temples.

Even so, I'm sure that the Rome Temple did cost a lot of money. It instantly becomes the showcase temple for all of Europe. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I look at it as similar to the Nauvoo Temple and the Provo City Center Temple. Were they really NEEDED? No; but it is cool that the Church CAN.
"Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another." --Romans 14:13

DoubtingTom
Posts: 269
Joined: 22 Mar 2017, 12:13

Re: Rome Temple

Post by DoubtingTom » 11 Mar 2019, 13:45

Seperately from the issue of cost, my TBM feminist SIL was very bothered by all of the apostles and their wives going to the dedication but none of the women general auxiliary leaders.

That thought didn’t even cross my mind until she brought it up which goes to show how far I still have to go in my attempt at being more progressive and feminist-minded in my thinking.

User avatar
Sheldon
Posts: 449
Joined: 14 Aug 2013, 13:44

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Sheldon » 11 Mar 2019, 14:10

No matter the cost, I'm sure the Rome Temple is the most expensive ever in modern times when looked at on a per capita basses. There is only 10 stakes in all of Italy. There is more mebers in my county in Southern California than all of Italy.

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 6832
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: Rome Temple

Post by DarkJedi » 11 Mar 2019, 14:56

So, did we just build a $1B temple in Rome because we could and thought it would be cool?
Tha's essentially my take on it.
I look at it as similar to the Nauvoo Temple and the Provo City Center Temple. Were they really NEEDED? No; but it is cool that the Church CAN.
Likewise a few others, including Palmyra and Council Bluffs (both of which are smaller and less costly, of course). At least one of those is very not busy, few sessions per week and low attendance at those few.

FWIW, I don't think it's all that cool. Yes, it is a beautiful temple and it has gotten the church some PR points (at least in Utah). Could it have been a small temple? Yep, but it wouldn't have gotten the mileage. All the apostles going? :thumbdown: Pres. Nelson meeting with the Pope? Not that big a deal. :roll: I love the Deseret News hype of two world religious leaders meeting - that's only true from a certain point of view because the church (compared to Catholicism or not) is really barely a blip.

I'm trying really hard not to be a Negative Ned, but I think this has been way overplayed even in the church. I do give my tithing money freely for them to spend as they see fit - nevertheless I think it could have been better spent (but it's still not my call).

(I am reminded of the joke about the phone call to God being a local call from SLC, though. :smile: )
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

User avatar
Holy Cow
Posts: 308
Joined: 10 Nov 2014, 17:07
Location: Las Vegas

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Holy Cow » 11 Mar 2019, 15:46

I don't feel like this temple was built for the local membership. It will likely have more attendance from LDS members who are visiting Rome, than from the actual local members. Any time a church member goes to Italy for vacation, the Rome temple will now be on the list of sites that they MUST see (so they can come back and tell everyone about it in F&T meeting). I'm sure there will be no shortage of testimonies about how 'cold and unfeeling' the catholic cathedrals in Rome feel compared to our incredible temple. :roll:
This temple definitely feels like more of a PR move than something that was built for the members in Rome. And I agree with some of the other comments about the photo opportunities with the Pope and the statues of the apostles. I'm sure the meeting meant a lot more to our top execs than it did to the Pope. It was a media blitz, and they definitely did everything they could to try acting like we're playing with the big boys now. Comparing our modern apostles to the Christ's 12 bugs me, too. Our current leadership is more like a board of directors, right down to the God complexes found in most boards of directors. That photo opp felt like an effort to remind people that, "Hey, look, we have the same authority that these guys had! Look how important our keys are! If it wasn't for the restored priesthood that we hold, we'd all still be like those lost Catholics!" :sick:
My introduction: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6139

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 4217
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 07:34
Location: Ten miles west of the exact centre of the universe

Re: Rome Temple

Post by nibbler » 11 Mar 2019, 15:52

DarkJedi wrote:
11 Mar 2019, 14:56
Likewise a few others, including Palmyra and Council Bluffs (both of which are smaller and less costly, of course). At least one of those is very not busy, few sessions per week and low attendance at those few.
I've been to Palmyra and unless there was a massive population boom, every sentient life form in that region could be a card carrying member and I couldn't imagine that temple being busy. I guess there is appeal for tourists to do a session so close to the sacred grove but the non-summer months must be light on attendance. More so with the pageant gone.

I see the temple in Rome as pure advertising. The payoff is more about people talking about the building (both the locals and members worldwide) than it is about placing a temple where it will achieve maximum throughput. To that end I would say that it has already achieved its purpose.

Still, I'm left with the question. Why the big hullabaloo of having the entire Q15 show up and by extension the big deal about the statues of the 12 apostles? I'm not up on my history, did all the original apostles pick up and move to Rome or just Peter and Paul? Maybe save that for the temple in Jerusalem? I guess you save your most important performance for when the spotlight is trained on you. Edit, IOW what Holy Cow said.
He who sits alone, sleeps alone, and walks alone, who is strenuous and subdues himself alone, will find delight in the solitude of the forest.
— Buddha

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16707
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Curt Sunshine » 11 Mar 2019, 16:37

1) "Rumor has it" is not a solid way to frame this discussion. We have no idea, but I am skeptical of that cost.

2) This is a showcase temple. I am fine with that, given the location. It probably will become a Mecca-like location - the SLC temple of Europe. If that is the intent, I get it.

3) Photo ops as impoertant religious leaders with the Pope are powerful propaganda. It does send a message to a whole lot of people, inside and outside the LDS Church. Priceless? Probably not. Worth what it cost as part of the package? Probably.

4) All other issues aside, it is gorgeous - physically breathtaking. It will draw attention, I am sure. If it becomes a tourist site for non-members, like the SLC temple, it will be worth the cost.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 6832
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: Rome Temple

Post by DarkJedi » 11 Mar 2019, 16:40

nibbler wrote:
11 Mar 2019, 15:52
DarkJedi wrote:
11 Mar 2019, 14:56
Likewise a few others, including Palmyra and Council Bluffs (both of which are smaller and less costly, of course). At least one of those is very not busy, few sessions per week and low attendance at those few.
I've been to Palmyra and unless there was a massive population boom, every sentient life form in that region could be a card carrying member and I couldn't imagine that temple being busy. I guess there is appeal for tourists to do a session so close to the sacred grove but the non-summer months must be light on attendance. More so with the pageant gone.
Keeping in mind that this is one of Hinkley's small temples, you don't know the half of it. I have literally been in sessions on Saturdays where more than half in the session were temple workers and they had to be there to make enough people for the prayer circle (in which everybody took part). It runs 16 sessions a week right now, most less than half full. It is slightly more busy during tourist season, and yes, I think the demise of the pageant will affect that. FWIW, membership in the Palmyra Temple area is on the decline.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

User avatar
Holy Cow
Posts: 308
Joined: 10 Nov 2014, 17:07
Location: Las Vegas

Re: Rome Temple

Post by Holy Cow » 11 Mar 2019, 16:55

Curt Sunshine wrote:
11 Mar 2019, 16:37

3) Photo ops as impoertant religious leaders with the Pope are powerful propaganda. It does send a message to a whole lot of people, inside and outside the LDS Church. Priceless? Probably not. Worth what it cost as part of the package? Probably.
I agree wholeheartedly with this statement, which is also why I think it was a missed opportunity. They could fly out the top 15 and their wives, but none of the leaders in the women's auxiliaries were invited? Seems like a swing and a miss! I've seen one picture of the top 15's wives, which originally stated, "The wives of the first presidency and quorum of the twelve." There were a lot of comments complaining that their names weren't even included, and they were only being referred to as 'the wives of...' However, it looks like they paid attention to the comments, and have now added the names of the women. Would have been nice to see some of the women leaders mixed in with the PR photo campaign, and the husbands of those women standing alongside, "the wives of..."
My introduction: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6139

Post Reply