David O. McKay Diaries – “Temples – 1963-69”

Below you will find diary entries on the topic of “Temples – 1963-69.” You can view other subjects here.

Search the diary entries below for specific dates, names, and keywords using the keyboard shortcut Command + F on a Mac or Control + F on Windows.

Sun., 6 Jan. 1963:

“Sunday, January 6, 1963

January 6, 1963

PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL

President David O. McKay

Building

Dear President McKay:

You asked that I dictate a memorandum or minute of the meeting you and I held together at your home in Huntsville today, January 6.

. . . .

I asked you if it would be advisable for us to prepare some new films for temples and have them prepared by the BYU Motion Picture Department. You felt this would be a good thing but asked that we refer it to Elders Evans and Hinckley. I am leaving a memorandum for Brother Evans suggesting that he and Brother Hinckley confer with Judge Whitaker, who is the manager of the Moving Picture Department at BYU, and come back to you with such recommendations as they may jointly make.

We also discussed the need for an advisory committee for the Los Angeles Temple, especially the chairman of the committee to take the place of Brother Russon, who has gone to Europe. You thought you would like to give this some thought as the president who would be next in line may not be the one you would like to have.

We discussed the matter of finishing the temple in Salt Lake and agreed that the furnishings and furniture in the room on the fourth floor, used by the General Authorities, could be left as they are now until the other more essential changes have been completed. We agreed that a short dedicatory service would be in order when the temporary annex is ready for occupancy but that a dedicatory service for the other improvements in the temple would not be necessary.

I recommended that there be a meeting of the presidents of the various temples held in Salt Lake City during the April Conference, and you consented thereto. I am advising Elder ElRay L. Christiansen in a letter tonight to make arrangements for that meeting.

We discussed some proposed changes in the temple ceremony which had been recommended by Brother Christiansen and others, and you thought you would like to think that over and consider it when in the temple.

. . . .

Affectionately,

Hugh B. Brown

Thurs., 31 Jan. 1963:

8:30 – 10:00 a.m.

The usual meeting of the First Presidency was held. President Brown absent, he still being in South America.

London Temple Tax Case

We discussed the postponement of the London Temple Tax suit. This case had been set for trial in the House of Lords February 11, 1963. It has now been postponed until March 25. President Moyle mentioned that Brother T. Bowring Woodbury, acting upon the First Presidency’s assignment, is in London at the present time and has reported that he had a long conference with Mr. Forbes, our barrister, yesterday. Brother Woodbury said that he thinks there is no question but what Mr. Gardner, our Queen’s counsel representative, can win the case, that the reason Mr. Gardner has not been able to spend any time on our case thus far is because he has been involved in another important case which he is now trying. Mr. Gardner had said that under the circumstances, if the case were to be tried on February 11, someone else would have to handle it. The question was then asked if we could secure a postponement of the case and Mr. Gardner said we could upon application if it were represented to the court that it is impossible for our counsel, Mr. Gardner, to be there on the date in question because of a conflict. Accordingly our representatives went to the House of Lords yesterday and had an order entered setting the hearing for March 25. In addition, Mr. Gardner will review the entire case and has asked for an extended statement from President Moyle. President Moyle said that Brother Woodbury had obtained all of the pleadings and the briefs which we have not heretofore had, and had sent them yesterday to Lawrence McKay and President Moyle to review. Mr. Gardner has said that he would like us to make as lengthy a statement as we desire setting forth our feelings in the matter. He also stated that we are not bound by the record, but that we can argue the case outside of the record, that therefore in light of these pleadings we can make very good use of any facts or any methods of approach. Our legal counsel have asked that President Moyle come to London before March 25, so that he can sit in council with Mr. Gardner. Brother Woodbury reports that he is arranging a dinner to which will be invited Elders Mark E. Petersen and Marion D. Hanks and their wives; also Mr. Forbes, Mr. Gardner, Mr. Sharman and Mr. Reynolds, the latter being an associate of Mr. Sharman. This dinner is arranged so that Mr. Gardner will have an opportunity to meet our people and become acquainted with us. Then on Wednesday next an appointment has been made for a meeting with Mr. Gardner which will be attended by Elders Petersen and Hanks, and also our attorneys, Mr. Forbes, Mr. Sharman, and Mr. Reynolds. President Moyle said in thinking of the matter he thought we should cable Brother Woodbury to invite Brother Selvoy Boyer also to attend this meeting. He said that President Boyer could explain that the attendance at the temple has greatly increased since the case first commenced. President Moyle said that he had heard from two or three different sources that Mr. Gardner is looked upon as the top man of the bar in Great Britain today, and therefore we are fortunate to have him as our representative.

I felt impressed that President Moyle should arrange to meet with this group at the dinner to be given in London next Wednesday, which dinner will be at Claridges, so that he could lay the groundwork for the appearance before the House of Lords in March. President Moyle said at the same time he could confer with our barrister, Mr. Forbes, and go over the pleadings with him in person, that he did not want to leave a stone unturned in this matter. I further said that there is a higher power working for us on this case, that it will be the first time the Church has ever had an opportunity to present to the House of Lords the real purpose of Mormonism, that therefore we must not leave anything undone that should be done in order properly to present our case. President Moyle will arrange his affairs to leave Saturday for London, resting in New York on Sunday, and flying from New York to London on Monday.

10:00 – 12:45 p.m.

Was convened in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the office of the First Presidency. The Salt Lake Temple is still not ready for occupancy.

I reported to the Brethren assembled in Council Meeting that word had been received last night that the hearing of our London Temple tax case before the House of Lords has been postponed until March 25.

I gave the Brethren assembled in Council meeting this morning a brief report of the London Temple Tax Case.

I said that I am very grateful for the postponement of the case before the House of Lords, and feel that there is a higher power than that of puny man working in this situation, and that I feel satisfied that our case will be decided to our satisfaction.

Fri., 1 Feb. 1963:

“7:30 – 8:30 a.m.

I met by appointment, at their request, Brother and Sister ElRay L. Christiansen, who came in to discuss with me matters pertaining to ordinances as given in the various Temples. They said that in taking care of their assignment to supervise the various Temples, they see the need for uniformity of procedure in presenting ordinances, relating principally to minor details of the presentation.

After discussing at length Temple matters, I instructed them to see that a uniformity in the presentation of Temple ordinances should be adopted in all our Temples.

Tues., 5 Feb. 1963:

“9:45 a.m.

Elder Gordon B. Hinckley of the Council of the Twelve came in to report a telephone conversation he had had with President Moyle from London last evening.

London Temple Tax Case

Elder Hinckley further referring to the telephone conversation with President Moyle said that President Moyle had told him that while on the plane going to London he went over all the material pertaining to the London Temple tax litigation and that he has come up with one or two thoughts which he feels will give a twist to the case that will result in a victory for us. President Moyle is meeting with our lawyers in London today and will communicate these ideas to them. President Moyle asked Brother Hinckley to convey this message to me. I commented that my son, Lawrence McKay, while normally very conservative about such matters, is very hopeful that we shall win the case.”

Wednesday, February 13, 1963

Notes by Elder Richard L. Evans on meeting with President McKay, Wednesday, February 13, 1963, at 6:00 a.m.

5. Discussed with President McKay the various alternate possibilities for improving the Temple film presentation: 1) the possibility that it be produced at BYU film studio under properly safeguarded conditions; 2) that it be produced in the Salt Lake Temple assembly room, in which case we would have to convert it into a studio as we once did; 3) that we might consider discontinuing the film altogether and produce several sound tracks of the voices only, which would permit people to listen to the instructions without the distraction of seeing characters portrayed, which, in reality cannot adequately be portrayed. The President suggested that he felt that we could trust BYU, and that we could consider the alternate proposal of not presenting a film at all, but simply the instructions on sound. Agreed to submit a letter to him for final decision.

Wed., 27 Feb. 1963:

“8:30 a.m.

Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. Many matters of general importance to the Church were discussed and passed upon. Among them were:

Oakland Temple Contributions

We read a letter from President O. Leslie Stone of the Oakland-Berkeley Stake in which he reports that the contributions toward the Oakland Temple fund allotted to the Stakes amounting to more than $500,000, which amount was set as the local share, have been collected, and the money has been deposited with the Presiding Bishopric. Many of the stakes have exceeded their allotments. He said that in 1962 when the allotment was received, the tithing of the people also increased ten per cent over the previous year. He expressed appreciation for the opportunity to participate in this project.

Fri., 1 Mar. 1963:

Garments – Marking of by members

Bishop Vandenberg said that some members are asking if they may mark their own garments. I said there is no objection to marking their own garments, but no person should mark the garments who has not been through the Temple.

Thurs., 7 Mar. 1963:

“10:00 a.m.

Council Meeting

For the first time for several months, we met in the Salt Lake Temple for our regular weekly meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve.

We then took up the regular order of business. Among items take up were:

Salt Lake Temple – Dedicatory Services of Temporary Annex

I announced to the Brethren that tonight the dedicatory services of the Temporary Annex to the Salt Lake Temple will be held, and that all the Brethren of the Council are invited to be present; that only the Temple workers, under the presidency of Willard R. Smith and Sister Smith, together with a few others and the General Authorities will be present at the meeting. I explained that the building will be dedicated as a Temporary Annex while the new annex to the Temple is being constructed.

7:30 p.m.

Salt Lake Temple Temporary Annex – Dedication of

In company with my son, Robert, went over to the newly-constructed Bureau of Information Building, which will now be dedicated as a Temporary Salt Lake Temple Annex. Sister McKay was not well enough to attend the services.

Four hundred persons were gathered in the Assembly room for this sacred occasion, including General Authorities and their wives, officials of the Temple, and set-apart Temple workers. Elder Willard R. Smith, President of the Temple, conducted the services, and welcomed all to the ‘glorious occasion of this dedication.’ He explained that ‘in this temporary Temple Annex, until a new annex is built, we shall engage in ordinances preparatory to entering the Temple for endowment work.’ Brother Smith also said that a goal had been set for the re-opening of the Salt Lake Temple on April 6, which would be the birthday of the Church, and the Seventieth Anniversary of the Dedication of the Temple. He said that there is yet much to be done and the opening date uncertain, but the goal is still there.

President Joseph Fielding Smith offered the opening prayer, and President Hugh B. Brown and Elder ElRay L. Christiansen were the main speakers. Elder Horace Pratt Beesley, of the Temple Presidency, gave the closing prayer.

The music was furnished by a double-mixed quartet from the Tabernacle Choir, with solos by Richard P. Condie, conductor of the Choir, and Albert Fallows, a member of the Choir.

The sermons delivered by President Brown and Elder Christiansen were excellent.

I addressed the audience briefly and then dedicated the newly-completed Bureau of Information Building as a Temporary Salt Lake Temple Annex.

The services were inspirational! (see following newspaper clippings for details of this important event) (see also copy of dedicatory prayer and remarks made by President McKay)

Note by CM

In President McKay’s dedicatory prayer, he prayed for moisture. The valley has had very little snow this winter, and the water situation seemed very serious. On Monday, a heavy snowstorm swept into Utah, and exceptionally deep snow piled up in the mountains, making it necessary to close some of the roads. This was followed by other storms during the week, and on Friday we had another heavy snowstorm, for which all of us were very thankful!”

Fri., 8 Mar. 1963:

London Temple – Nigeria Mission

Telephone call from Elder Mark E. Petersen, President of the European Mission. President Petersen said he had sent two letters, one giving a definite date for the hearing before the House of Lords which now Mr. Gardiner says there is possibility of postponement, that both he and the Department of Inland Revenue oppose postponement. There seems nevertheless to be some indication that an element in the House of Lords wants the postponement. Mr. Gardiner has set March 22, at 2:30 p.m. to meet President Moyle and Lawrence McKay about the hearing before the House of Lords. Mr. Forbes will keep in touch with Mr. Gardiner and if the case is postponed, Mr. Gardiner will not expect the brethren to meet this appointment. President Moyle said he and Lawrence McKay will remain in Salt Lake City until they hear further from President Petersen.

Children – Mentally Retarded, Sealing of

The letter of President Don Van Slooten of the Netherlands Mission presented the inquiry as to whether or not two mentally-retarded unbaptized children over eight years of age may be sealed to parents living in that mission. The children have not been baptized because they are mentally retarded and it is the opinion of the local authorities and of the parents that they could not understand the significance of the ordinances. Neither the parents nor the branch president feel the children are responsible.

President Mark E. Petersen advised President Van Slooten to write to the First Presidency and ask permission to have the children sealed, and President Van Slooten asked that the answer come to him and that President Trauffer of the Swiss Temple be informed also. I said there is no reason why they should not be sealed, but they should not be baptized. There being unity of opinion, direction was given that the answer be prepared accordingly.”

Tues., 12 Mar. 1963:

London Temple – Hearing on Taxation

While in our meeting, we received a long distance call from President Mark E. Petersen in London. He said the hearing before the House of Lords is not to be postponed, but will be held on the morning of the day originally set. The hearing will be in a conference room before a committee of the House of Lords, and not before the whole House. There will be a room which will accommodate only 15 guests. President Petersen reported that Mr. Gardiner is informed that one of the members of the committee will be Lord Justice Reed, who may be difficult. President Moyle confirmed that he and Lawrence McKay will be in London on Wednesday before the conference with Mr. Gardiner.

Thurs., 21 Mar. 1963:

“10:00 – 2:30 p.m.

Was convened in Council Meeting. A very important meeting! Some of the items considered were:

Temple Square Landscaping

Elder Evans then presented to the Council, at my suggestion, the matter of landscaping the ground between the new Bureau of Information and the Tabernacle, and the placement of monuments. He explained that the plan contemplates the placement of monuments depicting the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood and the Melchizedek Priesthood between the new Bureau of Information and the Tabernacle. Elder Evans exhibited a sketch showing the proposed placement of these monuments and the landscaping in connection therewith. He said that the ground should be planted soon so that there can be a full season’s growth this year.

In this connection, I said that the plan is to have the Christus monument in the Bureau of Information where it now is, that it is marble; that we have a monument commemorating the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood in stone, and that Brother Fairbanks has authority to make a Melchizedek Priesthood restoration monument, that it was originally thought that these two monuments should be one on each side of the entrance to the Bureau of Information; that, however, word has been received that these monuments if done in marble would be as durable as granite, in which event they would be placed on the grounds in the positions indicated on the sketch.

I said it is necessary that we make certain that the information that has come to us to the effect that the marble would be as durable as granite is reliable before further work is done on the monument commemorating the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and that in the event there is no question as to the durability of marble, it will be necessary to re-do in marble the Aaronic Priesthood monument.

Elder Evans indicated that what was desired was that the general plan be approved, subject to the working out of the details by Brother Cannon Young and Brother Irvin T. Nelson, with the placement of the monuments approximately as shown on the sketch.

On motion, duly seconded, Council indicated its approval.

Wed., 17 Apr. 1963:

“Temple Sealing

The letter of President Toronto of the Spanish Fork Stake presented the question as to whether or not a young widow, nine months a member of the Church, may have a recommend to the temple to receive her endowments and to have her two children by her deceased husband sealed to her before she returns to the home of her family in the South. I advised that she be in no hurry to do this. She may want to marry another man and he may want her to be sealed to him. I said I think she should be advised to wait.”

Fri., 10 May 1963:

8:30 to 11:30 a.m.

Was engaged in the meetings of the First Presidency and also of the Presiding Bishopric. Among other matters, we took up the following:

1) Temple Recommend – New Form

Bishop Vandenberg reviewed two questions appearing on the new Temple recommend form, and asked instructions: ‘Are you a tithe-payer?’; ‘Are you a part tithe-payer?’. Bishop Vandenberg explained that some bishops think it is all right to issue a recommend if the person is a part tithe-payer. I said that we should delete the second question. President Moyle concurred in this.

The other question is: ‘Have you every been denied a recommend?’ Bishop Vandenberg expressed the opinion that something more should be included to permit the following up of this question. After discussion, it was agreed that the question is protective, and should be followed up by the Bishop and that instructions should be added to guide the Bishop in following it up.

Bishop Vandenberg then read a letter prepared by Elder ElRay L. Christiansen to accompany the issuance of the new recommend forms giving information to Bishops and other certifying officers of the Church for the issuance and use of the recommend by patrons of the Temples. Amendments to this letter were proposed, including provision for the patron’s signature to the answers of the Bishops’ questions, and space for signature of the patron when he presents the recommend to each Temple to which he goes.

As amended, the new form and the letter were approved. (see copy of letter following.)

Friday, May 10, 1963

TO ALL PRESIDENTS OF STAKES, PRESIDENTS OF MISSIONS, BISHOPS OF WARDS, AND PRESIDENTS OF BRANCHES

Dear Brethren:

With the thought in mind of reducing the time spent by bishops, branch presidents and mission presidents in preparing recommends for members of the Church who desire to go to one or more temples, a recommend form has been prepared which may be used for any and all temples.

Hereafter, one recommend acceptable in any temple will be issued to each patron rather than issuing a separate recommend for each temple. The new form will be used by those who go to the temple for their own endowments, sealings or marriages or who receive these ordinances in behalf of the dead.

You will continue to use the forms you now use for children between 12 and 21 years of age who go to the temple to act as proxies in doing baptisms for the dead.

The new forms are being printed and will be sent by July 1. You will kindly use the new form for those members who apply for recommends to be used after August 1, 1963.

You will notice that the new form is arranged in two sections. When issuing a recommend for all ordinances for the dead, use only the left hand portion. However, when the applicant is recommended for own Endowment, Marriage, Sealing after Civil Marriage, or Sealing to Parents, both portions of the recommend are to be filled out.

The bishop will prepare the original, the buff and pink copies. He will retain the pink copy. The patron will present the white and buff copies to the first temple he goes to, where they will be stamped and dated. He will retain the buff copy, leaving the original (white) with the recommend clerk. If the first temple the patron attends is not in the temple district in which he resides, the temple will make a photo copy of the white (original) recommend for its own files. The temple making the photo copy will send the white (original) to the temple in the district where the patron lives for filing and for future reference.

We stress again the importance of bishops’ filling out the recommends completely and accurately, giving all dates and other information called for. This should be done in ink in the bishop’s own handwriting, including his initials, indicating the ordinances to be received.

To avoid disappointments and difficulties at the temple, make sure that the applicant takes the recommend to the stake president for interview and for his signature.

We urge also that each applicant is carefully interviewed to ascertain if he or she is worthy and prepared to enter the temple.

Please inform the applicant that he may be asked to also sign the recommend at the temple on the place provided for on the temple recommend.

Faithfully your brethren,

David O. McKay

Henry D. Moyle

Hugh B. Brown

The First Presidency”

Tues., 4 June 1963:

“Minutes of the meeting of the First Presidency held in the Church Office Building, Tuesday, June 4, 1963, at 8:30 a.m.

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Henry D. Moyle and Hugh B. Brown.

President Moyle Reports on Outcome of London Temple Tax Appeal to the House of Lords

By appointment, I asked my son, David Lawrence McKay, to come into the meeting to hear President Henry D. Moyle’s report on the outcome of the London Temple Tax Appeal to the House of Lords, which decision was delivered May 30, 1963, in London.

President Moyle explained that the Court met in the Chamber of the House of Lords.

The president of the Court sat on the wool sack where the Lord Chancellor sits when the House of Lords is in session. Four other members of the Court were present and occupied seats, two on one side and two on the other side of the president of the Court. The clerk called the case, and the president of the Court, Lord Reed, stood up and went through a formality of standing on one side and then on the other, and when he got to the negative side he said, ‘Inasmuch as the majority of the Court have decided to dismiss the appeal, I feel to go along with Lord Evershed’s opinion.’

Lord Evershed read the four, five, or six-page printed opinion. Lord Evershed seemed apologetic and uncertain. He said he was not at all certain that the decision the Court had reached was right, and then he read and gave a review of the situation which would have justified a decision in our favor, ‘I thought a very learned and thoughtful statement. He ended by saying, ‘Inasmuch as the Court has decided to the contrary, I do not feel to stand out against my associates,’ or some words to that effect. He ended his remarks by saying he was in favor of dismissal of the appeal.’

Lord Morris on the other side read a short paragraph of about two thirds of a page. He commented upon the fact that the President of the Church in a statement to the press in Bern, Switzerland had said that there is a basic difference between our meeting houses, places where we publicly worship, and the Temple, and that the Temple was not a public place of worship.

‘We met that in the very first court, but we took the position that the Temple was place of public worship, not a public place of worship, differentiating between the two. They made no reference to that differentiation. That was the major point of Mr. Gardner’s differentiation before the Court.

‘It was all predicated upon its being a place of public worship, and then he indicated that he was in favor of dismissal of the appeal. Lord Devlin, the man who had little to do with the original hearing, said that Lord Pearce’s opinion expressed his views very accurately.

‘Then Lord Pearce, the fifth member of the Court, read a rather lengthy statement. He outlined the issues of fact and gave a number of reasons why the case should have been decided in our favor. One would have thought that he was going to end the voting to uphold the appeal, but at the end he voted to dismiss the appeal, and that made it unanimous.

‘The President of the Court, Lord Reed, stood up and in a very formal way, the way which one only could understand who knows the procedure in the House of Lords, indicated that the appeal had been lost by the Appellate, and that the Court ruled for the respondent to the appeal.

‘I presume they will carry the costs all the way down the line. I talked with Mr. Forbes afterwards, who said that they would, but in this event the way he stated it, the House of Lords will determine their own form of order, or rely entirely upon the respondent to prepare the order.

‘After the hearing, in a meeting with Mr. Sharman and Mr. Reynolds, our solicitors, and Mr. Hugh Forbes, our Barrister, I had two members of the Building Committee, Brother Bradley and Brother Aposhian, the engineer, show a floor plan of the Temple. We went over this with the attorneys and told them that there were possible changes which would be made which might make it possible to open up the chapel on the first floor of the Temple, in which we could hold public weddings, which must be held under the law; and that the building of an annex had already been approved, and that the purpose of the annex would be to have a public chapel for weddings to be held preliminary to their going into the Temple to be sealed.

‘I told them it would be helpful to the First Presidency in finally determining the course they would pursue if we had their opinion on this subject. I went into some detail with them and the Building Committee. All three apparently said they did not care to express an opinion on the subject, so I took the liberty of instructing them to go into the matter in as great detail as they thought fit, and give the First Presidency a written opinion as to whether or not they would recommend these changes being made, and then a new suit be instituted under the changed circumstances, which they said could be done.

‘I rather gathered that all three of our lawyers are definitely of the opinion that the outcome would be that the taxing of the portion of the Temple which was closed to the public would result, and only that part of the Temple which was open to the public would be exempt.

‘I told them that I felt we would not be justified in making such a concession in opening up the Temple at all under a partial exemption, and so I asked them to predicate their opinion upon what they thought the possibilities are of our having a complete exemption of the Temple. They suggested many other things; we might make arrangements with the County of Godstone Rural District to have the Temple exempt entirely under these circumstances, if we opened it up, and if we are willing to pay taxes on the balance of the buildings, the Manor House and the 15 acres which we own — if we pay taxes on everything but the Temple. They, of course, had no way of knowing what the Godstone people would do. Brother Boyer thought that they would make us no concession at all; that the feeling was very bitter, and he said he was not sure that this would improve it, since we were forced to do it rather than to do it voluntarily.’

President Mark E. Petersen and President Marion D. Hanks and their wives were present. President Moyle took his daughter, Marie Wangeman of New York, who accompanied him from New York, thinking he should not go alone. There were the brethren of the Building Committee, Brother J. Neil Bradley and Brother George Z. Aposhian, the engineer, and President Selvoy J. Boyer of the London Temple. These constituted the party.

President Moyle said he took advantage of President McKay’s permission and went down to see his son at Geneva, Switzerland, where President Moyle attended a district conference in Toulon, France, and drove back to Geneva in time to take his plane yesterday, going by Swiss-Air to New York.

President McKay inquired as to the amount of the tax.

President Moyle said the tax to be paid will be from the time of the beginning of the tax hearings through the appeals.

President Moyle reviewed from an accumulation of documents in his files on the tax appeal the procedures which had been followed in arriving at evaluation of the Temple for rating purposes. He said he had followed the practice of sending all the documents which came to him to Lawrence McKay. The file remaining in his office had been started in the time of President Stephen L. Richards. President Moyle read from correspondence President Richards had received from President Woodbury, including the letters of evaluation surveyor, who prepared an estimate on the basis of evaluations he would place upon the property.

President Moyle reported that President Marion D. Hanks, with some concurrence of President Mark E. Petersen, will likely propose that the British Mission headquarters be moved from Exhibition Road to the Temple site at Newchapel. Some interest was expressed also in changing the name of the mission to omit the word ‘mission’ because this general connotation in Great Britain causes people to think of a place of charitable relief for people in need rather than a proselyting organization.

President McKay inquired about the advisability of making accommodations in the Temple for the meeting of the branch.

Explanation was made that the new Crawley Ward, for which Sir Thomas Bennett is architect, serves the members of the former Newchapel Branch, including the people living in East Grimstead.

President McKay inquired about the legal representative of the European Mission.

President Moyle explained that Brother Royal K. Hunt, lawyer of the legal Department here, and former bishop of the University Ward, who was called to succeed T. Quentin Cannon, is the legal counsel for the Church in the European Mission. He is not at Frankfurt, Germany.

In response to President McKay’s questions as to whether or not he has anything to do with the Scandinavian countries, President Moyle said he serves the European Mission, including the Scandinavian Missions; that Abundi Schmidt does the legal work in Switzerland, and Mr. Brodeus is the legal representative in Paris, France.

President Moyle read President Woodbury’s correspondence with President Stephen L. Richards of February, 1959, reporting the conference he had had with Mr. Sharman and the tax evaluation officer for the Ryegate District, relating to the rating of the Temple.

President McKay inquired if President Moyle had any information about the cost of the appeal to the House of Lords.

President Moyle replied that he had not received this, but the information is expected soon from the Solicitors.

President Moyle read from the agreed statement of facts used before the First Tax Court hearing the case, which detailed evaluations of the property in the parish at Horn, and in the parish at Felbridge, Newchapel being in both parishes. The rateable value in Horn being 403 Pounds, and that in Felbridge 2,144 Pounds, or a total of 2,547 Pounds. (2547 Pounds x $2.80 = $7,131.60.) The rate of tax is set at 14 shillings and 7 pence in the pound, or roughly 15 shillings — 75 percent. (75% of $7,131.60 = $5,349.70 — the annual amount of the tax.)

President McKay read from a schedule and said that the tax on the Alberta Temple in 1962 was $923; Arizona Temple, $923; Los Angeles Temple ( including the Mission President’s home and headquarters) $5,897.

Explanation was made that rates on the Newchapel property before the Temple was built were at one pound a day, or 365 Pounds annually, equalling $1,022.

President McKay said: ‘Meantime, I would like Brother Hunt to give us a report on the law in Sweden and the opinion of the tax authorities in Sweden who tax our property there now, as to what would be their attitude if a Temple were erected on our land, and whether it would be tax exempt. I would like to have an authoritative statement from the authorities in Sweden. We have property upon which we are paying taxes, and we would like a ruling of the taxing authorities themselves as to what would be the attitude of the government if we erect a Temple on the land, and whether or not it would be tax exempt.’

He asked David Lawrence McKay to take this assignment.

President McKay: ‘I would like to decide this morning on a Committee to wait upon the Swedish Government.’

President Moyle suggested David Lawrence McKay, President Mark E. Petersen, President Theodore M. Burton, Brother Eben R.T. Blomquist, President Alvin W. Fletcher of the Swedish Mission, and Brother Royal K. Hunt, our legal representative in Europe.

David Lawrence McKay expressed the opinion that it would be advisable to furnish a Swedish lawyer with all the facts first and to obtain his opinion.

President McKay said that Brother Hunt could do that, and that this would be wise as the first step. President McKay agreed, and advised that the opinion on the basis of Swedish law about place of worship be obtained. He asked President Moyle to prepare a letter for the signatures of the First Presidency to Brother Hunt, telling him that we would like an opinion on what the law is on the subject.

President Moyle commented upon the importance of giving the lawyers the facts, including those available to date, as a basis for such opinions, and mentioned that the Barristers of Gardner and Forbes had President Richards’ conservative and clear statement of the nature of worship in the Temples. He expressed the opinion that all this information would be needed to get to the exact problem before the lawyers could prepare an opinion.

President McKay asked if Brother Hunt knows anything about this appeal to the House of Lords.

President Moyle said he talked with him informally about it, but that he does not have the complete information. President Moyle said David Lawrence McKay has been present, and is fully informed upon every detail of the London Temple tax matter thorough all the appeals, except that he did not attend this latest announcing of the decision of the House of Lords, but he suggested that the complete information about the matter before the House of Lords can be given to Brother David Lawrence McKay also. He expressed the opinion that no one should discuss this with the Swedish authorities without this complete information.

David Lawrence McKay commented upon the fact that the case before the House of Lord is on the basis of law peculiar to the British Isles.

President McKay asked David Lawrence McKay to take under advisement the best way of finding out from Sweden the attitude of the Government, if we build a Temple in Sweden.

David Lawrence McKay said, ‘I think I do not have to take that under advisement. I would send all the facts to a Swedish lawyer through Brother Hunt, and ask Brother Hunt to get his opinion as to whether or not it would be taxable.’

President McKay said, ‘All right. Do that, will you please?’

David Lawrence McKay said he has a copy of President Richards’ statement.

Minutes by A. Hamer Reiser”

Fri., 7 June 1963:

Temple Recommends – Instructions for New Forms

Bishop Vandenberg read a letter proposed to be sent to Bishops and Branch Presidents, Stake Presidents, and Mission Presidents, with the new Temple recommend forms over the signature of the First Presidency with instructions relating to the preparation and use of the new forms. Explanation was made that Elder ElRay L. Christiansen has prepared a letter on the same subject to go to the Temple Presidents. The letter was approved and instructions given for it to be prepared and sent out with the signatures of the First Presidency.

(see copy of letter following)

Friday, June 7, 1963

May 29, 1963

TO ALL PRESIDENTS OF STAKES, PRESIDENTS OF MISSIONS, BISHOPS OF WARDS, AND PRESIDENTS OF BRANCHES

Dear Brethren:

You will continue to use the forms you now use for children between 12 and 21 years of age who go to the Temple to act as proxies in doing baptisms for the dead.

The new forms are being printed and will be sent by July 1. You will kindly use the new form for those members who apply for recommends to be used after August 1, 1963.

To avoid disappointments and difficulties at the temple, make sure that the applicant takes the recommend to the stake president for interview and for his signature.

We urge also that each applicant is carefully interviewed to ascertain if he or she is worthy and prepared to enter the temple.

Please inform the applicant that he may be asked to also sign the recommend at the temple on the place provided for on the temple recommend.

Faithfully your brethren,

David O. McKay

Henry D. Moyle

Hugh B. Brown

The First Presidency

Wed., 12 June 1963:

Telephone Call

President R. Raymond Barnes of Denver West Stake, Denver, Colorado, telephoned and inquired whether or not Jerry John Grimshaw, who has been in the Church ten months, could receive a temple recommend. I said that this is in President Barnes’ hands; if he thinks the young man is fully adjusted and worthy, then he may make an exception in his case.”

Sat., 29 June 1963:

“Devoted the morning hours at the office reading over case histories of thirty-four petitions for cancellation of Temple sealings! With the exception of one or two cases, I cancelled the sealings.

As I have said before, this is one of the most unpleasant tasks I have!”

Fri., 19 July 1963:

“Garments – the wearing of in Steel Mills

We read a letter from President Philip S. Low of the Indianapolis Stake in which he presented the case of a man who had asked for a Temple recommend, but that he is not wearing his garments where he is employed because he is engaged in pouring molten metal, and when fragments scatter and fall to his shirt and his undershirt, he can easily throw them out by raising his one-piece undershirt. If he wears garments, he cannot expel the hot pellets.

I directed that President Low be informed that the man may reverently remove his garments under these circumstances, but should replace them as soon as convenient when he leaves his employment where he is engaged as he explains.

Fri., 27 Sept. 1963:

Washington, D.C. Temple Site

President Brown reported that President Milan D. Smith of the Washington Stake had called him from Washington and explained that having an announcement made of the Church’s intention to erect a Temple on the property purchased there could be the basis for securing tax exemption of approximately $5,000 annually. The purchase of property in Washington concerning the use of which no announcement has been made was reviewed by President Brown. I said we are not prepared to make an announcement now and consideration must be given to the need of a Temple in many places.”

Tues., 1 Oct. 1963:

“Washington, D.C. Temple site

My secretary, Clare, brought into the meeting a letter addressed to me from President Milan D. Smith of the Washington, D.C. Stake. I said that I do not want to be placed under the obligation just yet to visit the property purchased as a Temple site in Washington, D.C. I stated that Brother Smith seems to have expected me to go to Washington, D.C. to look over the site.”

Thurs., 31 Oct. 1963:

“Suicide – Vicarious Temple Ordinance for

The letter of Sister Paulette U. Ollestad of Spring Valley, California, recited hardship and illness suffered by her mother which culminated in the mother’s breakdown and suicide September 8, 1962. Sister Ollestad requested the privilege of having temple ordinances done vicariously for her mother by an aunt. I directed that in view of the circumstances the request be granted and referred the matter to President Tanner.

Tues., 5 Nov. 1963:

Brother Robert Barker presented the request of President Milan D. Smith of Washington Stake that President McKay or one of his counselors see the site obtained and proposed for a temple in Washington.”

Fri., 20 Dec. 1963:

“Marriages – Civil Ceremonies in Chapels – Each Case to be Considered

President Tanner mentioned that two of the Brethren of the Twelve had mentioned that they thought it was having a bad effect to permit couples to be married in our chapels. He also made reference to cases where couples desire to be married by civil ceremony before going to the Temple, in order that relatives may witness the civil marriage. These relatives, in most cases, are non-members, but there are cases where the relatives are members, but not worthy to receive Temple recommends.

It was mentioned that as a general rule these exceptions should be limited to cases where the parents are not members of the Church.”

Tues., 14 Jan. 1964:

Temple Sealings – Adopted Lines and Lines of Sealings

President Tanner referred to a ruling by President McKay in 1961 to the effect that where children have been adopted by men other than their own fathers, their responsibility for sealings and research should be on their adopted father’s line and not on their own blood lines. The question had been raised as to whether this ruling pertained only to illegitimate children rather than the entire field of special sealings of wives to husbands. President Tanner mentioned in this connection the ruling contained in the manual to the effect that if a child is legally adopted, that adoption transfers him to the family of his adopted parents and he is considered henceforth to all intents and purposes their child, and that he should trace the lines of his adopted legal parents. Also that in a ruling dated March 17, I had indicated that in genealogical research, legally adopted children had no responsibility to the natural blood lines although there may be occasions when conditions would suggest special consideration. In this connection, President Brown raised the question as an illustration as to what the situation would be where a woman was married to three husbands and there were three children each having different fathers. If they were all sealed to one man would the responsibility for research be through the blood line or through the sealing line. I said that if they are sealed for time and eternity, they will follow the sealing. I said that the same ruling should apply in all cases, legitimate or otherwise, that the person in question should act as though the adopted father was his real father.”

Monday, January 20, 1964

Minutes of interviews held in President McKay’s apartment in the Hotel Utah, Monday, January 20, 1964.

Counselors in the Idaho Falls Temple Presidency

President William L. Killpack called with his two new counselors who had been approved to serve with him in the presidency of the Idaho Falls Temple, Elders Roy Wood and Raymond Walker Miles. President McKay set these brethren apart as first and second counselors respectively to President Killpack in the presidency of the Idaho Falls Temple. He also conferred the sealing power upon Brother Wood. Brother Miles had already had the sealing power conferred upon him.

Tues., 4 Feb. 1964:

Temple Work – Exception to One-Year Ruling

President Brown mentioned that the mother of a young woman, Mary C. Reed, of Salt Lake City, is asking for permission to do her daughter’s Temple work without waiting the full period of one year after the daughter’s death. Mary C. Reed, who was married to a non-member, was killed in an automobile accident this week. The mother is not well and is getting along in years and would like to do the endowment work for her daughter as soon as possible. The non-member husband is still living, but has given his consent. I said that this would be all right.

Children Born In the Covenant Cannot Be Sealed to Anyone Other than Their Parents

President Tanner read to me a letter he had prepared in answer to a letter addressed to me regarding sealing of children to others than their natural parents. In his answer President Tanner had emphasized that children born in the covenant cannot be sealed to anyone other than their own parents. I indicated my approval of the letter.

Wed., 5 Feb. 1964:

“Temple Work – Children Born in Covenant to be Sealed to Natural Parents Only

President Tanner presented a case that had come to him from Herbert L. Cromer regarding his son, Warren Lynn Cromer, who died in February 1953, leaving two children who were born in the covenant to him and his wife, Winona. His wife subsequently received a cancellation of the Temple sealing and has married two other men since that time. She was married to her present husband in April, 1962, by civil ceremony and she and he later went to the Temple and were sealed for time and eternity and had the two children, born in the covenant to her first husband, Warner Lynn Cromer, sealed to her and her present husband. I said that the sealing was not valid, and I asked President Tanner to notify these people to that effect, and to write to the Temple where this sealing was performed, asking that it be cancelled, a copy of the letter to the Temple President to be sent to Brother Cromer.”

Fri., 7 Feb. 1964:

“Temple work for Presidents of the United States

President Tanner brought to my attention a question that had been raised regarding temple work for Presidents Martin Van Buren, James Buchanan and Ulysses S. Grant. In this connection reference was made to President Wilford Woodruff’s statement that he had done the work for all the presidents of the United States excepting these three. President Tanner referred to information that had been given to him by Henry Christiansen of the Genealogical Society to the effect that in the case of James Buchanan the records indicate that baptism was performed for him and he has been sealed to his parents, this work having been done by relatives. In the case of Martin Van Buren, baptismal work was done for him August 9, 1876 in the Endowment House, which apparently was not known to President Wilford Woodruff at the time he had the work done for the other presidents. Subsequently, the baptism was done again for Martin Van Buren in 1948 and was followed by endowments, but he is not sealed to his parents, nor has there been a sealing between him and his wife. In the case of Ulysses S. Grant, his baptism and endowment work were done in 1926 at the insistence of President Heber J. Grant. President Tanner raised the question as to whether, in view of President Woodruff’s attitude, these ordinances should be cancelled or if the necessary additional work should be done in each case. I ruled that we should leave these cases as they are until the Lord gives us further direction in the matter.

London Temple Tax Problem

A letter was read from President Mark E. Petersen enclosing tax notices on the London Temple, together with a letter from the treasurer of the Rural District Council of Godstone. President Petersen said that our counsel, Mr. Sharman, recommends that we pay the amount suggested by Mr. Cooper, namely, L 392-8-1. It was decided to make this remittance. In this connection the Brethren gave consideration to measures that might properly be taken to reduce, if not eliminate, this tax problem. It was mentioned that if that portion where the chapel is located were opened to the public and regular Sacrament services were held and everybody welcomed to this service, it would no doubt be considered as a place of public worship and not subject to taxation. I said that I am ready to do this, and to notify the lawyers in the County of Godstone to that effect. I asked that we follow along this line. In this connection I mentioned that I had taken the liberty of inquiring whether a Temple built on land that we own in Sweden would also be taxed, and the best advice that I have been able to receive is that it probably would be taxed.”

Fri., 14 Feb. 1964:

“Temples – Book of Decisions for Presidents of

Presidents Brown and Tanner reported to me that they had gone through the manuscript of the proposed book of decisions as prepared by Elders Howard W. Hunter, ElRay L. Christiansen and Alvin R. Dyer, and had marked those items which they felt needed the decision by me. The matters were presented and I approved as follows:

1) Endowment work need not be done for deceased children under eight years of age.

2) Ordinances need not be performed for children under eight years of age born in the covenant.

3) Children born in the covenant remained sealed to their father and mother even though the sealing between their parents may be cancelled. They cannot be sealed to any other parent.

4) All persons going through the Temple for themselves or the dead should wear the ceremonial garment. The modified approved style may be worn at any other time.

5) In the washing and anointing and sealing rooms the full name of the individual for whom the ordinance is performed should be used when initially given in the ordinance, but the proxy’s full name need not be used when otherwise mentioned in the ordinance.

6) It was suggested that the ordinance of baptism for members of the negro race be performed by others than negroes if this can be accomplished without offense.

Temple Recommend Cards for General Authorities

Consideration was given to the suggestion that a Temple card be prepared for the General Authorities and their wives to be signed by the First Presidency, indicating that they are entitled to the privileges of all Temples. This card could be presented at the Temple gate indicating that the General Authorities and their wives have an authoritative Temple card of admittance, thus eliminating the necessity of presenting a Temple Recommend. It was suggested that provision be made for the signature of the holder to appear on the back of the card for identification, and the card would not need to be renewed. I indicated my approval of this proposition.

Temple Sealings Involving Polygamous Marriages

President Tanner presented to me for my clarification the case of Ammon Meshach Tenney. Prior to the marriage in question, this man had been married twice and both of his wives were living and married to him when he married the third wife in Mexico. This sealing was supposed to have been performed by A.F. Donald and cannot be confirmed by official records. In such cases the usual procedure is to encourage the family to have the sealing done again, wives to husbands and children to parents, with the notation on the bottom of the sheet that the family has record of the sealing, but it cannot be verified from official records. It was explained that in this case the family is willing and ready to perform the requested sealings for the purpose of having an official record. The question is raised: Should this be done because it is a polygamous marriage. Brother Christiansen of the Genealogical Society indicates that it is his interpretation of my ruling heretofore made that when no official record exists of a polygamous marriage in the Church no action is to be taken to perform sealings even if the sealings were performed before the Manifesto. President Tanner said that this ruling, as he understands it, pertains to the United States, but that so far as Mexico is concerned, it was his understanding of my ruling that if it was a polygamous marriage before the Manifesto and there was no official record the work should be done again. He asked if his understanding was correct. I said I think that is the safest thing to do, so that there would be a proper record of the sealings.”

Wed., 4 Mar. 1964:

“Temple Ordinance for Young Woman Killed Accidentally

President Tanner recited special circumstances of a young girl whose accidental death after she had been to her Bishop to present him with a gift the day before the ward was to be divided and her expression of a seeming premonition. She was 21 years of age and was preparing to go on a full-time mission when she was old enough. I gave permission for Temple ordinance work to be performed for her though she has been dead less than four months.

Wednesday, March 4, 1964

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FIRST PRESIDENCY

HELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1964, AT 9:00 A.M.

Present: Presidents David O. McKay and N. Eldon Tanner. President Hugh B. Brown absent, being indisposed.

President Hawkes’ Successor at New Zealand Temple

President Tanner commented upon President Hawkes of the New Zealand Temple having been in Salt Lake City and his return to New Zealand to take care of a matter which needs to be cleared up. He also mentioned that Heber Jensen, who is now with Sister Jensen on the South Island in New Zealand taking care of the property there. He reviewed Brother Jensen’s Church experience in Canada including his having been a missionary, a bishop, counselor to Willard Smith of the Alberta Stake before Brother Gordon Brewerton was president; that Brother Jensen and his wife had been workers in the Cardston Temple. He has also served as counselor in the mission presidency, as a district president, as a bishop in Calgary, and now as patriarch. He suggested that Brother Jensen would be a good successor to Brother Hawkes in the New Zealand Temple and that Sister Jensen would be a good matron. President McKay said he seems to be a good man to succeed Brother Hawkes at the temple. President Tanner said he does not know that Brother Jensen has received the sealing power.

Sketch of Proposed Finishing of New Structures near the Temple

President Tanner exhibited an architect’s sketch showing proposed finishing of the addition of the Salt Lake Temple and of the new annex building north of the temple and also of the wall around this portion of the temple block. President McKay expressed preference for finishing the buildings in granite and the wall in concrete.

President Bryan Bunker May Perform Sealing in Los Angeles Temple

President Tanner presented the inquiry of President Bryan Bunker who has the sealing power for the Salt Lake Temple as to whether or not he may perform a sealing for a missionary who served with him in the California Mission who is being married in the Los Angeles Temple. He does not ask that anything be done which would be out of the order of the Church. President McKay said it is all right.

Temple Work for Young Woman Killed Accidently

President Tanner recited special circumstances of a young girl whose accidental death after she had been to her bishop to present him a gift the day before the ward was to be divided and her expression of a seeming premonition. She was 21 years of age and was preparing to go on a full time mission when she was old enough. President McKay gave permission for temple ordinances to be performed for her though she has been dead less than four months.

Fri., 6 Mar. 1964:

Temple Marriage of Divorced Persons

President Tanner mentioned a case of a couple who after being divorced from their former spouses were married by civil ceremony and now want to be sealed in the Temple. This matter had been presented to President Tanner by Brother Beesley of the Presidency of the Salt Lake Temple. President Tanner said he told Brother Beesley he thought these people should wait a year before going to the Temple. President Tanner said he explained to Brother Beesley that I had given permission for people to get married civilly and then go to the Temple immediately after, but that it was his feeling that this ruling did not pertain to people who have entered into a civil marriage without having made previous arrangements for Temple sealings, that in such cases they should wait a year.

I said that that is right. The couple in question have been married only five or six months.”

Fri., 3 Apr. 1964:

“Rested until 3:45 p.m., at which time I called Brother Darcey U. Wright, and asked him to walk over with me to the Temple, my legs being too unsteady and weak to walk over there myself.’

Minutes of the meeting held with President McKay in his apartment in the Hotel Utah on Friday, April 3, 1964 at 8:30 a.m., with Elder Howard S. McDonald and his wife, Sister Ella Gibbs McDonald.

President McKay discussed with Brother and Sister McDonald their call to serve in the Salt Lake Temple, Brother McDonald to be president and Sister McDonald to be matron. Brother McDonald said they were very happy to be here to do the work of the Lord; that coincidentally with receipt of the letter telling him of his appointment he received almost in the same mail two opportunities to take other jobs. He said he wrote back and told them no, that the President of the Church had called him to this position and that would be their new appointment. Elder McDonald said that one of these positions was the head of one of the biggest business colleges on the coast, Woodbury College, and that the Teachers Organization in Los Angeles wanted him to be their executive secretary; also that the government wanted him to stay in the position he was occupying. Elder McDonald said that he and his wife were thrilled with this call and they hoped that they could do the things the President wanted.

Sister McDonald mentioned that now she and her husband could be together for the first time in a long time, whereas in the past his work had taken him away much of the time.

President McKay asked them when it would be convenient to come and Brother McDonald said that he had two conferences that he was almost obligated to take care of, one April 14 and 15 and the other April 17 and 18, that then they would come to Salt Lake and get located and will be ready by the first of May to go to work. Elder McDonald said that there is nothing physical or mental, nor is there any obligation that would hinder them from taking over this position.

President McKay said that ever since he was called to the apostleship he had made it a rule to present four questions to every person whom he had raised his hand to sustain, either in stake work, general church work, or ward work. He said that he had found there are several ideals which are important when accepting a position of this kind. The President said that while he knew the answers that Brother and Sister McDonald would give, yet he would not break the rule that he has heretofore followed.

President McKay said the first principle that he desired to present to them is the principle of unity. He said that some years ago many of our people felt that the Church was wrong and that they, the individuals, were right in regard to the rules pertaining to the plural marriage question. They were sure they were right and the leaders of the Church were wrong. President McKay then asked them if they believed in the spirit of unity and they answered yes. President McKay then referred to the words of the Savior as contained in the 17th chapter of John: ‘to know thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ is eternal life.’ He said that the principle burden of that prayer was ‘keep them one, Father, as thou and I are one.’ He said that that principle of unity is one of the most glorious principles in the Church.

President McDonald said that they were united together and hoped to radiate that spirit.

President McKay said the second question is the payment of tithing. Elder McDonald said, ‘We pay our tithes.’

President McKay said that the next question was, ‘Do you observe the Word of Wisdom?’ and Elder McDonald and Sister McDonald said that they do these things.

Finally the President said that the first calling in the priesthood is to be true to the priesthood. He mentioned that there are many in the Church who belong to secret orders. President McDonald said, ‘We belong to none.’ President McKay explained that their first allegiance is to the priesthood and we do not condemn people for joining these organizations, but we do not need them in the priesthood.

President McKay asked Brother and Sister McDonald if they could say yes to all these principles and they gave assurance that they could. Elder McDonald said that they felt it a great honor and privilege and a crowning event in their lives and that they were saying this in humility. Sister McDonald said that she had always been active in the Church, that she had filled a mission when she was a girl in the Eastern States, for the last forty years had worked in the Church, mostly in the Relief Society. She said that she tried to live the gospel wherever she had been and that she had worked with people who were not members of the Church most of her life.

Elder McDonald said that a postal inspector in San Francisco had called upon him saying that he had a message from the postal inspector in Los Angeles who said they would like Brother McDonald to come to Los Angeles and testify against certain magazines which are picturing nude women, nude children, boys and girls mingling together, men and women mingling together absolutely in the nude. Brother McDonald said that he put on his desk about eight volumes and wanted him to testify, saying that his name had been recognized in Los Angeles as one who would testify against such things. Elder McDonald said that he told him that he would be glad to testify normally, but that he must refrain from doing so now since the President of the Church had asked him to serve in a position where he would be performing marriages and he and his wife would be brought before the youth of the Church, young people who were going to school.

Elder McDonald said he told him that he had gone through a terrific experience about two years ago when he testified in the courts of Los Angeles against Henry Miller’s book, ‘The Tropic of Cancer,’ which is a filthy book; said he read it on request and testified against it and they threw it out of the book stores in Los Angeles. Elder McDonald said that he took a terrific beating in the Press of the United States, that he was ridiculed all over.

So far as this request now is concerned he said he told the inspector that he would be glad to do so but he had an obligation, that the youth of the Church would see the publicity that would come out and they would not understand it, so he would not like to do that at this particular time, inasmuch as he was going to serve in the temple, that he would not want his name to be associated with pornographic stuff that comes through the mail. Elder McDonald said he wrote a letter to the inspector accordingly, but told him he would be glad to give him the name of someone who would be willing to testify.

President McKay, assisted by President Brown, then laid his hands upon the head of Elder Howard S. McDonald and set him apart as president of the Salt Lake Temple and conferred upon him the sealing power. Following this blessing, President McKay and President Brown, together with Brother McDonald, laid their hands upon the head of Sister Ella Gibbs McDonald and President Brown was voice in setting her apart as matron of the Salt Lake Temple.

Following the settings apart President McKay asked President McDonald to please submit the names of those whom he would like for his counselors. President McDonald said that if it met with the approval of the President he would be glad to keep the counselors who have heretofore been serving with President Willard R. Smith, for the time being at least. President McKay indicated his approval but said in the meantime Brother McDonald should be thinking of someone else, because he has something in mind for these brethren.

Minutes by Joseph Anderson”

Wed., 8 Apr. 1964:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Presidents Brown and Tanner and Elder Thorpe B. Isaacson in the apartment at the Hotel.

Washington, D.C. – Temple Site

President Tanner presented to me a letter from President Miller F. Shurtleff of the Potomac Stake, together with maps and sketches, recommending the purchase by the Church of a piece of property consisting of 300 acres for use as a Temple site and for Church schools. The site to which President Shurtleff referred is on the Potomac River. It was mentioned that property in that area would cost about $10,000 an acre and that property values are increasing.

President Shurtleff says that membership in that area and faithfulness of the people justifies our giving consideration to the erection of a Temple there.

I said that the first step would be for President Shurtleff to discuss this matter with President Milan D. Smith, and that then one of the Brethren of the First Presidency would have to go back and look at the property later; that we could not make a purchase of that kind near Washington without very careful thought and prayer.”

Thurs., 7 May 1964:

“Seattle – Acquiring of Property Which May Be Used as Temple Site

President Brown reviewed the recommendation which had come from Seattle Stake that the Church acquire a part of the property of Fort Lawton, which covers a 640 acre area. He said this is situated just south of Seattle between the city and the airport. President Tanner added that the site is described as equally good as the site at Los Angeles Temple. President Kay in Seattle asks if the Church is prepared to consider it and if so if they may make application to purchase a piece of land.

President Tanner expressed the opinion that the Church would be well advised to acquire the land if it does not have to make a specific commitment to build on it. I recalled the area as beautiful and President Tanner said that it overlooks the city and the sea.

I advised that the stake officers be told to inquire into it, and to make a report to the First Presidency with a view to making application for purchase of a part if the price is right. President Tanner asked if the First Presidency’s support of their application is desired, would the Presidency be prepared to support it. I answered yes, that is all right; and agreed that the suggestion of President Brown be made to the stake authorities that the site is not to be known as a Temple site. President Tanner took the papers.

Wed., 13 May 1964:

Sealing of Children to Foster Father – No Action to be Taken on Children Born in the Covenant

It was mentioned that some question has been raised in regard to the sealing of children to their mother and foster father in cases where the natural parents have been separated by divorce and the mother marries a second man. I reiterated former instructions that in all such cases the children should be legally adopted before they are sealed to their mother and the foster father; that no action should be taken regarding children born in the covenant.

Sealings – Authorization to Perform

It was mentioned that the question has been raised as to whether brethren who have in the past received the sealing power and officiated in the Temple are now authorized to perform sealing ordinances for their friends in the Temple without special permission.

I ruled that in cases of this kind these brethren should receive special permission in each instance before performing sealings in the Temple.”

Thurs., 21 May 1964:

8:30 a.m.

Was engaged in the regular meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed were the following:

Temple Recommends – New Coverts to Wait at Least a Year

I ruled that unless there is some really extenuating circumstance, new converts should be required to wait at least one year before permission is given for them to go to the Temple.

Wed., 3 June 1964:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Presidents Brown and Tanner in my office at the Hotel Utah apartment. I did not feel up to walking over to the Church Administration Building. Some of the matters discussed were:

Salt Lake Temple

Report was given to me that some young men, two non-members, and one inactive member had gained admission to the Salt Lake Temple on forged recommends; that word had been received by telephone at the Temple that an attempt would be made by certain individuals who were not entitled to go to the Temple to gain admission. Accordingly, the sisters at the recommend desk became suspicious of these young men. Two of them had already been sent to the washing room, and one was held for questioning. They were interviewed by President McDonald, their names and addresses obtained, and they were sent from the Temple.

Consideration was given to the advisability of bringing some legal action against these people for forgery, but it was thought that it would be inadvisable to do this.

I asked President Brown to obtain information regarding these young men, their parents, place of residence, etc., and bring to the meeting tomorrow.

The next day, President McDonald’s report was read. The three persons involved are: David Roberts (a non-member), Robert Phillips (non-member), and Don Anderson (a member).

After consideration, I directed that the matter be reported to the Council of the Twelve today, and asked President Brown to follow the matter up and to prepare a final and full report.

Wed., 10 June 1964:

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Wednesday, June 10, 1964, at 9:30 A.M.

The First Presidency met with President Delbert F. Wright of the Oakland Temple and President O. Leslie Stone of the Oakland Temple Committee and discussed the following matters pertaining to the temple dedication:

Routing for Public Preview of Temple

President Wright reported that the temple committee had worked out a tentative routing for the tour during the public preview of the temple; also that they are arranging to have placed in strategic rooms and strategic areas well worded placards of explanation, thus avoiding any questions or conversation in the temple during the tour. The wording on these placards will be presented for approval of President Brown when he next visits the temple.

Changing of Entrances

President Stone said that the work in connection with the changing of entrances to the temple has already been commenced.

Pictures in the Rotunda

President Brown mentioned that provision is being made for the placing of some appropriate pictures in the rotunda, that Harold Burton is working on this and will arrange for the pictures to be hung in the right places.

Stakes in the Northwest

President Stone stated that he had written the presidents of thirteen stakes in the northwest to ascertain their attitude regarding being added to the Oakland Temple District and had received favorable answers from six stakes. President Wright said that it is possible that the extreme northern stakes like the Cascade and North Seattle stakes would prefer to stay in the Canadian district. It was felt that all the stakes in one area should go to one temple district, either to Oakland or to Canada as the case might be. In other words, that it would not be proper for the Seattle Stake to come to Oakland and the North Seattle Stake to go to some other temple district.

Number of Dedicatory Sessions

Presidents Wright and Stone favored confining the dedicatory services to six sessions and indicated even though the stakes in the northwest were to become attached to the district and invited to the dedicatory services they could be accommodated without additional sessions. This matter can be decided definitely after word has been received from the other stake presidents, at which time President Wright and President Stone will submit the matter to the First Presidency.

Housing for General Authorities

President Stone reported that the committee had talked with President Brown about housing the General Authorities who will attend the dedication and it was the sentiment of all concerned that it would be preferable to provide accommodations for them in the Hilton Hotel in San Francisco. Accordingly arrangements have been made for forty reservations in that hotel from Monday night until Wednesday. Explanation was made that this would be a desirable place for the sisters to stay particularly, and that it would take only about thirty-five minutes for them to drive from here to the temple.

Provisions for Luncheon Between Sessions

It is contemplated that luncheon will be served in the cafeteria to the General Authorities and their wives between the morning and afternoon sessions, and if the sisters do not want to stay for the afternoon session transportation can be arranged to take them back to the hotel.

General Authorities to Attend

President Stone said that they should know perhaps thirty days prior to the dedication which of the Authorities will attend. The First Presidency will report to the committee later the General Authority personnel who will attend. It was mentioned that all of the General Authorities and their wives would no doubt wish to be at the first session; that, however, they might not all attend the other sessions.

Evening Program for Authorities

President Stone said that they would like to have a dinner on one of the evenings for the General Authorities and their wives with a short program at the Hilton Hotel. It was agreed that this dinner should be held Tuesday evening, and that the presidents of the stakes and their wives in the temple district should also be invited to this dinner.

Arrangements for Dedicatory Services

President Stone submitted a plan showing where the dedicatory services would be held in the temple, which would include the celestial room, the terrestrial room and the sealing rooms on each side, these rooms all to be opened up on one floor and would provide accommodations for a thousand people to hear the service. The service would be carried by television closed circuit to the inter-stake center where 5,000 additional people will be assembled. According to this plan 6,000 could be accommodated at each session. There would be in addition 200 people in the chapel who would also see and hear.

Pre-Dedication Invitations

President Stone reported that 709,000 invitations are being printed for distribution to the general public inviting them to attend the preview. This is in addition to the special preview that will be held for officials. Thirty-five thousand additional invitations are being printed for that special day. His estimate was that about 305,000 people would attend the preview. There will be a period of two weeks between the close of the preview and the dedication services to make preparations for the latter.

Visitors from Stakes other than in the Area

In answer to a question as to whether the committee was considering allowing visitors from stakes outside of the area to attend the services President Wright said that they could take care of any who want to come for the preview but those coming to the dedication must have an invitation. President Stone said it was their thought that we do not encourage people from outside the area to come to the dedication because every available space is needed for the people in the temple district. The Presiding Bishopric will handle the distribution of tickets for the General Authorities and will make the distribution. President Stone said that they intended to give the General Authorities tickets good for all sessions and that if all the spaces are not used by the General Authorities and their families and guests, and that each day they would provide 24 extra tickets each session for this same purpose. Those who may wish to come to the dedication from other areas could perhaps be accommodated in the stake center. It was indicated that we do not want to discourage any faithful saints who want to come but while we would not encourage them to do so we would not want to cut them off entirely. So far as requests that may be received from individuals for tickets it was agreed that these should be sent to President Stone. President Stone said that they have placed with the printer the information for the printing of the tickets, that they have one ticket for the opening on September 25th for the distinguished guests for the preview, and one for the public starting October 5th. They have different colored tickets for each session of the dedication.

Music for the Dedicatory Services

President Stone explained that there will be at each of the sessions a 70 voice choir, which choir will be from the stakes participating in that particular session, and the same music will be used that has been used in other temple dedications. There will also be a solo in each session presented by different persons, one from each of the respective areas. The solo to be sung in each session will be ‘Bless This House’ and there will be a slight change in the wording in order to fit the situation. President Stone said that people are sending music which they suggest be sung at the dedication. It was agreed that we should not accept any of these suggestions. It as suggested that musical numbers for the morning sessions should be ‘The Morning Breaks; the Shadows Flee,’ and ‘Oh, How Lovely Was the Morning,’ and that for the second and fourth sessions the hymns should be ‘An Angel From on High’ and ‘I Know That My Redeemer Lives,’ and then for the sixth session the songs would be ‘An angel From on High’ and ‘Holiness Becometh the House of the Lord.’ The solo at each session would be ‘Bless This House.’ The concluding number at every session will be the ‘Hosanna Anthem,’ with the congregation joining in singing ‘The Spirit of God Like a Fire is Burning.’

Temple Recommends for Admission

President Stone said that they are providing that everyone who enters the temple for the dedicatory service will have to have a temple recommend in addition to the ticket, that there are some sisters in the choirs who have good voices who are married to non-members, that they are worthy people but the question is whether we may issue a recommend to them. It was agreed that if these people themselves are worthy of temple recommends they might be admitted; that, however, it should be stated on the recommends that they are issued for the dedicatory service only.

Time of Sessions

Arrangements are being made to have two sessions a day, from 9:30 to 11:30 and 2:30 to 4:30.

City Authorities to Assist Traffic Situation

It was reported that the city authorities, having in mind that this is the greatest attraction that has ever come to Oakland, will work out a full traffic control program.

Press Conference

It was decided to hold a press conference. President McKay said that his counselors could take care of this matter in the event he is unable to do so.

Guides to be Dressed in White

It was decided that the sisters who will serve as guides for the preview will be dressed in their white dresses and that the brethren should also wear white suits. These brethren and sisters should likewise be dressed in white for the dedication services.

Hosanna Shout

It was decided that only those participating in the service in the temple would participate in the Hosanna Shout. There was no objection to televising the Hosanna Shout so those in the inter-stake center and the ward building could view it, but they would not participate in it.

Those Who Attend Services in the Inter-Stake Center and Ward Building

It was agreed that all members of the Church holders of the priesthood, and girls of corresponding age and older, will be permitted to attend the services in the inter-stake center and the ward building and will be issued tickets for this purpose by their bishops; that, however, they will not need temple recommends for this purpose, and some of them may not be eligible for temple recommends; that, however, those who attend the services in the temple will be required to have temple recommends in addition to the tickets of admission.

Setting Apart Workers

President Wright mentioned that his first counselor, Brother Schettler, has been set apart by President Brown but not given the sealing power, that he will be here on vacation for a couple of weeks and he will contact President Brown so that arrangements can be made for him to be given the sealing power. The other counselor, Brother Kenner, will also be here later, when he can be set apart and given the sealing power. President Wright said that he would be in a position probably within the next month to furnish suggested names of others to be given the sealing power. President Wright was informed that the regular temple ordinance workers, after they have been approved by the First Presidency and Twelve, can be set apart by the temple president. It was suggested that when submitting recommendations of brethren and sisters for temple ordinance workers they should submit the information called for in the regular forms and should also submit with the recommendations temple recommends signed by their bishops and stake presidents.

Recorder for Temple

President Wright said that he is having a little difficulty selecting a recorder, the brother formerly recommended having not been approved. He said they would continue to look for someone else. President McKay suggested that President Wright send in a list of men whom he felt to recommend, giving the facts regarding them.

Bureau of Information

The brethren discussed the matter of the appointment of someone to take charge of the Bureau of Information at the Oakland Temple, and after considering several names it was agreed to ask Brother Paul Summerhays to serve in this position. Brother Summerhays is a counselor to President Stone in the Oakland-Berkeley Stake, and it was felt that he should be released from this position and a new counselor selected. It was also decided that the new manager of the Bureau of Information might use as his home the house now being occupied by Brother Price of the architectural department. As to compensation, President Stone and President Wright will confer with Brother Summerhays and ascertain what his needs are. It was agreed that he should be allowed not more than $400 per month.

Temple Ceremonies Sound Film

The question was raised regarding the sound film for the temple ceremonies and President Wright was requested to take this matter up with Elder Richard L. Evans. In this connection it was mentioned that Brother Evans is very much concerned regarding the wide screen, thinking that it would be very difficult for the people sitting close to the screen to see the picture. President Stone mentioned that Architect Price thinks that when the people are sitting in the seats that will be there they will not have to raise their heads to see the picture. President Stone was inclined to agree with Brother Price in this matter. It was suggested that this should be discussed with Brother Evans.

Tracts for Distribution

President Stone suggested that the following tracts be distributed at the preview: ‘The Purpose of the Temple’ by President McKay, ‘Why Mormons Build Temples’ by Mark E. Petersen, and the regular missionary tracts. In addition there would be the special edition of the Improvement Era. President Stone said that booths will be set up so that the names and addresses can be obtained of those who are interested in getting more information. The Improvement Era will be sold at 50 cents per copy.

Details Pertaining to Preview

President McKay said that we would leave to the committee the matter of the details pertaining to the lines of visitors entering the temple in the preview, and the matter of a presentation of a film to the visitors.

President Wright and President Stone left the meeting at this time.

Fri., 12 June 1964:

“8:00 a.m.

Met by appointment at his request, Elder Marion D. Hanks of the First Council of Seventy.

After a brief report of his activities since coming home from his Mission in Great Britain, Elder Hanks told me of the number of requests that are coming to him from missionaries and others to officiate at their marriages in the Temple, and that he wondered inasmuch as some of the members of the Council have been ordained High Priests why they could not have the sealing power conferred upon them.

I explained that members of the First Council of Seventy do not belong to the High Priests Quorums; that they are members of the First Council. I said that they have been ordained High Priests so that they can place everything in order in the Church in accordance with their assignment.

I said that I would take the matter of conferring of the sealing power up with the Brethren and let him know.

8:30 a.m.

First Council of Seventy – Sealing Power to be Conferred

Following Elder Hanks’ departure, Presidents Brown and Tanner came over to the apartment, and I presented to them the matter of conferring the sealing power upon members of the First Council of Seventy, and it became the unanimous sentiment of the First Presidency that the sealing power should be conferred upon them, which authority I shall confer at a later date.”

Tues., 16 June 1964:

Temples – Sealings of Mentally or Physically-Handicapped Living Persons by Proxy

President Tanner presented the request of Elder Theodore M. Burton for the Genealogical Department for instructions in the matter of sealing living persons by proxy as in cases where the living person is mentally or physically so incapacitated that he cannot come to the Temple for the ordinances, and also in cases where the mental age is not determined. He reviewed the ruling that when a person is not physically or mentally able to go to the Temple the work may be done by proxy. Problems included are: ‘Who decided whether the mental age is eight years or over?’ The Genealogical Department has been informed that a competent physician may determine the mental age and if it is not eight years of age the child is not baptized, but that such a child may be sealed to parents.

I directed that each case be considered on its special circumstances.

President Tanner reviewed the rule as being so far as necessity for proxy work is involved, the case must come to the First Presidency for consideration on its special circumstances, and I said, ‘that is right.’

Temple Site – Washington, D.C.

President Tanner read letters received from President Milan Smith and President Miller F. Shurtleff of Washington and Potomac Stakes respectively which affirmed their unanimity with the nine mission presidents who recommend consideration be given to the building of a Temple on the site of 57.4 acres owned by the Church in the Kensington area near Rock Creek Park, Washington, D.C. I asked that the letters be acknowledged and the brethren informed that the matter will receive consideration.”

Fri., 19 June 1964:

“10:30 to 11:00 a.m.

Following the departure of the Presiding Bishopric, the secretary presented several letters addressed to the First Presidency.

First Council of Seventy – Sealing Power to be Conferred

Report of the action taken at the meeting of the Council held June 11, when I was not present, approving the conferring of the sealing power upon the members of the First Council of Seventy was reviewed. I said that this matter I had presented at a First Presidency’s meeting previous to that and had expressed approval of the sealing power being conferred.

11:10 a.m.

Returned to my private office.

First Council of Seventy – Sealing Power Conferred on Marion D. Hanks

Met by appointment Elder Marion D. Hanks. I discussed with him the role in the Church of the members of the First Council of Seventy.

Following our discussion, I conferred upon him the sealing power, thus permitting him to officiate at marriage ceremonies in the Temples of the Church.”

Fri., 26 June 1964:

“8:40 to 10:00 a.m.

After the departure of Brother and Sister England, I went into the meeting of the First Presidency. President Tanner is absent in Florida and New York.

Temple Work – Translation of Temple Ceremonies into Japanese

Among items discussed was the matter of authorizing the preparation of a Japanese language recording for use in the Hawaiian Temple, bringing Brother Sato to Hawaii from Tokyo to do the translating, at an approximate cost to the Church of $1,000. Brother Edward L. Clissold of the Hawaiian Temple will follow through with the work under the supervision of Gordon B. Hinckley.”

Wed., 8 July 1964:

“First Council of Seventy

I discussed with the Brethren the advisability of conferring the sealing power upon the members of the First Council of Seventy. I asked Presidents Brown and Tanner if they could see any objection thereto, and they both expressed themselves as favoring this proposition. I mentioned that I had already given Elder Marion D. Hanks this authority, and that Elder Paul H. Dunn, also of the First Council of Seventy, has been asked by some of his friends to perform marriages for them in the Temple.

I said that I had prayed about this matter, and have thought seriously about it, and that I can see nothing wrong about it.

I then said that I would confer the sealing power upon Brother Dunn as soon as convenient.”

Sat., 1 Aug. 1964:

“After discussing with President Brown matters concerning the Oakland Temple, I decided that I would go to Oakland to inspect the Temple, especially to decide upon the color of the flood lights to be used on the building. I called my son, Llewelyn, and asked him to accompany President Brown and me.

We left the Salt Lake Airport at 6:00 p.m. and arrived at the San Francisco Airport at 7:35 p.m. President Stone and President Wright and their wives met us, and we were driven at once over to Oakland and to the Temple site. A large group of young people were on the grounds. I took time to greet a number of them.

Three different colors of lights were displayed on one side of the building, and the question was whether the outside of the Temple should be one of these three colors. There was an all-white color; another in a gold shade, and another greenish-blue color.

As soon as we arrived at the Temple at about 8:00 p.m., they took me in a wheelchair and wheeled me around the Temple, inside and out, making it easier to decide upon a color for the outside lights that would harmonize with the coloring on the inside rooms. They were going to decide upon the white lights, and that would not do at all. I told them that the lights should harmonize with what we already had in the inside of the Temple — that the color of the lights should be the gold tint. They all agreed as we looked at the gold lights that this would be better.

While we were there, we also decided where we would hold the dedicatory service so that 1,087 could be seated. We chose the Celestial Room upstairs. The choir will sit behind us; part of the audience and speakers on the left, and a number on the right.”

Tues., 15 Sept. 1964:

“8:30 to 10:00 a.m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency. The following items were discussed:

Oakland Temple Preview and Dedication

President Brown reported that Elder Howard W. Hunter, while in Oakland, had called at the Oakland Temple where he conferred with President Delbert F. Wright, President O. Leslie Stone, and Brother Harold W. Burton. Elder Hunter, upon his return, reported that parking is arranged, the trees are planted, the interior of the Temple is nearly finished, and the carpeting is down. Arrangements are being made to have those who view the Temple before its dedication go in through the front door, whereas at the dedication people will go into the Temple from the side. President Brown reported that 600 or 700 students, members of the Church who are going away to school, went through the Temple yesterday. President Stone having given special authorization for them to do this. Brother Hunter had reported that they went through in groups of 20 to 30, that they were very respectable, well dressed, and well behaved. As they entered the Temple, they were told that they should reserve any questions they might have until after the tour, when the questions would be answered. President Brown further reported that at the dedication services one-thousand can be accommodated in the main part of the Temple and two-hundred in the Temple chapel. Five-thousand additional can be accommodated in the tri-stake center for each session.

President Brown said that some question had been raised in regard to giving of the Hosanna Shout. Inasmuch as only those in the Temple could participate in the shout, some of the Brethren have wondered whether the Hosanna Shout is a necessary part of the dedication. I said that the shout should be given in the Temple and that the television connection to the stake house would be cut off at that time so that the shout will not be broadcast.

Thurs., 22 Oct. 1964:

“8:30 to 9:00 a.m.

Held a meeting with my counselors in the office at the Hotel. Among the matters discussed were:

Temples – site for in Ogden

Attention was called to a letter from President Lawrence D. Olpin of the Lorin Farr Stake offering the use of his property as a site on which to erect a Temple in Ogden. President Olpin said if additional acreage is needed it could be obtained. He also mentions that the Stake Presidents in Weber County have discussed the establishment of a Genealogical Library in Ogden, and President Olpin offers his large home to the Church for this purpose, and he also offers his second home as a home for the Temple President. President Olpin states that if we do not anticipate building a Temple there, he will take steps to sell part or all of his property.

It was decided to express appreciation to President Olpin for his offer, and to tell him that we have no plans to build a Temple in Ogden, and, therefore, he is at liberty to dispose of his property if he wishes to do so.

Fri., 6 Nov. 1964:

“Oakland Temple

I told the Brethren that in all probability I shall go to the dedication of the Oakland Temple; that, however, my doctors are advising against my going.

11:00 to 1:00 p.m.

Had a conference with my secretary, Clare, who presented schedules for the six sessions of the Oakland Temple Dedicatory Services. I assigned the General Authorities who are to speak at the various sessions, and also selected Stake Presidents who are to give the opening and closing prayers. Clare also handed me manuscripts of the dedicatory prayer and talks that are to be given at each session. I shall take time this week-end to go over these, and hand them back to Clare so that she can have final copies made.

Tues., 10 Nov. 1964:

“8:30 to 10:30 a.m.

Held the regular meeting of the First Presidency. The greater part of the time was spent in discussing details of the Oakland Temple dedicatory services. Among the matters we talked about were:

1) The matter of the Hosanna Shout. Presidents Stone and Wright both recommend that if agreeable to the wishes of the First Presidency, those seated in the Stake House be permitted to view the shout and the one conducting it, and that part of the Choir that would be within the vision of the lens, rather than to cut that part of the service out entirely. I said it would be all right to leave this in.

2) I told President Brown that I should like him to lead the shout at the opening session.

3) The Associated Press, United Press, and local Oakland Papers desire to have a press conference, and President Stone would like to favor the Oakland papers inasmuch as they have been so cooperative. I said that it would be arranged at a convenient time.

4) I raised the question as to why the counselors were going early Monday morning, and said I thought it would be preferable if they went in the afternoon. I said that I should prefer to go in the afternoon. Later, President Tanner changed his flight to 1:30 p.m., but President Brown decided to go on the 7:00 a.m. flight. I decided that I would go at 10:30 a.m.

5) The question was raised as to the dress of the ushers in the Temple, and we agreed that the men might dress in their regular suits, and that the women be dressed in white.

6) We decided that there would be no objection to Henry Smith of the Deseret News making a tape recording of the service, with the understanding, however, that it will be kept for the record and not for other use.

7) It was mentioned that there is a little room in the Temple that will accommodate about ten people, in addition to the regular dining room, and the question was raised if I should prefer to eat with my family and whoever else I should like to eat with me in the small room, or whether I should prefer to be in the larger dining room with the group. I said that I had no objection to eating with the entire group.

Extent of Activities

I said that I had talked with the doctor this morning, and he is writing a list of recommendations as to my activities. I said that I would be restricted, and would have to refer some of the work to the counselors.

I said that is my intention at the opening session to give a few words of greeting, and later in the session to make brief remarks, and then to read the dedicatory prayer. I said that the Patriarch will be asked to offer the Invocation; that President Joseph Fielding Smith will give the Opening Remarks; that Jesse Evans Smith will sing ‘Bless This House; and that President O. Leslie Stone, as Chairman of the Committee for the Dedication, and President Delbert F. Wright of the Temple, will make remarks. Following the dedicatory prayer the ‘Hosanna Anthem’ will be sung by the Choir and Congregation, and then the Hosanna shout will be led by President Hugh B. Brown. The benediction will be offered by President Irven G. Derrick of the San Francisco Stake.

I said that at the afternoon session I would have President Tanner conduct, and President Brown and members of the Twelve and Assistants to the Twelve will be called upon to speak. The program for the other sessions will be given later.

Wives of the General Authorities

The question was raised as to whether the wives of the General Authorities should attend all the sessions, and I said that they are free to do as they wish; that we should like to have them there, but there is no compulsion.

Hours for Holding the Sessions

The sessions will start at 9:30 a.m. and the afternoon session at 2:30 p.m., excepting on Thursday when the first session will start at 9:00 a.m., and the second session at 1:00 p.m. This session had been scheduled for 2:30 p.m., but it was the feeling of the Brethren that if possible arrangements should be made to leave on the Thursday afternoon plane for home, and in order to do this, it would be necessary to hold the afternoon session at an earlier hour than otherwise.

Sealing Power to be Conferred

President Brown reported that President Wright had stated that one of his counselors and he had not been given the sealing power; also that there are five others who have been sustained, but have not been given the sealing power. He wondered if I would be able to perform these ordinances while in Oakland, and I said I would make arrangements to confer the sealing power upon these brethren at a convenient time.

List of Guests

I asked President Brown to furnish me with a list of those who are going as guests of the First Presidency.

Thurs., 12 Nov. 1964:

“10:00 to 1:25 p.m.

Attended the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple.

I greeted the Brethren and told them how happy I was to be in their presence again. I said that I am tired of loafing and that the doctors were really surprised yesterday morning at my improved condition, and gave me hope that I would overcome the impediment in my speech and that I would not have to stutter so much.

I expressed my love for the Brethren, and said that it is my desire to be in their company.

Oakland Temple – Attendance at

I told the Brethren that I am going to attend the dedicatory services of the Oakland Temple, and that I had been giving considerable thought to the program of these services. I said that the Twelve would have to do most of the speaking, and some of the Assistants also; that the responsibility for the sermons would rest upon the Brethren of the Council.

I said that if I listened to Dr. Viko I should not be going, but he has sent a letter to President Stone, mentioning some restrictions which should be followed.

I told the Brethren that I feel better, and thanked them again for their prayers on the occasion when Presidents Brown, Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith came to the hospital and administered to me, and the other Brethren of the General Authorities met together fasting and praying for me.

Referring to the Oakland Temple Dedicatory Services again, I said that I should like President Brown to take charge of the Hosanna Shout at the Temple.

I said that I think we shall have a time of rejoicing. I stated that I shall leave on the plane Monday so that I can take a good rest Monday night, and after that I shall know what I can do at the services.

I stayed during the entire meeting, and was happy to hear the reports of the Brethren.”

Mon., Tues., Wed., and Thurs., 16, 17, 18, and 19 Nov. 1964:

“Dedication of Oakland Temple

Monday, November 16, 1964

10:15 a.m.

Departure for Oakland

Sister McKay and I left the Hotel Utah for the Airport in a piercing 81-mile-an-hour wind, which has been blowing all through the night. However, the sun was shining brightly in a blue sky, swept clean of the smoke and fog which had been hanging over the valley. So our hearts were light and happy as we left with members of our family to attend dedicatory services of the Oakland Temple.

The following members of the family accompanied Sister McKay and me: Lawrence and Mildred McKay, Edward and Lottie McKay, Emma Rae McKay Ashton, and Robert McKay.

We were driven directly to the ramp of the Western Airlines Jet plane, and then lifted to the door on the plane in a mechanical lift. Sister McKay and I smiled and joked with the reporters who swarmed around us as we were being put into the lift.

Aboard the liner besides members of the family were some thirty other Church officials and community leaders, some of whom were: President and Mrs. Joseph Fielding Smith, Elder and Mrs. Thomas S. Monson, Elder and Mrs. Thorpe B. Isaacson, Elder and Mrs. Theodore M. Burton, Elder and Sister Boyd K. Packer, Dr. and Mrs. George R. Hill, Clare Middlemiss, my secretary, and representatives of the Auxiliary organizations.

I understand that there are three planes scheduled to leave today. President Brown and party left at 7:00 a.m., and President Tanner and party will leave at 1:30 p.m.

When we reached our seats in the plane, photographers gathered around and took several pictures.

The flight to San Francisco was delightful; it was perfectly smooth and one hardly knew we were traveling at such high speed. We landed at the airport at 12:40 p.m., and were met by President and Sister O. Leslie Stone, President and Sister Delbert F. Wright, and others, and were driven directly to our headquarters in the ‘Boatel’ situated on the water front, in Jack London Square, Oakland, California.

Soon after we arrived in our rooms, a delicious lunch of baked salmon was served to Sister McKay, all members of the family, and me.

2:00 p.m.

Press Conference Held

A press conference was held in our rooms in the ‘Boatel’. President Hugh B. Brown was present. Representatives of the press, radio, and television of the Bay Area asked many questions relative to the purpose of the Temples, and source of funds for building Temples. Others who attended the conference were: President O. Leslie Stone of the Oakland-Berkeley Stake and Chairman of the Temple District, and President Delbert S. Wright, Oakland Temple President. Mayor John C. Houlihan of Oakland was also present, and he paid tribute to the stability and ‘outstanding citizenship’ of the Latter-day Saints of the Bay Area. He said that ‘more than any other group, I know they make a substantial contribution to our society.’

Following the Press Conference, Sister McKay and I took a rest.

Following a delicious dinner at 4:00 p.m., I went over my notes for tomorrow morning’s opening session.

5:00 p.m.

Sister McKay and I, and members of the family were driven to the Temple site so that we could view the Temple by night. It is a sight never to be forgotten — the Temple at night is like a sparkling jewel, and brings a feeling of reverence and deep faith to the heart.

Tuesday, November 17, 1964

(OPENING SESSION)

The weather was unusually beautiful — the sun was shining, and although there was a cool, brisk breeze, it was delightful. Inasmuch as it had been raining for the past two weeks, everyone was thankful for this wonderful weather.

Assisted by our children, Sister McKay and I were up bright and early. At 7:30 a.m. breakfast was served in our rooms.

9:00 a.m.

President O. Leslie Stone and President Delbert L. Wright were on hand with cars to drive the McKay party and the Brown and Tanner party to the Temple. Buses were furnished for the others. It took us about 15 minutes to get to the Temple.

Streams of people were filing into the Temple and the Stake House as we arrived. I was told that about ten thousand people were assembled in the Temple and the East Bay Interstake Center, located on the Temple grounds, and that the people had been coming since six o’clock this morning. Those in the Center will view the proceedings this morning by closed circuit television.

Outside the Temple we stopped long enough for the press and television photographers to take pictures.

9:20 a.m.

As I entered the Celestial Room, tears welled up in my eyes as I looked around at those gathered there in the rooms on either side of the pulpit, and at the Choir members dressed in white. I knew then that our prayers had been answered, and I felt grateful that the Lord had granted me the privilege of being in attendance at the dedication of this beautiful Temple.

As I took my seat, I was impressed to ask Brother O. Leslie Stone, who had done so much toward the planning and direction of this Temple, to conduct the services.

9:30 a.m.

The services commenced with a choir from several Stakes assigned to attend the first session singing: ‘The Morning Breaks, the Shadows Flee’. Elder Eldred G. Smith, Patriarch to the Church, offered the opening prayer. The Choir then sang: ‘Oh, How Lovely Was the Morning’. I then took my place at the pulpit, and gave the Opening Remarks, expressing sincere appreciation for the Temple and for those who have been instrumental in its erection. I then told of the prophecy by President Brigham Young and Willard Richards in a letter to the Saints in California who had just come around Cape Horn with Samuel Brannan, that ‘in the process of time, the shores of the Pacific may yet be overlooked from the Temple of the Lord’, and the later inspiration of Elder George Albert Smith who in 1924 ‘envisioned a Temple would one day surmount the East Bay hills — one that would be visible as a beacon to ships as they entered the Golden Gate from the far-flung nations of the earth.’ I expressed appreciation for the committee of three men — Elder Eugene Hilton, Chairman, Elder Delbert F. Wright, and Elder A.B. Graham who were moved upon by the Spirit to select this very site where the Temple now stands. I also told of my participation in recommending to President Grant that the site be purchased in 1934.

Elder Delbert F. Wright, President of the Oakland Temple, Brother O. Leslie Stone, Chairman of the Temple Committee, and President Joseph Fielding Smith were speakers on this first session. Sister Jesse Evans Smith sang ‘Bless This House’.

I then delivered the Dedicatory Address and Prayer. I stood at the pulpit for over an hour at this time, and I knew that the Lord had blessed me as I stood there without any support of any kind. (See copies of President McKay’s remarks and prayer following, and also newspaper clippings.)

The Choir then sang the ‘Hosanna Anthem’ with the congregation joining in with ‘The Spirit of God Like a Fire is Burning’.

President Hugh B. Brown then led the Hosanna Shout, and the Benediction was offered by Brother Irven G. Derrick, President of the San Francisco Stake, and the first session of the Dedicatory Services was concluded.

Note by Clare Middlemiss, Secretary

A rich outpouring of the Spirit of the Lord was present on this occasion. There was hardly a dry eye in the whole congregation as President McKay stood at the pulpit. Some of us knew that it was a miracle that he was standing there, as he had been unable to stand alone like that since his stroke almost a year ago. In his opening remarks as he welcomed all present, and also an ‘unseen audience’, naming all the former Presidents of the Church, an emotional thrill went through all present, and I am sure was felt even by the six thousand and more who were listening and watching by closed circuit wire in the Stake House. President McKay’s voice was clear and distinct all through the hour or more that he gave his inspirational address and prayer.

At the conclusion of this session, President Stone asked that those present remain standing until President and Sister McKay and party had left the room as it was necessary to put President and Sister McKay in wheelchairs to travel down to the dining room on the lower floor.

Between the hours of 12:30 and 2:00 p.m., President and Sister McKay had lunch and then rested.

SECOND SESSION OF THE OAKLAND TEMPLE DEDICATION

2:30 p.m.

I asked President Nathan Eldon Tanner to conduct the services.

The choir, with the Sacramento, Sacramento North, Gridley, American River, Redding, Tacoma, and Salem Stakes participating, sang: ‘An Angel From On High’. Brother Julius B. Papa, President of the Gridley Stake, offers the Invocation.

The Choir then sang, ‘I Know That My Redeemer Lives’.

The speakers for this session were: President Hugh B. Brown, Elder Gordon B. Hinckley, and Elder Henry D. Taylor, Assistant to the Twelve.

Sister Ewan Harbercht Mitten sang ‘Bless This House’, with special words written for the occasion.

Before giving the dedicatory prayer, I related a sacred experience that occurred during my visit on the Island of Maui when former missionaries appeared on the site where the first converts of the Church in the Hawaiian Islands were baptized.

The choir then sang ‘The Hosanna Anthem’, with the congregation joining in singing ‘The Spirit of God Like a Fire is Burning’, after which President Brown led the inspirational Hosanna Shout.

The Benediction was offered by Elder Albert B. Crandall, President of the Sacramento Stake, and the Second Session of the Dedicatory Services adjourned until 2:30 p.m.

Note by CM

President and Sister McKay and members of his family, and Presidents Brown and Tanner, and members of their family, then left the room as all present stood in reverent silence. Many tears were shed at this session, and you could feel their love and thankfulness that President McKay had been able to be present to give his address and the dedicatory prayer.

The President had stood without support at the pulpit for 58 minutes in delivering his dedicatory address and prayer.

Many members of the Church were gathered around the Temple as President and Sister McKay left. The President waved and smiled at every one. They were then taken to the cars and driven back to their quarters in the ‘Boatel’, where they rested the balance of the day.

Wednesday, November 18, 1964

THIRD SESSION OF OAKLAND TEMPLE DEDICATION

9:30 a.m.

The day dawned bright and clear. Following a delicious breakfast, President Stone and others were on hand to drive us to the Temple. As we entered the Celestial Room, and looked at the loving faces of all those gathered in that beautiful, heavenly room, tears of appreciation filled my eyes. As I took my seat at the pulpit I turned and acknowledged the members of the Choir who were seated just back of us.

I asked President Brown to conduct the services this morning, which started promptly at 9:30 a.m.

Brother Richard B. Sonne of the Palo Alto Stake offered the Invocation.

The singing was furnished by a choir from the Palo Alto, Monterey Bay, Cascade, San Jose, San Jose West, Puget Sound, and Covallis Stakes.

Their singing of ‘The Morning Breaks, The Shadows Flee’ and ‘Oh How Lovely Was the Morning’, was exceptionally beautiful.

The speakers for this session were: President Nathan Eldon Tanner, Elder Harold B. Lee and Elder Marion G. Romney. President Tanner very emotionally bore his testimony, and emphasized Genealogical and Temple Work. Elder Romney gave a history of ancient and Modern Temples, and Elder Lee spoke on the ordinances of the Temple which were revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith, which had lain hidden since the foundations of the earth.

Brother C. Edwin Segale sang ‘Bless This House’, with special words composed for the dedicatory services.

I then spoke for several minutes on the Eternal Plan of Salvation. I said that I had very keenly felt the nearness of our Father and of our Loved Ones who had gone before during these dedicatory services. I also touched on the immortality of the soul, and the persistence of personality after death. I said that this Temple dedicated today, and other Temples erected for the salvation and exaltation of the human family, contribute to the carrying out of the eternal plan of salvation. After my remarks the choir sang the ‘Hosanna Anthem’, with the congregation joining in singing ‘The Spirit of God Like a Fire is Burning’, and then President Brown conducted the Hosanna Shout.

Brother Horace J. Ritchie, President of the San Jose Stake, offered the Benediction.

The services were inspirational, and again we all felt grateful to the Lord for His nearness and many blessings.

Sister McKay and I then left the Celestial Room and proceeded down to the dining room where we had lunch with members of the family. After this, we retired to a room where we rested until time for the next session to convene.

FOURTH SESSION OF OAKLAND TEMPLE DEDICATION

2:15 p.m.

Sister McKay and I returned to the Celestial Room, which was crowded to capacity. The organ was softly playing as we entered, and a sweet, peaceful feeling permeated my being.

As I took my seat immediately in back of the pulpit, I greeted the members of the Choir, who I understand are from the following Stakes: San Joaquin, Modesto, Fresno, Fresno East, Napa, Klamath, Willamette, and Medford. Tears were in their eyes as they acknowledged my greetings with warm smiles.

I asked President Nathan Eldon Tanner to conduct the services. The Choir opened the meeting by singing, ‘An Angel From On High’. The Invocation was offered by Brother Clifton A. Rooker, President of the Modesto Stake, after which the Choir sang, ‘I Know That My Redeemer Lives’.

The speakers at this session were: ‘Elders Delbert L. Stapley, ElRay L. Christiansen, and Sterling W. Sill.

Sister Normand Oldham sang, ‘Bless This House’.

I then addressed the audience, speaking on the subject of ‘Immortality’. (See newspaper clippings following for beautiful thoughts expressed by President McKay.)

Following my address, I again delivered the Dedicatory Prayer.

President Brown led the Hosanna Shout following the singing of the ‘Hosanna Anthem’.

The Benediction was offered by Brother Dallas A. Tueller, President of the Fresno Stake, and another inspirational Dedicatory Service was concluded.

The audience stood again in reverent silence as Sister McKay and I left the Celestial Room.

Crowds were gathered around as we left the Temple and proceeded to our cars. Cameras were in evidence everywhere.

As we drove through the grounds and on to the highway, we were deeply impressed with the beautiful view of the City of Oakland and the Bay Area.

7:00 p.m.

This evening a banquet was held in a hall just a short distance from our rooms in the ‘Boatel’. President O. Leslie Stone and forty Stake Presidencies of the Oakland Temple District were hosts at this affair. Although I wanted to go, my son, Dr. Edward R. McKay, urged that I conserve my strength for the final sessions of the Dedicatory Service tomorrow, so I gave in to his pleadings and did not go. However, Sister McKay, who is feeling surprisingly well, and other members of the family attended.

They reported later that it was a delightful affair and that they had enjoyed the dinner and program very much.

Thursday, November 19, 1964

Another beautiful day!

FIFTH SESSION OF THE OAKLAND TEMPLE DEDICATION

Our party left the ‘Boatel’ at 8:15 this morning for the Oakland Temple and final sessions of the dedicatory services. As we shall leave for the Airport in San Francisco immediately following the concluding session this afternoon, we had packed our bags and left them in our rooms so that they could be picked up this morning and taken to the Airport.

As we approached the Temple site, we could see many people wending their way toward the Temple and also to the Inter-Stake Center.

We entered the Celestial Room just in time for the opening of the meeting at 9:00 a.m. I asked President Brown to conduct the meeting.

The choir from the Walnut Creek, Concord, Reno, Reno North, Seattle, Seattle North, and Seattle East Stakes opened the services by singing ‘The Morning Breaks, The Shadows Flee’, following which Brother Kenneth D. Jensen, President of the Walnut Creek Stake offered the invocation.

The choir then sang ‘Oh How Lovely Was The Morning’.

Elder Spencer W. Kimball was the first speaker. He mentioned his coming to my office twenty-one years ago, and of his feeing of inadequacy as he was told that he had been chosen to become an Apostle of the Church. He said that I told him the story of Thomas, which brought comfort and hope to his soul, and thankfulness to his soul that we have Prophets to guide us in this day.

As we approached the Temple site, we could see many people wending their way toward the Temple and also to the Inter-Stake Center.

We entered the Celestial Room just in time for the opening of the meeting at 9:00 a.m. I asked President Brown to conduct the meeting.

The choir then sang ‘Oh How Lovely Was The Morning’.

Elder Spencer W. Kimball was the first speaker. He mentioned his coming to my office twenty-one years ago, and of his feeling of inadequacy as he was told that he had been chosen to become an Apostle of the Church. He said that I told him the story of Thomas, which brought comfort and hope to his soul, and thankfulness to his soul that we have Prophets to guide us in this day.

Elder Thomas S. Monson was the next speaker. He referred this Temple as the open ‘Golden Gate’, and compared it to the Statue of Liberty’, which beckons to all who love God and Liberty. He bore an eloquent testimony of genealogical and Temple work, and of his knowledge of the truth of this Latter-day work.

Sister Claire Richards then sang ‘Bless This House’.

Elder LeGrand Richards then spoke and told of the marvels of this day and age in bringing about the purposes of God. He told of his experiences and other missionaries in obtaining genealogical records.

I then spoke to the audience on the principle of service. I said that there comes to my mind this morning a seemingly contradictory expression by the Savior who on one occasion said to those to whom He was speaking, ‘… whosoever will save his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.’ I said that naturally it would seem that when one attempted to save his life, he would have a good chance to save it, and a better chance than when he would lose it. But that it also seems strange that if a man loses his life, he would save it. But in that seemingly contradictory expression by the Savior there underlies a fundamental truth of life; that you may see it on every hand if you keep your eyes open. Men who have striven to save themselves, to build themselves up, lose themselves in the estimation of their fellows. I said that when this principle of losing oneself for the Savior is applied, we find that the spirit of man grows and becomes more in touch with the Spirit that guides us through life. I stated that this Temple furnishes to all faithful members of this Temple District and others who may come an opportunity to render the greatest service in the world to your Loved Ones who have gone before, some of whom have been waiting hundreds of years to receive the blessings that they alone could give them.

I said that a confirmatory testimony of the divinity of the work of the Prophet Joseph Smith is associated with this principle of service.

I then said that we had all been inspired by the singing of this Choir this morning, and by the other Choirs that have sung; that each member had lost himself for the good of others, and that they had brought inspiration to many hearts by beautiful singing.

I then turned to President Brown and asked him to read the dedicatory prayer.

Following the reading of the prayer, the Choir sang the “Hosanna Anthem’, and the congregation joined with them in singing ‘The Spirit of God Like a Fire is Burning’.

President Brown then led the audience in the Hosanna Shout, after which Brother J. Price Ronnow, President of the Reno Stake, offered the Benediction.

Confirmed Sealing Power Upon Temple Workers

Following the meeting, I accompanied Presidents Stone and Wright to President Wright’s office in the Temple, where I conferred the sealing power to be exercised in the Oakland Temple upon the following: Bernherd Herman Schettler, Eugene P. Hilton, Stephen Henry Winter, and Rufus Osborne Phelps.

After attending to the meeting with these brethren, I joined Sister McKay in the dining room where we had a bite to eat, following which I took a rest.

12:50 p.m.

Arrived in the Celestial Room for the sixth and final session of the dedicatory services. The room and adjoining rooms were crowded beyond capacity, chairs having been placed at every advantage point.

1:00 p.m.

Asked President Nathan Eldon Tanner to conduct the services. The Choir from the Hayward, San Leandro, Oakland-Berkeley, Portland, Portland West, Columbia River, and Columbia River North Stakes, opened the meeting by singing, ‘An Angel From On High’. Brother Thomas Y. Emmett, President of the Portland Stake, offered the Invocation.

The choir then sang, ‘Holiness Becometh the House of the Lord.’

Elder Howard W. Hunter was the first speaker. He told in some detail the history of the early Latter-day Saints in California, particularly those of the Mormon Battalion and the members of the Church who came around Cape Horn on the ship Brooklyn under the leadership of Samuel Brannan, taking 178 days to make the trip, and landing at Yerba Vista, which is now San Francisco. He also told of the pioneers who had crossed the plains under great hardship, and had started the building of the great Salt Lake Temple almost immediately upon arrival in the Salt Lake Valley. He said these pioneers have left us a great heritage, and urged that we search out the genealogy of our ancestors and do the work necessary for them.

Governor George S. Romney of Michigan, formerly President of the Detroit Stake, who had been visiting Southern California for a speaking appointment, arrived just as the services were beginning. President Tanner asked me if I wanted him to address the audience, and I said that it would be nice to ask him to say a few words, so following Elder Hunter’s remarks, he was asked to speak. He spoke on the value of family life, and said that the Church gives to the world a higher concept of a family life; helps us to be better parents, and to have better children. He said that he hoped the Temple would always be a symbol to the people of this area of the importance of good family life.

Sister Estrella Olszowaka from the Oakland-Berkeley Stake, then sang, ‘Bless This House’, after which Elder Richard L. Evans spoke to us. He declared that the Creator has given us the glorious assurance that light and truth and personality have limitless possibilities. He stressed the fact that exaltation was an individual responsibility, and said, ‘I have great respect for scholarship and for brilliance, but I have never known a man so brilliant that I would entrust to him the eternal future of myself or my loved ones …Each man, if he is wise, will look to the commandments of God and how he stands with respect to those commandments. There is great unwisdom in the postponement of essential things relative to both the living and the dead.’

Following Elder Evans I took my place at the pulpit, and spoke to the audience on ‘Christ, the son of the Living God’. I stated that if I were asked to name the dominant theme of the dedicatory services, it would be the reality of the existence of our spirits after death, and the obligation of Church members to do the necessary work for them in order that they may become members of the Kingdom of God.

I stated that the Savior invited the disciples of old when John the Baptist asked Him, ‘Master, where dwellest thou?’ to ‘Come and see’. I said that answer of Jesus to the disciples is really the message that the members of the Restored Church are giving to the world — that we invite all men to ‘come and see’. to investigate the reasons for our declaring to the world that the Lord has spoken in this dispensation to the children of men. It is really the Savior who still says, through his prophets, to all mankind ‘come and investigate the principles of happiness, of salvation, and exaltation for the human family.’ Many look, but they do not see. Many listen, but they do not hear. I said that I have met some people to whom the comprehension of the ordinances in the Temples has never come; that seeing or visualizing the glory of the Temple work is something like obtaining a testimony of the divinity of Christ’s work. To some the glory of the truth of the Restored Gospel comes immediately; to others, it comes more slowly, but surely.

I then told of the testimony which had come to Peter, that great Apostle, that Jesus was the Christ, the son of the living God. I closed my remarks by saying that a testimony of Jesus Christ is the greatest blessing that can come to man.

I then asked President Brown to read the Dedicatory Prayer.

The choir then sang the ‘Hosanna Anthem’, and the congregation joined them in singing ‘The Spirit of God Like a Fire is Burning’.

Following this, the Hosanna Shout was given under the direction of President Brown.

The Benediction was offered by Brother William Howard Allen, President of the Northern California Mission, and the Dedication of the Oakland Temple was finished.

The meeting ended at 3:00 p.m., and Sister McKay and I were taken to a room where we could rest awhile before being driven to the San Francisco Airport, which is an hour’s drive from Oakland.

4:15 p.m.

Sister McKay and I, with members of our family, left the beautiful Oakland Temple for San Francisco, where at 5:35 p.m. we boarded the Western Airlines jet plane for Salt Lake City. A delicious dinner was served to us on board the plane.

8:25 p.m.

After a very pleasant trip, we arrived at the Salt Lake Airport at 8:25 p.m. Our grandson, Dr. Richard McKay, had driven right to the plane with the car. I refused to be taken down the ramp in a ‘lift’, and walked down with Edward’s help. Sister McKay came down in the ‘lift’.

A crowd of about fifty children and their parents were at the plane to greet us. I stopped long enough to wave to them and say a few words of greeting, and then we got into the car and were driven directly to our suite at the Hotel Utah.

I am grateful to the Lord that my health has held up during the three days of Dedicatory Services, and that I was able to attend all of the sessions, and privileged to speak at each session, and to offer the Dedicatory Prayer at all but the last two sessions. I think the Dedication was an inspirational and successful occasion! Everything went according to plan, and I am satisfied and sincerely appreciative for the blessings of the Lord. Sister McKay was also thrilled with the services and with the trip to Oakland. She was very well during the entire time!

It is estimated that approximately 35,000 members of the Church in the Oakland Temple District attended the six sessions of the Dedication.”

Tues., 1 Dec. 1964:

London Temple – Modification in Temple Services

A letter from President Mark E. Petersen was read in which he reports comments of Temple services when one group of participants in the service continues session after session, in which case at first the entire procedure is given, with film, prayer circle, and the lecture; but for the sessions immediately subsequent, in which this same group and no others participate, the tape is used but the film and the lecture may not be; and if the same group wishes to continue for another session, the prayer circle is occasionally omitted. I said and advised, ‘I would not omit anything. The people who go through are proxies for some man or woman who should participate in the entire session without omission.

Note by CM

After another half hour, President McKay put on his coat, hat, and rubbers and started to leave. As he slowly walked across the room with his secretary on one side, and Brother Darcey Wright on the other, he stopped in the doorway and said:

‘You know, I am still thinking about the dedicatory services of the Oakland Temple. Just before rising to the pulpit there in the Temple, I wondered if I would be able to go through with standing there for over an hour to give the address and prayer, and then there came to my soul the assurance that I could go through with it; I had no doubt, and I was able to give an address at each session and to read the dedicatory prayer so that everyone could hear them!’ The President seemed lost to his surroundings as he talked of this event. It was a thrill to see and hear him!

He then proceeded on his way out the back door to get into his car. He stopped on the landing just before descending the stairway, and was very interested in looking at the great expansion of run-ways leading to the new mammoth underground garage which is nearing completion. It was raining steadily, but he stood there exclaiming at the work that had been done. As the President was walking on the slippery sidewalk to get to his car, he slipped and almost had a bad fall, but the men caught him just before he went all the way down. As he got up, he was smiling, and jokingly said, ‘That leg would not obey me, and that is what it gets!’ Tears were in our eyes as we watched him and admired his determination, courage and cheerfulness. We never cease to wonder at him!”

Wed., 13 Jan. 1965:

“4:00 a.m.

Arose.

8:00 a.m.

Met by appointment in my office in the Hotel Brother Seymour Dilworth Young of the First Council of Seventy, and conferred upon him the sealing power.

Fri., 15 Jan. 1965:

Salt Lake Temple – Letter Regarding Pompous Actions of One of the Sealers

Read a letter from a couple here in Salt Lake City, who expressed their dismay and disgust with the pompous actions of one of the sealers in the Salt Lake Temple; that he gestures and ‘brags’ about the number of sealings he has performed, etc. when he is performing sealings of young couples.

I stated to my secretary that no man should hold an office who takes glory unto himself and misuses his authority.

I called Brother ElRay L. Christiansen, supervisor of the Temples, and asked him to look into this matter and make whatever adjustment that may be necessary. (Letter referred to above, is filed in Temples, Misc. file)”

Sat., 16 Jan. 1965:

“At eight o’clock this morning I met Brother ElRay L. Christiansen who brought up a number of matters pertaining to the work in the Temples.

I handed Brother Christiansen a letter that I had received regarding the pompous actions of one of the sealers in the Salt Lake Temple, and asked him to look into the matter.”

Tues., 2 Feb. 1965:

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Tuesday, February 2, 1965, in the winter home of President David O. McKay at Laguna Beach, California.

Present: President David O. McKay and President Hugh B. Brown. President N. Eldon Tanner was in Salt Lake City. The following matters were discussed:

Design of Temple Garments:

President Brown read the proposed letter regarding the revision in the design of temple ordinance garments. President McKay recommended that a sample of the new garment be obtained and reviewed by him upon his return to Salt Lake City, that in the meantime this letter be held in abeyance.

Sound and Film to be used in temple ceremonies:

President Brown presented a letter from Benjamin L. Bowring, president of the Los Angeles Temple, reporting that they were using sound only in the Los Angeles Temple in five sessions daily and that sound and film were used in only two sessions. Reference was made to the request of President England, in charge of the London Temple, to dispense with the film after the first sessions and use only sound. It was the sense of the meeting that both sound and film should be used in all sessions and that we advise both temple presidents accordingly.

Irregular Sealing Matter:

President Brown read a letter from President Howard C. Anderson, of the California Mission, which brought to the attention of the brethren the case of Robert Nish, who is the president of a small Harlowton branch, and who has recently learned that his former wife, now married to Brother Butters, had had the children of Brother Nish and his wife sealed to Brother Butters and their mother. It was decided this was irregular and that the sealing should be cancelled and Brother Nish advised accordingly.

Charge for food and clothing at London Temple:

An excerpt from President Mark E. Petersen’s letter to the First Presidency was read referring to the suggestion of President England, endorsed by President Petersen, that the saints attending the London Temple be charged a reasonable amount for meals and clothing. Authorization was made for such charge and a request made that we be advised as to what charge is recommended by Presidents Petersen and England. President Petersen will be written to accordingly.

Minutes by President Hugh B. Brown”

Fri., 5 Mar. 1965:

“Second Sealings – Taking of Book Out of the Temple

Following Brother Jensen’s departure, I had a confidential conference with President Joseph Fielding Smith concerning a request which President Brown had made of him that he take from his safe in the Historian’s Office, and hand to President Tanner, the book containing the ceremonies for second sealings. President Smith said that the original copy to this is in the Temple, which President Tanner could see in the Temple, but that the copy he (President Smith) has is a copy given to him years ago by President Anthon H. Lund of the First Presidency for safe keeping; that it is locked up in the safe in his office, and has never been taken out.

President Smith said that he is very worried about letting the book out of the safe; that during the night he had awakened and was impressed to call President Howard S. McDonald of the Salt Lake Temple, and ask him if anyone had been to the Temple and asked for the book of second sealings. He said he awakened Sister Smith and told her of his impression. Early that morning he called President McDonald and asked him if anyone had asked him for the book, and that President McDonald had said that Brother ElRay L. Christiansen had been over and had obtained the book from Brother Beesley, his counselor, when he was not there; that they had been instructed by President Brown to let Brother Christiansen have it. President Smith wondered why they want President Tanner to take the copy from the safe when there is a copy available in the Temple.

Under these circumstances I told President Smith not to let the copy he has in the safe out of his hands. I said that President Brown had brought ElRay L. Christiansen over to my home yesterday and had asked for permission for Brother Christiansen to take the book out of the Temple; that I had given permission for him so to do, but that no copy should be made and that the book should be returned to the Temple that very day. Later, I instructed my secretary, Clare, to call Brother Christiansen and ask if a copy had been made, and he told her that no copy had been made.

Later, President Smith reported that that night he had awakened again with a strong impression to call President McDonald and ask him to call Brother Christiansen and ask him if he had made a copy of the book of second sealings. President McDonald later reported that he had called Brother Christiansen and asked him a direct question regarding this, and that Brother Christiansen was evasive in his answer.

7:00 p.m.

Brother ElRay L. Christiansen called at the home and explained the conditions under which he had secured the book of second sealings; that he had made a copy and then returned the book to the Temple. However, later he felt that he had had no right to make a copy, and that in the presence of his wife he had burned the copy he had made, and that there is no copy now. He asked my forgiveness for having made the copy.

Clare later reported to me that President Smith had taken the book of second sealings out of the Temple and had locked it up in the safe in the Historian’s Office with the other copy, and that there it would stay until President McKay called for it.”

Tues., 16 Mar. 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with President Tanner — President Hugh B. Brown enroute home from South America. We considered a number of letters and problems, among them being:

Sealing Cancellations

President Tanner mentioned an application for a sealing cancellation from a woman who is anxious to have the sealing cancelled between her and her deceased husband who was untrue to her, in order that she may be sealed to her present husband. President Tanner asked me if it is my desire that any of these sealing cancellation applications be brought to me for determination. I answered that Brother Hunter should bring all of these applications to me after he has gathered the necessary information regarding them.”

Fri., 19 Mar. 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

President Joseph Fielding Smith came over to the apartment by appointment. He said that President Brown had asked him for the book containing ‘second blessings’, and that he (President Smith) had told President Brown that the book is given only to the President of the Church who is the only one who has the right to give these blessings, and that they are given at his (the President’s) invitation.

President Smith explained that he has a copy of the book in the safe in the Historian’s Office, and the original is in the safe in the Salt Lake Temple President’s office, sealed, and a note placed on the top: ‘To be given to the President of the Church only.’

I told President Smith that he was right in what he had done, and then I turned to Sister Smith who had accompanied President Smith, and said, ‘You are a witness to this.’

Later that morning, President Brown called and said he would like me to call President Smith and ask him to give the book of the second blessings to him, and I told President Brown that I would call him back about this.

Thirty minutes later I called President Brown and told him that the book was locked up and that matters had been taken care of; that the book need not be taken out again, President ElRay L. Christiansen having previously taken the book out of the Temple upon instructions of President Brown.

Note by CM

Temple Sealings

Elder Howard W. Hunter came in and reported that he had been asked by President Tanner to take all petitions for cancellations of Temple sealings over to President McKay’s apartment and present them to him. I said, ‘There are about seventy cases on his desk, it would be impossible to take all of those at once to him; that President McKay is planning on doing a few at a time following Conference.’

This was reported to President McKay and he said that it is not necessary for Brother Hunter to take all of these up with him, excepting in special cases; that he (President McKay) would go over them as he could.”

Tues., 20 Apr. 1965:

Sealing – Child Under Eight to Witness

President Tanner raised a question as to what the attitude of the Church should be regarding permitting a seven-year-old boy to witness the sealing of his adopted sister to his parents. The Temple authorities had told the mother that this could not be done without the approval of the First Presidency. I said that consent might be given in this case.

In answer to the question as to whether this should be accepted as a Church policy that children under eight years of age might witness sealings, I said that each individual case should be judged upon its merits.”

Tues., 27 Apr. 1965:

‘Sealings for the Dead by Japanese Members

President Tanner reported that a number of Japanese Saints are coming to Hawaii in June on a Temple excursion. There are among them four members who wish to do the endowment work for and have sealed to them persons who have recently passed away; that is, they have been dead less than one year — four months to nearly a year. The question is raised as to whether an exception might be made granting this permission inasmuch as they may never have another opportunity to come to the Temple.

I ruled that permission could be given for this work to be done in the cases mentioned. In this connection, it was mentioned that Elder Gordon Hinckley will be in close touch with these people.

Sealing to Father Who is Deceased

President Tanner mentioned the case of a sister who lives in Massachusetts who desires to be sealed to her father who is deceased. This sister can come to the Temple at this time with a family who are coming from that area, and it would seem that this may be her only opportunity. Her father, who is not a member of the Church, died December 29, 1964, and she wishes to do his endowment work and to be sealed to him as child to parents. I gave consent for the exception in this case.

Wed., 28 Apr. 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

Held the regular meeting of the First Presidency. Some of the matters discussed were:

Salt Lake Temple Presidency

President Brown reported information that had come to him in the way of certain objections regarding Howard W. McDonald as President of the Salt Lake Temple, indicating that he does not inspire his associates with the spirit of Temple work, that he does not get close to the people and is somewhat erratic in his decisions. President Brown mentioned that President McDonald’s counselors have said that while they did not wish to make any complaint against him, they do want us to know that people do not feel at liberty to go to him with their problems. President Brown suggested that perhaps he might be considered for appointment as a Mission President somewhere. I asked President Brown to talk with President McDonald about the situation.

Tuesday, May 4, 1965

May 4, 1965

President David O. McKay

Hotel Utah

Salt Lake City

Utah Re: Temple Problems and Decisions

Dear President McKay:

It was an extreme blessing and privilege for me to be with you for a little while this morning and to report the condition of the temples generally. Your excellent help in resolving the problems and the needs that exist is deeply appreciated.

According to your wishes, I am reviewing for you herein the matters that were discussed and the decisions that you made in regard to each of them.

#1: I reported to you that during the past several weeks we have visited the St. George, Logan, Salt Lake and Idaho Falls Temples, in connection with my conference assignments, and have found the work and the spirit and atmosphere of orderliness prevailing in each of the temples. The temples are kept immaculately clean and the temple officials are carrying out your wishes in a commendable manner.

#2: Idaho Falls Temple: I reported to you that President Killpack had stated to me that they are in desperate need of additional sealers. One of their sealers has been called on a mission and three others are in poor health. He stated that he becomes very weary at the close of the daytime work and therefore finds it difficult and sometimes impossible for him to return to do sealing work in the evening.

He stated that some time ago he had recommended the following persons who he felt were worthy of receiving the sealing power:

Parley A. Arave – formerly president of the Blackfoot Stake; formerly president

of the Western Canadian Mission; a retired rancher who, with his wife, are now

serving as officiators in the Idaho Falls Temple. They live in Idaho Falls. I

personally feel that Brother Arave would be an excellent choice for this service.

Roderick Millar – Patriarch in the Shelley Stake. Brother Millar is a little past 70

years but in good health and is available for this service. I do not know him

personally.

Walter A. Clement – Patriarch in the Rigby Stake.

I do not know Brother Clement, but no doubt Brother Killpack has

stated his qualifications in his letter to you.

Decision: You asked me to remind you, by letter, of this need.

#3: Alberta Temple: I reported to you that President Octave Ursenbach of the Alberta Temple has written recently stating that some bishops have performed civil marriages with young couples after they have been married in the temple. This is done in order to satisfy and please certain relatives and/or parents who wish to have a public wedding. The letter stated that President Ursenbach feels that this is something of a mockery of the temple ceremony and it has been a matter of great concern to them in that area.

Decision: You asked me to write President Ursenbach and have him discourage this practice. This I have done, suggesting that he might talk with these bishops privately and individually and urge them to discontinue this practice generally.

#4: ‘Five Points of ______”: I referred to another letter from President Ursenbach in which he stated that while talking with President Tanner on the telephone on April 21st in regard to a recommend problem, President Tanner had asked some question in regard to the ‘five points’ as this part of the ceremony is done in the Alberta Temple, stating that some person had reported that there was some irregularity there in this regard. While the letter did not state what the irregularity is, I took the liberty of saying to you, President McKay, that I had known of cases in the past where these contacts at the veil have been made so literally and with such insistence by some brethren that it had become offensive and humiliating to some of the sister patrons being introduced.

I stated that I had been instructed by President George F. Richards, when he was supervising the temples, to make sure that the brethren who assist at the veil do not offend the sisters in this way and that rather than do so they should not insist on making contact with them except perhaps with the right foot and hand on the back for fear that it would be embarrassing to them. I read briefly from minutes of meetings held with workers covering similar instructions to them.

Response: President McKay stated that the highest degree of decorum and respect should be exercised by the brethren working at the veil, particularly in relation to the sisters who are being introduced and that any person who, even in his mind, fails to have pure thought and who is not circumspect and wholesome in every way should not be invited to assist at the veil. President McKay felt that the brethren who receive the sisters at this point should be carefully selected for their wholesomeness and unquestioned character. It is the responsibility of the temple presidency to see that the highest type of men are selected for this service. The substance of it all is that no person should be embarrassed or humiliated through the insistence of some to make certain of these contacts literal and actual.

I agreed to give direction, as necessary, by letter to President Ursenbach.

#5: Thumbs Parallel?: I pointed out that in the St. George Temple the officiator who instructs the Company in regard to the Patriarchal Grip, adds the instruction, ‘With the thumbs parallel.’ When I inquired about this, upon hearing it in the temple a few weeks ago, I was informed that this had been handed down through the years but that it is not found in the written ceremonies in any of the temples. I asked President McKay if we should give them any instruction contrary to what they are now doing.

Answer: Let them continue as now and we will give it further thought.

#6: Wigs on Women: Sometimes women come into the washing and anointing rooms wearing wigs which are often unnoticed or are not easily detected. I reported that some had asked about anointing the heads of such women where the ceremony says ‘I pour this…oil upon your head.’

Solution: President McKay felt that we should not anoint a wig, but where they are being worn, the sisters head should be anointed as near the hairline as possible — perhaps near the temple.

#7: I reported to President McKay that the six additional sealing rooms which have been included in the plans for the new annex and temple improvement project are completed and are beautiful indeed. They will serve a great need and help to expedite the movement of the many people who come to be sealed, especially those with families. President McKay seemed to be pleased at their completion.

#8: Inasmuch as we are leaving next Thursday, May 6, 1965, for official visits to the Hawaii and New Zealand Temples, in addition to assisting Elder LeGrand Richards in reorganizing the Hamilton Stake Presidency and creating a new stake at Wellington, President McKay sent with me, for the temple workers especially, his kindest and best wishes. He asked that they make every effort to keep the temple clean, neat, and sacred. He urged the workers to administer the ordinances reverently and impressively so the patrons will feel a reverential spirit and be edified by what they are taught and the blessings they receive and actually feel different and lifted up with a new purpose in their lives as they leave for their homes. By this means, he said, they will know that they are near to the Divine.

He sent his personal greetings and appreciation to the temple officials and the ordinances workers as well as to the patrons and assured them that they would be immeasurably blessed through the service that they are rendering both to the living and to those who have passed on.

I hope that this review of our conference will bring to your mind the things you wished to recall. I hope sincerely that I have covered it as accurately as possible. It was a dear privilege to be with you and I am grateful for you and sustain you with all my heart, might, mind, and strength. My only desire is to do the work you have given me to do in a manner that would be approved by you and acceptable unto the Lord. May God bless you in our absence is the sincere wish of your brother.

Sincerely,

ElRay L. Christiansen

Temple Coordinator

ELD:lp”

Wed., 5 May 1965:

“10:30 to 11:30 a.m.

Took up requests for appointments and other office matters with the secretary. Among the matters discussed were:

Irvin T. Nelsen – Trip to Europe

The secretary read to me a letter from Brother Irvin T. Nelson, Church landscaper, wherein he recalls that I had asked him to go to London at the most opportune time to finalize plans for landscaping at the Temple. He states that he is now ready to go, if it still be my desire.

I told the secretary to inform Brother Nelson that I approve of his going to Europe as he has planned.

In the letter, Brother Nelson also mentions that ‘at the suggestion of Elder Theodore M. Burton, he plans to visit Stockholm, Sweden and do work on some lovely old oak trees badly in need of attention at what some people think is a future Temple site.’ The secretary asked if I wish him to follow through on this, and I answered that I think it would be well for Brother Nelson to do so, as Stockholm will probably be the place to build a Temple which can serve the Scandinavian Countries.

Thurs., 6 May 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with President Tanner in a First Presidency’s Meeting. President Brown was absent, being enroute to Washington, D.C. Among matters discussed were:

Sealing of Illegitimate Child

President Tanner presented the case of a couple who were married in 1938 and divorced civilly in 1954 but had not had their temple sealing cancelled. Following the civil divorce the woman in the case gave birth to an illegitimate child by another man to whom she was not married. He reported that the child’s half sister is legally adopting the illegitimate child as her child and wants to have it sealed to her and her husband. The question has been raised as to whether this illegitimate child was born in the covenant.

I ruled that inasmuch as the sealing between this sister and her first husband was not cancelled, the child born illegitimately to her following the legal divorce was born in the covenant.

Sealing of Child Born While Father Was Excommunicated

President Tanner mentioned to me the case of a man who, after having been sealed to his wife in the Temple, was excommunicated, subsequently rebaptized and his Priesthood only restored. Children were born to this couple during the time that the father was out of the Church. The parents would now like to have these children sealed to them. The question raised is whether or not the man’s blessings should be restored before the sealing is performed.

I stated that it would be necessary that the endowments and sealings of the man involved be restored before these children could be sealed to their parents. Elder John Longden had officiated in restoring the Priesthood.

Sealing of Children Born Out of Wedlock

Attention was called to a question that had come from the bishop of the Gridley Second Ward, Gridley Stake, pertaining to a sister who before she joined the Church lived out of wedlock with a man by whom she had six children, that she joined the Church two years ago, has married a good Latter-day Saint, and they wish to go to the Temple to be sealed and to have these six children born by this previous relationship sealed to them. The father of the children refuses his permission for the children to be sealed to her and her husband. The question has been raised as to what action could be taken to have these children sealed to their mother and their stepfather.

I decided that the husband would have to legally adopt the children before they could be sealed to him and the mother.

Fri., 14 May 1965:

8:30 a.m.

Meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed were:

Ceremonial Temple Garment

Upon request of the First Presidency Elder Stapley called and presented samples of the new ceremonial garment which is to take the place of the string garment now being used in the Temples. This new garment will have buttons instead of strings, and closed crotch. It will also have a collar on it. Elder Stapley showed samples of the new ceremonial garments for men and women, and they were approved by me. Letters will be sent to the Presidents of Temples notifying them of this change. This new garment pattern had been presented to the Brethren in the meeting of the Council of the First Presidency and the Twelve on January 21, 1965, at which time it was unanimously approved by the Council.

Osborne A. Nelson (Alias Swen Osborne Nillson) – Excommunication of

Elder Stapley presented the case of a Brother Osborne A. Nelson, who was sealed to his wife in the Temple in 1936. He filed for a divorce from his wife and married a second woman before the divorce was final. No record can be found of his having had the second wife sealed to him in the Temple. This couple were teaching the present practice of plural marriage, and the man himself invited a young twenty-year-old girl to be his wife, but this she refused to do. Both he and his present wife seemed to be in harmony with the plural marriage idea and they were both excommunicated in 1950. The man then changed his name to Swen Osborne Nillson somewhere around 1953, after his excommunication. The missionaries, not knowing of this situation, called on this man and his wife. They did not reveal that they had been excommunicated, permitted the missionaries to proselyte them, and were baptized, secured Temple Recommends, went to the Temple and received their endowments and were sealed to each other and had their ten children sealed to them. This man since rejoining the Church has baptized two of his daughters and confirmed one. He ordained a son a deacon. It was in 1962 that they went to the Temple for endowments and had the children sealed to them. Subsequently, they went to the Salt Lake Temple and the Manti Temple and did endowment work and sealings for deceased persons. Elder Stapley presented the question as to what should be done in regard to this couple and the ordinances and ordinations that they had performed. We agreed that we must of necessity disregard all that this man has done and do it over again from the beginning. I said that there is certainly nothing else to do, that the man has been dishonest. Elder Stapley was requested to ask this man’s Stake President to notify him that all the ordinances that had been performed for him and by him were invalid and would have to be done over again.

Tues., 1 June 1965:

11:30 a.m.

Met by appointment in my office at the apartment the following brethren and sisters from Idaho: Brother and Sister William L. Killpack (Brother Killpack is President of the Idaho Falls Temple), Brother and Sister Rodrick Millar of Shelley, Idaho, Brother and Sister Parley A. Arave of Idaho Falls, Idaho, and Walter A. Clement of Rigby, Idaho.

After shaking hands and saying a few words of greeting to each of them, I had them sit around the desk and I gave them a few words of instructions before conferring the sealing power upon three of the Brethren. I told them that there were three things that I wish they would keep in mind: 1) That I should like them to pay no attention to the hesitancy in my speech — that that is something that was thrust upon me when I had a stroke about one and one-half years ago. I said I am all right and ‘I want you to pay no attention to it.’ 2) That they are to remember that they are holders of the High Priesthood and ‘You are to honor that Priesthood’; 3) That ‘you are to pay your tithes and fast offerings, keep the Word of Wisdom, and that you are to sustain those in authority over you — your Bishop of your Ward, Stake President, etc.’

I then asked them if they felt that they could abide by these principles, and if so, to show it by raising their right hands. With tears in their eyes, these brethren humbly accepted this responsibility.

I then proceeded to confer the sealing power to be exercised in the Idaho Falls Temple upon the following: Rodrick Millar, Parley A. Arave, and Walter A. Clement.

Fri., 4 June 1965:

“8:30 to 9:50 a.m.

Held a meeting with my counselors in the office in the Hotel. Some of the matters considered were:

Garments – Marking of Union Suits

President Brown reported that at the Council Meeting in the Temple yesterday, Brother Lee, who is head of the Garment Committee, had raised a question about authorizing ZCMI to mark Munsingwear and other union suits as Temple Garments, which practice they have been following for some time. It was the sentiment of the Garment Committee that inasmuch as the distribution of Temple Garments has been turned over to the Relief Society that anyone desiring to use union suits or underwear other than the authorized pattern garment should take this underwear to the Relief Society for marking, or should mark it themselves.

I agreed with this sentiment.

Fri., 16 July 1965:

“Baptism for Dead by Members Over Twenty-One

We gave consideration to a letter from A. James Martin, President of the French East Mission, submitted by President Mark E. Petersen of the West European Mission, in which letter President Martin proposed that the Church grant permission for young women to be baptized for the dead up to the age of twenty-seven. He states that heretofore permission has not been given for sisters between the ages of 21 and 27 to be baptized for the dead.

Decided to answer Brother Petersen and Brother Martin that there is no Church regulation to the effect that women or men of the ages mentioned may not be baptized for the dead, if otherwise worthy, even though they may not have had their endowments.

Tues., 20 July 1965:

11:00 to 12:30 p.m.

My secretary, Clare, came over. She presented fifteen petitions for cancellation of sealings which I went over. After looking over the facts of each case, I decided there is nothing else to do but to cancel the sealings.

Wed., 21 July 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with President Hugh B. Brown in a meeting of the First Presidency. President N. Eldon Tanner excused, being on vacation.

Some of the matters discussed were: Divorce Clearances

President Brown reported that Elder Howard W. Hunter had conferred with him this morning in regard to the present practice of requiring divorced persons to obtain a clearance from the First Presidency. Elder Hunter had indicated that if the Stake Presidents and Bishops were required to clear the divorces, rather than sending them to the First Presidency, it would save a great amount of time.

After discussing this matter, I agreed to have the Stake Presidents and Bishops clear the people for recommends following divorces.

Tues., 3 Aug. 1965:

London Temple – Taxes on

Lawrence McKay said that he had received a letter from Mark Sharman, our legal counsel in London, with reference to the Temple tax case, in which he states that he has an opinion from counsel that there is a good chance of setting aside the new tax which has been levied on Temple property on the ground that this is a charitable operation. He said they are taking the position that because the House of Lords held that this is not a public building it therefore does not qualify under a charity. The barrister whom they employed is of the opinion that there is a good chance to fight it. Brother Lawrence McKay said that he understood that Mr. Sharman was going to give us information as to how this would be done and what it would cost. He wants to know whether they should go ahead. Lawrence recommended that we tell him to ascertain the cost and what the procedure would be before giving a definite answer. His position is that the decision of the House of Lords has nothing to do with this. We decided to leave the matter in the hands of Lawrence McKay.

Thurs., 19 Aug. 1965:

“9:15 a.m.

Arrived at the underground parking plaza at the Church Administration Building. Presidents Brown and Tanner were just leaving for the Temple through the newly-constructed tunnel which leads directly into the Temple. I joined them, and was thrilled with this new convenience — what a wonderful thing it is to be able to leave our offices in the Church Administration Building and go by tunnel right under Main Street to the Temple.

10:00 to 1:00 p.m.

Met with the Brethren in the first meeting of the Council in the Salt Lake Temple since our adjournment on Thursday, June 24, 1965. Following the singing and opening prayer, I expressed my appreciation and thanks to the Lord for the opportunity of meeting with the Brethren in the House of the Lord. I extended my greetings and blessings and then told them to proceed with their regular order of business; that I am unable to do much talking but that I would listen and participate as much as possible.

Wed., 25 Aug. 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency. President N. Eldon Tanner present, President Hugh B. Brown enroute to Canada.

London Temple – Tax Matter

We met with David Lawrence McKay, who discussed with us the advisability of the Church’s making an appeal against the Rating Authority’s decision on the London Temple. Lawrence read to us a letter that he had received from our solicitor, Mark Sharman, reporting on the procedure that would be involved. Mr. Sharman states that if any action is to be pursued he thinks it should be an action for a declaration that the amount of rates chargeable should only be one-half of the amount otherwise chargeable, though he suggests that an additional argument might be that the correct course would be proceedings in the nature of certiorari to quash the Rating Authority’s decision. He mentioned that he has spoken to Sir Milner Holland’s clerk, that Sir Milner is away on a holiday, as to the exact procedure to be followed, and states that it seems clear that the case would either have to commence in the Queens Bench or Chancery Division of the High Court, that thereafter in either case an appeal would be possible to the Court of Appeal, and from there, with the leave of the Court of Appeal, an appeal would have to go to the House of Lords. As to costs of such a procedure, Mr. Sharman states that he cannot be specific; that, however, the fees of the attorneys if the case ended in the High Court would amount to $3,822; if it ended in the Court of Appeal, $7,644; and if it were argued before the House of Lords, $13,269. Lawrence McKay read to us from an opinion by Sir Milner Holland, page 11, paragraph 12, in which he indicates that if we lost the case there is a possibility that we would be taxed on all the tithing that the Church in England receives. It was our final decision that Lawrence be authorized to make further inquiries and submit the full facts with his recommendation.

Tues., 5 Oct. 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Presidents Brown and Tanner in a First Presidency’s meeting. Some of the matters discussed were:

Temple Marriage Prior to Year’s Church Membership – Exception Made

President Tanner called attention to a letter that he had received from a Bishop Godfrey in Cardston, whose son, while in the mission in the Florida area, baptized a young woman on May 1, 1965, and whose parents, grandparents, and three others were baptized shortly after. The young missionary is now desirous of marrying this young convert sister. His home is in Cardston and she resides in Miami, Florida, and has been in the Church only six months. The young couple do not want a civil marriage, nor do they wish to wait an additional six months before being married. The President of the Stake and the Bishop of the Ward where the young woman resides in Florida indicate that they are prepared to give her a recommend if it meets with the approval of the First Presidency.

I advised that an exception to the rule be made and that this young woman be given a recommend to the Temple to be married now if she is otherwise worthy.”

Thurs., 28 Oct. 1965:

“Temples, Misc. – Those Who Witness Marriages Must Have Their Endowments

President Howard McDonald of the Salt Lake Temple reported to President Tanner that people who have not had their own endowments have come to the Temple with Recommends to witness sealings of friends or relatives. This President McDonald said had been done without his knowledge. It was agreed that instructions should be given to the Bishops to the effect that only worthy persons who have received their endowments should be recommended to the Temple to witness marriages. This matter will be taken to the Council meeting today for the information of the Brethren.

Fri., 29 Oct. 1965:

Children – Legal Adoption Must Be Completed

President Tanner called attention to an action by the First Presidency in their meeting of September 17, 1965, to the effect that in the future adopted children may be blessed and named at the time the parents receive these adopted children from the State and that in cases where the adoption is not completed the situation could be handled by cancelling the record.

President Tanner explained that the handbook indicates that legally adopted children should be blessed, baptized, confirmed, and the records given in the surname of their adopted parents; that, however, these ordinances should not be performed in the name of the adopting parents until after the legal adoption has been completed. The statement further indicates that if foster parents desire to bless their foster children informally at home they may do so and the Ward Clerk will record only the official blessing given in the regular Fast Meeting service.

I said that the ruling as set forth in the handbook should not be changed; that, therefore, the action taken by the First Presidency in the meeting of September 17, 1965, should be reversed, wherein it was stated that adopted children may be blessed and named at the time the parents receive these adopted children from the State. It was reported that following the action of the First Presidency, that adopted children might be blessed before the adoption is completed. President Brown had answered letters that had come to him on this subject to the effect that when the child is given into the hands of parents by proper authority the child may be sealed to the parents and not have to wait. Others having heard of this letter by President Brown had written asking for permission to have their adopted children sealed to them before the adoption was completed. It was decided to answer these letters stating that the information given in President Brown’s letter was in error and that it is necessary in each such case to wait until the adoption is completed before the child can be sealed to its parents.

Wed., 3 Nov. 1965:

“Temples – Property in Sweden

Brother Garff referred to the property that the Church has purchased near Stockholm Sweden, consisting of 168 or 188 acres, he was not sure, on which it has been suggested we propose to build a Temple and on which property we have built a mission home at a cost of $374,000. He stated that this property is 25 kilometers, or about 17 miles, from Stockholm, and that the airport is on the opposite side of Stockholm, making it a long distance to travel from the airport to the headquarters, and also that it is far removed from the center of Church population in Stockholm. He mentioned that in addition to the Temple site, there are areas proposed for young men and young women to use as camping sites, although there is nothing there at the present time except the mission home. Brother Garff said that the city of Stockholm is insisting that the Church tell them what we are going to do with the property, that they do not propose to allow this entire acreage to be tax free if we are not going to use it.

Brother Garff presented maps to show that Stockholm is not centrally located so far as northern Europe is concerned. He stated that so far as Stockholm is concerned, we have four-thousand people and that it would not be possible to get one-hundred young people to go to our headquarters for the reason that we do not have many young people and that transportation is almost impossible.

In Oslo we have 3,000 people belonging to the Church, in Finland 2,800, and in Denmark 3,700. Brother Garff further mentioned that Norway has 3,000,000 people, Sweden 7,500,000, Denmark 4,500,000 Finland 4,500,000, and that there are in northern Europe in that area 20,000,000 people within three hours of Copenhagen. Amsterdam would be within four hours of Copenhagen. He suggested that Copenhagen would be the logical central location for a Temple for Northern Europe. Brother Garff suggested that we retain enough land to maintain the mission home and then sell the balance.

We decided that Brother Garff should discuss this matter with Elder Howard W. Hunter, and then make a trip to Sweden and investigate the situation, and also ascertain what the prospects would be for selling the surplus property and perhaps the entire tract, and bring back a firm report and recommendation.

Salt Lake Temple – North Entrance to Annex

We discussed at some length the action that should be taken to correct the north entrance to the Temple Annex. It was indicated that there is practically no security provided so far as the entrance to the Temple is concerned when these north doors are opened, and in case a mob or other violence people could pass through these doors and we would have no way of protecting them from entering the annex or the Temple. Brother Garff mentioned that the suggestion had been made that we close the north doors and arrange an entrance into the annex from the West. He said that Brother Emil Fetzer, Edward O, Anderson, and he had made a careful study and had discovered that we could not make an entrance there because of power lines, plumbing, etc. The thought was then advanced that another annex be built on the east side of the present annex to the Temple and President McDonald had expressed a desire to install escalators to take care of the people in the new annex at a cost of $85,000. We decided to give the matter further study.

Logan Temple

Brother Garff stated that the Logan Temple has been permitted to get run down, that it has not been taken care of as it should have been, that we invited the public to visit our grounds, we have no bureau of information and no toilet facilities on the property. He said that Emil Fetzer had spent two days there going over the situation carefully, that the toilet facilities, bureau of information, renovation of rugs, carpets, etc., would cost, according to his estimate, $350,000.

I asked Brother Garff to present his proposal to the First Presidency in writing and they would give it consideration.

Manti Temple

Brother Garff said that the Manti Temple is in a worse run-down condition than the Logan Temple, and that it needs paint, new carpeting, and drapes, that nothing has been done to the Bureau of Information for years; that we did commence work there but never finished it, and that it should be finished. He mentioned that Brother Emil Fetzer had gone over the situation at the Manti Temple and he had reported that we must finish the job we started and make the necessary repairs. The suggested estimated cost is $500,000.

I asked that Brother Garff submit a written recommendation.

Brother Garff then gave a report of the need of improvements and repairs to the following Temples: Arizona, Hawaii, St. George, Oakland, Los Angeles, Alberta, London, Swiss, New Zealand.

Fri., 5 Nov. 1965:

10:00 to 11:30 a.m.

At my request, my secretary, Clare, came over with a number of letters and sixteen petitions for cancellation of Temple sealings for my consideration. I went over each case and cancelled all but one petition, which I asked Clare to hold for further consideration.

Tues., 16 Nov. 1965:

“9:00 a.m.

Following our discussions, we went through the tunnel to the Church Administration Building and on into the First Presidency’s Office, where we held the regular meeting of the First Presidency. A number of items were discussed, among them were the following:

London Temple Tax

A letter was read from David L. McKay regarding the London Temple Tax. Brother McKay refers to a communication he has had from Mark Sharman in England enclosing a supplementary opinion from Sir Milner Holland to the effect that ‘There is no danger of a finding either that the hereditament is not occupied by a charity or that the Church is not a charity.’ Brother McKay further states that Mr. Sharman has written the rating authority to determine whether the registration of the corporation as a charity has made any difference in their opinion that the Temple is not a charity, and has not yet received a reply. It is Brother McKay’s recommendation that if the rating authority continues to decline, proceedings be commenced for relief under the Charities Act of 1960, which should relieve the tax burden on the Temple by at least fifty percent. The Presidency approved David L. McKay’s recommendation.

Tues., 23 Nov. 1965:

Genealogical Society Matters

Following the departure of Brothers Nelson and Hawkes, Elder Howard W. Hunter of the Council of the Twelve, called and discussed with the First Presidency certain matters pertaining to the work of the Genealogical Society. He explained that in order to secure names for baptisms and endowments for the Temple, they had been taking from some of the parish records names of the persons christened, and processing them for baptisms and endowments in the Temple to furnish the Temple with names. He said that the experience of the Society during the past three years has raised some questions in their minds.

We approved of the following recommendations made by Elder Hunter:

1) That permission be given in doing work for the dead, to seal children to their parents, later to seal the parents to each other when they are properly identified, and to perform baptisms later. In other words, these ordinances would be performed as a sort of ‘blood bank’ for the credit of the individuals for whom performed until definite information is received regarding relationships, etc.

I said that I could see no objection to this proposal because we do everything for the individual to be accepted when he is ready to accept it, and if he does not accept it, no harm is done. President Isaacson raised the question as to whether there is any chance for a slip-up whereby the work would not be finished; that if all the other work were done for the individual and the baptism work were not done, it would be of no value. Elder Hunter said that by means of the computer that is now in use, this situation would be taken care of. He said as a matter of fact, we have this same situation to contend with now whereby a man and his wife were baptized but they have not finished all the sealings.

We were agreed that this would greatly expedite matters and save a great deal of expense. President Tanner said that if we did not have the computers this program would not help us, but with the computers to keep them operating, it is almost essential.

2) It was agreed also that we discontinue taking names from the burial section of parish registers where no relationship can be identified between the individual and his parents. (For further detail of this discussion, see First Presidency’s minutes of this date.)

Excommunications – Rebaptisms and Restoration of Blessings

President Tanner referred to the work that has been assigned to a special committee appointed to pass upon rebaptisms of excommunicated persons and restoration of blessings. Elder Stapley, who is chairman of the committee, has raised two questions for the consideration of the First Presidency.

1) He feels, and the committee supports him in this, that normally if a person is ready to be baptized, he is also ready to have his blessings restored. In other words, that it would save much time and work if when a person who has been excommunicated and is considered worthy of reinstatement to the Church if he could have his blessings restored when he is confirmed a member. It was mentioned that this was the procedure in earlier days in the Church.

I said that I do not favor this.

2) If it is decided to follow the present procedure of re-baptizing the person first and then requiring additional time to prove his worthiness, the question is, should the committee have authority to arrange for the rebaptism on their own judgment, or should their recommendation be brought to the Twelve or to the First Presidency.

I said that they should make their recommendations for rebaptism to the Twelve, and for restoration of blessings to the First Presidency.

Committee on Expenditures – Elder Ezra Taft Benson to Return to Committee

President Isaacson raised a question with reference to the members of the Twelve who should meet with the Committee on Expenditures. He said that the three members of the Twelve who were the latest appointment were Spencer W. Kimball, Marion G. Romney, and Ezra Taft Benson, that Brother Benson has been away for a considerable time and no one has been appointed to take his place. Elder Isaacson asked if Brother Benson should not resume his membership on this committee, particularly in view of the fact that there will be much building in Europe. I said that Brother Benson, having been appointed to this service, should now attend the meetings as he formerly did.

Tues., 30 Nov. 1965:

Marriages, Civil Ceremony Following Temple Marriage

Our attention was called to a letter that had been received from Sister Delle Chrisman of Kemmerer, Wyoming, explaining the situation pertaining to her daughter’s marriage in the Temple. Sister Chrisman is LDS, but her husband and his family are Masonic and antagonistic to the Church. Sister Chrisman states that she knows personally of two occasions where the Temple marriage has been solemnized and then followed by a Church wedding in the Ward with the Bishop officiating. She wants to know if the Church forbids such practices and in cases where it was done if it was done without permission.

It was decided to answer Sister Chrisman that the Church does not approve of a civil marriage being performed following a Temple marriage, that such a ceremony would be a mere mockery of the Temple marriage.

We decided to prepare a letter to send to Stake Presidents and Bishops advising them against such practices.

Tues., 14 Dec. 1965:

“8:15 a.m.

Met with Presidents Tanner, Smith, and Isaacson. President Brown was excused on account of illness.

Temple Garments

Another matter mentioned by Sister Spafford pertained to the people in foreign countries making their own Temple clothing. She said that a report has been received that the saints in Berlin have been urged to make their own Temple clothing, and that when these sisters pass over the border, this clothing has to be inspected. I asked that they write the Stake Relief Society Presidents in the areas where they are doing this and ascertain the facts and present their recommendations to the First Presidency.

President Isaacson reported that the distribution of Temple garments by the Relief Society is being taken care of very satisfactorily; that this year they will sell approximately two-million dollars worth of garments through the Relief Society, and that the distribution centers are busy and accomplishing a very satisfactory work.

Other matters of general interest were discussed following the departure of the sisters.”

Tues., 21 Dec. 1965:

“8:30 a.m.

First Presidency’s meeting held in the office in the Hotel Utah. Presidents Tanner and Smith were the only ones present. President Brown and President Isaacson were excused on account of illness. A number of items were discussed, some of which were:

Excommunication – Problem of Dr. Reed Smith

President Tanner explained the case of Dr. Reed Smith and his wife who were married in the Temple and later had family problems. It seems that this brother was trying to live his religion but his wife’s parents persuaded her that there was no objection to social drinking, that Brother Smith became interested in his secretary which interest resulted in moral transgression for which Brother Smith was excommunicated from the Church. The wife has now become a drug addict. Brother Smith is anxious to get back into the Church and had called on President Tanner and discussed the situation with him, showing him a letter that had been written by his Stake President, telling him that he could not attend Priesthood Meetings, nor participate in the Church in any way, nor would they accept tithing or fast offerings from him. The Presidency discussed the question as to whether this brother should be permitted to pay his tithing and fast offerings.

I said that if he wants to pay his tithing, it will help him get back into the Church, and that the more he does for the Church the more he will love it.

Temple Sealings – Cancellations Not to be Done by Temple Presidents

President Tanner called attention to a report and inquiry by Henry Christiansen of the Genealogical Society. He states that a sealing cancellation was granted in the Salt Lake Temple on February 5, 1965, by action of President Howard S. Donald, that President Tanner had asked Brother Christiansen to ascertain from President McDonald if this were done and if so whether it was by authority of the President of the Church. It seems that the sealing had been performed in life, but now both the woman in question and the second husband to whom she had been sealed are deceased. Upon inquiry of President McDonald, it was reported that the sealing cancellation was accomplished by instructions in the Book of Decisions, paragraph 107, which reads: ‘A man, his wife, and several children, members of the Church, were on their way to Zion. The father died while on the plains. ‘The woman was later sealed to another man, but had no children by him. All are now deceased and her descendants desire to have the woman sealed to her first husband and the children to them. The Presidency ruled that their wishes may be granted and the Presidency of the Temple may have their wishes granted. (In all other like cases, the Temple President may act in making the cancellation without consulting the First Presidency.)’

I stated that this should not be and it was decided to write a letter to all Temple Presidents telling them that no sealing cancellation is to be granted without the authorization of the President of the Church. (See copy of letter following.)

Tuesday, December 21, 1965

January 4, 1966

PRESIDENTS OF TEMPLES

Dear Brethren:

In order that the record may be clear and that there may be no misunderstanding in regard to the matter, it should be definitely understood that the authority to cancel temple sealings is vested in the President of the Church, and in him only, and that no sealing of the living or the dead can be authoritatively cancelled except upon his personal authorization. Should there be on file in any of the temples information or advice that could be otherwise understood we kindly ask that the instruction given in this letter be accepted as a substitution therefor.

Sincerely yours brethren,

David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

Joseph Fielding Smith

Thorpe B. Isaacson

The First Presidency”

Wed., 9 Feb. 1966:

8:45 to 10:30 a.m.

Held a meeting with the First Presidency. Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith were present.

We considered a number of general Church matters, among them being:

Temple Recommends for Wives of Non-member Husbands

We gave consideration to the question of authorizing the issuance of Temple Recommends to worthy sisters whose husbands are non-members. I said that each individual case should be considered on its own merits, and that there should be no set rule on this matter.

Thurs., 10 Feb. 1966:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Counselors — Presidents Brown and Tanner — in a meeting of the First

Presidency. President Smith is meeting with the Council of the Twelve in the Temple, and President Isaacson is in the hospital.

Some of the matters considered by us were:

Excommunicants – Sealing Children of

Mention was made of contrary rules made in the John W. Arrington case. On September 26, 1946, it became the action of the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve that Brother Arrington’s children born to him and his wife following his excommunication and before the restoration of his Priesthood and blessings, were not born in the covenant and should be sealed to him and his wife. On May 19, 1960, in regard to this same matter, the First Presidency ruled that under the circumstances in the John W. Arrington case, the children were born in the covenant and that no further sealing was necessary.

Referring to these actions, I said the first action was correct; namely, that they were not born in the covenant and should be sealed to their parents after their father’s restoration.

Thurs., 24 Feb. 1966:

“10:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.

Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple.

I told the Brethren that I had been engaged in consultations with various persons on Church matters throughout the week, in addition to attending First Presidency’s meetings every day.

I also mentioned that I had been reading one of our Church magazines and was struck with the number of young men who were married in the Temple principally because the girls wanted to go to the Temple and would not be married in any other place; that these young men went through the Temple, and afterwards put aside their garments and failed to keep their covenants and started using tobacco.

I also said that yesterday I sat by the side of Sister McKay as she was watching television, and that the number of people shown on the screen who use cigarettes was shocking. I stated that I consider this habit one of the worst evils in the nation.”

Tues., 1 Mar. 1966:

“Temple – Endowments for Cerebral Palsy Sufferer

In response to an inquiry from a brother as to whether his 34 year old son, who is suffering from cerebral palsy, might be permitted to refrain from wearing his garments after receiving his endowments in the Temple, it was decided to tell this brother that we think it inadvisable for his son to receive his endowments at this time under the circumstances.”

Tues., 7 June 1966:

‘Temple Sealings – Sealing of Children to Persons other than Natural Parents

We read a draft letter that had been prepared by Howard W. Hunter and President Tanner to be addressed to Presidents of Temples, Presidents of Stakes, Bishops of Wards, and Presidents of Missions, outlining the circumstances under which children who have not been born in the covenant or sealed to their natural parents may be sealed to a natural parent and step-parent or to foster parents. I approved the letter as submitted. (See copy of letter following.)

Tuesday, June 7, 1966

June 8, 1966

PRESIDENTS OF TEMPLES, PRESIDENTS OF STAKES

BISHOPS OF WARDS AND PRESIDENTS OF MISSIONS

Dear Brethren:

In order that there may be no misunderstanding in regard to the matter of the sealing in the temple of children to persons other than natural parents, we are pleased to give you the following information for your guidance.

Children who have not been born in the covenant or sealed to their natural parents may be sealed to a natural parent and stepparent, or may be sealed to foster parents, under any one of the following circumstances:

1. If the stepparent or foster parents have legally adopted minor children to be sealed and a copy of the final decree of adoption, or Certificate of Live Birth issued in states using this form of evidence, is presented to the temple president, or

2. If the stepparent or foster parents to whom minor children are to be sealed have secured and presented to the temple president a written statement from the natural parent or parents consenting to the proposed sealing, or

3. If the children to be sealed are of legal age in the place of their residence and request the temple president for such sealing, or

4. Minor children may be sealed to a natural parent and a stepparent without the requirement of adoption in cases where the other natural parent is deceased.

Children born in the covenant cannot be sealed to persons other than their natural parents. This rule is not altered by adoption, consent of the natural parents, or request of the child after becoming of age.

Illegitimate children may be sealed to their natural mother and the husband to whom she is sealed without the consent of the natural father, and only the natural mother’s consent is necessary for illegitimate children to be sealed to foster parents.

No sealing of children to persons other than natural parents will be permitted except as set forth above without written authorization of the First Presidency.

Sincerely yours,

The First Presidency

David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

Joseph Fielding Smith”

Tues., 14 June 1966:

“Temples – Recommends to for Persons Involved in Divorce

In a letter from Elder ElRay L. Christiansen, the question was raised as to whether or not men or women who have commenced divorce proceedings should be recommended to the Temple either for their own endowments or to do work for the dead while the divorce is being sought.

We understood the present policy to be, which understanding was confirmed, that where a divorce is in process, the Bishop should not issue Temple Recommends to the parties involved in until after the divorce situation has been settled.

Temples – Civil Marriage Ceremonies Prior to Temple Marriage

In his letter, Elder Christiansen also states that two Temple Presidents have recently inquired regarding permitting couples to be married civilly before traveling from their home to the Temple within a few days to have the sealing solemnized in the Temple.

We decided to send a letter to Presidents of Temples informing them that the First Presidency must be consulted in regard to any proposed civil marriage of couples desiring to go to the Temple to be sealed.

Tues., 21 June 1966:

“Temples – Recommends in Exceptional Cases

President Tanner mentioned that at the June 9th meeting of the First Presidency and the Twelve, two questions had been considered regarding the issuing of Temple Recommends — one of which pertained to granting authorization for the issuance of Temple recommends to converts who have been members of the Church less than a year, and the other the issuing of Temple Recommends to couples who have been married by civil ceremony for else than a year. It was the sentiment of the Council that any such exception should be granted only upon the approval of the First Presidency and that when exceptions are granted a copy of the First Presidency’s letter of permission should accompany the recommend to the Temple.

Temples – Instructions to Missionaries and Young Couples Following Temple Endowments

Referring to the issuing of Temple Recommends to new converts and others, President Tanner mentioned that at the meeting of the Council referred to on June 9, the Brethren had mentioned that many of our young people who go through the Temples gain a wrong impression, that they do not obtain a proper understanding of the Temple work and sometimes lose their faith by reason of the Temple ceremonies. He explained that when companies of young men and young women going on missions have been through the Temple for the first time and received their endowments, it is customary to hold a meeting with these young people after the Temple session and explain to them the meaning of the Temple ceremonies and give them opportunity to ask questions. It was thought that it would be helpful if a meeting of this kind might be held with new converts, young couples and others who go through the Temples to receive their endowments so that they could ask questions and get enlightenment regarding the Temple ceremonies. I commented upon this matter at the Council meeting referred to and said I was impressed with the necessity of having missionaries and young couples meet together after the Temple ceremonies where they might ask any questions they wished, and said that there are hundreds of our boys and girls who, after going through the Temple, would like to ask questions. I feel we should make it obligatory. I said also that what we do here in the Salt Lake Temple we must do in the other Temples as well. I also stated that the First Presidency would take the matter under consideration and appoint a committee of three to make a study of this problem.

In discussing the question of who should be appointed members of the committee, it was agreed that Elder Harold B. Lee should be asked to be chairman of this committee, Brother Anderson to notify him of this appointment and ask him to be prepared to meet with me to discuss the problem with me before the appointment of additional members of the committee. A meeting with me will be arranged for sometime next week.

The Brethren then departed from the apartment.

Wed., 6 July 1966:

“8:00 a.m.

Temples Miscellaneous – Sealings for the Dead

I met by appointment Elder Howard W. Hunter, and I gave him authorization to introduce the program in the Genealogical Department whereby all deceased persons who have been dead a year or more, are dealt with on the same basis, regardless of their previous status. Therefore, according to this program, in the future there will be no restoration of blessings for those who are dead.

Temples – Sealings for Eternity

Consideration was given to a letter from Lola B. White of Springville, Utah, in which she asks three questions regarding sealings:

1) ‘Does the Church permit the sealing for eternity of a single living woman to a deceased man, a friend but not a husband, in life?’

2) ‘Does the Church permit the sealing for eternity only of a single living woman to a married living man?’

3) ‘If the answer is yes to either or both of questions, would you advise me to have the sealing performed?’

The proposition submitted by this sister is to the following effect: This sister, who is 82 years of age, has never been married. A few weeks ago a friend said to her in the presence of his wife, who is also a friend, that if she wanted a husband she could be sealed to him. This suggestion was reiterated on a second occasion by the man in the presence of his wife.

We decided to answer the questions submitted as follows: That the answer to the first question is yes, that a single living woman may be sealed while living to a deceased man, a friend but not a husband; that, however, each such case should be submitted to the First Presidency with the facts for their approval.

To the second question, we agreed that the Church does not permit the sealing for eternity only of a single living woman and a married living man.

In other words, in the case submitted that the answer to the third question would be that if Sister White wishes to be sealed to the man she mentions after he passes away, or if he wishes to have her sealed to him after she passes away, this may be done inasmuch as both parties have expressed their desire in life to be so sealed, this expression having been made in the presence and with the approval of the man’s living wife.

Mon., 11 July 1966:

’11:00 – 1:00 p.m.

Clare brought over fifteen petitions for cancellation of Temple sealings. I went over each one and granted petitions after reading the cases as presented by the various parties involved.

Tues., 2 Aug. 1966:

“Temples – Ordinances for the Dead

Counselors approved that a letter be sent to Presidents of Stakes, Bishops of Wards, Presidents of Missions, and Presidents of Temples, informing them of the new ruling to the effect that after the expiration of one year from the date of death, Temple ordinances may be performed for all deceased persons, except those of known Negro blood, without the consideration of worthiness or any other qualification, these ordinances to consist of those not received by such persons during their lifetime, or which were taken away by excommunication. The letter also indicates that this rule will eliminate investigations and decisions as to worthiness and qualifications of deceased persons whose names are submitted for Temple work, and also the necessity of restoration of blessings of those who were excommunicated in life. The letter was approved as submitted. (See copy of letter following.)

Tuesday, August 2, 1966

August 15, 1966

To: Presidents of Stakes and Bishops of Wards

Presidents of Missions

Presidents of Temples

Re: Temple Ordinances for Deceased Persons

Dear Brethren:

In authorizing temple ordinances to be performed for the dead, it has been the policy to ignore the matter of worthiness of such persons during their lifetime except in cases of murder, suicide, excommunication, mental retardation, or other conditions which have been defined as restricting ordinance work. In these latter cases the work is not done and the matter is left in the hands of the Lord. These latter cases are very few and cause the laborious work of checking and invesigating. Usually the only evidence available is hearsay, and decisions made are often arbitrary because of the absence of facts.

Ordinance work has been done and is being done for many deceased persons who would not qualify under the present rules for the reason that vital statistics and other records do not reveal such disqualifying matters. In these cases the work is done but the matter rests in the hands of the Lord, being little different from the cases where the work is not done and left to the Lord.

The Genealogical Society has recommended that in all cases where persons are deceased, and one year has elapsed from the date of death, temple ordinances may be performed for them without consideration of worthiness or qualification.

After careful consideration of this recommendation, the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve have decided that after the expiration of one year from the date of death, temple ordinances may be performed for all deceased persons, except those of known Negro blood, without the consideration of worthiness or any other qualification. These ordinances shall consist of those not received by such persons during their lifetime or which were taken away by excommunication. This rule will eliminate investigations and decisions as to worthiness and qualification of deceased persons whose names are submitted for temple work, and also the necessity of restoration of blessings to those who were excommunicated in life. Therefore in the future it will not be necessary to submit to the First Presidency applications for restoration of former priesthood and blessings to those who were excommunicated before they passed away.

Sincerely your brethren,

The First Presidency

By David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

Joseph Fielding Smith”

Tues., 23 Aug. 1966:

“Temple Recommends to Divorced Persons – Letter to Stake Presidents, etc.

We gave attention to a circular letter dated July 5, 1966, addressed to Presidents of Stakes and Bishops of Wards to the effect that where a divorce is in process Temple Recommends should not be issued to the parties involved until the divorce is completed. The letter also stated that it was necessary to submit to the First Presidency for clearance divorce situations in cases where the parties have had two or more civil divorces.

In setting forth this latter instruction a former instruction had been overlooked to the effect that it was necessary to submit to the First Presidency for clearance divorce situations in cases only where the parties have been sealed in the Temple.

President Tanner said that Elder Howard W. Hunter recommends that this instruction be changed to the effect that Stake Presidents, Bishops, and others involved in issuing recommends be cautioned to make careful investigation in respect to persons involved in a divorce action. He stated that it sometimes happens that divorces are not fully determined for a rather lengthy period of time, and in some cases the innocent party involved would, under the instruction heretofore given, be prohibited from receiving recommends to do work in the Temple. We decided to send a letter to Presidents of Stakes, Bishops of Wards, Presidents of Branches, and Presidents of Missions, correcting the former instruction. (See letter sent which follows.)

Tuesday, August 23, 1966

August 30, 1966

To: Presidents of Stakes, Bishops of Wards

Presidents of Branches in Stakes and Presidents of Missions

Dear Brethren:

The instructions given in this letter supersede those set forth in ours of July 5th addressed to presidents of stakes and bishops of wards on the subjects therein treated.

Where persons who are involved in pending divorce or annulment proceedings make application for permission to go to the temple, brethren authorized to issue temple recommends should carefully and searchingly interview the applicant, and if it is found that he or she is innocent of any serious wrongdoing in connection with the divorce or annulment and is otherwise worthy, a temple recommend may be issued.

When the final decree of divorce or annulment has been entered, a divorce clearance must be obtained from the First Presidency by the parties involved, if they were previously sealed to each other in the temple, before they may be permitted to continue temple attendance or receive a temple recommend. Divorce clearances are secured by making application on forms previously furnished to stake and mission presidents. The forms contain the specific instructions.

Divorces or annulments of marriage need not be cleared by the First Presidency for persons who were not sealed to each other in the temple. Nevertheless, brethren authorized to issue temple recommends should conduct a thorough, searching interview to determine the applicant’s worthiness to go to the temple.

Sincerely yours,

The First Presidency

David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

Joseph Fielding Smith”

Tues., 30 Aug. 1966:

“Note by CM

Temples, Miscellaneous – Recommends to Temples and Appointments to Administrative Positions not to be given to Persons Employed in Gambling Places

In letter to Stake President in Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada, and Presidents of California Missions, the First Presidency stated that in the matter the ‘Church should assume in the matter of appointing to administrative positions or issuing Temple Recommends to employees in gambling casinos, more specifically employees who are dealers, pit bosses, cashiers in tellers windows, change girls, bartenders, cocktail waitresses, and cigar and cigarette girls’, the question had come before the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve for consideration some months ago, and that it was the sentiment of the Council that we do not want any of our members participating in these gambling dens; that President McKay had indicated that while he did not want to rule arbitrarily on this matter, we cannot handle whiskey and gambling without being scarred by it; and that our people should stay away from such places. President McKay further stated that we had better not temporize with these things. Therefore, it was decided that those thus employed should not be appointed to administrative positions, and Temple Recommends should not be issued to them. (See copy of letter following.)

Tuesday, August 30, 1966

August 30, 1966

To: Stake Presidents in Las Vegas and Reno

Presidents of California Missions

Dear Brethren:

Inquiry has been received from the presidency of one of the stakes in Las Vegas regarding the attitude that the Church should assume in the matter of appointing to administrative positions or issuing temple recommends to employees in gambling casinos, more specifically employees who are dealers, pit bosses, cashiers in tellers windows, change girls, bartenders, cocktail waitresses and cigar and cigarette girls.

This question came before the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve for consideration some months ago, and it was the sentiment of the Council at that time that we do not want any of our members participating in these gambling dens. President McKay indicated that while he did not want to rule arbitrarily on this matter that we cannot handle whiskey and gambling without being scarred by it, and that our people should stay away from such places. The President further said that we had better not temporize with these things.

In a subsequent consideration of the matter it was decided to convey this information to stake presidents who are concerned with this problem and advise that we should not appoint to administrative positions nor issue temple recommends to people in these gambling places whose employment requires them to meet the public and participate in the manner indicated. We hope that our brethren and sisters can find employment in a more desirable environment.

Sincerely yours,

The First Presidency

David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

Joseph Fielding Smith”

Wed., 31 Aug. 1966:

Temples, Miscellaneous – Sealings in

President Tanner called attention to a report by Elder Howard W. Hunter that since 1962 the names of over 2,500,000 deceased persons have been sent to the Temples for baptism and endowments as a result of the record tabulation program of the Genealogical Society. Under this program no sealings have been performed for any of these persons.

It is now proposed to prepare ordinance lists from the record tabulation program from which sealings of children to their parents can be performed. Elder Hunter suggest that it may be necessary to call additional sealers and that the saints would be benefited by this opportunity to participate in sealing ordinances in a greater volume than has ever been possible heretofore. It is estimated that the development cost of the program would be $3,500 to write up and initiate the program. The operating cost to print and update the ordinance lists are estimated to be $50 per ten thousand names, the cost to microfilm the lists after the ordinances are recorded to provide the final Temple record will be approximately $2 per ten thousand names. It is understood the cost of the program has been budgeted under the present Genealogical Society budget. We gave our approval of this program and a letter of authorization will be prepared with a copy to the various Temples.

Temple Sealings – Members of Family Witnessing

President Tanner referred to a question that had arisen as to the possibility of children who have themselves been sealed to their parents or who were born in the covenant attending a sealing where other children are being sealed to their parents. As an illustration he mentioned cases where parents who have children born in the covenant go to the Temple to have sealed to them children whom they have adopted. Under these conditions the parents would like to take their family with them to witness the sealing of other children. He stated that in two or three cases we have authorized this procedure, but that the Temple rule is that children under 21 years of age and only those over 21 who have had their endowments should be permitted to witness these sealings. President Tanner said that he and President Brown had discussed this with Elder Howard W. Hunter and it was their feeling that it should be a general rule that children under 21 may, where they desire to do so, and obtain the necessary recommends, attend and witness the sealing adopted brothers and sisters.

Tues., 20 Sept. 1966:

Temple Sealings – Children born to Excommunicants

President Tanner called attention to some variance in decisions heretofore made regarding children born to parents while they were out of the Church who had been sealed in the Temple and subsequently excommunicated. He referred to an action taken by the Council in the days of President Snow, January 13, 1898, at which time President Snow gave it as his opinion that under these circumstances children born while their parents who had been sealed in the Temple were out of the Church because of excommunication should be sealed to their parents. He also mentioned rulings made by me to the same effect on September 26, 1946, and February 3, 1966, at which time I said these children were born out of the covenant and would have to be sealed; that, however, on May 19, 1960, in the case of John W. Arrington who was excommunicated from the Church and whose wife was not excommunicated, I had ruled that the children born to this couple while Brother Arrington was under excommunication were born in the covenant and remain sealed to the mother and that since the father’s blessings had been restored, nothing more need be done.

I said that it was evident that in cases of this kind children born while one parent or both parents were out of the Church should be sealed to the parents after the parents have had their former blessings restored. This became the unanimous sentiment of the First Presidency.”

Tues., 27 Sept. 1966:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Presidents Hugh B. Brown, Nathan Eldon Tanner, and Joseph Fielding Smith in a regular meeting of the First Presidency. We first took several recommendations of the committee appointed to pass upon reinstatement and restoration cases.

Temples – Sealing to Parents of Children with Negroid Blood

After considering all the facts presented regarding the desire of a couple who have been sealed in the Temple to have sealed to them two children with Negroid blood, I indicated that I could see no objection to the sealing being done.”

Tues., 25 Oct. 1966:

“8:50 a.m.

Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith in the office at the apartment. Some of the items discussed were:

Temples – Second Anointings of the Brethren

Reference was made by President Tanner to a question raised at the lunch table last Thursday following the Council meeting to the effect that someone had said that he had seen on the desk of the president of the Manti Temple a book regarding second anointings. President Brown had conferred with President Petersen of the Manti Temple who said that he has such a book, that he has always kept it in the vault in the Temple and that no one has access to it. The Brethren had not understood that there were copies of this book in the Temples other than one in the Salt Lake Temple. I asked President Joseph Fielding Smith to look into this situation and if there is such a book, it should be brought here.

President Tanner mentioned that following this discussion the question was raised about individuals in the Quorum of the Twelve who haven’t received their second endowments. I asked that I be given a list of the names of the Brethren of the Twelve who have not received these blessings.”

Wed., 9 Nov. 1966:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting with President Hugh B. Brown. President Tanner is in Hawaii until November 21, and President Smith is excused on account of a meeting with the Twelve. President Thorpe B. Isaacson is still absent recovering from a stroke.

We discussed several general Church matters, included in which were:

General Authorities, Second Anointings for

We went over a list of the Brethren of the General Authorities who have not had their second anointings. I asked President Joseph Fielding Smith to officiate at these ordinances in behalf of these Brethren, to be assisted by Elder Spencer W. Kimball when Elder Kimball returns from South America.”

Wed., Nov. 23, 1966:

“12:00 noon

Clare came up to Huntsville with a folder full of correspondence which had accumulated for sometime now, and also with some forty cases of petitions for cancellation of Temple sealings. We went over these without any disturbance in two hours, and I was very happy that this work had been cleared away. There were one or two cases on the cancellations which were doubtful, so I allowed a second sealing for the woman, leaving to the next life and the Lord’s decision which man the woman would have.”

Thurs., 5 Jan. 1967:

11:00 – 12:10 p.m.

Clare came over. She presented for my consideration ten cases of petitions for cancellation of Temple sealings. After listening to the reports on these cases, I decided to grant the cancellations.

Tues., 24 Jan. 1967:

“11:45 a.m.

Clare came over. She presented eight petitions for cancellation of sealings, and read to me a number of letters prepared for my signature. She also read the telegram of sympathy I instructed her to send to the family of Henry Aldous Dixon, a long-time friend, who just passed away. (See following copy of telegram, copy of newspaper items, and note by Elder Benson.)

Wed., 15 Feb. 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith in a regular meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed were:

Beer – Sale of by LDS Family and their Worthiness to Receive Temple Recommends

Attention was called to a letter from President Robert L. Webster of the Dutch John Branch written in behalf of a family in the branch who operate a service station, and in connection therewith a cafe, in which cafe beer is served. This matter having been presented to the Presidency in 1965 by President William B. Wallis of the Ashley Stake, the brethren had written that under the circumstances these people should not be permitted to hold offices in the branch while trafficking in beer. President Webster of the Dutch John Branch says that this family are a very active and fine family, that they pay their tithing and serve as far as possible, although during the summer months they cannot attend their meetings as frequently as they should because of their activities at the service station and cafe, that one of the sons of the family is attending the Brigham Young University and is expecting to go on a mission this summer. The Branch President raises the question as to whether, under the circumstances, his parents may be permitted to have recommends to go to the Temple when the son goes to the Temple after he receives his mission call.

In discussing this matter, I ruled that if the parents are otherwise worthy, as indicated by the Branch President, except for their involvement in this cafe operation, they may be given Temple Recommends.

Fri., 24 Feb. 1967:

London Temple – Matters Pertaining to

President Tanner reported his visit to the London Temple last week, where he met with President Buckmiller and discussed matters pertaining to the Temple, as follows:

1) Non-Member Technicians Working in Temple

President Buckmiller reported that it becomes necessary at times to use technicians for telephones, elevators, projection machinery, etc., and that we do not have any such skilled help among our members, making it necessary to bring in non-members who are technicians. He asked if he may have authority to take these non-member technicians to the particular places where the work must be done. President Tanner said it was his reaction that if the President of the Temple would personally remain with them while they were doing the work, just go with them to the particular place where their services were needed, that that is the only thing we can do under the circumstances.

I agreed to this with the understanding that the President of the Temple stay with the technician all the time the service is being performed.

Wed., 8 Mar. 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Held at the apartment a meeting of the First Presidency — Presidents Brown and Tanner were present. President Smith was excused as he was attending a quarterly meeting of the Twelve. President Isaacson still at home ill due to a stroke. Among a number of items considered were:

Children – Adoption of Though Child Dies During Process of Adoption

Consideration was given to a letter from Sister Vonnis Guymon of Hemet, California, asking the following question: In a case where a child is being legally adopted by a couple and the child passes away before the adoption proceedings are completed, may the child be sealed to the adopting parents. It was our sentiment that under these circumstances the child could be sealed.

Tues., 25 Apr., 1967:

Elder Garff explained and discussed with the group the maintenance costs needed for the different Temples; he explained that the Salt Lake Temple Annex is now completed and as far as the Building Department is concerned, it is ready for dedication. There we had expended approximately $6,500,000 on the Annex and remodeling of the Temple, which costs were exorbitant and completely out of line with what the costs should have been. Elder Garff also mentioned to the President that it might be considered feasible to build some smaller Temples and not go to the expense of enlarging the now existing Temples, that because of the students at the Brigham Young University and their travel to the Manti Temple in great numbers, he might consider a small Temple in Provo and one in Ogden as we already have the land provided for such buildings; also there is a critical need for a Temple on the East Coast of the United States. Elder Dyer at this point interjected the thought there should be no Temples built anywhere except those designated by revelation to the President of the Church and Elder Garff answered that his suggestion was based on what his own personal observations and thinking are and he thought it well to mention this matter to the President.

Wed., 26 Apr. 1967:

Temple Sealing – Mentally Retarded Son Sealed to Parents

Consideration was given to the matter of the sealing to his parents of Philip Rodgers, 15 years of age, who is retarded, the mother having inquired if this could be done by proxy. In answer to a letter from the First Presidency, President Leland F. Priday of the Alpine Stake reports that the boy is hyperactive, his attention span is very short, he cries readily and becomes violent at times, and doesn’t understand normal conversation. According to President Priday the American Fork Training School Chaplain suggests that the boy could possibly be brought to the Temple if accompanied by a matron to take care of him, and that they do have matrons who hold Temple Recommends.

It was our sentiment that the boy might be taken to the Temple and sealed to his parents under the conditions mentioned.

Temple Sessions for Deaf People

Attention was given to a letter from Elder Mark E. Petersen reporting that a group of people associated with the deaf organization in Southern California and Salt Lake City had conferred with him relative to the possible arrangement of Temple sessions for the deaf. He stated that there are 200 faithful Latter-day Saints who are deaf in Southern California in the San Diego-Los Angeles area, 255 in Salt Lake City, and 120 in Ogden.

We were unanimous in our feelings that sessions for these deaf people should be provided in the Salt Lake and Los Angeles Temples.

Negroes – Adoption of Negro Children

Attention was called to a letter from Bishop Blaine D. Bendixsen of the North Jordan Fourth Ward stating that an Elder and his wife are considering legally adopting two Negro children. They have two children of their own. The Bishop asks for counsel on the matter. He inquires if the couple will be able to have these children sealed to them in the Temple.

We decided to answer the Bishop stating that they should discourage such an adoption.”

Fri., 5 May 1967:

“8:30 – 10:30 a.m.

Met with President Brown, Tanner, and Smith for a meeting of the First Presidency. Among the matters discussed were:

Temples, Miscellaneous – Marriage Ceremonies Where Non-member Parents are Involved

President Tanner called attention to the numerous requests received for permission to hold civil marriage ceremonies before going to the Temple where one or more of the parents are non-members. He stated that we make no exceptions in regard to this procedure, and suggested that perhaps a letter should be sent to Bishops of Wards and Presidents of Stakes authorizing the granting of permission in such cases without requiring each individual case to come to the First Presidency.

I said that we should continue as we are doing; however, that these letters of consent from the First Presidency might appropriately be signed by any one of the Brethren of the First Presidency rather than by the entire First Presidency.

Tues., 23 May 1967:

“Temples – Tenure of Presidents

President Tanner mentioned that some of the Temple Presidents have served nine or ten years and others a briefer period of time. He was wondering if it would be well to have a policy indicating a specified period of time that a Temple President should serve. He thought that if this were done it would be easier to release them than otherwise.

I said that I do not feel there should be any limitation set on a Temple President’s term of service. President Tanner inquired if I would agree with him that it might be a good thing to review the list of Temple Presidents from time to time to ascertain just how long they have served. I said that this is a good idea, and Brother Anderson was asked to prepare a list for our consideration.

Wed., 26 Jul., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with President Hugh B. Brown, Nathan Eldon Tanner, and Joseph Fielding Smith in a meeting of the First Presidency in the office in the Hotel Utah apartment. We considered several matters, some of which were:

Temples – Administration of

President Tanner reported that Elder Howard W. Hunter had discussed with him the lack of definite coordination and clear understanding regarding the administration of the Temples. He said that some of the Temple Presidents feel that Elder ElRay L. Christiansen has certain responsibilities in connection with the operating of the Temples and they submit to him recommendations pertaining to such operations rather than sending them to the First Presidency. He said there is also a question as to Elder Hunter’s responsibilities. Brother Hunter has suggested that the responsibilities of the different individuals be clarified so that everything would operate smoothly.

President Tanner explained that Brother Howard Hunter of the Twelve supervises the genealogical work with Theodore M. Burton serving under him, that although the chain of authority is not entirely clear it appears that the operation of the Temples is under a member of the First Presidency assisted by an Assistant to the Twelve, and the ordinance work is under the direction of a member of the First Presidency assisted by an Apostle with an Assistant to the Twelve working under him. He said there is obviously a lack of correlation which can only result in confusion, one of the problems resulting from the fact that the Assistant to the Twelve in the chain of operations does not work under a member of the Twelve, whereas if a member of the Twelve were assigned to this phase of the work under whom Brother Christiansen would be working it would improve the Temple administration.

Elder Hunter has suggested that the administration be under the First Presidency or a member of the First Presidency, that a member of the Twelve be appointed to serve under the Presidency or a counselor in the Presidency, he to be given two assistants, one for operations and one for ordinance work, so that the president of the Temple would go through the assistant to the member of the Twelve to the First Presidency, and on matters of operation the same line would be followed; namely, through the assistant in charge of operations to a member of the Twelve and from him to the First Presidency. Under this arrangement Elder Christiansen could be given a letter explaining to him exactly what his authority and responsibilities are. President Brown mentioned that Brother Christiansen has served there a long time and that perhaps a change in that assignment should be made. After some discussion of the matter it was finally agreed that President Tanner should represent the First Presidency in looking after Temple matters, that Elder Howard W. Hunter of the Twelve would serve directly under him, with Elder Theodore M. Burton in charge of the ordinance work and ElRay L. Christiansen, or someone else to be chosen in his place, in charge of administration, both under Elder Hunter. I gave my approval of this arrangement.

Tues., 8 Aug., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Survey of Temples – New Temples Agreed Upon for Ogden and Provo

This morning I met with my counselors, Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith, and the following members of the Church Building Committee: Elders Mark B. Garff, Fred Baker, and Emil Fetzer.

Elder Garff, Chairman of the Building Committee, reported that in the survey of Temples that they had made at the request of the First Presidency, they had broken down their report in three parts, and that he would give the first part, reporting on the buildings, the work that is accomplished in the Temples, and at the conclusion would make a short report; that Brother Fred Baker would make a report on the flow of people to the Temples, where they come from, and what the Building Committee’s recommendation is; and that Brother Emil Fetzer would mention the planning that has been done over the past year.

From the report given by these brethren, we find that the great majority of Temple work is carried on in the Salt Lake, Logan, and Manti Temples (see minutes for details). The traffic in the Manti and Logan Temples is becoming so acute that it becomes necessary either to remodel those Temples or build new ones, and a remodeling job would be a drastic one. Brother Garff reported that to remodel the Logan and Manti Temples would cost between $3.5 and $4 million, whereas we could build new Temples in Ogden and Provo for $2.5 each. He said that so far as the Los Angeles and Oakland Temples

are concerned, they are able to accommodate easily all the people who want to go there.

Brother Baker said that if we created two new Temple districts — one centering in Ogden and one in Provo — the Salt Lake Temple district would be reduced from 493,000 to 370,000. He mentioned that in spite of the tremendous work that has been done in the Salt Lake Temple, actually the work is still increasing year by year, and the load is becoming heavier and heavier. He said that in 1950 we did 163,000 endowments if the Salt Lake Temple, and in l966, 413,000.

He said further that if the two new districts proposed — Ogden and Provo — were created, the Logan and Manti Temples could continue to serve the surrounding areas in which they are located, and serve them adequately, and there would be ample room for growth in all of the existing Temples; namely, Salt Lake, Logan, and Manti.

Brother Fetzer said that the design they would propose for the new Temples would be similar to the Oakland Temple, but not so large or so elaborate. The Temple design for Ogden could be exactly the same plan as the one designed for Provo, and the model could be used in other places.

Elder Garff said that their study had led them to the conclusion that if we are going to get the Temple work done and accommodate the people who hold Temple recommends, we shall have to build Temples in the areas where the people live.

It was decided that Brother Garff and his associates should proceed with two things; namely, acquiring of the lands and preparing the plans for the two new Temples in Ogden and Provo.

I inquired about the acquiring of land for the Temples, and Brother Garff said that his thinking is that in Ogden we should not have to purchase any land; that we could place the Temple on the large square in Ogden where the Stake Tabernacle is located. Brother Fred Baker said he thinks it would be a mistake to place the Temple anywhere else. Brother Baker comes from Ogden. In Provo, Brother Garff thinks we should not have sufficient property there where the old Tabernacle is located; that we probably would have to buy a little extra land for parking purposes.

I said, “all right”, and it was agreed that Brother Garff and his associates are to go forward and make provision for the location of the new Temples, prepare their plans, and so far as possible, have the same plan for both Temples. Elder Garff said they will make their recommendation at a later date as to the architects.

On Thursday, this whole matter was presented to the Council of the Twelve at their meeting in the Temple.

(See following copy of minutes of First Presidency’s Meeting for details; also see copy of minutes of First Presidency and Council of Twelve following.)

Following the departure of the members of the Building Committee, the Counselors remained for the regular meeting of the First Presidency.

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Tuesday, August 8, 1967, at 8:30 A.M., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith. President Thorpe B. Isaacson absent on account of illness.

Temple Program

Elders Mark B. Garff, Fred Baker and Emil Fetzer of the Building Committee met with the First Presidency and reported on a survey of temples that they had made at the direction of the First Presidency.

Elder Garff said that in their survey they had broken down their report in three parts and that he would give the first part, reporting on the buildings, the work that is accomplished in the temples, and at the conclusion would make a short report; that Brother Baker would make a report on the flow of people, where they come from, and what the Building Committee’s recommendation might be, and that Brother Emil Fetzer would mention the planning that has been done over the past year.

Elder Garff stated that the reproduction cost of our temples today would amount to about 75 million dollars for the 13 temples, that is, if we were to replace them today. He said that in the past ten years the great expenditure on temples has been with the Salt Lake Temple in the matter of the new annex, that the annex and remodeling of this temple approximated 6 1/2 million dollars in cost. He said that because of the great thrust forward of chapels, stake houses, schools, etc., the temples have suffered to some degree in expenditures.

Elder Garff reported that the total ordinances performed in all temples in 1966 was 3,970,000, and that 51% of all the work for the living and the dead is performed in three temples, namely, the Salt Lake Temple, the Logan Temple and the Manti Temple. In the Salt Lake Temple 1,298,000 ordinances were performed by a Church population of 493,473. That is one third of all the work that was accomplished in our temples.

In the Logan Temple they performed 12% of the total, with 159,614 people. In the Manti Temple, 224,000 ordinances were performed, or 6%, with 93,466 people. He stated that the members of the Church attending the temples come from within a 50 mile radius, and that beyond that they drop off to almost nothing. He said that St. George accounts for 6-5/10% of the work that is done. He mentioned that people from Ogden, Logan, and from Malad to Logan and in that area, go to the Logan Temple, and that the BYU students are going to the Manti Temple to do temple work. He mentioned that we have so many sessions in the Salt Lake Temple that the Provo students take excursions to the Manti Temple, and the Logan students go to the Logan Temple.

The baptisms last year were 1,263,000 and the Salt Lake Temple accounted for 33%. The ordinances were 664,000 and the Salt Lake Temple accounted for 31%. Endowments for the dead, 511,000, the Salt Lake Temple 33%. Sealings of couples, 134,000, the Salt Lake temple 38%. Sealing of children, 538,000, 30% of which were taken care of in the Salt Lake Temple. He said that so far as the London, Swiss and New Zealand temples are concerned, they do not take care of a great deal of work because the Church population is not centered in those areas. He said by these means the people have been unable to receive their own endowments but as far as temple work for the dead is concerned it amounts to nothing compared with what the Salt Lake, Logan and Manti Temples are able to perform. Forty-one percent of all the endowments for individuals was carried on in the Salt Lake Temple. There were 12,673 couples sealed in the Church last year and the Salt Lake Temple accounted for 36.5%. The sealing of living children was 17,856, or 31%, all of which was accounted for in the Salt Lake Temple. The Logan Temple accounted for 8% and the Manti Temple 6%. He stated that the traffic in the Manti and Logan temples is becoming so acute it becomes necessary either to remodel those temples or build new ones, and that a remodeling job should be a drastic one which would require an expenditure of considerable money, that a realigning of the temple areas and constructing one temple in Ogden and one in Provo would take 117,000 people from the Salt Lake Temple and 25,000 from the Logan Temple. If we were to build temples in Ogden and Provo they would not be expensive temples but temples where we could use the film process. He estimated that it would cost between 3 1/2 and 4 million dollars to remodel the Logan and Manti temples, whereas we could build new temples in Ogden and Provo for 28 million dollars each. He reported that as far as the Los Angeles and Oakland temples are concerned, they are able to accommodate easily all the people who want to go there.

Elder Baker said that the difficulty in the Logan and Manti temples does not relate to the number of seats in the rooms of the temples, the problems relate to the attendant facilities, the preparation rooms, the locker rooms, the rest rooms, the workers rooms, the rooms for washing and anointing, as well as the flow into the temple. He said these are the things that create the problems in trying to service large numbers. In Oakland and Los Angeles the facilities are ample at the present time.

Brother Baker mentioned that we have a request from Hawaii for a major remodeling of the Hawaii Temple and yet they are performing only about 60,000 ordinances a year, or about 1 1/2% of the total activity, so it is thought that a major remodeling there would not be wise at the present time.

Elder Baker said that if we created two new temple districts, one centering in Ogden and one in Provo, the Salt Lake Temple district would be reduced from 493,000 to 370,000. He mentioned that in spite of the tremendous work that has been done in the Salt Lake Temple, that actually the work is still increasing year by year and the load becoming heavier and heavier. He said that in 1950 we did 163,000 endowments in the Salt Lake Temple and in 1966 413,000. If the two new districts proposed, Ogden and Provo, were created, the Logan and Manti temples could continue to serve the surrounding areas in which they are located and serve them adequately and there would be ample room for growth in all of the existing temples, namely, Salt Lake, Logan and Manti. This would mean that these three temples would be maintained and kept up to standard with the small additions that they might need, with changes in preparation rooms, but no major remodeling.

Brother Baker said that Brother Fetzer had visited all the temples except New Zealand and that Brother Garff and he had visited there, and it seemed to them that this is a major problem that needs first consideration. He suggested also that anything we do in the future in the way of remodeling our temples ought to be designed according to actual activity in the area.

Brother Fetzer referred to the annex that had been added to the Logan Temple, which had been remodeled several times, and stated that the plant is not geared for the big crowd that goes to that temple at certain times, and as a result there is sometimes a mass of confusion there, that when large groups go they have long lines standing waiting, and the circulation along the corridors into the temple makes it difficult to handle the company as it should be handled. He said that were we to remodel this temple to accommodate the group we have there now from Ogden, Logan and Malad, they would suggest that we tear down the annex completely and build an entirely new one, and that would solve only half the problem. It would take care of the circulation in the annex but they would have the same problem in the temple that we have now. The temple is designed for a smaller group and there are a lot of stairways to the various ordinance rooms which would have to be taken out inasmuch as it is difficult for older people to climb these stairways. He stated that even after the remodeling had been done we would still have a problem of people coming long distances to attend the temple. He mentioned that the situation in Manti is very similar to that in Logan.

Brother Fetzer said that the design they would propose for the new temple would be similar to the Oakland Temple but not so large or elaborate. There would be two ordinance rooms, one on each side of the celestial room, which would be in the center, and that we would use the film for the sessions, which would make it possible to have two sessions going through at the same time, one session on each side going through the film rooms in alternate sessions. There would also be sealing rooms and the annex. He said that the length of the session shouldn’t be as long as it is when we move through the temple. The temple design for Ogden could be exactly the same plan as the one designed for Provo, and the model could be used in other places.

Elder Garff said that their study had led them to the conclusion that if we are going to get the temple work done and accommodate the people who hold temple recommends, we will have to build temples in the areas where the people live. He further stated that we cannot do the kind of skilled carpentry work in the temple that was done in early days, that it is impossible to get men who can do this type of work.

Brother Garff mentioned also the lack of necessity for large assembly rooms such as we have in the Salt Lake, Los Angeles, Oakland and other temples, for the reason that meetings are held in these assembly rooms so seldom that it would seem unnecessary to go to the expense of providing rooms of this kind in these new temples.

President Tanner asked President McKay if he would like Brother Garff and his associates to proceed with two things, namely, acquiring the lands and preparing the plans.

In answer to the President’s inquiry as to the acquiring of land for this purpose, Brother Garff said that his thinking was that in Ogden we shouldn’t have to purchase any land, that we could place the temple on the large square in Ogden where the stake tabernacle is located. Brother Baker thought it would be a mistake to place the temple anywhere else.

Brother Garff said that so far as Provo was concerned, he thought we would not have sufficient property where the old tabernacle is located, that we might have to buy a little extra for parking purposes.

President McKay said “all right.” President Brown said that as he understood it these brethren were authorized to go forward and make provision for the location of the new temples and prepare their plans, and, so far as possible, have the same plan for both temples. President McKay agreed. Elder Garff said that they would make a recommendation at a later date as to architects.

Lorin L. Richards and Wife

After Elders Garff, Baker and Fetzer left the room President Tanner raised this further question: President Tanner reported that some time ago Lorin L. Richards was approved to go to New Zealand to be in charge of the Visitors Center there, to be an assistant to President Jensen of the temple and to be given the sealing power. He said that Brother and Sister Richards will be leaving for New Zealand about the first of September. President McKay agreed to meet Brother and Sister Richards Wednesday morning, August 9th, to set Brother Richards apart and give him the sealing power.

* * * *

Minutes by Joseph Anderson”

“Council Meeting, Aug. 9, 1967

New Temples and Changes in Temple Districts

President Brown mentioned a matter which he said President McKay wanted brought to the Twelve which represents proposed changes in temple districts. He stated that upon a rather lengthy investigation, it has been found that of the work being done in the various temple, about 50 per cent of it is done in three temple districts, namely, Logan, Salt Lake and Manti; that Salt Lake does 33 per cent of the work done in the temples of the Church; 12 per cent is done in the Logan Temple; and 6 per cent in the Manti Temple. It has been proposed, which proposal has been approved by the First Presidency, that the matter be referred to the Twelve for their comments regarding building a new temple in Ogden and another new temple in Provo, taking from the Salt Lake, Logan and Manti Temple Districts the following membership:

The Salt Lake Temple District has a membership of 493,000. This proposal would leave 370,000.

The Logan Temple District population is 159,000. This proposal would leave 80,000 in this temple district.

The Manti Temple District population is 93,000, and this would leave 60,000.

Ogden would take 117,000, and Provo about 115,000.

The proposition in brief is that we re-distribute the membership of the Church in the temple areas according to this plan, and build two new temples. President Brown said that when the proposition was originally considered, the recommendation was that we remodel the Logan and Manti Temples, that is, enlarge them and enable them to take care of their present loads. Upon investigation it developed that it will cost from three to four million dollars to do what would need to be done in those two temples in order to absorb this heavy load; whereas, to build the two temples would cost about five million dollars, and it is uncertain just what the cost of remodeling would eventually amount to on these old buildings. In other words, we can build two temples, cut down the size of the temple districts, distribute the membership more equitably into temple districts, and make it so that no person or family would have to travel more than 25 miles to a temple.

President Tanner said that there is one other thing that should be mentioned, namely, that in remodeling the temples it would destroy the present inside architectural work which it is felt would be very serious; also, that besides making more facilities available, this would cut down the travel of the people very materially. They would be smaller temples but functional. They would have a central room, with ordinance rooms on each side, in which central room would be the necessary equipment for the presentation of the ordinances on tape. He said it would be like Oakland in the inside facilities, but not in grandeur.

Elder Petersen suggested that when a choice of sites is made these sites should be such as would be acceptable to old people. He said he had learned that in Ogden they have a temple site way up on the side of the mountain where there is no bus service.

President Brown answered that we have on the tabernacle block in Ogden a sufficient area to accommodate the temple, and it is intended that that would be the place where it would be erected.

President Brown said that they were going to wait until next Thursday to bring it before the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve but that President McKay wanted him and President Tanner to talk with the stake presidents in these areas and get their support, that they did not want to do this until they had first presented it to the Twelve for their approval, and that President McKay had been asked for permission to present it today, which permission he granted. This would precede any official announcement.

President Brown mentioned that in Provo we have two acres on the site where the tabernacle is located, but he personally did not think this would be desirable, that there is a site on the side hill about 800 North and 1400 East that belongs to the BYU which we own already. He said he had spoken to Brother Mark Garff, Emil Fetzer and Fred Baker in regard to this, and that this committee would report back to the First Presidency about these site locations.

Elder Stapley said he thought this was a wonderful recommendation. He said he had one other thought, and that is that we really need a temple badly in the eastern part of the United States.

Elder Petersen said we should build these two temples first and he moved approval of the proposal. Motion seconded by Elder Stapley.

Elder Lee mentioned that one of the criticisms of our recent temples is that we have relied solely on one architect’s ideas and that some of these temples have not proved entirely satisfactory so far as practical use is concerned. He suggested that we ought not to leave the architectural phase of it to our own building department, but that we should have a council of architects discuss the matter and make sure that we come up with the best of their combined judgment.

President Tanner said that Emil Fetzer’s idea was that we get some good qualified architects and work with them on the matter. He said that perhaps we might have two or three architects working on it.

The motion was unanimously approved.

Benediction by Elder Thomas S. Monson.”

Wed., 9 Aug., 1967:

“8:30 a. m.

New Zealand Temple – New Counselor

Elder Lorin L. Richards and his wife, Sister Florence Richards, met with the First Presidency this morning in the office in the Hotel Utah apartment. Following greetings and a few words of instruction, I was voice in setting apart Brother Richards as a Counselor to President Heber Jensen in the New Zealand Temple Presidency, and in conferring upon him the sealing power. I also set Brother Richards apart as Director of the New Zealand Visitors Center.

After the departure of Brother and Sister Richards, we held the regular meeting of the First Presidency. Some of the items considered were:

Ogden and Provo Temples – Meeting of Stake Presidents

President Tanner referred to the action we took yesterday in our meeting approving the proposed erection of Temples in Ogden and Provo, and suggested that it would be well for the First Presidency to call together the Stake Presidents in those particular districts, tell them what we have in mind, obtain their support of the project financially and otherwise, and also approve a site to be selected. He thought this should be done before the information leaks out that we are contemplating erecting these Temples so that they will feel that they are a part of the proposition.

I said that this should be done as it had been done in other Temple districts before building Temples, such as Los Angeles and Oakland.

President Brown suggested that I would no doubt wish this matter presented to the Twelve before any further action is taken, and the suggestion was made that this could be done at the Council meeting to be held Thursday, August 17. President Brown mentioned in this connection that there is a site in Provo on the hillside which belongs to the BYU, which is located at 820 North and about 13th East in Provo, which is an ideal site for a Temple. He thought that perhaps we should ask Brother Garff and his associates to look at this site as a possible location for the Temple. President Brown said that he had made inquiry and learned that there are two acres available to us adjoining the Tabernacle in Provo, but that is not sufficiently large to do the kind of job we want. President Tanner asked if I would wish to look at this property before a decision is made, and I said that I do not feel physically able to do this. I approved of the proposal that Presidents Brown and Tanner proceed with these meetings with the Stake Presidencies after the Council of the Twelve had indicated their approval. President Brown will prepare a program and bring it to me for my consideration and approval. President Brown said that all he would wish to do is make preliminary arrangements and bring the proposed procedure to me, and then action can be taken under my direction and with my authority.”

Thur., 10 Aug., 1967:

“9:45 a.m.

Temples – Ogden and Provo

Henry Smith of the Deseret News came in with my secretary. He said that President Brown had sent him over to get from me permission to announce in today’s paper, noon edition, the building of the Temples in Ogden and Provo. He said, also, that President Brown had told him that the Twelve had approved of the building of the Temples in their special meeting held yesterday.

I said, “Absolutely not — nothing is to be said about it today.”

2:00 p.m.

New Temples for Ogden and Provo

Presidents Brown and Tanner came over to the apartment in company with Fred A. Baker of the Building Department, and discussed further with me the proposed building of the two new Temples — one in Ogden and one in Provo.

Brother Baker gave statistics regarding the membership and distances traveled by members to the three Temple districts; namely, Logan, Salt Lake, and Manti; and stated that the boundaries now suggested for the three Temple districts would make the Temples more accessible to our people, and thus Temple work would be greatly increased, especially that which comes from Ogden and from Provo, as well as relieving the great load now on the Salt Lake Temple.

He named the Stakes that have been suggested to be in the Ogden and Provo districts (see Minutes following for these Stakes).

President Brown said that he and President Tanner will carry out the suggestion made by them; namely, that they go to Ogden and Provo and acquaint the Stake Presidents with the plans that are now contemplated for the new Temples. As I would not be able to make these trips, I gave them permission to hold these meetings with the Stake Presidents in Ogden and Provo.

I asked Presidents Brown and Tanner if they favored the propositions that had been presented and they said that they did. President Tanner said that these plans had been presented to the Twelve yesterday, and that all of those present, excepting Brother Hinckley, were in favor of it. He said that there are some who would like to see a Temple in South America and one in the Eastern part of the United States.

I said that this whole matter of Ogden and Provo should now be presented to the Stake Presidents involved, so that they would have a chance to express themselves before any publicity is given.

(See copy of First Presidency’s Meeting minutes following.)”

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Thursday, August 10, 1967, at 2:00 p.m., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown and N Eldon Tanner.

New Temples

Brother Baker met with the First Presidency and the brethren discussed further the proposed building of two new temples, one in Ogden and one in Provo. Brother Fred Baker of the Building Committee explained that at the present time there are three temple districts along the Wasatch Front, Logan, Salt Lake and Manti, and all the membership in that area is distributed into those three districts, that along the lines already proposed there would be two new districts located, one at Ogden and one at Provo, and that then the membership distribution would be such as to have 70,376 less in the Logan district and there would be 122,720 in the Ogden district. Those included in the Ogden district would be people from Brigham City on the north to Kaysville on the south, everyone within a 25 mile radius of Ogden.

In the Salt Lake district there would be 340,000 people left. They would be included in a 30 mile radius of Salt Lake. The Provo district would have a membership of about 112,000 within a 48 mile radius of Provo.

Manti would take everything from about Spanish Fork to the present temple boundary and this would cut the membership in the Manti District to about 43,000.

The north boundary of the Manti district would be at Eureka and it would run to Torrey on the south, that is, about to Richfield. From there on the people go to St. George.

He said that this would enable these people who now have to travel over 78 miles to get to the Logan Temple and those who now have to travel about 150 miles round trip to Manti, to be within about 30 minutes’ drive of the temple. Brother Baker said that he felt it would greatly increase the amount of temple work that comes from Ogden and from Provo, as well as relieving the great load now on the Salt Lake Temple, and we would have to do only minor upkeep on the Logan and Manti temples in order for them to continue to serve their districts. Brother Baker presented the following list of stakes that would fall in each of the new temple districts.

Ogden District Provo District

Ben Lomond Alpine

Ben Lomond South American Fork

Box Elder BYU 1st

Clearfield BYU 2nd

Brigham BYU 3rd

East Ogden BYU 4th

Farr West BYU 5th

Kaysville BYU 6th

Lake View BYU 7th

Layton BYU 8th

Lorin Farr East Provo

Morgan East Sharon

Mt. Ogden Kolob

North Davis Lehi

North Weber Nebo

Ogden Orem

Riverdale Orem West

Roy Palmyra

Roy North Provo

South Box Elder Santaquin-Tintic

South Ogden Springville

Sunset Timpanogos

Washington Terrace Utah

Weber Wasatch

Weber Heights West Sharon

West Utah

President Brown told President McKay that he and President Tanner had in mind carrying out the President’s instructions by going to Ogden and Provo and acquainting the stake presidents with this new plan. He said this should be done before any notice is given to the public. It would be the intention to bring the stake presidents in the Ogden area and those in the Provo area together and present this proposal to them and obtain their assistance in moving the program forward. He said that it was his intention to meet with the presidents of stakes in the Provo area Monday morning next and that President Tanner would meet with the presidents of stakes in the Ogden district Monday afternoon. President Brown further explained that Provo would take 83,000 members from Salt Lake and 32,000 from Manti.

President McKay asked his counselors if they favored this proposition and they said that they do. President Tanner mentioned that it had been presented to the Twelve yesterday, all of whom were present excepting Brother Hinckley, and they were in favor of it. He said there are some who would like to see a temple in South America and one in the eastern part of the United States.

President Brown further explained that we have a problem because we are loading the Salt Lake, Manti and Logan temples with work more than they can handle and the distances the people have to travel are great. He mentioned the thought that had previously been considered of remodeling the Logan and Manti temples; that, however, when Brother Garff’s committee presented the matter to the Presidency on Tuesday last it was mentioned that it would take three to four million dollars to do the remodeling and it would only take approximately five million dollars to build these two temples. Mention was also made of the fact that in the winter time the roads are hazardous, making it difficult for people to travel back and forth to the temple over such long distances as they have to travel under the present circumstances. It was also mentioned that people sometimes go to the Salt Lake Temple and have to wait from 4:00 to 6:00 because of the congestion at the temple.

President McKay said the matter should be presented to the stake presidents involved before any publicity is given and indicated his approval for President Brown and President Tanner to make this presentation together to the stake presidents as suggested and give them a chance to express themselves.

President Tanner further stated that he thought this would increase our temple attendance very materially in this area.

In answer to an inquiry by President Tanner as to whether he and President Brown should meet with the stake presidents and bishops or just with the stake presidents, it was agreed that they should meet with the stake presidents and that they could carry the message to their bishops. President Brown asked the President if they should go ahead with their meetings with the stake presidents in the areas mentioned as indicated and the President said that they should do so.

* * * *

Minutes by Joseph Anderson”

Mon., 14 Aug., 1967:

“8:00 a.m.

Announcement of the Building of Two new Temples in Provo and Ogden, Utah

President Hugh B. Brown called by telephone and said that he and President Tanner are planning to leave for Provo this morning to meet with the Stake Presidents in the Provo area to discuss with them the plans for the building of a new Temple there, and also to appoint a Committee of the Stake Presidents to choose a site for the Temple. Following their meeting in Provo, they will return to Salt Lake, and at 4:00 p. m. will proceed to Ogden to announce to the Stake Presidents in that area the building of a Temple in Ogden, and will also set up a committee of the Stake Presidents to choose a site for the Ogden Temple.

President Joseph Fielding Smith was not invited by the counselors to go to Provo with them, but was invited to go to Ogden at four o’clock this afternoon. (See newspaper clippings following for announcements; see also report of First Presidency on August 15, 1967.)

10:00 a.m.

My secretary, Clare, came over. She mentioned how surprised she was to learn that two new Temples are to be built by the Church in Ogden and Provo.

I said that I had given permission this morning for the Counselors to meet with the Stake Presidents in these two places because I am not physically up to going to Provo or Ogden to meet with them. The secretary said, “But they could have come to Salt Lake to meet with you, could they not?”

Note by CM

At this point, President McKay leaned his head back on his chair, closed his eyes, and after several minutes of thought, looked up and said, “Yes, that is what should have been done, but it was not suggested.””

Tues., 15 Aug., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith, and considered with them various letters and general Church matters.

Ogden and Provo Temples

President Brown reported for my information that yesterday morning at ten o’clock President Tanner and he, together with Mark B. Garff and Fred Baker of the Building Committee, met in Provo with the Presidencies of Stakes that would be included in the Provo Temple District — that 27 of the 28 Stakes were represented by their Stake Presidencies, and they all enthusiastically endorsed one hundred percent the proposal that a Temple be built in Provo, and indicated that their people would pay such proportion of the cost as might be assigned them. President Brown said that an effort was made to make these brethren feel that they are being considered in the matter; that we were not merely telling them that this is what is going to be done, but we were asking for their recommendations.

A committee was appointed to make investigation with the Building Committee regarding a proposed site, and to bring back to the First Presidency their findings and recommendation.

Ogden Temple

In the afternoon at four o’clock, Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith, together with Brother Garff and Brother Baker of the Building Committee, met with the Presidencies of the 25 Stakes in the proposed Ogden Temple District, all of whom were very enthusiastic about building a Temple in Ogden as soon as possible. He stated that several proposed sites were mentioned on which the Temple might be erected. Here, too, a committee was appointed to investigate with the Building Committee and report back to the First Presidency. President Brown said that the Counselors in the Presidency carried to each of these groups my love and blessing, and told them that because of a slight indisposition I was unable to be present. President Brown said he thought the meetings were very successful.

Thur., 17 Aug., 1967:

Note by CM

Ogden and Provo Temples – Report by President Brown to Council on August 17, 1967.

Today at Council Meeting, President Brown mentioned his attendance with President Tanner and others at the special meeting in Provo and Ogden where the announcement was made of the proposed construction of a new Temple in Provo and one in Ogden. He said there was not a dissenting vote in either place; that they all seemed to want the Temples, and were very enthusiastic about the possibility of their financial participation; and said if we would indicate what we wanted that they would take care of it. One of them said if we would multiply it by two that they would get the money. He said that committees are now at work considering locations, and will bring back a recommendation, and after that is decided, it is thought that we can go forward without delay. He said that schematic drawings are now under way.

(See August 24, 1967, for decision regarding location of sites for Temples and announcement to be made.)”

Tues., 22 Aug., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Sites for new Temple in Provo and Ogden

Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith, and Elder Mark B. Garff, and listened to a report from Elder Garff regarding the sites that have been chosen by the committees appointed in Ogden and Provo for the new Ternples.

(See minutes following for details of this report.)

Instructions by Temple President to Stake Presidents

Following Brother Garff’s departure, President Tanner called attention to a note that had appeared in the Deseret News stating that a Priesthood Session will be held in the Temple Saturday, October 7, and that the various Stakes in this Temple District have been asked to arrange for a certain number of Priesthood holders to attend sessions in the Temple that day. President Tanner suggested, in which suggestion Brother Hunter concurred, that the Stake Presidents in the region should decide when, where, and how their Stake days at the Temple should be assigned, rather than for the Temple President to do so. In the assignment by the Temple President for this specific occasion, he indicated how many Priesthood holders should be assigned from each Stake and the particular sessions that they should attend.

I agreed that the Temple President should not have the authority to tell the Stake Presidents when their day in the Temple would be and how many people should be assigned to attend those sessions. It was agreed that the Temple President could say that they need the brethren to take names in the Temple if that were the case. President Tanner mentioned that this procedure is also followed in the Los Angeles Temple. He said that in Los Angeles we have an Advisory Committee of Stake Presidents, and they work with the regions and could handle this program in their area rather than leaving the responsibility to the Temple President to tell the Stake Presidents what to do. President Tanner said that if I felt to approve this correction that he and Brother Hunter would go forward and correct the present method of handling this program; that, however, the Priesthood Session scheduled for October 7, could go forward as scheduled. I gave my approval.

Temple Ordinance Work Is a Mason

Attention was called to a recommendation by the Los Angeles Temple Presidency that Ott Calvin White be approved for Temple ordinance work. Brother White had written to the First Presidency regarding this proposed appointment stating that he is in good standing in the Masonic Order and also a member of the Church in good standing; that he values his membership in the Church above all other things, and if he cannot continue to be a member of the Masonic Order and serve as a Temple worker, he would refuse to pay his 1968 dues and automatically forfeit all benefits in the Masonic Order.

It was decided to write President Bowring informing him that one who

is a Mason does not necessarily have to give up his membership in the lodge in order to be a Temple worker, but in the event he is called to this service, he should become inactive in the lodge.”

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Tuesday, August 22, 1967, at 8:30 A.M., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith. President Thorpe B. Isaacson absent on account of illness.

New Temple Site in Ogden

Elder Mark Garff, chairman of the Building Committee, met with the First Presidency and reported that the committee that had been appointed in Ogden to give consideration to the selection of a site for the proposed new temple, together with Elders Garff and Baker of the Building Committee, had visited a number of sites that had been suggested. (The committee in Ogden consists of President Scott B. Price, chairman, Floyd D. Fowers, vice chairman, Keith W. Wilcox, Albert L. Bott and Lawrence D. Olpin). The committee and Elders Garff and Baker now present the unanimous recommendation that the new temple be placed on the tabernacle square on Washington Avenue in Ogden. As a second choice they recommend that it be located between 5th and 7th Street and east of Madison Avenue, which is a property consisting of eight acres. This latter property had been offered to the committee by President Lawrence D. Olpin of the Lorin Farr Stake. Elder Garff said that the problem in connection with the second site is the matter of transportation, getting the people there from both the south and north sides of the district. He said that if we took this latter site it would also require considerable development so far as sewer and water are concerned. He stated that the committee had considered 13 sites altogether. Elder Garff said that there is ample room on the tabernacle square for the temple to be placed between the old tabernacle and the new one, and that there would also be sufficient parking on the block. He mentioned the old Third Ward chapel located on the southwest corner of the block, which he felt should be removed and a new chapel built for this ward, but said that this would not be necessary in order to provide sufficient space for the new temple. President McKay indicated his approval and his counselors were in agreement with this decision.

Provo Temple Site

Elder Garff reported that the committee that had been appointed to make a study of sites for the proposed new Provo Temple had visited 13 sites in an effort to find a suitable place, that the committee, together with Brother Garff and Brother Baker, now recommend as the most desirable site a property at 23rd North and 12th East. He explained that this site is free and clear from incumbrance, that we have 23 acres there and that the temple can be located on such part of the property as may be desired. He said it is a beautiful site and is protected from the outpouring of water from the rock canyon by dams, and we have no danger of flash floods reaching this property. President McKay and the brethren indicated their approval of this site. Elder Garff said that he was sure that the city will be willing to extend its bus service so that elderly people and others who do not have automobile accommodations may have transportation to that area. Elder Garff suggested that if we would withhold for a day or two the announcement of the proposed site, he thought we could get the city to put in curb and guttering there. Brother Garff was requested to confer with the city officials and see what can be done along the lines indicated, and that the announcement of both sites would be postponed until definite word had been received form the city officials in Provo.”

Thur., 24 Aug., 1967:

“In Huntsville.

10:30 to 11:30 a.m.

Ogden and Provo Temples – Announcement of Sites that have been Chosen

By appointment made at the request of President Hugh B. Brown, Elder Mark B. Garff of the Building Department came up to Huntsville to give me a report of the location of the sites that have been chosen by the committees appointed for the Ogden and Provo Temples.

Brother Garff then read to me a proposed announcement to be made to the press, which announcement was read and approved by President Hugh B. Brown this morning before Brother Garff came to Hunysville.

After listening carefuly to the announcement, I approved of it to be made to the local newspapers, Associated Press, and others.

(See following copy of announcement as read to me; see also August 25, 1967 for announcement in newspapers.)

Note by CM

The matter of the sites chosen for the new Temples in Ogden and Provo, and the building of the Temples were discussed at length by the Brethren in their meeting of the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve held in the Salt Lake Temple today. President McKay was not present.”

“On August 24, 1967, Mark B. Garff, Chairman of the Church Building Committee, and his secretary, Bill DePew, drove to Huntsville, Utah to the residence of President David O. McKay, for a 10:30 A.M. appointment. The meeting lasted until 11:30 A. M. The meeting was regarding the two Temple sites in Utah and a news release to the public through the Deseret News and KSL broadcasting station. The following is a resume of the meeting:

Elder Garff asked President McKay if he felt able to listen to a report he had prepared to be issued as an announcement of the new Temple locations and President McKay assured Elder Garff he was able and ready to go over the matter and bring the same to a conclusion. Elder Garff asked Bill DePew to read the news report to President McKay which had already been prepared explaining the location of the sites which had been selected for the two new Temples to be built in Provo and Ogden, Utah. These sites had been approved by The First Presidency in a meeting with Elder Garff

on Tuesday, August 22, 1967. At this meeting Elder Garff made the report of the recommendations of the committees which had been appointed, consisting of Stake Presidents, for the location of Temple sites and The Presidency was pleased with these locations and it was decided that we would proceed. Elder Garff explained this information regarding the sites would be given to the Deseret News, KSL radio station and that United Press and Associated Press would follow and notification of these sites would go out to the public.

Elder Garff discussed with the President how these two Temples would take the pressure off the Salt Lake, Manti and Logan Temples and President McKay was pleased with this report. It was discussed with the President and decided at the same time that the architectural department of the Church Building Department should start the designing of these Temples and work out the schematic plans under the direction of Emil Fetzer, and that he would use his two brothers, Henry and John Fetzer, helping to work out the schematic and preliminary work on these Temples. President McKay

instructed Elder Garff to proceed on this basis. Elder Garff explained to the President that he would like to get started as soon as possible and he felt the Temples could be designed and finished within a period of approximately two years. Elder Garff explained in detail the location of the two sites of the two new Temples and President McKay assured him that he was completely happy with them and the way this matter had been handled and he seemed to be extremely pleased with the location in Ogden as it was decided that it would go on the Tabernacle Square.

It was explained to the President that the property, both in Ogden and Provo, had access to water, sewer and power and that the Church owned both pieces of property and it would not be necessary to purchase additional property for these Temple sites. President McKay reiterated to Elder Garff, as he had done previously, that he, President McKay, would give the directions to Elder Garff as to what his wishes were and as regard to Elder Garff’s work, that Elder Garff should not take directions from any other General Authority, that his directions would come from President McKay. This had been agreed

upon in previous meetings and at the time, Elder Garff agreed to help the President in building matters.

President McKay was pleased with the report and so indicated by thanking Elder Garff for his visit and the presentation made and stated he was very happy with what had been accomplished and gave his permission to proceed with this news release.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 A.M., at which time we had a chance to say ‘hello’ to Sister McKay before we left the home.”

Fri., 25 Aug., 1967:

“In Huntsville.

Ogden and Provo Temples – Sites Announced

Announcements were made in newspapers and on radio and television of the sites that have been chosen by the appointed committees for the new Temples in Ogden and Provo. The sites were selected after careful consideration of other properties in the two Utah cities. Twenty-four Stakes will be served by the Ogden Temple, and twenty-six Stakes will form the new Provo Temple District.”

Fri., 1 Sep., 1967:

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Friday, September 1, 1967, at 11:00 A.M., at President McKay’s Home in Huntsville

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith. President Thorpe B. Isaacson absent on account of illness.

Marriages in the Temple

President Brown reported that in the Council meeting Thursday some complaint was made about giving temple recommends to converts of less than a year. The brethren were agreed that conditions altered cases, that sometimes exceptions may be made where people have been in the Church only seven or eight months under certain conditions.

President Tanner mentioned that a case that had given the brethren concern was an announcement that appeared in the press regarding a civil marriage by an elder of the Church in the Skaggs Baptist chapel, followed very shortly thereafter by a sealing in the temple. This was a case where the mother of the bride was not a member of the Church. The brethren felt that care should be exercised in these cases.

Temple Clothes for New Temples

President Tanner called attention to a letter from Sister Nellie Evans Bertelson of Springville offering her services to help make clothes for the new temples. It was decided to refer this matter to Sister Spafford of the Relief Society.

Los Angeles Temple Landscaping

President Tanner catted attention to a letter that had been received from Jay Quealy in charge of the Los Angeles Temple Visitors Center, regarding needed landscaping around the temple and the preparation of a master plan and recommending the hiring of Harold W. Burton, formerly in the architects’ department, to prepare plans and sketches for the work at a cost of $2,000. The Los Angeles Temple Advisory Committee are asking for authority to go ahead on this project. The brethren had some question in their minds regarding using Brother Burton in this capacity and decided to approve of the work being done and to ask Brother Emil Fetzer, architect in the Building Committee, to arrange to hire someone to take care of it and to supervise the work.

Ogden and Provo Temples

President Tanner said that two of the stake presidents in the Provo area have asked him when they are supposed to commence raising money for the new temples. They feel that the First Presidency should let them know what percentage of the cost we would like them to raise and they will then set up a committee to decide the amount that each stake should collect. They indicate that now is the best time of the year to get under way on the project. President Tanner said that President Lunceford suggests Ben E. Lewis for chairman and that there should be appointed on the committee someone from Lehi and he suggests President Herman C. Goates, president of the Lehi Stake, and President Leo A. Crandall of the Springville Stake, so that both the north and south boundaries of the proposed temple district will be represented. President McKay asked his counselors to take care of this. President Tanner asked the President, as a floor, what he would suggest the stakes raise. President Tanner suggested the each district raise a million dollars, which would be 40% of the estimated cost, but more likely one third of the actual cost. President McKay approved this suggestion.

Allowance for Hawaii Temple Presidency Counselors

The question was raised as to what allowance should be given to the counselors to President Brooks of the Hawaii Temple. President Tanner mentioned that the brethren who have just been released received no allowance. President McKay indicated that we should pay an allowance comparable to what we are paying elsewhere.

Arizona Temple Excursions

Attention was called to a letter from Lucian M. Mecham, Jr. reminding the brethren that the excursions of the Spanish-speaking members to the Arizona Temple are scheduled to be held September 16th to 21st; October 14th to l9th, and November 18th to 21st. The question was raised as to whom we should appoint of the General Authorities to attend these excursions. The counselors were asked to ascertain who has been there previously and assign someone.

Tues., 26 Sep., 1967:

“12:00 noon

Held a meeting with my counselors and discussed the following matters:

Ogden Temple

President Tanner handed to me a letter addressed to him from Albert L. Bott, President of the Mount Ogden Stake, setting forth in some detail his objections to the proposed erection of the Ogden Temple on the Tabernacle Block in Ogden. President Bott suggests that it would be far more appropriate if the Temple were built on another site perhaps near the Weber State High School, which is just off Harrison Avenue. I mentioned that President Bott had discussed this matter with me in person. In his letter, President Bott states that 90 to 95 percent of the people in Ogden think the Tabernacle Block is not the proper place for the Temple to be built. President Brown mentioned that President Bott had signed the recommendation with other Stake Presidents in that area that the Temple be built on the Tabernacle Block, that apparently since that time he has changed his mind. President Tanner suggested that if I feel the proposition should be reconsidered, we should call together again all the Stake Presidents of the proposed Ogden Temple district. President Tanner said that announcement of the proposed site had been made by the First Presidency and that the Stake Presidents would support the Presidency if that were my desire; however, he felt that they should have the opportunity of reconsidering the matter if that were considered advisable. President Tanner asked me how I thought it should be done, and I said that I thought these brethren should be brought together again and be given the opportunity to express their views. Accordingly, the Counselors in the First Presidency were authorized to call such a meeting after Conference.”

Thur., 5 Oct., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

This morning held a meeting of the First Presidency in my apartment with Presidents Brown and Tanner. President Smith was meeting with the Twelve in the Temple. Among matters discussed were:

Provo Temple – Financing

President Tanner mentioned a letter that had been received from Ben E. Lewis, Chairman of the committee of Stake Presidents in the Provo area appointed to take charge of raising funds from the Stakes in the Provo Temple District, for the financing of their part of Temple erection expense. It was reported that they expect to collect $1,250,000, and that they hope to have it raised by the end of this year.

Ogden Temple

President Tanner asked if it was still my wish that the counselors call a meeting of Stake Presidents in the proposed Ogden Temple district for a further consideration of the site on which the Ogden Temple should be erected. He stated that there is considerable opposition to the propsition to erect this building on the Tabernacle Square in Ogden, and that when the matter was previously discussed by the First Presidency, it was the sentiment that the Stake Presidents in that area be called together, that we might obtain their views on the matter of the Temple site. I indicated my desire that this be done, and accordingly the Brethren will set a date for such a meeting.

Wed., 18 Oct., 1967:

“Minutes of a Meeting of the First Presidency with the Presidents of Stakes in the Ogden Temple District

Held Wednesday, October 18, 1967 at 3:25 p. m. in Ogden, Utah

Present: Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith; also Elder Alvin R. Dyer, Elders Fred Baker and Emil Fetzer of the Building Department and Joseph Anderson, Secretary to the First Presidency, were also present.

Prior to this meeting the counselors in the First Presidency and Brothers Dyer and Anderson, had met with President Albert L. Bott of the Mt. Ogden Stake and President Lawrence D. Olpin of the Lorin Farr Stake, and were driven by Presidents Bott and Olpin to two suggested sites, one close to the mountain near the Weber State College, and the other across the street from President Olpin’s home.

At the meeting of the stake presidents, 23 out of 25 invited were present. The opening prayer was offered by President Olpin. President Brown was chairman of the meeting. He mentioned a previous meeting some time ago with these same stake presidents when the matter was discussed of erecting a temple in Ogden and the proposition was enthusiastically received by the stake presidents. At that time a committee was appointed to look at different sites, and the committee unanimously recommended that the temple be built on the tabernacle block. He said this recommendation was presented to President McKay and counselors and the Presidency gave approval for its construction there. He mentioned that subsequent to that time some officers of some of the stakes in the area had talked with President McKay and had raised a doubt in his mind as to whether the committee had made the right decision, and that accordingly President McKay had asked his counselors to meet with the stake presidents again to get from them a frank and complete report as to their feelings regarding the site on which the temple should be erected. President Brown said that the only thought the Presidency had in mind as he understood it is to build a temple which, when completed, will be available to the most people in such a way as to make it accessible by transportation. He said that whatever the decision of the brethren is today would be taken to the President and he would make the final decision. President Broxvn asked each of the brethren of the stake presidents to speak and to be free in their statements. The brethren spoke in the following order and expressed themselves as follows:

President Clyde Russell Hansen of the North Davis Stake said that they were pleased with the recommendation that the committee made, and were pleased when the announcement appeared that the temple would be built on the Tabernacle Square site because of the accessibility for their people, that the freeway would bring them close to it and also that it would be accessible for those who might work within the city. He said as far as they were concerned they were pleased with the original decision and still feel that way.

Gabriel LaVirl Stewart, first counselor in the presidency of the Kaysville Stake, stated that President Blood was unable to come, that the stake presidency had talked the matter over yesterday evening and it was their sentiment that the farther south the temple is located the more beneficial it would be for them. He said they would certainly be in favor of the site up around the university or the new hospital. He thought that would be the wishes of President Blood if he were here.

President I. Haven Barlow of the Layton Stake, said that when they first heard the announcement that it was to be built on this block the tone of the people was that they were disappointed, but since having had time to contemplate the matter he thought that generally the people would accept it either way. He felt as president Hansen had remarked that having it close to the heart of the community might be easier of accessibility, particularly for the older people who do the majority of the temple work. He said that maybe the other site up near the university would be better so far as appearances go, that that area is one of the nicest in the city, but he thought that he would sustain the Temple Square location at the present time.

President George Haslam, Clearfield Stake, said that in considering the usage of the temple, that is, the people who do most of the temple work who are older and retired people, he thought we must consider the most convenient location from a transportation standpoint and, therefore, felt that this site would be more desirable.

President Raymond P. Larson, Morgan Stake, said that when they first talked about this matter they thought of the temple as something which should be located where people would look at it as well as use it, that they, therefore, thought of something in the other area. He said that so far as the stake is concerned he thought more young married couples go to the temple to work and have to drive a car anyway. He thought that his people would favor the temple on the upper site, but he said they would sustain the brethren wherever it is placed.

President Rudilph L. Van Kampen, Riverdale Stake, said that his people had gone along with the committee on their selection. He said they had no knowledge as to where the other sites are that are being considered, but he felt to confirm this area.

President Reed Hodgkinson, first counselor, Washington Terrace Stake, said that in discussing this matter last night with President Wheeler, president of the stake, they would both like it on this site.

President Earl Bert Child, first counselor, Roy North Stake, said that the stake presidency had considered this matter together last evening and concluded to accept this as the most desirable spot.

President Harold Thompson, North Weber Stake, said that the people of his stake are unanimous in approving the site on this block. He said they considered that this would be easier of access to the people who would come, and that they are strongly in favor of this site.

President Floyd D. Fowers, Lake View Stake, said that he was on the committee that considered the various sites, that they saw some beautiful sites but that for accessibility to the temple, knowing that a lot of their people live in the western area of the county, they felt the Ogden Tabernacle site is the proper site. He thought that if we were building where its beauty could be seen it should be in the Pleasant View area. He said he thought that was the place where it could be seen most from the county.

President A. Reed Halverson, Weber Stake, said that it was his first thought that maybe we should go up on the side hill, President Olpin’s site, and when the decision was made and the people of the stake considered it and felt satisfied with it, he was sure there would be disappointment now if it were changed. He said he could go along with this site.

President Grant L. Alder, Ben Lomond Stake, said that he hadn’t heard a single complaint from his people regarding the decision that had been made. The only comment that he had heard is that our people might enjoy the temple in the Pleasant View or North Ogden area. He said as a presidency they sustained the decision of the brethren on the site.

George E. Wright, first counselor, Ogden Stake, speaking for the presidency and high council, the priesthood leaders and the people and President Burton, said that they were unanimous in favor of the selection of the Ogden Tabernacle Square as the site.

President Jack Evertsen, second counselor, South Ogden Stake, representing President Peek, said that after discussion and some deliberation, and visiting with the high priest group leaders, it was suggested that the Ogden Tabernacle Square be used as the site for the temple.

President John Lester Nicholas, Sunset Stake, said that in view of the reasons already given they felt that this should be the logical place.

President George Albert Wimmer, Farr West Stakes said that in sampling the membership, and in consultation with the presidency and high council, it was his feeling to support the site now selected.

President Robert M. Yorgason, Ben Lomond South State, said that they had discussed with the people other locations but thought it would be better to leave it as it was decided. He said that, however, as a stake presidency, they felt otherwise about it. He said as they contemplated the matter they could not see how the temple could be built on the Tabernacle Square as it would take second place, and they felt that the temple should take first place. They also felt that very few people would walk to this location, that most of the people who came would ride. Further, that many who came would be coming in the evening and that in the evening the area takes on a different character from what it is in the day tirne; that hoodlums and others congregate around here with their motorcycles, and it is not quite so desirable in the evening as in the day time. He thought that the temple should be placed where it could be seen on the hill, that it would be much more desirable and the access could be such as to take care of the needs. He said that they would have to rearrange the landscaping on the Tabernacle Square.

President O. Dee Lund, Box Elder Stake, said that he had heard no dissension as to the selection made. He thought everybody was happy about the selection and he felt that this is the place where the temple should go, that it would complement the tabernacle and make the Ogden Tabernacle Square something like Salt Lake.

President Lawrence C. Taylor, Brigham City Stake, said that they were completely satisfied with this location, that they felt it would be an imposition on their people to have to drive six, eight or ten miles farther to the south to have a place on the hill, that it would be much closer to the Logan Temple if they were to do this than it would be to this temple. He thought that the building of a temple on this site would be one of the greatest things that could happen to Ogden.

President Albert Bott, Mount Ogden Stake mentioned that he had worked within a block and a half of the Tabernacle Square for forty odd years, that he had known the neighborhood all his life, having grown up on Lincoln Avenue, not far away; that his concept of a temple was that it was something not only to be used but as an inspiration, that whenever he has walked past the temple it has done something to him. He mentioned that nonmembers in Oakland had told him that when they have driven past the Oakland Temple and seen the building there is something about it that has impressed them greatly. He said that President McKay called his home one day and made an appointment with him to see him and talk about this, that President McKay asked him how he felt about it and he told the President that perhaps he was wrong, that maybe he had that wrong perspective but he did not favor placing it on the Tabernacle Square, that he had a feeling in his mind that the old tabernacle would have to be moved away, that perhaps the old tabernacle doesn’t mean too much to some people, that it was built in 1857, ten years before the Salt Lake Tabernacle was built, and that there were about forty families in Ogden at the time. He explained that it was constructed during the poverty of the people. He said he had thought this was a good place for Tabernacle Square and the genealogical library and other things, but he had thought it would be better to place the temple in a quiet place where there are residences nearby. He said that he had watched the people checking out of the Salt Lake Temple and that 90% of them at least went across the street and got into their automobiles. He said if we were to attempt to get property across the street they would want a quarter of a million dollars for it and so he had felt that it would be desirable to place the temple in an area where it would be an inspiration as well as a useful place. He said, however, that he would go along with whatever the brethren decided, 100%.

President Lawrence D. Olpin, Lorin Farr Stake, said he wanted it known that he personally had not promoted the property that he owns as a temple site, that he had told the First Presidency it was available if they wanted to build a temple there and it would be agreeable with them. He said many of the people of the Lorin Farr Stake have expressed themselves to him as they had come to his home for temple recommends that it would be wonderful if they could have a temple on that property. He mentioned that he bought the property originally in order to have a site for a home and then, that as he got older and retired, maybe he could sell off a lot at a time for something to retire on. He said when people had mentioned this to him he had said that the First Presidency had asked that they suggest sites to them, which was his reason for mentioning his property. He said as far as he was concerned he felt fine about the site selected.

President Scott B. Price, East Ogden Stake, said that to begin with he wanted to express his love for President Olpin who had just spoken. He said it is a wonderful thing that he has offered his land to the Church, property which he was saving for his retirement. He thought this was a noble thing to do. Secondly, he said he felt very keenly about this matter and that the decision to erect the temple on Tabernacle Square was an answer to prayer. He said he was chairman of the committee and that as the committee knelt in prayer before they went out to look at these sites they were grateful for this responsibility. He said they made their recommendation to the First Presidency with full hope and faith that whatever they recommended would go before the brethren and that they would decide under inspiration. He said he personally felt that the brethren were inspired in selecting this site even if it was upon the recommendation of the committee. He thought it was a case of inspiration, and that really the principal reason he would hate to see it changed is because he had told many of his people that it was a matter of inspiration and to change it now would more or less make a mockery of it. He said he would support the brethren if they felt it was not the right place, but that he had had a great deal of satisfaction in feeling they were inspired in choosing the tabernacle site. He said definitely the people of East Ogden Stake felt good about the choosing of the site that was chosen.

President Keith Wilcox, Weber Heights Stake, said he was also a member of the committee that has been meeting the past two years regarding the proposed construction of a temple in Ogden. He said that there were several reasons perhaps why he should be against this site but that he was for it. He said that his stake surrounds the Weber College and would have the temple in it if it were decided to move to that area. He felt that there was nothing that made it necessary that the temple should be on a hill, that it is always desirable to have a lovely site for a temple and that he would be the first, perhaps, to say we should get a beautiful site for it; but he said, as he had expressed himself to the committee and as he had gone through the valley that he could not find a central site that would be such as the one in Logan. He said that in talking with Brother Fetzer he is informed that a screen could be built around the block which would make it a sacred place and that this area would be as large as Temple Square in Salt Lake City if the chapel were taken down. He said he would support this site.

President Brown then asked Brother Fred Baker of the Building Committee to express his feelings. Elder Baker said that the Building Committee attempted to arrive at its decision from a different basis than any that had been discussed. He said what they did was to take the sites and plot them out, that they plotted access to the areas, population, etc., that they were looking for a commercial location, that is what they felt we need to get a place where people would come of easy access, that they considered this the central place in Ogden and that they would like to be as close to that location as conveniently possible as this is the place where the people would congregate. He said the temple is not going to be a huge monument but a workable building and he felt that more people would see it here than anywhere else.

Emil Fetzer, the architect, was asked to speak and he said that the Building Committee would do whatever the inspiration of the Lord to the Presidency dictates, that, however, architecturally they could put a building on any of these sites and it would be a beautiful building, but that from a use standpoint they felt that this site has certain qualities that would perhaps be lacking in other sites, that this was the best site so far as accessibility and use are concerned. It would be very accessible to the people and that if they screened the block they could make it a very sacred place.

Fred Baker said that there was one thing that Brother Fetzer was too modest to mention and that is his concept for this new temple which he said would be unique if approved. He said their goal as a Building Committee is to get the people in and out of the building in an hour and thirty minutes from the time they leave their car until they are back in it again. He said they are designing a building that will function adequately and provide access in location which they consider more important than other things, that businessmen on their way home could come to the temple. He said Brother Fetzer had done a tremendous job in arriving at a concept that it is thought would make everybody elsewhere unsatisfied with the temples they now have.

President Bott asked Brother Baker this question: He asked what is the difference in the matter of selecting the site for the Provo Temple, that is is away from every business area? Brother Baker said that they went through the same arrangement that they had done in Ogden, and if the tabernacle square downtown Provo had been large enough, even if they had to sacrifice the tabernacle building that would have been their first choice for a temple; that they also considered the downtown BYU location, which is a five acre plot, and were it not for the fact that they are currently using those buildings, which they feel they cannot give up, they would have asked them to demolish the buildings and put the temple there. He said they would have had to confiscate 80,000 feet of the campus if they were to take the third choice, and so they decided to use the Rock Mountain site. He said that the Provo site would be handy for the Brigham Young University students.

President Brown expressed appreciation for the frankness of the expressions of the brethren, that the First Presidency would not want to make any declaration one way or another at this point. He asked if the brethren would like to say anything further. President Tanner expressed appreciation for the spirit of the meeting, that he was concerned that that same spirit be taken into the stakes whatever site is chosen, that they might go forward with complete unity.

President Smith was asked if he had any comments to make. He made the following remarks: As I don’t live here I have no right, I suppose, to express an opinion, but in the building of a temple it ought to be for the convenience, of course, of the people whether you build it high or whether you build it low. I think there is a sort of feeling that has existed down through the ages that a sacred spot, something to be dedicated to the Lord, ought to be elevated, but I don’t know why we cannot worship the Lord on lower ground. We build for the convenience, or should I suppose, of the people, and I do not think that it is a feature that is sacred or stands out boldly in the minds of the people that a sacred building of this kind has to be on elevated ground. Now the Salt Lake Temple is not and I would hate to think we had to remove it and put it somewhere else because it isn’t on elevated ground. When they built the Manti Temple, I have no right to criticize, but when I first went down to Manti I wondered why in the world they put that temple on the most elevated place they could find to the inconvenience of the people. Now it looks well when you go into the city of Manti and look above you and there you see the temple. Access to it was not taken into consideration. St. George is not built on an elevated piece of property, if I remember correctly. So the building of a sacred building does not depend on elevation in my judgment. I know that in the early days when there were no temples the prophets of the Lord went onto the tops of the mountains to pray and that was all right, but I do not know why the Lord cannot and would not hear a prayer when it is offered on the level ground just as well as when offered on elevated ground. In other words, I do not think that is something that is dominant in the choosing of a temple site. That is all I need to say.

President Brown reported to the brethren that President McKay had just sent word that he was not able to meet with them at this time and that he would like the First Presidency to come to his house in Huntsville after this meeting, which they will do as soon as they can. President Brown said he thought we had heard from all whom we need to hear and that the matter could be now presented to the President in Huntsville. He told the brethren that we would report to them later.

President Tanner said that President Bott has expressed perhaps more oppostion to this site than anyone else today but that he had made the statement before meeting with the committee, which he has reiterated since and he thought all present ought to know, that he would make this unanimous and not question in any way the site that is chosen.

President Bott said he had always said this.

The closing prayer was offered by President Harold Thompson, North Weber Stake.

The counselors then drove to Huntsville and held a meeting with President McKay at 4:45 p.m. President Brown reported to the President that pursuant to appointment they had met with the presidents of stakes in the Ogden Temple area in the Ogden Tabernacle, from which meeting they had just corne, where the matter of location of the proposed new temple was considered. He said that prior to attending this meeting the counselors had inspected two proposed sites for the temple, one up near the Weber State College and the other across the street from President Olpin’s home; that they then met with the presidents of the stakes in the area and asked them to express themselves frankly and freely as to where they felt the temple should be erected. He said of the 25 stake presidents that were notified to be present, there were 23 represented. Of the 23 stake presidents, 19 preferred the Tabernacle Square site and 4 some other site. President McKay said that that was surprising to him. President Tanner mentioned that Brother Fred Baker also spoke at this meeting and expressed Mark Garff’s feeling and his own in favor of the Tabernacle Square site. President Brown said that these brethren, in discussing the matters felt that from the standpoint of accessibility for the older people and the people living in the nearby area, also those coming from outside the city, the Tabernacle Square would be the best location, and that they all spoke very frankly and freely on the subject.

President McKay asked the brethren if they weren’t very much surprised, and President Brown said that he was not surprised, that he had thought favorably of that site all the time because it is comparable to the Salt Lake City site and there is plenty of room for the temple if we move from the Square the old chapel and later perhaps the old tabernacle. He further said it is easily accessible and especially for the older folks. President McKay then asked his counselors how they felt about the matter. President Brown said he favored the downtown site. President Tanner said he had no feeling on the matter. President Smith said that that was the way he felt also. Elder Dyer said that the stake presidents were favorable to the downtown location and he said that he had no specific feeling about it. He felt whatever decision the President made the brethren would sustain him. President Tanner commented further that Brother Emil Fetzer was present and was asked his opinion as to the architectural and landscaping phases of the temple and he said they could build a beautiful temple there and by screening the block he thought it could be a sacred spot. Elder Dyer mentioned another point, namely, in regard to publicity, that if the temple were built on the Tabernacle Square we would have there the tabernacle, the temple, the genealogical library, the old tabernacle and the bureau of information, and all would complement one another. He thought there was some advantage to this. President McKay then said he thought we had better stand by the decision heretofore made that the temple be erected on the Tabernacle Square.”

(Report Meeting — 1:00 P.M.)

I attended Stake Conference Report Meeting with others of the General Authorities. I reported my attendance at the Lyman Stake Conference at Rock Springs, Wyoming, on October 7-8. I also reported the Oneida Stake Conference at Preston, Idaho, on October 15.

(Meeting with Stake Presidents of the Proposed Ogden Temple Area)

Some dispute had arisen among certain of the Stake Presidents concerning the site which had been selected for the Ogden Temple — which is in the Tabernacle grounds. These feelings were conveyed directly to President McKay at Huntsville, who asked that a meeting be held at the Tabernacle in Ogden with the Stake Presidents of the area; that he would meet the counselors and myself there.

We left Salt Lake City in President Brown’s car. Eldon Tanner was the driver; President Smith, Joseph Anderson and myself completed the party.

We met President Albert Bott of the Mt. Ogden Stake and President Lawrence Olpin of the Lorin Farr Stake before going to the meeting, for the purpose of inspecting two alternate sites suggested for the temple by these two presidents — the one, east of Ogden just north of the Weber State College, on the hillside; and the other in the north part of Ogden on a choice piece of level ground, and somewhat elevated above the City of Ogden, which President Olpin offered to the Church at no cost.

We then went directly to the Tabernacle where 23 of 25 of the Stake Presidents were assembled. President McKay sent word by Darcy Wright that he would not attend the meeting, but that we were to meet with him at Huntsville after the meeting.

President Brown conducted, and went directly to the question — asking for a direct and frank approval or non-approval of the site selected by a committee chosen by this body of Stake Presidents, that designated the Ogden Tabernacle Grounds as the site for the temple.

The response as I recorded it by stake was as follows:

1. North Davis Yes

2. Kaysville No Site by Weber College

3. Layton No Either of other two sites

4. Clearfield Yes

5. Morgan No Weber College Area

6. Riverdale Yes

7. Washington Terrace Yes

8. Roy North Yes

9. Brigham City Yes

10. North Weber Yes

11. Lake View Yes

12. Weber Yes

13. Ogden Yes

14. South Ogden Yes

15. Sunset Yes

16. Farr West Yes

17. Box Elder Yes

18. Ben Lomond South Yes

19. Ben Lomond Yes

20. Mt. Ogden No Weber College Area

21. Lorin Farr Yes

22. East Ogden Yes

23. Weber Heights Yes

TOTALS: 19 Yes

4 No (Roy and South Box Elder Stakes absent)

It is to be noted that virtually all Presidents stated they would accept the site that President McKay would choose. There was a very fine spirit in the meeting.

Representatives of the Building Committee — Fred A. Baker and Emil Fetzer — both spoke in favor of the Tabernacle site; and this after careful consideration of the other sites mentioned. Brother Fetzer stated that the area for the Temple, including the entire Tabernacle grounds, would be screened from the outside, thereby adding to the sanctity of the place.

Presidents Tanner and Smith made brief responses of appreciation for the fine spirit of the Presidents. I was not asked to speak.

(Meeting with President McKay at Huntsville)

Leaving the Ogden Tabernacle at about 4:00 P.M., we traveled to Huntsville in the President’s car. We found the President and his wife Emma together in the living room watching television. Cherie, the nurse, was there. After greetings, we met with the President in the small office room. The President appeared tired and somewhat weary.

As we all sat down, the President said how glad he was that we were together, and it appeared to me that he was going to say more — perhaps to announce my place as a counselor in The First Presiclency; this same impression came to Joseph Anderson who expressed this to me while driving from the Church parking lot to Brother Anderson’s home in my car later that early evening. As I recall his words, which he expressed completely upon his own, he said, “I believe the President was about to make an announcement about your place, when he was interfered with by the brethren in reporting the meeting at Ogden.”

Thus, President Brown reported the result of the meeting with the Stake Presidents held earlier at the Ogden Tabernacle. The President seemed quite surprised that so many of the Stake Presidents favored the Tabernacle site for the Ogden Temple.

He asked each of us for an expression concerning it. President Brown stated he had favored the Tabernacle site from the beginning. President Tanner at first said he had no preference, but later said that the Tabernacle site was no doubt the best place for it. President Smith stated that he could see no reason why we could not worship God on a flat area as well as on an elevated area (the other two alternate sites were both on elevated ground.) President McKay asked for my feelings; in response I expressed myself as being content to have the President designate the site — to feel free to do this. President Brown then interjected, “Well we all feel that way.”

The President then said we should go ahead with the site as announced — which is on the Tabernacle grounds. Since the President designated the site, I then said I thought it was best as it would provide a complex at this site downtown to include the Temple, the Tabernacle, Genealogical Library and Bureau of Information; and this no doubt will best serve the over-all interests of the Church.

I then asked the question if the matter of the site for the temple, after decision, had ever been presented to the Quorum of the Twelve for their sustaining vote. President Brown spoke up and said this was not necessary and had never been done — meaning upon other temple sites — referring to the New Zealand Temple site.

(Other Matters Taken up with the President)

President Tanner reported that the “Days of Forty Seven” parade committee was in the red to the extent of thirteen thousand dollars in promoting this project, which according to him The First Presidency had authorized and recommended that the bills be paid. It was approved.

President Brown read a letter from Joseph Rosenblatt, who is the fund-raising chairman for a proposed addition to the Neighborhood House, on West First South, requesting a contribution from the Church. It was reported that 80% of the people using this facility from the southwest part of the city were LDS — (daytime care of children of working mothers, with some adult services.)

It was mentioned that the Church had never been asked for any money to maintain this place, but were being asked now because of a needed expansion.

President Brown was going to suggest $25,000 or one-fifth of the estimated cost, but President Tanner suggested 10% or $12,500. Each of us were asked to comment. I of course was very familiar with this operation, it being located originally in the 15th Ward where I served in the Bishopric for a number of years.

Now it has been moved to larger quarters at 1050 West 5th South because of the freeway. I stated that many of the LDS using the service were inactive, but that it did serve a worthy purpose.

President McKay approved the 10%, speaking highly of Joseph Rosenblatt.

The President asked if there were any other matters. I referred to a letter sent to Wilford Kirton, Church attorney, from George Reuland of Allis-Chalmers in Independence, Missouri, which letter was sent to me. Mr. Reuland whom I know very well, and a great friend of the Church, is chairman of a fund raising committee for the erection of an addition to the Independence Hospital — a non-profit organization operated by the Reorganized LDS. This hospital is the only one in that area and is consequently used by our people there. They are asking for a contribution of $3,000. I mentioned that once before we had donated $1,000. President Brown immediately spoke up and said this matter should be held in abeyance; that I should have submitted it to them (meaning the counselors) the day before at a meeting of The First Presidency. I knew nothing about a meeting of The First Presidency to be held Tuesday, October 17. I called Joseph Anderson on Monday, the 16th, to inquire if a meeting of The First Presidency was scheduled for Tuesday morning; and that if so I would cancel my BYU Devotional appointment. He said he was reasonably sure the President would not come down from Huntsville and he did not know whether the counselors would meet or not. At any rate I was not informed and thus fulfilled my appointment at the BYU.

Because of this I could not understand President Brown’s sharp remarks — unless he intends that any matter I may have for President McKay’s attention must first be approved by them before it is taken to him. This of course would be untenable, and indicates the need of being appointed as a counselor so as to have some say in all matters; not only those raised by me, but also the other counselors as to what shall be presented to President McKay for approval.

President Brown also said that the whole Independence matter should be discussed — referring no doubt to the Bureau of Information and grounds beautification on our Temple Land property. This is not understandable because the President has already approved this project, and as late as October 18, 1967, in response to a letter from the City of Independence concerning the land, he informed them that plans are in process for a project on the land in question, involving a building, and that I had been appointed to meet with City officials on the matter.

(Return to Salt Lake City)

We said good-by to President and Sister McKay — expressing our love and blessings. We drove first to Ogden where the party split, with Brothers Brown and Tanner continuing to Salt Lake together while President Smith, Joseph Anderson and myself traveled together in the President’s car.

Upon reaching Salt Lake, I drove Brother Anderson home. He was congenial, and this is when he made the statement that it looked to him that the President was trying to make the announcement about me — but his remarks were cut off.”

Thur., 19 Oct., 1967:

“In Huntsville.

Ogden Temple

Report of meeting held in Ogden with Stake Presidents, and later with President McKay in Huntsville, reported in Council Meeting. (See copy of minutes following.)”

“(Report of Meetings Held in Ogden and Huntsville Regarding Ogden Temple Site; Given at Council Meeting Held Thursday, October 19, 1967.)

Provo and Ogden Temple Sites

President Brown reported for the information of the brethren action that had been taken some time ago at the request of President McKay by the counselors in The First Presidency in meeting with members of the stake presidencies in the Provo area relative to the erection of a temple in Provo, and that on the same day they met with the presidents of stakes in the Ogden area and presented to them the matter of erecting a temple in Ogden. He said the recommendations of the Presidency were accepted enthusiastically by the presidents of stakes in the two temple areas, and that subsequently committees were appointed to look into and evaluate the sites that had been offered as possible locations for the temples. These sites were approved by The First Presidency after consideration and consultation, and so far as Provo is concerned, they are going forward with the project.

Ogden Temple – Review of Site

He said, however, that because of the activity of some members of stake presidencies in Ogden who apparently discussed the matter with President McKay, the President asked that the counselors again meet with the presidents of stakes in that area, and ascertain their feelings with respect to the site proposed, which was that the temple be erected on the tabernacle square on Washington Avenue in Ogden. President said that yesterday he, President Tanner, President Smith and Elder Dyer met with twenty-three of the twenty-five stake presidents in the Ogden area; the other two presidencies had been invited but failed to be present.

President Brown said that these stake presidents were informed of the decision that had been reached but were told it was not irrevocable, and that we would like to have a further expression from them with respect to the location of the Ogden Temple. He stated that nineteen of the twenty-three presidents spoke in favor of the former decision, namely, that the temple be located on what is called the tabernacle square in Ogden. Two other sites were mentioned, and the brethren inspected them, but President Brown said the almost unanimous concensus was that we leave it as it was and maintain the decision previously reached by the Presidency.

Meeting in Huntsville

Following this meeting with the stake presidents the brethren of the Presidency drove to Huntsville where they met with President McKay and acquainted him with what had taken place, and he concurred in the recommendation that we should follow the expressed wish of the stake presidents and build a temple on that block.

President Tanner commented that at that meeting with stake presidents it was made abundantly clear before any discussion took place that the recommendation of the committee, which was approved by The First Presidency, should not influence them in their impressions or feelings; that we wanted them to be as frank as they could possibly be.

Elder Romney asked what the reaction was to the information received regarding the blighting of that area by the influx of colored and lower class people. President Tanner said that the explanation was made that by screening the block, it could be made a sacred place, and it was felt that the genealogical library there, as also the visitors center in that area, would make it most desirable. President Brown further commented that they seemed clearly to feel that the older people and those who would be able to walk to the temple could go there easier than if the temple were on a hill.

Suggested Improvements on Ogden Tabernacle Square

Elder Petersen commented that he was thankful this decision had been made. He mentioned that a section of the tabernacle had been made into a small visitors center and that they had tried to add to the attractions there for the tourists the Miles Goodyear cabin, and just behind the cabin, the museum that has been placed there by the Daughters of the Pioneers. He said the Miles Goodyear cabin is a disgrace the way it is at present, that it is dusty and dirty and anything but attractive; that he had tried to interest the stake presidents there to ask the community if they wouldn’t provide a better kind of cover for the cabin and clean it up, and perhaps place a little furniture in it. He said he was in hope something of this kind might be done. He thought that the area would be very attractive when the temple is placed there if everything pertaining to the block were properly cared for. He raised the question as to whether the brethren thought we should set up another visitors center there other than in the tabernacle, and whether they had any suggestion to make regarding the Miles Goodyear cabin. He thought something should be done, whether by the Church itself or by the community as far as the cabin is concerned.

President Tanner suggested that Brother Petersen and his committee work with the people in Ogden and bring a firm recommendation. In answer to the question as to whether the community of the Church would wish to put the cabin into proper condition, President Brown said he thought it advisable that the Church look after this instead of the community, that we would not want to divide up our interests on that block.

Elder Petersen then raised a question in regard to the museum which is owned by the Daughters of the Pioneers. He said it was a worthwhile museum and thought that with the coming of the temple there we could have a real center for tourists on that block, and do the kind of work that is being done on the temple block here in Salt Lake City. Elder Evans commented that if an effort is going to be made to divest the Daughters of the Utah Pioneers of the Museum, now is the best time to do it, before the construction of the temple is commenced.

In answer to Elder Petersen’s question as to what it was thought desirable to do in regard to building a little bureau of information there, President Brown said that that would depend upon the overall picture, among other things whether we are going to keep the old tabernacle or destroy it. President Tanner suggested to Brother Petersen that he contact Emil Fetzer, architect in the Building Department, who would be very helpful in these matters.

Salt Lake Temple Annex Dedication

President Brown then announced that the Annex of the Salt Lake Temple will be dedicated Monday morning at 8 o’clock; that while the brethren are not requested to be present, they are invited to be there if they wish to do so. He said President McKay has given the instruction to proceed with the dedication.”

Mon., 23 Oct., 1967:

“Salt Lake Temple Annex

At my request, the Salt Lake Temple Annex was dedicated by President Hugh B. Brown. President Brown had handled all arrangements for the dedication while I have been in Huntsville. Temple workers, the Counselors in the First Presidency, some of the Assistants to the Twelve, and a few other invited guests were present. The services were held in the chapel of the Annex.

I learned later that none of the Brethren of the Twelve were present; they having been told by President Brown at Council meeting that if they wanted to come, they were invited.

I was very sorry that I was unable to be present, and not able to follow through with the arrangements of the services. I should have liked to have been there, having been present at the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple in 1893.

(See copy of Alvin Dyer’s minutes of dedication following. Elder Dyer attended, without invittion, so that he could report to President McKay.)”

“JOURNAL RECORD OF ALVIN R. DYER

SATURDAY October 21, 1967

Clare Middlemiss, President McKay’s secretary, called me regarding the dedication services for the Salt Lake Temple Annex, to be held Monday, October 23, 1967, at 8:00 A.M. She wondered if I had been invited. I replied that I had not and knew nothing about it. She encouraged me to attend and I replied that I agreed with her that I should be there so that I could report to the President.

SUNDAY, October 22, 1967

Salt Lake Temple Dedication

Early on this morning I called President McDonald of the Salt Lake Temple to inquire as to the particulars of the Temple Annex Dedication. He said that President Brown was in charge, being authorized by President McKay, and had asked him to conduct a proposed one hour service Monday morning at 8:00 A.M. I asked who was to be present, and who had notified the General Authorities. He said President Brown had asked him to see that the Auxiliary Heads were called, and that he (President Brown) would be responsible for the General Authorities. I then told President McDonald that I had not received an invitation, but that I would be there.

Later during the morning I called Robert McKay and asked that he call Huntsville to ascertain whether the President knew that the dedication had been set for Monday. He said that he would later and call me back, which he did. He said that his father was resting when he called and it was felt he should not be disturbed, but LouJean had said that President McKay had said something about coming to Salt Lake City tomorrow morning if he felt up to it; that evidently he knew of the Dedicatorial Service scheduled for Monday.

I attended Priesthood Meeting in my home Ward and enjoyed meeting again many of the brethren over whom I presided as bishop years ago.

I met briefly with Emil Fetzer, a member of the Bishopric of the Monument Park Twelfth Ward, concerning the progress of the preliminary sketches for the Independence, Missouri, Bureau of Information. We set a tentative date of October 26, to go to Independence to meet with the City officials concerning President McKay’s letter to them.

During the morning I also visited the Neighborhood House, located at 1050 West 5th South. This center is truly serving a great need in the community. Included in its service are classes for older people in the training of skills for worthwhile hobbies; lectures to parents on child care; caring for children or working mothers during the day–providing these children with class work for pre-school ages; immunization shots, no doubt sponsored by the Board of Health. The present building has many class rooms but they are not adequate to fill the need. I feel the Neighborhood House is worthy of the help the Church will give to help build a new wing. It is a United Fund sponsored operation.

I spent some time during the day reading the new revised “Conducting The Oral Evaluation” Manual, making wording and phrase change recommendations.

MONDAY, October 23, 1967

I attended the Salt Lake Temple Annex Dedication held in the Temple Chapel on this day. I met President Smith and Jessie in the Church parking lot and went with them to the Service. The three of us rode on the little small auto made available for the purpose.

The Service started at 9:05 A. M., with President McDonald conducting under the direction of President Hugh B. Brown. President N. Eldon Tanner was present, and also President Joseph Fielding Smith. These, and the Temple Presidency occupied the first bench on the stand. I sat on the second — the only other bench on the stand — with the following brethren: Sterling W. Sill, Henry D. Taylor, William J. Critchlow Jr., Theodore M. Burton, James A. Cullimore and Milton R. Hunter. There were none of the Quorum of the Twelve present excepting Joseph Fielding Smith, who was actually there as a member of The First Presidency. (Note: When President and Sister Smith and I were in the parking area before the service, President Smith had a typewritten copy of the Dedicatorial Service Program. As he looked at it I heard him say, “I’m all mixed up; sometimes I don’t know where I am at.”)

The Chapel was filled to capacity. Many temple workers were in attendance. I saw Marianne Clark Sharp of the Relief Society, Florence Jacobsen of the Y. W. M. I. A., and Carlos Smith of the Y. M. M. I. A. There may have been more present of the General Boards. The Presiding Bishopric were not present. It was reported that they were out of the city.

The Opening Prayer was offered by President Joseph Fielding Smith, and N. Eldon Tanner of The First Presidency was the first speaker. He was announced as the one in charge of all temples. He told of the increased facilities made available by the Annex — making it possible to take care of more ordinance and endowment work.

Surprisingly enough to me, President Brown turned — I sat right in back of him — and asked if I would say a few words after President Tanner.

This I did, referring to the early-day Saints in Missouri and Kirtland who suffered great tribulation particularly in Missouri, where Zion is to be established; that when they were persecuted and driven, the Prophet Joseph Smith prayed earnestly to God for the reason for their expulsion from Jackson County, the center place. The Lord answered the Prophet by saying, “Be still and know that I am God,” — that the redemption of Zion and the salvation of His people were in His hands.

At the hour of great tribulation, came the promise of the endowment and many blessings to the faithful.

I told of the anxiety of the Saints in the last days of Nauvoo to go to the temple there to receive their endowments — risking much, since they had been told first to leave by spring, but then at an earlier time in the winter. Thus amidst the turbulence of persecutions and drivings, they wanted to receive their endowments before departing from their homes — before facing what they knew would be hard and difficult and many of whom would face death in the forced exodus from Nauvoo. Of course that exodus led to the settlements in this valley here in the Rockies.

And now what do we see in the expansion of God’s work throughout the world? The building of many temples, and here today the Dedication of the Salt Lake Temple Annex to make possible greater temple work.

I expressed my gratitude in being present, and bore testimony that the work of Our Heavenly Father would continue to go forward to fulfill His Holy purposes.

President Hugh B. Brown gave the Dedicatory address and prayer. He said that President McKay could not be there in person but was there in spirit. Among other things he referred to the prayer of the Prophet Joseph Smith in Carthage Jail, and also the Prophet’s declarations while in Liberty Jail concerning the few who are chosen from the many called. He also read a number of verses from Doctrine and Covenants 109, which is the Dedicatory Prayer offered by the Prophet at the Kirtland Temple.

President Brown said he remembered when he was very young attending the Dedication of the Salt Lake Temple in 1893, and was now privileged to offer the Dedicatory Prayer of the Annex.

President McDonald of the Temple made a few remarks at the end. He regretted that President McKay could not be there and expressed the desire that he and all associated with temple work wanted to do the will of the President. He thanked all who contributed to the Service.

Jessie Evans Smith sang “Bless This House”, and Selvoy J. Boyer of the Temple Presidency offered the benediction.”

Thur., 2 Nov., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency in the office in the Hotel Utah apartment. Those present were: Presidents Brown and Tanner, and Elder Alvin R. Dyer. Some of the matters discussed were:

Temple Presidents – Proposal by Counselors to Release Some of Them

President Tanner said that in his opinion consideration should be given to releasing two or three of the Temple Presidents; that they have served a considerable period of time, and he thought it would be in the interest of better Temple administration if a change were made. He mentioned that in England, for instance, we have asked those appointed to serve as Temple Presidents to serve only two or three years; that in New Zealand Brother Jensen has served about four years. He wondered if I thought President Jensen’s service should be continued indefinitely. He then mentioned Brother Trauffer of the Swiss Temple who has served for several years. I remarked what a wonderful Temple President he is. President Tanner said he did not know if I wished a man of his age to continue or not. He then mentioned President McDonald of the Salt Lake Temple, concerning whom, according to President Tanner, there has been constant

criticism. President Raymond at the Logan Temple has served a long time. Mention was also made of the Los Angeles Temple. President Tanner also suggested that it might be considered advisable to reorganize the Presidency of the Alberta Temple. Concerning this overall proposal of President Tanner’s, I had nothing to say at this time.

“Thursday, November 16, 1967

3:00 p.m.

The following brethren met with President McKay in his apartment for the purpose of presenting to the President the new temple ordinance film and tapes: Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith; Elders Richard L. Evans, Gordon B. Hinckley, Alvin R. Dyer, Frank Wise, Judge Whitaker and Joseph Anderson. Sister McKay was also present.

Following the presentation of the picture Elder Evans stated that this is the first improvement that the committee had attempted to make since the President instructed them 12 years ago to prepare a film for the Swiss Temple, which film is now in use in several of the temples. He said that the nature of the construction of the Oakland Temple rooms prompted this improvement and that the film is a result of the further assignment given the committee to move forward and upgrade the film that is being used in New Zealand, Great Britain, Switzerland and Los Angeles. He said the committee would hope to continue its attempt to improve the film but it is proposed that this film which they had witnessed today be used until they are able to improve it further, replacing the one that was produced 12 years ago.

President Brown commented that there is very little change, that the words are the same but there are a few modifications and refinements, nothing that changes the meaning, the wording or the significance of the film. President Brown and President Tanner had reviewed it yesterday and were greatly impressed by it and thought it should be presented to the President for his consideration.

President McKay said that he approved it just as it is, and authorization was therefore given for the committee to go forward with the project. In answer to Elder Evans’ inquiry as to whether they might continue to improve it, not holding up its use but making improvements wherever it was thought advisable, this was authorized. Elder Hinckley commented that in the temple it would be shown to greater advantage because it would be presented on a large screen and the light and sound will be better than was the case today. President McKay commented that this is the best we have had. President Smith also said it was very well done.

Minutes by Joseph Anderson”

30 Nov., 1967:

After this we got onto a subject peculiar in nature, but I asked the President to listen me out and see if I was foolish in what I was suggesting. He said he would be glad to listen and I told him I had just returned from the Far East; this is about the only time I have left my desk for the two and half years I have been working for for President McKay and in my mind I tried to conceive a plan whereby we could bring Temple work to our people. I said cautiously to President McKay: “If you think I am out of bounds I want you to tell me, but I am proposing to you now, that The Church obtain or build a ship sufficient in size to run the oceans and we equip this ship as a temple ship; that we take the ship and outfit it as a temple, then take the ship into the ports and harbors where our people live. We could do this around the entire continent of South America, Europe, along the coast of China, Japan, Australia and even Africa if we wanted to. I was sure the cost would not amount to any more than what the cost of some of our temples has been. I suggested to the President that we do not have the money to build temples all over the world and it would be an impossibility because our funds are limited and if we followed this procedure we could get at least those who want their endowments done while they are still alive, we could move to the ports where we would dock this ship; otherwise it would be impossible for them to have their own endowments and we might carry it even further than their own endowments and move on to doing work for the dead, making this a continuous tour of where there are people needing the blessing of the temple and the holy endowment.

After I explained to the President my thinking he said to me: “That is not foolish thinking and I want you to pursue this thought and pursue the feasibility of it and make a report to me.” He seemed to be greatly intrigued with the idea, he seemed to grasp it very quickly and thought it would be a good idea, so I am going to pursue it a little further as fast as my time will allow.

[Report by Mark Garff]

Tues., 5 Dec., 1967:

“8:30 a. m.

Plans for Ogden and Provo Temples.

Held a meeting with the First Presidency — Presidents Brown, Tanner and Smith, and Elder Alvin R. Dyer being present. Also attending the meeting were Elders Mark B. Garff, Fred A. Baker, and Emil Fetzer of the Church Building Committee, who presented the schematic plans for the new Provo and Ogden Temples.

Brother Emil Fetzer, architect, was spokesman for the Building Committee, and he presented the floor plans and exterior of the Temples which we dicussed at some length.

Our meeting lasted until 9:45 a. m. I asked that the study for the plans of the Temples be continued and be re-submitted to the First Presidency. Brother Fetzer was commended for the excellent work he has done on the preliminary plans.

(See following copy of First Presidency’s minutes of this meeting; also minutes by Elder Alvin R. Dyer. )

Later in the morning, our son, Lawrence, drove Sister McKay and me to Huntsville. I had previously told Lawrence that I needed to get out of the apartment for a change of scenery and that I should like to drive up to Huntsville. We enjoyed the trip up there very much, and when I saw Sonny Boy I was tempted to try to ride him. It is always a glorious experience for me to visit dear old Huntsville — the air is so clear and refreshing that it renews one’s being!”

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Tuesday, December 5, 1967, at 8:30 A M., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Joseph Fielding Smith; also Elder Alvin R. Dyer. President Thorpe B. Isaacson absent on account of illness.

Ogden Temple

Elders Mark B. Garff, Fred Baker, and Emil Fetzer of the Building Committee met with the First Presidency and presented schematic plans which had been prepared for the new temple in Ogden, which is to be erected on the Tabernacle Square. Elder Garff stated in preparing these schematics, they had made a careful study of all the temples of the Church. He said what they are trying to do is to prepare a plan that would better facilitate the getting of the people through temple sessions, not to hurry them but to get the work done in the least amount of time. He said that Brother Baker, Brother Fetzer, and he had worked very meticulously and carefully on what they thought would be a way of moving the people in and out of the temple in the shortest length of time without rushing them through; and that they had come up with a plan that is somewhat different from those found in other temples. He said that the plan they have prepared will provide that the people will not have to wait more than fifteen minutes before going through with a session. Brother Garff said that in the new temples that they are designing they propose to move them through with seventy-five people in one group and another similar group

will follow every few minutes. The schematics of this proposed plan have been prepared by Brother Emil Fetzer.

Brother Fetzer then presented to the brethren the schematic drawings pertaining to the proposed Ogden Temple. He explained that the service area, which will be on the ground floor, consists of the general administrative offices for the temple, the laundry, kitchen area, and cafeteria. The entire back area is the locker room area for the patrons of the temple. The washing and anointing areas would be off from the locker rooms. There would be no ordinance work taking place on this floor, except the washings and anointings.

He explained that the temple would be erected south of the new tabernacle and just west of the old tabernacle; that the rear area on the west side of the lot will be for parking of automobiles. The main entrance to the temple is on the west side, just off the parking lot. The temple faces east.

Brother Fetzer then showed a drawing of the basement area. He explained that those who were going to be baptized for the dead would enter a side entrance and go down a stairway into the basement. It is planned to separate the baptismal work from the temple ordinance work. There will be locker rooms for the girls and women and locker rooms for the men and boys. The baptismal font would be in the center of the temple on the lower floor. He said the entire basement would be excavated for the time being and nothing would be done with it, that it would be available for additional locker rooms at some future time and that we would just build the walls and leave it in an unfinished condition.

The dome of the baptismal room would be two stories high, and there would be a balcony above the font.

There are two escalators and one elevator, which would take the people after they are dressed in their temple clothes to the ordinance rooms, which are in the upper part of the temple.

The floor above the base of the temple would be the sealing room floor, and there would also be a small assembly chapel, if it is considered desirable to have it. If it is not thought necessary to have the chapel, it could be made into more sealing rooms. According to the plan there are about twenty sealing rooms. Some of them are small and some larger. It was explained that the sealing rooms are designed with folding doors, so that the folding door could be opened between two rooms, and there would be a large sealing room for a large wedding group; otherwise the door would be closed between the rooms.

There are also rest rooms and escalators on the two sides.

It was explained that anyone going to the temple for the regular endowment service would go to the top floor of the temple on the escalators where the ordinance rooms and the celestial room would be. It is proposed that the names would not be given on the ground floor. The individual would wait until he came up to the top floor before he would be given the proxy names. The plan is to have six ordinance rooms, which would seat about seventy-five to eighty people each. The celestial room is in the center of them; that is there would be three small ordinance rooms on each side of the celestial room. In the ordinance rooms there would be film for the entire service. Instead of having all four rooms that we have in the Salt Lake Temple, there would be one room, and a new film is being prepared at the Brigham Young University to show in this one ordinance room. From the ordinance room, the patrons would go through the veil into the celestial room. There would be six projectors, six films, and the services would be going on at various times. It was explained that the idea is that as soon as one room is filled with seventy-five people, the service would be commenced and they would open the door to the next room. It would be timed so that each session would start in fifteen minutes after the other.

For those going through for their own endowments, the washing and anointing room and the main booth are located on the main floor. There would be an escalator going up and one going down on each side. The film, it was explained, will take about an hour and fifteen minutes and going through the veil takes about fifteen minutes. There would be three ordinance rooms on each side and two veils entering the celestial room. The entire session would be about two hours, and there would be no long waits of time for receiving the name or receiving the new name.

Elder Baker explained that the whole purpose is to help people get in and out of the temple without waiting or accumulating.

Brother Fetzer explained that this is a Danish super oval shape, that no one can get lost because there is no place to become confused. There would be two places just off the escalators to get names, one on one side and one on the other. In addition there is an elevator that goes to all floors of the building. He said the sealing rooms on the second floor would be for larger groups, and if we find at some later time that we want more ordinance rooms, it would be possible to arrange it. He explained that the Advance Planning Department representatives have been in five temples, studying flow of people and where the bottleneck problems are. They have compiled an entire list of comments by the presidents of the temples about the physical facilities, and all those things have been taken into consideration with this design.

In regard to the parking area, it was explained that this will be double the size that it is now, that it will serve conference parking as well as temple parking. There will be two entrances with a gate house on each side of the parking lot.

President Tanner inquired if they were consulting with other architects on this. Brother Fetzer said they had not done so as yet. President Tanner said he thought they should. He thought it important with a building like this to have consultation with others.

Brother Baker then showed the brethren the exterior design, which, as formerly stated, is a large Danish super oval shape with a spiral of metal leading up from the center of the top. The top of the building would be flat. It was stated that if the President wanted a statue on the top of the temple that might be arranged. It was explained, too, that the exterior can be modified, if that were thought necessary.

President Tanner said that the thing that appealed to him about our churches is that we should have buildings that will stand through time and that they should not indicate that one was built in a certain year and another at another time, that they should be so built that they would stand through the years, more classic than conventional.

Elder Garff said that they were trying to keep the design simple and the cost within reason. It was also explained that there would be a fence, perhaps ten feet high, around the entire property.

In regard to consulting other architects, Brother Garff stated that Brother Fetzer has spearheaded this and he thought that we should keep him in the forefront. He mentioned two architects in Ogden and one in Provo who might be consulted, Brother Barker in Provo and Brother Wilcox and one other architect in Ogden. Brother Tanner thought that while it should be spearheaded by Brother Fetzer and that he should carry it through, we should have the benefit of the thinking of these other architects.

Elder Garff explained that so far as the Provo Temple is concerned the site is very different from the Ogden site, but it is the intention to use the same design, adjusting it to the site. There would be some modifications necessary.

President Tanner asked President McKay if it would be offensive to him if they worked with these other three architects and then came back with a generally accepted plan. Brother Fetzer said that he did not think this particular oval would be any more expensive than a rectangular building. It would be built with structural steel and with cast stone facing. So far as the two temples are concerned, the one in Ogden and the one in Provo, Brother Fetzer said that they would want to vary the design so that the two would differ a little from each other.

Elder Fetzer said that one thing we would need to be careful about is that four architects would have four different ideas, that he would be agreeable to using the others as consultants. He said that if it was desired that they be merely consultants, that is to give advice, he was sure that he could work with them and do very well that way.

Elder Dyer felt that the matter of the movement of people in the interior of the temple needs further study; that, perhaps, arrangements should be made for the women to go down the escalator on one side and the men on the other, inasmuch as the women’s locker rooms would be on one side of the building and the men’s on the other.

President Brown suggested that this morning we give approval for the over-all intent as exemplified in the sketches and pictures and authorize Brother Fetzer to consult these other architects, with the understanding that Brother Fetzer would spearhead the entire thing and come forward with such refinements as the four of them may come up with and bring back to the First Presidency a drawing and their recommendations after their discussions.

President McKay said that he would like them to resubmit it. The Building Committee representatives were excused at this time.

“(First Presidency Meeting and Private Meeting with President McKay)

JOURNAL RECORD OF ALVIN R. DYER

TUESDAY. December 5, 1967

Ogden and Provo Temples

8:30 A. M. I attended a meeting of The First Presidency in the President’s apartment. He was present, looking and feeling well. Also attending the meeting were Mark B. Garff, Fred A. Baker, and Emil Fetzer of the Church Building Committee. The meeting was devoted to a presentation made by the Building Committee on the schematic plans for the proposed Provo and Ogden Temples.

These plans were presented principally by Brother Fetzer who is mainly responsible for the plans. Both proposed floor plans and exterior elevations were shown and discussed at considerable length.

Mainly the schematics propose the use of six small ordinance rooms, to accommodate between 75-80 persons, located on the third floor of the temple. These would serve the need of the World, Telestial and Terrestrial rooms in our present temples. All would surround a centered Celestial Room which would be entered through a veil that would accommodate each of the six rooms. Access would be exposed by the partition which would accommodate the moving picture screen being raised electronically. This operation for each ordinance room would be at segregated times, but all would pass through the veil exposed in the particular room — passing into the one Celestial Room.

All names for the various vicarious sessions would be given at a place on the third floor near the ordinance rooms.

The symbols of the temple will all be given in the one room, as pertaining to the world, telestial and terrestrial areas; this by colored motion picture projection on the screen in each separate ordinance room.

Sealing Rooms would be on both the second and third floors, providing about 18 in all.

The main floor, directly in from the street or parking areas, would house all the temple facility rooms.

The baptismal font would be in the basement with a domed ceiling extending two stories high thereby permitting a view of this work from tne first floor through a look-in glass wall.

The whole concept, as was explained, would speed up to about one hour and thirty minutes the entire temple ceremony — this being mainly accomplished by the six ordinance rooms and moving the temple goers in smaller companys thus eliminating to a great extent the delays in sessions getting underway.

The principle of architecture involved in the schematics is based upon what is referred to as the “Danish Oval”. This type of design seems most adaptable to the purpose intended.

The exterior elevations, showing two distinct appearances but both based upon the same concept, appeared quite modern and a little shocking.

The main points of the discussion, in addition to the workableness of the floor planning which seemed well thought out and planned, concerned the movement of the temple goers and the exterior elevations.

I expressed myself to the extent that the flow of the people needed more study so as to move them in clockwise fashion in and out of the temple, and that the oval roof should have some spiralling effect instead of being completely flat.

President Tanner suggested that several other architects be called in as associate consultants. This was agreed upon with Emil Fetzer to remain in complete charge. It was decided to approach an architect in Provo, and two in Ogden for this purpose.

President McKay asked that the study continue and that schematics be re-submitted to the Presidency. Brother Fetzer was complimented on a fine job done with the preliminary schematics. His charts, with floor plans and perspectives in elevation were expertly done.

The meeting came to a close at 9:45 A. M. President Brown requested that a meeting be held with President McKay Wednesday morning. The President said “What for?” “Because”, said President Brown, “there are a number of items we need to discuss with you that we could not get to this morning.” The President then said it would be all right.

At this point I mentioned to the President that which I am confident he already knew, that Emil Fetzer and I were going to Independence and Far West, Missouri, on the morrow, so I would not attend the meeting of The First Presidency on Wednesday morning. President Brown said the matters to be brought up were only routine anyway. President McKay said I was to go, and he knew of the purpose, and he would see me after my return.

Tues., 19 Dec., 1967:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting with Presidents Brown, Tanner and Smith, and Elder Dyer.

Baptisms for the Dead

President Tanner mentioned a letter that had been received from the Bishop of the Laramie Ward mentioning an excursion that young people in the ward were contemplating making to the Temple for the purpose of doing baptismal work for the dead. The Bishop says that one young girl will be baptized right away and they were wondering if she had to wait a year after baptism before she could go into the Temple to do baptisms for the dead.

I said that after one has been baptized, he need not wait any specific length of time, if worthy, before going to the Temple to do baptismal work.

Fri., 12 Jan., 1968:

“Temple Sealings – Women as Witnesses in

President Tanner mentioned that in the Temple book of instructions in London at least, and perhaps in the other Temples, the statement is made that women may be used as witnesses for Temple marriages. President Buckmiller of the London Temple is asking if women can be used as witnesses for seatings for the dead in the Temple, sealing of children to parents, etc. He said that Elder Hunter says that it is permitted for the living and the question is raised as to whether the same service may be performed by women for the dead.

I said that I could see no reason why the women could not so serve. President Tanner explained that in England it is very difficult to get enough men to the Temple to take care of this work for the deceased.

Temple Sealings – Negro Children to White Couples

President Tanner mentioned that sometime ago a ruling was made that where a couple had adopted Negro children, those children could be sealed to the adopting couple; that now a question comes to the following effect: A man married a Negro woman by whom he had a child. This woman died, and he married a white woman. He is now asking if his child or children by the former marriage with the colored worran may be sealed to him and his present wife, who is a white woman, after they have been properly adopted. President Tanner asked if the former ruling regarding sealing adopted children to white parents would include this situation. I said there was no reason why it shouldn’t.”

Tues., 16 Jan., 1968:

“8:30 a. m.

Held a meeting with Presidents Tanner, Smith and Elder Dyer. President Brown has left for Palm Springs, California for a rest. President Smith is just back from a siege of the “flu”, and he seems to be better.

I felt well, but had difficulty with my hearing until I called the nurse to put a new battery in my hearing aid, after which I could hear perfectly and was able to participate in the discussions.

Temple Sealings – Retarded Person to be Sealed to Parents by Proxy

Consideration was given to a letter from Herbert A. Hancock, President of the Jacksonville, Arkansas Branch, regarding a question raised by Robert Wayne McElderry and his wife, Elizabeth McElderry. This couple wish to have their family sealed to them in the Temple. The eldest daughter, Kathleen, who is eighteen years of age, suffered a severe illness when she was two and one-half years of age, as a result of which her mental development was stopped at that point. She is in the hospital and her parents say that it would be practically impossible to move her any distance.

The question raised is whether or not this girl may be sealed to her parents by proxy. It was decided to answer President Hancock that under the circumstances this sealing may be done vicariously.

Tues., 23 Jan., 1968:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting with my counselors, Presidents Tanner and Smith, and Elder Alvin Dyer. President Brown was absent because of illness, and President Isaacson is still confined to his home with a stroke .

High Councilors – Calling to be an Ordinance Worker in the Saint George Temple

President Tanner referred to a letter from the Saint George Temple Presidency requesting that permission be given for a Stake High Councilman to be called as a Temple Ordinance Worker, and serve in both positions. President Tanner said he could see no reason why this should not be done, even though Elder Harold B. Lee had opposed it, since he (President Tanner) felt that High Councilmen usually did not have enough work to keep them busy.

In commenting upon this to me, Elder Dyer stated that in the present Correlation Program that High Councilmen, functioning as they should, would not possibly have time to spend two or three evenings a week as a Temple Ordinance worker; that if this High Councilman was called to this work, it would contradict other instructions of responsibility given to him.

I said that I feel, and it was agreed by those present, that a High Councilman should not be called to be a Temple Ordinance Worker.

Temples, Miscellaneous – Ordinance Work Discussed

Elder Howard W. Hunter then came into the meeting and presented a number of conditions involving Temple ordinance work, on which I gave instruction and approval as to the correct procedure to follow.

(See minutes of the First Presidency’s meeting of this day for details discussed.)

Wed., 24 Jan., 1968:

“9:45 a. m.

Met with my Counselors, Presidents Hugh B. Brown, Nathan Eldon Tanner, and Joseph Fielding Smith, also Elder Alvin R. Dyer, who meets in all meetings of the First Presidency when held with me at the office in the Hotel Utah apartment.

Temples, Miscellaneous – Changes in Temple Ceremony Wording

President Tanner mentioned consideration that was given yesterday to some small changes in the wording in Temple ceremonies which had been approved by me some years ago, concerning which there is nothing in writing. He felt that these changes should be placed on record and that they might be made a part of the Book of Rules of the Temple.

(The details of our discussion at this time are contained in the minutes of the meeting of this date.)”

Fri., 26 Jan., 1968:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith. Also Alvin Dyer was present. Some of the matters we discussed were:

Temples, Miscellaneous – Marriage in Temple Following Civil Marriage President Tanner mentioned the desire of a young couple to be married in the Temple who had been married by civil ceremony seven months ago. He said that the inquiry was made as to why they were not married in the Temple in the first place, and the answer was that they were not worthy of a Temple Recommend at that time, that they had to get married. President Tanner raised the question as to whether we should not satisfy ourselves in all these cases where people want to get married in the Temple before a year has elapsed following the civil marriage.

We felt that such letters should be answered to the effect that permission is granted provided they were worthy to go to the Temple at the time of their civil marriage.”

Tues., 30 Jan., 1968:

“11:00 a.m.

Held a meeting with Presidents Brown and Smith and Elder Alvin R. Dyer. President Tanner is enroute to New Zealand, and President Isaacson is absent on account of illness. Some of the matters we discussed were:

Temples – Sealing of Children to Mother and Step-father Where Natural Father is Deceased

Mention was made of an inquiry by President Carl Pettersson of the Oquirrh Stake regarding the desire of a sister in his Stake whose husband has passed away, to go to the Temple to be sealed to another man and have her minor children by the former marriage sealed to them. The father of the children was a member of the Church. Attention was called to a statement in the First Presidency’s letter of June 8, 1966, to the effect that “minor children may be sealed to a natural parent and a step-parent without the requirement of adoption in cases where the other natural parent is deceased.” We felt that the mother’s desire in the matter should be granted.

The Brethren left the apartment at 11:45 a.m., and I was tired after our long discussions.”

Tues., 26 Mar., 1968:

“8:30 a.m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown, Tanner and Smith, also Elder Alvin R. Dyer were present. Among matters discussed were the following:

Salt Lake Temple – Criticisms Regarding Temple President

Elder Dyer reported that several reputable men associated with the work in the Salt Lake Temple had come to him on separate occasions complaining regarding President McDonald, his attitude, and some of the statements that he is making regarding the garments and other matters.

President Tanner said that we have heard many criticisms about President McDonald in the past. I stated that we should now extend him a release, and inquired if they had anyone in mind to succeed him. President Tanner will follow the matter up. He thought the matter should be taken to the Council of the Twelve for their consideration, and brougt to the First Presidency again.”

Wed., 1 May, 1968:

“9 to 10 a.m. Held a meeting with the First Presidency: N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer. President Brown is in the hospital, and President Isaacson is still absent on account of a stroke .

The following are some of the most important items considered:

Temples – Miscellaneous — Wearing of Temple Garments

Attention was called to a letter that had been prepared addressed to Elder Marion D. Hanks in answer to a letter from him on the subject of wearing temple garments by couples during intimate relations. Brother Hanks had received a letter, a copy of which he enclosed eliminating the name of the writer. In the letter it was mentioned that in the temple many of the sisters have been told by the temple president’s wife preceding their marriage that they should not remove their garments during their marital relations, and the husband has been given the same advice. An answer had been prepared to Elder Hanks stating “We have given no instruction or advice of the kind mentioned. We feel that this is such an intimate matter that it must be left to the decision of the persons concerned.” I approved the answer given as did the other brethren.

We decided to send a letter to the presidents of temples, setting forth the position the First Presidency has taken on this subject, and explaining that the weaning of garments under the named circumstances is an individual matter and is not to be arbitrated by temple instruction so as to cast a shadow over the validity of covenant birth. (See copy of letter following)

“May 16, 1968

PRESIDENTS OF TEMPLES

Personal and Confidential

Dear Brethren:

It has come to our attention that in some of the temples instruction has been given to those going through to receive their endowments prior to entering into the marriage covenant that they must not remove the temple garment during the time of sexual relations.

We have authorized no such instruction or advice. We feel that this is a matter of such intimate nature that it must be left with the persons concerned. We therefore ask that you govern yourselves accordingly.

Sincerely yours,

David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

The First Presidency”

Wed., 8 May, 1968:

“Held a meeting of the First Presidency in the office of my apartment in the Hotel Utah. Presidents Tanner, Smith and Dyer were present. President Brown still resting in California.

Some of the Matters discussed were:

Marriages — Civil

President Tanner called attention to a letter from Bishop Francis V. Henrie of the Marysvale Ward, South Sevier Stake, reporting that two young women had asked for permission for their uncle, an ex-bishop, to perform the marriage ceremonies for them. Bishop Henrie says that he has tried to persuade them against this but they insist that their uncle, Walter Kennedy, perform these marriages. He says that he cannot wholly recommend Brother Kennedy as worthy to perform this ceremony because he is a non-tithe payer. He further states that it would save him a lot of trouble in the future if the First Presidency would “take a stand in this matter in either case”. President Tanner reminded the brethren that permission is given for former bishops to perform marriages by the First Presidency where the parties are properly recommended by the acting bishop; that in this case the only question seems to be that the brother whom the young women wish to perform the ceremony is not a tithe payer.

I said that this uncle and former Bishop should be granted the permission requested.

Wed., 5 Jun., 1968:

“9:00 a. m.

Met with Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer. President Isaacson still confined to his home from a stroke. Among items taken up were:

Lion House — Discussion in Council Meeting Re: Holding of Civil Marriage Ceremonies

President Brown reported that at a recent meeting of the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve the question was raised as to whether we should permit the holding of civil marriages in the Lion House when it is completed. President Brown said that there was a division of opinion among the brethren as to whether or not this should be done; one or two of the brethren indicating that some of the young people might think it would be almost as good as a temple marriage because it was in a Church building.

After discussing both phases of the situation, I agreed that the permission should be granted. President Dyer raised some question about this matter.

Tues., 11 Jun., 1968:

“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency today.

MEXICO — Temple for Spanish-speaking Peoples

1. I read the letter to him received from Marion G. Romney concerning a request that consideration be given for the erection of a Temple at Laredo.

MARRIAGE — In the Temple Before One Year’s Membership in the Church

I read to President McKay a letter received from Randall Kenyon, a returned missionary from Great Britain who had converted a woman and her daughter in England and the daughter was now in America and has been a member of the Church for nearly 9 months. Elder Kenyon stated that he and this girl were in love and wanted to be married but, because of the rule of being a member of the Church for one year it would be necessary for them to wait until September and this would mean that she would just have to sit around, as she could not work unless she was a citizen of the Country which would be applied as soon as they were married. He was asking if the one-year policy could be waived in lieu of the circumstances. I mentioned to President McKay that a letter had been received from his former Mission President and also his Bishop stating the sterling character of the young man and that nothing unusual had happened in the mission field, that he had maintained perfect decorum. I expressed my feelings to the President concerning this couple. The President said that they should not have to wait; that permission should be granted to them to be married this month as they desired.”

Tues., 18 Jun., 1968:

“Held a meeting with my Counselors this morning at 8:45. Present were Presidents Tanner, Smith and Dyer. President Brown is at home indisposed, and President Isaacson still is confined to his home because of a stroke.

The following matters were given attention this morning:

Temples – New Temples for Puget Sound Areas Mexican Border And Washington Area

A letter was read from the presidents of stakes in the Puget Sound area recommending that a temple be erected in the Northwest. They estimate that 87,000 Latter-day Saints presently reside in the area, not including the Alaskan-Canadian Mission. These stake presidents pledge the financial and spiritual support of the members of their stakes for such a project. In this connection President Dyer mentioned a letter addressed to me from Elder Marion G. Romney, which I had asked him to bring up, regarding the need for a temple near the Mexican border to accommodate Saints in Mexico, Central America, and the southern part of the United States. It was also mentioned that the people in the eastern part of the United States are appealing for a temple. President Tanner thought that we should build temples less elaborate in the future in these various places, perhaps for such an amount as about one million dollars instead of two or three million, and that if we were to do this we could build three temples for the amount we are spending to build one in Provo. He mentioned that we now have a year’s backlog of names of people for which the temple work can be done, and said it was his feeling that in the next few years we are going to have the greatest opposition that we have ever had and that we are going to have the finest support we have ever had.

It was decided to give consideration to the matter of building new temples at a later meeting.

(See copy of Elder Romney’s Letter following)”

“May 15, 1968

President David 0. McKay

Building

Dear President McKay:

In the Temple meeting of October 20, 1966, you suggested that I might write you concerning the building of a temple on the United States side of the international border in the Rio Grande Valley. Justifications for such a temple are stated in a letter addressed by President Eugene F. Olsen of the West Mexican Mission to President A. Theodore Tuttle, dated January 24, 1968. In his letter he said:

“We were wondering if consideration has been given to the building of a temple at Laredo, Texas. If not, we would like to suggest that this be considered. As you will note by the enclosed map, this would be much closer than the temple at Mesa, Arizona, for the south half of our mission (the States of Nayarit, Sinaloa, and Baja California Territorio Sur – the only available transportation from Baja California Territorio Sur to the mainland is by ferry from LaPaz to Mazatlan). The northern half of our mission (the States of Sonora and Baja California) could continue to use the temple at Mesa, Arizona, or better still our Saints in Baja California could use the temple at Los Angeles.

“Not only would the south half of our mission be much closer to Laredo, but Laredo would also be much closer than Mesa to all of the southern and eastern part of the Republic of Mexico, as well as Guatemala and Central America. The temple could also serve, of course, the whole southern portion of the United States who would be much closer to Laredo, Texas, than to Mesa, Arizona.

“Another advantage to our people would be that an ordinary Border Crossing Card would suffice for then to go to the temple at Laredo, whereas they must now obtain special visas or permits from the U. S. Consulate as the Border Crossing cards permit only visits not to exceed 72 hours in duration and travel into the United States not to exceed 50 miles from the border.

“We have discussed this with the presidency of our mission and we would like to sincerely recommend that the possible feasability of such a thing be given consideration.”

At the present time we have in the stakes and missions of Mexico and Central America, 80,277 members. In addition to these poor and humble Church members, the saints, (Spanish speaking and Anglos) living in the border states from Texas to Florida, would be closer to a temple in the lower Rio Grande Valley than they are to any temple we now have. The membership of the Church in Mexico and Central America is growing very rapidly. Ten years ago, when you first sent me to Mexico to study the school situation there, we had in these two countries only 14,557 members.

It would seem to me that in the not too distant future it would be wise to give consideration to establishing a small functional temple, more convenient than any we now have to these poor and humble people.

Faithfully and sincerely yours,

Marion G. Romney”

Thur., 27 Jun., 1968:

“At 9 o’clock this morning, feeling much better than I have for some little while, I called a meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith and Dyer were present.

Among the items we discussed were:

Temples. Misc. — Temple Work for General Douglas MacArthur

A letter was read from George W. Crawford of Fairchild AFB, Washington, asking for permission to do temple work for General Douglas MacArthur, who is dead. It was decided to answer this brother that it would be contrary to our policy to grant this permission. Such vicarious baptisms are usually performed as a result of genealogical research accomplished by descendants of the individual to be baptized.

Mon., 8 Jul., 1968:

“9:00 a. m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency in the office in the apartment at the Hotel Utah.

Among the general matters discussed were:

Temples, Misc. — Proxy Sealings for Mental Cases:

A letter was read from Ralph Camery of South Houston, Texas, reporting that he and his wife will be coming to the Temple around August 1 to receive their endowments and to be sealed, and to have their children sealed to them; that, however, one of the sons has a mental condition and will not be able to come. He asks for permission to have the child sealed by proxy. Brother Camery enclosed a letter from the doctor at the state hospital where the boy is confined stating that his mental retardation is severe, and that to join the family in a prolonged ceremony might provoke him into abnormal behavior.

It was agreed to grant the request to have this boy sealed to his parents by proxy.

Tues., 13 Aug., 1968:

“9:00 to 10:30 a. m.

Held a meeting with Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith, and Dyer, together with Mark B. Garff, Fred Baker and Emil Fetzer of the Church Building Committee, in the Hotel Apartment.

Building Committee – Discussion of Preliminary Plans for the

Ogden and Provo Temples

By appointment we met with the aforementioned members of the Building Committee. We viewed the final preliminary plans for the Ogden and Provo Temples. All were pleased with the plans that have now been made.

Brother Dyer raised the question that according to his understanding all Temples of this dispensation were to face east. President Joseph Fielding Smith concurred and the matter was discussed. It was pointed out that as a matter of location and convenience this was not possible on either the Ogden or the Provo Temples so far as the entrance doors were concerned and their relationship of entrance to parking facilities. It was concluded nevertheless that markings such as “Holiness to the Lord” and the name of the Temple would

be placed on the east side of the Temple. This then would become the main facade of the Temple and it would truly face east as indicated by the markers.

Wed., 28 Aug., 1968:

“9:00 a.m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Present were Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith and Dyer.

Some of the matters discussed were:

Temples – Ordinances for the Dead – Proxy Confirmations

President Tanner mentioned a report that had been received that in the Logan Temple the one baptizing proxies for the dead is permitted to perform the baptism ordinance for five or more deceased persons in succession without the confirmation ordinance being performed immediately after each baptism, which has been the customary practice. The Idaho Falls Temple presidency are now asking for permission to follow this same practice. In discussing the matter the brethren were agreed that they could see no need for performing the confirmation ordinance immediately after the baptism in each case. It was mentioned that so far as the living are concerned, the baptismal ordinances are performed sometimes several days before the confirmation in the ward fast meeting. If the policy now being used in the Logan Temple were adopted, it would mean that the one doing the baptizing would perform this ordinance with one proxy for several in succession, and after the proxy has dressed he would be confirmed for the several for whom he had been baptized. President Brown moved that approval be given for the adoption of this policy in the various temples. President Smith seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.

Fri., 11 Oct., 1968:

“9:00 a. m.

Meeting of the First Presidency with Elders Mark B. Garff, Emil Fetzer and Fred Baker of the Building Committee present. The matter discussed concerned a unique temple facility for persons in foreign lands and in distant areas of the United States who do not have access to the present Temples.

(For details see Minutes of the First Presidency and Minutes of

President Alvin R. Dyer which follow.)

“(Minutes of Meeting with the First Presidency held in President McKay’s Apartment)

TEMPLES – Temple facilities for those unaccessible to present Temples

A Floating Temple

Mark B. Garff, Emil Fetzer and Fred Baker of the Building Committee met with the First Presidency and presented to them a proposition pertaining to taking a temple to members of the Church in foreign lands and also to distant areas in the United States who cannot afford to make the trip to one of the temples. Brother Garff mentioned that over a year and a half ago President McKay had given the Building Department the assignment to look over the temples and to come back with a recommendation as to what our program should be in the matter of providing new temples and how we could accommodate our people who wish to go to the temples. Brother Garff mentioned that upon permission of the brethren he had made a trip into the Far East and the islands of the sea, that he made a trip from Alaska to Hong Kong, from Hong Kong to the Philippine Islands, and from the Philippines to New Zealand and Australia, and that he saw a great number of our people who would never have the blessing of the temple. He said there was great wonderment in his mind as to how we could take care of these people because he knew it should be impossible to build temples in all of these areas, and from an economic standpoint it would be infeasible. Brother Garff said that at the request of President McKay he had made a study of this situation and had reported back to the President, and that now he would like to show the brethren the results of his study and also his recommendation. He mentioned that in the Church 52.7% of the members in the United States are within a reasonable distance from the temple, that 1,370,000 can go to the temples; that there are other members within reasonable distances outside of the United States but that is only 7.2%. There are 30%, or 785,000 people who do not have access to a temple. These people are scattered anywhere from Alaska, on the east coast, in the islands of the sea, Australia, Korea, and areas where the people haven’t the money to go to the temple because they are so far away.

Elder Garff said that he felt that what we should do is bring the temple to the additional membership of the Church. He said it was the committee’s proposal that he buy a ship and outfit the ship and make it a temple ship and that we take this ship to the ports of the earth where our people are. He said that with a ship we could outfit a temple and take that temple to 30%. Included in the 30% should be people in the United States who are not accessible to the temple and those throughout the world. He said that this could be done for between a million and a half and two million dollars, that a ship could be purchased and remodeled and that we could get the crew and could sail the seas at about a half a million dollars a year. This would mean that there are 50,000 Melchizedek Priesthood members in the Church that we would reach by bringing the ship to them in these ports, and in addition, their wives and children. He said there are plenty of people in the Church who would be willing and who are able to serve as captain and crew members. In this manner he said that we could take a ship to the people of the earth for less money than it costs us to build a temple anywhere in the United States or elsewhere. He thought that they could get this thing underway within a year and could buy the ship and rig it up for our purposes.

Brother Baker said that the thing that had led them to consider such a proposal was that as they looked activity-wise at our existing temples today they found that the temples outside of the United States are being utilized mostly for living endowments rather than vicarious work for the dead. He said he did not think that they had ever been in a country considering building matters that a mission president, stake president or someone else hadn’t said that they had picked out a beautiful site which they thought would be wonderful for a temple.

Referring to the United States he said our temples are located in the western area which takes care of the bulk of our people, but in visualizing what a ship might do it is startling to realize that in a short time making a very small circuit a ship could cover all the areas of the United States stopping at vital points along the seaboard. He said the idea should be that the ship would be scheduled in these ports for a certain length of time and that the stakes and missions would be scheduled for certain sessions so that provision could be made for living endowments to be given to worthy members in these accessible areas as well as work for the dead. He said that such a ship could travel up the Mississippi and the Missouri rivers and that the entire inland part of the United States could be covered. In this way he said that it would be possible to do away with the pressure that is being brought in the various areas away from the Church until such areas had sufficient membership to sustain a temple of their own. He said that in areas where there was unrest we could stay assay from such places until the unrest subsided. He expressed the view that once every year or every eighteen or nineteen months we could touch all of these particular areas with the vessel.

In answer to a question as to whether the ship would fly the American flag it was stated that it would not be the intention to do this, that if it were to sail under an American flag it would cost three to four times the amount involved than if it flew under a foreign flag. They thought there would be no problem at all in getting temple workers who would take care of the ordinance and temple ceremonies on board ship, nor in getting members for the crew. He mentioned that we have many seamen and navy men who like the sea and would be delighted to serve on a ship of this kind. The brethren stated that they had such a ship in mind which is a thousand ton ship and that they had made investigation to see if it was possible to put a temple facility in this particular vessel, that it has four decks and Brother Fetzer explained to the brethren how the ship could be remodeled in such a way as to provide the necessary rooms and facilities for temple work, which would be separate and apart from the space that would be occupied by the crew and would provide necessary staterooms for passengers, waiting rooms, initiatory ordinance roo;ns, etc. It was stated that the complete ordinance could be presented on either tape or film, and this would be like our ordinance rooms in our new temples. In addition there would be sealing rooms provided and it was thought that it would be possible to accommodate three companies a day on the ship.

Elder Dyer mentioned a matter that he said bothered him somewhat and that was in the very early days of the Church the Prophet Joseph had said that the waters would be cursed, that he did not know exactly what that might mean but that we should not be insensible to that. He also mentioned the fact that when the saints came to Utah they had to wait forty years before a temple was completed and he did not think it was so urgent that people who live in distant places could not wait a little for a temple. Elder Dyer said he thought this was a wonderful study that had been made and he realized that it might present an answer to an existing problem.

President Tanner said it was his understanding that the brethren of the Building Committee had merely presented a program for the consideration of the First Presidency, that they were not saying this should be built or any other temple should be built, that they had made a careful survey in accordance with the President’s request and are merely reporting the results of their survey and study.

Elder Garff said that if the brethren would like them to do so they could pursue this matter further and bring actual costs and loot for a desirable ship. The brethren said that they should not do this at the present time. The brethren were agreed that the matter was deserving of careful consideration.

Minutes by Joseph Anderson”

“(From Minutes of President Alvin R. Dyer)

(Meeting of the First Presidency with President McKay)

At 9:30 a m. a meeting was held with President McKay in his apartment which was attended by President Tanner, President Smith, myself, Brother Joseph Anderson, and the three members of the Church Building Committee.

(Temple on an Ocean-going Vessel)

For nearly one hour the brethren from the Building Committee made a presentation suggesting the purchase of an ocean-going vessel, which vessel was to be equipped for Temple Ordinance work and then sail to the various points strategically located throughout the earth where Latter-day Saints, principally in remote places, would have access to the Temple Endowment. It was reported that this project would cost approximately two million dollars and could be maintained throughout the year at a cost of about $500,000 per year, that crews could be recruited by simply calling various members of the Church to a 12 or 18-month mission, and that the members of the crew on the boat would not be the same as those that would be called to officiate in the Temple Ordinances for people throughout the earth.

(Comment)

It is obvious that this would satisfy a need for the far away, remote places where members of the Church would not have access to the Temple Endowment, but in order for it to be successful it would have to also touch the heavier populated areas in America as well as in South America. Otherwise it would be unfeasible as to cost. The proposition thus submitted is without question worthy of consideration and this is precisely the status that it was left in. There were no decisions made. However, a great many comments were made which consisted of the following:

1. President Smith raised the question that Temples were to be constructed according to revelation in Stakes of Zion.

2. I raised the question as to the cursing that has been placed upon the waters in the last days, as to whether it would be proper in the light of that statement by the Prophet to construct a Temple to sail on the waters.

3. I also raised the question as to the worthiness of the members in far away places or as to whether their association in the Church was sufficiently experienced to have the Temple work performed for them at this time. The Building Committee stated that there were 50,000 men who held the Melchizedek Priesthood in these far away places who would have access to the Temple. I pointed out that even here in Zion only 40% of them were worthy of going to the Temple and it would be probably much less in these far away places. Then if they were not permitted to go with the ship being anchored in a nearby harbor, that it would offend them.

4. The question also arose as to why we should be so pressing and introducing such urgency methods to get the Temple work done for people in remote places since most of the Temple work will be accomplished in the Millennium and no one will suffer who is worthy to receive the endowment and that we sometimes were pressing these matters. I pointed out the fact that my own parents waited 25 years before they could go to the Logan Temple and even though they had the Endowment House before they constructed the Salt Lake Temple, there was no vicarious work done for many, many years after the Saints arrived here.

5. I also pointed out the fact that there were areas in the United States and in South America where Temples should be erected on a permanent basis since they would remain during the Millennium as Temples are to be constructed in North and South America which the Lord has designated as Zion, for the work to be accomplished, not only prior to, but during the Millennium.

6. Finally, while this project appears to have great merit on first thought, the more it is thought about the more problems would seem to arise. However, the matter was left for further consideration by President McKay and the First Presidency.”

Tues., 15 Oct., 1968:

“9:00 a.m.

A meeting of the First Presidency was held in the Hotel Apartment. President Hugh B. Brown was absent because of illness.

The following were almong the matters discussed:

TEMPLES – Endowments for Women Separated from their Husbands

It was reported that requests have been received for permission to issue temple recommends to women to go to the temple to receive their endowments who are not divorced but have been separated from their husbands for some years and have not heard from them during that period of separation, nor do they know where they are. President Tanner said it was his feeling that where the law of the state where the parties reside says that a man who has deserted his wife and has not been heard of for a designated number of years is considered dead, that the woman in such a case should be given a recommend to the temple to receive her endowments.

I concurred that under conditions of this kind the woman should be granted permission to go to the Temple to receive her endowments if she is otherwise worthy.

TEMPLES – Baptismal Procedure

Reference was made to the consideration given by the Presidency in a previous meeting of a recommendation by President Stone of the Salt Lake Temple and ElRay L. Christiansen that we permit two people to be in the baptismal font at the same time in the temple and establish a policy whereby baptisms would be alternated one after the other by the two officiators; the purpose being to speed up the baptisms.

I said I felt that would be all right.”

Mon., 21 Oct., 1968:

“8:45 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the hotel apartment. President Brown absent due to illness.

Temples – Ordinance Work for Non-Members

A letter was read from Theodore M. Burton, Vice-President of the Genealogical Society, concerning a specific request of a nonmember of the Church for future temple ordinance work to be done. Brother Burton stated that they have many such inquiries come to them and he ask for direction as to how to answer future inquiries. He suggested the following policies:

(1) That it is not the policy of the Church to hold for future temple ordinance work the names of living non-members or living relatives thereof. In the case of wives who are prevented by their husbands from joining the Church, their names can be placed in the 110-year file. Thus if they die before their husbands, the work can be done for them automatically.

(2) That it is not the policy of the Church to process names for temple ordinance work for deceased relatives at the request of those who are not members of the Church. This work should await normal processing under the GIANT System, either through systematic processing or by later work done by relatives who join the Church.

I with the brethren felt to approve these suggestions and recommendations.

11:00 a. m.

Elder Howard W. Hunter came over by appointment to take up the following two matters:

1. Permission to have a second sealing without cancellation of the first in the case of Catherine Cutler Poulter and Samuel Ship Musser.

I made an exception in this case and authorized the second sealing.

2. Permission to use a talk I had given in the Salt Lake Temple Annex on September 25, 1941, for a new book “About Marriage and More” by Dr. W. Dean Belnap and Dr. Glen C. Griffin.

I advised Brother Hunter that the portions of the talk to do with covenants would have to be deleted and told him to work with my secretary Clare and for her to report further to me.”

Thur., 24 Oct., 1968:

“8:40 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the hotel apartment. Present were: Presidents N. Eldon Tanner and Alvin R. Dyer. President Hugh B. Brown indisposed and President Joseph Fielding Smith meeting with the Twelve.

The following matters were taken up:

Temples – Proposed Temple Facility

It was mentioned that Brother Fred Baker of the Building Committee had called and inquired if any further consideration had been given to the proposed floating temple. He stated that they have a report to the effect that a vessel is currently available in Europe at an extremely advantageous price which they would like to consider if there is a possibility that the brethren would approve such a project.

I said that as far as I was concerned we are not considering this

proposition; that therefore they should not consider taking this vessel.”

Tues., 5 Nov., 1968:

“8:45 a.m. Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Those present were: Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

Some of the items discussed were:

Salt Lake Temple – Sealing Power Conferred

President Joseph Fielding Smith reported by letter from the Temple Presidency that according to my authorization he had conferred the sealing power, to be exercised in the Salt Lake Temple, upon a number of brethren.”

Wed., 6 Nov., 1968:

“8:30 a. m.

Held a meeting with my counselors — Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

Washington, D. C. – Discussion of Temple For This District

We met by appointment with the following brethren from Washington, D.C. to discuss the proposal to erect a temple on a site of land that the Church purchased sometime ago on the outskirts of Washington D. C., 1968: President Milan D. Smith of the Washington Stake; President Julian Lowe of the Potomac Stake; Robert Barker, Regional Representative; Williard Marriott; Edgar B. Brossard; Wilford M. Burton, Regional Representative.

(See following copy of First Presidency Minutes for the discussion held regarding this matter. )”

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Wednesday, November 6, 1968, at 8:45 A.M., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David 0. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer. President Thorpe B. Isaacson absent on account of illness.

Temple in Washington, D. C.

The following brethren met with the First Presidency and discussed with them the proposed erection of a temple on a site that has been purchased on the outskirts of Washington, D. C. where it is hoped the Church will erect a temple: President Milan D. Smith of the Washington Stake; President Julian Lowe of the Potomac Stake; Robert Barker, Regional Representative; Willard Marriott; Edgar B. Brossard; Wilford M. Burton, Regional Representative. President Brown introduced the matter by mentioning that some time ago President Smith and his counselors had appealed for the privilege of purchasing a site in Washington that might be used for a temple site, which purchase was authorized. This property, upon which we have been paying taxes, has been held for some years. President Milan Srnith, he said, had submitted to the First Presidency a statement and proposition of what they could do and what they feel they should do, including the number of people that would be in the proposed temple district. President Smith presented to the Presidency and others present charts and maps pertaining to the territory east of the Mississippi River, and particularly along the eastern Atlantic seaboard. It was explained that the site consists of 57.4 acres near Rock Creek Park, and that the new belt way or circumferential highway which goes around Washington D. C. passes the property. It was also explained that this property is on somewhat of an elevation and is the most beautiful and most desirable vacant property in the Washington area. It was reported that hundreds of thousands of automobiles use this highway every day. The property is in the state of Maryland. President Smith indicated that such a temple would serve nearly a quarter of a million members. One of the maps presented gave a breakdown of the stakes and the membership thereof, as also the missions in the area, that the temple would serve. He stated that density of population in the Washington area is the greatest we have on the eastern seaboard and that there are approximately 12,000 members in metropolitan Washington.

Brother Barker stated that there is a very large population that can be reached by car within a day, that in the Philadelphia, North Carolina and Virginia areas about 41,000 members could drive to the temple and back in a day. He also stated that they have every reason to believe that the stake presidents and mission presidents in this area would fully support such a project. President Srnith indicated that the greatest advantage to our people is the possibility of greater temple work. Mention was made of the expense involved when people come to Salt Lake to visit the temple bringing with them their parents, which expense a great proportion of the people are not prepared to pay. It was also mentionecl that Washington D. C. is unique in the matter of genealogical records, that they have the national archives, libraries and museums which could all be used as a means of assisting in this great work. Wilford M. Burton mentioned that when he was presiding over the Eastern Atlantic States Mission a rather extensive review was made of this situation at one of the mission presidents’ seminars at which it was resolved that the stake presidents of the areas and mission presidents of the Atlantic seaboard would indicate by letter their support of such a proposition. It was also mentioned that a visitors center could be erected on this site to which millions of people would come every year. It was stated that there is no city in America that has the enormous number of visitors that they have in the nation’s capitol, fifteen million or more a year. The brethren pointed out on the maps that [there] were present the various super highways and area arteries over which people could come to that area without hindrance from rather long distances. It was also mentioned that the airports are not far removed from this area, and any one of them could be reached within perhaps forty-five minutes.

Reference was made to the location of the site and the housing developments within the various price ranges, and that there would be accommodations for temple workers. It was stated that the surrounding area is beautiful, that all the property is either park land or tightly zoned residential. President Smith mentioned that in considering temple sites and development in this area some tinge ago Willard Marriott had indicated his full support and pledged a substantial suns of money to assist in the project. President Smith asked Brother Marliott to make his own comments on the matter, and he said that he was greatly in favor of this site. He considered it the finest site in the nation’s capitol and in the center of a great population and new area, and he felt that a temple in this part of the United States was imperative and said that he was willing to do anything he could to help in the project. He said he had told President Milan Smith that he would give the Church a half million dollars to start it out. He said he did not think they would have any trouble in raising any amount of money that the brethren thought should be raised toward the cost of this temple. President Smith commented that if the brethren of the First Presidency were to agree with their ideas on the matter he was sure they could do whatever they were directed to do so far as raising funds was concerned.

Elder Brossard, who had formerly served for some years as president of the Washington Stake, said that he was highly in favor of the project and had thought about it for the past fifty years and had urged that a temple be built in that area. Brother Barker mentioned that soon after the property was acquired President Thorpe B. Isaacson, when visiting Washington and looking at the site, said that if it was authorized by the President he would pledge a substantial amount himself. The Presidency expressed appreciation to the brethren for their presentation and said that the matter will be left for further consideration and decision.”

Wed., 13 Nov., 1968:

“9:00 a. m.

Held a meeting with my counselors – Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith, and Alvin R. Dyer.

Among the items discussed were:

Washington D. C. Temple – Project to go Forward

The following are minutes by President Alvin R. Dyer on the discussion held regarding whether or not we should go ahead with plans for erection of a Temple on land already purchased by the Church:

“President Brown brought up the matter of the President’s feelings with regard to the erection of a Temple in the Washington D. C. area on land which is now owned by the Church in Maryland, in accordance with the presentation made by the representative group from this area some two days ago. I stated, “President McKay, I feel and know the decision to build a Temple and where it should be built is the right and privilege of the President of the Church.”

“This matter was openly discussed by members of the First Presidency and I stated that I had some serious concern about this matter since the meeting and had done some checking and had re-studied the brochure which these brethren had given to each member of the Presidency and had come to the conclusion, so far as I was concerned, that if a Temple was to be built in that area, that the designated location up for discussion was perhaps the best. President McKay then said that we should go forward with the project, announcing approval of it.”

No minutes were available from the First Presidency on this discussion.

Meeting was then adjourned.”

Thurs., 14 Nov., 1968:

“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency, nor, upon advice of my doctor, did I attend Council Meeting.

Washington D. C. Temple — President Brown was not at the Temple meeting on this day so President Tanner therefore brought up the matter of approval given to the erection of a Temple in the Washington D. C. area. This approval met some reaction among some members of the Quorum of the Twelve. Elder Lee stated that there wasn’t much that could be done about it, since it had been approved by the Presidency and this was like the Ogden and Provo Temples — the Quorum of the Twelve were merely informed that such were to be built. He stated that a Temple in Washington D. C. was perhaps the poorest location in the East because of the tremendous amount of criminal disturbance in that area and the many Negroes that live in Washington and suggested that perhaps the Valley Forge area out of Philadelphia would be a more suitable place for the erection of a Temple. Elder Mark E. Petersen seemed to sustain the feelings of Elder Lee. Elder LeGrand Richards stated that he felt that a Temple at Washington was a proper location to serve the concentration of members in that area and other areas as well that would funnel into that point.

The other members of the Quorum of the Twelve seemed noncommital and completely resolved to the fact that the President of the Church had made the decision for the erection of the Temple in Washington and therefore did not make any comments.

President Tanner stated that he was not present at the meeting when the decision was reached and could not therefore report on what took place. Since I had been in attendance, he asked me to make a report. I then stated simply that President Brown had brought the matter up after President Tanner had left and President McKay had permitted discussion on the matter and comments from members of the First Presidency and, after receiving them, had simply said that we should go forward with the project. (From Minutes of President Alvin R. Dyer)

Because of the feelings of Brother Lee and Brother Petersen, President Dyer suggested to President Tanner that the matter should be taken back to President McKay and that a re-confirmation be asked for on the project in light of their opposition to it. President Tanner thought that this should be done.

(See Diary of November 6 and November 13 for meetings on new temple)”

Fri., 15 Nov., 1968:

9:00 a. m.

Held a meeting with Presidents Brown, Smith, and Dyer this morning.

The following items were considered:

Washington, D. C. Temple – Erection of — Announcement Made to

Newspapers and Other News Media

President Brown said that he was not at the temple yesterday when they discussed the proposed erection of a temple on the site near Washington, D.C. He said he was informed that a report had been given to the Council of the action of the First Presidency authorizing the erection of a temple on this site in Maryland just adjoining Washington, D.C. President Brown reported that he understood that Elders Lee and Petersen both raised a question as to the negro situation in that area; that a very large percentage of the population in Washington, D. C., 60% or 70%, is negroid, and that there is much criminality in that area. President Brown said that while the First Presidency had taken an action on the matter it was felt that inasmuch as some of the brethren of the Twelve had raised a question he thought maybe it should be brought back to the First Presidency for confirmation. President Dyer who was present at the meeting in the Council confirmed what President Brown had said regarding the question that had been raised relative to the criminal element and also the negro population. He said that Elders Lee and Petersen both thought that the Washington area was not the proper place for a temple. He said, however, that in this particular area where it is proposed to erect the temple there are no negroes.

After listening to the comments by the brethren, I said that we should not hesitate to go forward. President Brown asked me if it would be all right to ask Henry Smith to release the story and I said, “Yes”.

(See following newspaper clippings of announcement; also President Dyer’s Minutes which are included; also see copies of letters and answers thereto to President J. Willard Marriott, and to Stake Presidents in the Washington area.)

“(Minutes by Pres. Alvin R. Dyer)

(Meeting with_President McKay)

At 9:30 a. m a meeting of the First Presidency was held with President McKay. All were present except President Tanner.

Washington, D. C. Temple — Announcement of

President Brown stated to President McKay the conditions as he understood them concerning the announcement of the erection of a Temple in Washington, wherein Elder Petersen had requested Henry Smith to hold back on an article which President McKay had personally released to him for publication. President Brown stated that he was not present in the Temple when the matter was discussed and since I was present he asked me to report to President McKay what had taken place.

Before I made my report, President McKay forthrightly stated, “Why are you hesitating?” President Brown then again said that they were not hesitating, only that we felt that because of Elders Lee and Petersen’s opposition to the location of the Temple, that the matter should be brought back to him for re-affirmation. I then reported to President McKay that President Tanner had presented the matter of the approval of a Temple in Washington by the First Presidency to the Quorum of the Twelve and reported Elder Lee’s objection because of the Negro and criminal element and what he thought was inaccessibility in the present approved location.

I stated to President McKay that apparently Brother Lee was not rightly informed on the accessibility, because the location of the proposed Temple is completely accessible from any direction leading into a belt route which completely surrounds the District of Columbia and that people coming from the south, from the west, from the east, or from the north could reach the belt route and then go to the Temple, following the route in the direction needed without going into the District of Columbia. I said no more about it as to my personal feelings in the matter, feeling that it was strictly a matter for President McKay to re-affirm his first decision to go forward with the building of the Temple at the designated place. President Brown did say that he had called Brother Barker in Washington and had had confirmed to him that the Temple site was completely out of the Negro area in Washington.

At this point President McKay then said, “We should not hesitate in this matter. ” which meant that we should go forward in accordance with the decision which he had made.

Before leaving President McKay, I brought up the matter of the development of the discussion with regard to the insurance health and hospitalization study for the Church. I pointed out that our discussions might possibly lead into the area of self-insurance for the Church. President McKay unhesitatingly said to pursue the study in this and other directions and then make the report.

Washington, D. C. Temple — Area of

Following the meeting, to give some assurance to myself and to substantiate the feelings of President McKay to go forward with the building of the Temple in the Washington area, I made it a point to investigate the Negro population saturation in the District of Columbia and in Philadelphia because of the fact that Valley Forge was suggested as a possible site by Brother Lee. This was about the same distance from the boundary line of the City of Philadelphia as the proposed Temple site in Maryland is from the District of Columbia. I also was determined to learn of the extent of criminal acts in these two areas as a matter of comparison. These are the reports that I received from the F.B.I. and from the Census Bureau in the Federal Building.

Total Negro Population

District of Columbia 411,000 out of 763,000 53.9%

Philadelphia (not including suburbs) 520,000 out of 2,000,000 26.4%

The above report indicates that there are 117,000 more Negroes in Philadelphia than in the District of Columbia. In the period ending in the year ending in 1967, the FBI reports show 31,000 criminal acts in Philadelphia and 29,000 criminal acts in Washington, D.C. It would appear from this analysis that, regardless of where a site of the Temple might be designated in the east to serve the area in question, that the Negro and criminal problem would exist. While there is greater attention centered on Washington because of its being the capitol and there may be more demonstrations as we have witnessed in the past, the deep seriousness of the matter is no more difficult there than in any other areas. It would seem therefore that all things being equal, that Washington, the capitol of the Nation, is the best situated place for the Temple.”

“November 18, 1968

President Milan D. Smith, Washington Stake

President Julian C. Lowe, Potomac Stake

Elder Howard W. Barker

Elder J. Willard Marriott

Elder Wilford M. Burton

Elder Edgar B. Brossard

Dear Brethren:

You will undoubtedly be pleased to learn that, after careful consideration of the proposition submitted by you brethren when you met with the First Presidency some days ago relative to the proposed erection of a temple on the site that has been purchased for that purpose in Maryland just over the boundaries from Washington, your recommendation has been approved and arrangements should go forward in the immediate future for the preparation of the plans and the breaking of the ground.

We appreciate the interest you brethren have taken in this matter, and with you look forward to the erection of a temple in that area for the accommodation of the saints in the eastern part of the United States.

Sincerely yours,

David O. McKay

Hugh B. Brown

N. Eldon Tanner

The First Presidency”

Thur., 21 Nov., 1968:

“Held a meeting of the First Presidency this morning. Presidents Brown, Tanner and Dyer were present.

Washington, D. C. Temple – Groundbreaking Services

President Brown mentioned that President Milan Smith of the Washington Stake and the other presidents of the stakes from Maine to Florida would like to have a groundbreaking service on the site for the proposed Washington Temple and have expressed the hope that President Brown could attend this service on December 7th. It was mentioned that the question has arisen as to whether we could go forward with groundbreaking services when we have no schematic drawing of the proposed building. President Brown said that Robert Barker feels that breaking of the ground will be tantamount to an agreement to build and this would forestall any future taxation. President Brown explained that there is an eminence on the property which would seem to be the natural site for the temple. The proposal to break ground on December 7, was approved conditional upon obtaining a building permit prior to doing so.

Thur., 5 Dec., 1968:

“8:30 to 9:45 a. m.

Held a meeting of the First Presidency in my office in the Hotel Utah Apartment. Presidents Tanner and Dyer were present. Presidents Brown and Smith were absent; President Brown because of illness, and President Smith because of being in attendance at the Quorum of the Twelve meeting in the Temple.

Comment by President Alvin R. Dyer: “President McKay was very determinate in his decisions and expressions, and seemed vitally interested in and took part in all that transpired at this meeting.”

The following matters were discussed at the meeting:

Negroes – Worthy Negro Members May Be Baptized For The Dead

Attention was called to a letter from President Reuel E. Christensen of the Manti Temple reporting that a bishop and stake president in one of the BYU Stakes had inquired if they could send colored people who are members of the Church in good standing residing in their wards to do baptismal work for the dead in the temple.

I ruled that worthy negro baptized members of the Church should be permitted to do baptismal work for the dead if they desire to do so.”

Sat., 7 Dec., 1968:

“Note by CM:

This morning at 8:30 the secretary received a long-distance call from New York City from Elder Ezra Taft Benson who stated that he had just completed his tour of the Oriental Missions and had returned via New York City in order to visit his daughter and had just learned of the ground-breaking services of the Washington Temple, and since he was the first President of the Washington Stake, and had been on the ground-work for the need of the Temple, he had decided to attend the services. He asked that President McKay be notified that he will attend these services, and felt sure that the President would approve of his attending.

Washington Temple – Elder Ezra Taft Benson’s Attendance at Ground-breaking

Regarding Elder Benson’s attending the ground-breaking services of the Washington Temple, the secretary reported this to President McKay at the first opportunity, and he said “Good, I am glad that he attended; he should have been there.”

WASHINGTON TEMPLE — Ground-breaking Services Held Today

Some 4500 persons attended the ground-breaking services of the Washington Temple. The ceremonies were held on an eminence overlooking Rock Creek Park in eastern Maryland where the Church purchased a 57-acre temple site for $850,000 in 1962. This Temple will serve 238, 000 members in 38 Stakes and Missions east of the Mississippi River.

At my request President Hugh B. Brown represented me in officiating at these ceremonies, and Elder Ezra Taft Benson, the first President of the Washington Stake, was present and was one of the speakers. Elder Benson recalled that early in this century Washington’s Mormon leaders for lack of a temple met at the home of the late Senator Reed Smoot, R-Utah, who died in 1941, to discuss the matter. Elder Paul H. Dunn of the First Council of Seventy and currently serving as President of the New England Mission was also present representing the General Authorities.

At my request President Brown expressed my personal greetings and blessings to the people and told of my personal interests in this project. In making the announcement of erection of this Temple on November 15, 1968, I said: “It is my great pleasure to be able to approve the erection of a House of the Lord to serve an area in which a Temple is so much needed.

This will be the eighth temple built or now under construction since I became President in 1951. It was a source of real disappointment to me that I was unable to take an active part in the ground-breaking ceremonies of this Temple, the first to be built by the Church east of the Mississippi River.

Temples now completed and dedicated by me since 1951 are as follows: Swiss, London, Los Angeles, New Zealand, Oakland, each of which I dedicated. Temples now in process of planning and construction: Ogden, Provo, Washington. The Washington Temple will be the 16th temple built by the Church throughout the world.

(See newspaper clippings following; also see November 15, 1968 for announcement of the building of this Temple.)

Washington Temple – Report on Ground-breaking Services by President Brown and Others

At a meeting of the First Presidency held December 9, 1968, President Brown and Elders Mark B. Garff and Henry Smith made a report on the ground-breaking services.

(See following copy of minutes by the First Presidency.)”

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Monday, December 9, 1968, at 9:30a. m., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer. President N. Eldon Tanner in San Francisco, and President Thorpe B. Isaacson absent on account of illness.

Washington Temple — Report of Ground-breaking Services

Elders Mark B. Garff and Henry Smith met with the First Presidency, and President Brown reported the breaking of ground on the property in Maryland just overlooking Washington, D. C., as a site for the new temple to be erected there. He stated that he had never seen a more enthusiastic congregation of people, that about 5800 people assembled. The site is on an elevation of about 125 feet and overlooks the city of Washington. He said the weather was very cold. Brother Mark E. Garff and Brother Henry Srnith were both present. President Milan Smith and his associates of the Washington Stake, President Lowe of the Potomac Stake presidency and members of the other surrounding stakes were also in attendance. President Brown reported that there are 38 stakes and 12 missions in that area which it is anticipated may be included in this temple district and most of them were represented by the president of the stake or mission or one of his counselors. He said that with one accord they sent their love and blessings to President McKay. The program was commenced by singing in the President’s honor, “We Thank Thee, O God, For A Prophet.” He said there was a program which was not very long. He said the territory which was proposed be included in this temple district represents 67% of the total population of the United States, or 133 million people, and there are a quarter of a million Latter-day Saints in that area not including South American, and that it does include part of Canada, namely, the Toronto Stake and part of the Canadian Mission. He said it was felt that the temple district would take in Wisconsin, Illinois, part of Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina, New York, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and then the group of small stakes in the northeast section: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island. He said this area includes 38 stakes and 12 missions. The temple would be accessible to 75,000 saints in South America in addition if we wanted to have the people in South America attend that temple. President Brown mentioned that the site was acquired in 1962 under the direction of the First Presidency and that we had made an investment therein of $850,000. The site could be sold he said for three times that amount. It was selected as one of thirty properties that were presented to the committee, and he felt that it was a fortunate selection. President Brown mentioned that some of the finest genealogical research facilities in the world are found in Washington, and mentioned a number of them. He said that it is the largest undeveloped tract of its kind in the metropolitan area. President Brown mentioned that a man by the name of Stone, one of the most prominent architects in the country and one whom Willard Marriott, Milan Smith and Stanley McAllister are acquainted with, looked the property over and was enthusiastic as to the possibility of building on that site. It was thought that his services might be available as a consultant should we need to use him.

Brother Mark Garff mentioned that it would be the intention to appoint a board of architects from here and if we needed the help of a consultant regarding the exterior for any reason his services might be sought, that we would not need to use him so far as the interior is concerned.

Name of Temple. President Brown felt that we should decide upon a name to be given the temple, that the people in Washington would like it to be called the Washington Temple. President Brown moved that we decide to give the temple the designation of Washington Temple. This was unanimously approved by the brethren.

Contribution by Local People. The question was raised as to contributions by the local people. It was mentioned that in connection with the Provo and Ogden temples we are asking the people to pay one third. President Brown thought the people in the area of this proposed new temple would be glad to pay half the cost if we asked it. He mentioned that Brother Marriott had agreed to pay $500,000 and that others had offered large contributions. So far as the cost is concerned it was agreed that the temple ought to be worthy of the area and that on the other hand we should not be extravagant. It was decided to ask the local people to pay 50% of the cost.

Assessment. President Brown said that it would be necessary for someone to go back to Washington later and meet with the presidents of stakes that will be included in the temple district that may be decided upon and determine how to apportion the assessment.

Architects. It was decided that we would select four local architects to form a committee to come in with their recommendation as to the type of building that should be constructed and some drawings of the outside showing approximately what it would look like, and then at a later date, if we needed further help, we could contact prominent architects in the east. The brethren did not favor selecting some non-member architect to draw the plans and it was felt that the only use we would make of these so-called top flight architects would be in an advisory capacity; further, that these local architects to be selected would submit sketches under the direction of the Building Committee. Brother Garff said that they would bring to the brethren for their approval the names of four outstanding architects in the Church who, when approved, would make the necessary study and prepare designs and submit proposed costs. In this connection it was felt that when these architects’ names are suggested we should have some resume’ as to why they were selected and in what fields they have excelled.

President Dyer suggested that the temple in Washington ought to comprise two things, that it ought to comprise the arrangements that have already been provided for temple use and also exteriors that would be in keeping with its location so that the utility of the temple will be pretty much what has been developed in other temples. Authorization was given for Henry Smith to make an announcement in the Deseret Nenvs of the name to be given to the temple and the district area.

Temple District. In answer to President McKay’s further inquiry as to the area to be included in the temple district, President Brown said it would include that part of the United States lying eastof the Mississippi River and that part of Canada which is embraced in the Toronto Stake and the Canadian Mission which would lie east of an extension of that line into Canada. The temple district would include 38 stakes and 12 missions with a total of 238,000 Latter-day Saints, which is an area comprising 67% of the total population of the United States.”

Fri., 27 Dec., 1968:

“At 8:40 this morning held a meeting with my counselors, Presidents Brown, Smith, and Dyer. President Tanner is out of the city vacationing in Arizona.

Some of the items considered were:

Church, Misc. — Article Against Church in “Confidential Magazine”

President Dyer called attention to a spurious article written in the “Confidential Magazine”, written by a woman who claims to have gained access to the Los Angeles Temple with the assistance of a certain Bishop who is a traitor to the Church. The article is entitled “Mormon Money and Power Will Make You A Slave”. The ordinances of the Temple are ridiculed, as is the garment, and a picture accompanies the article with what appears to be a Negress wearing the garment. Charges are also made with regard to the finances of the Church. The whole article is vulgar and filled with discrepancies, and obviously has been written in a sensational vein to gain access to the Press. A copy of the magazine had come from Darrell M. Watnick of Mesa, Arizona, who stated that a friend had handed it to him.

I decided that no retaliation whatsoever be taken with regard to the article, although it would be advisable to make some checks as to who the Bishop might possibly be who would issue a recommend for the Temple under false conditions to this woman.

It was later learned that one of the Radio Stations in California conducted a question and answer program, and that the Editor of the “Confidential Magazine”, a woman, was a guest to answer questions on this article. The Radio announcer conducting the program, a Catholic, took the Editor to task for writing such an article, as did many people who called in to ask questions of the Editor.

After discussing the above matters, a number of restoration cases were reviewed, and the meeting was then adjourned.”

Mon., 13 Jan., 1969:

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Monday, January 13, 1969, at 9:30 A.M., in President McKay’s Apartment

Sealer for Salt Lake Temple

President Tanner called attention to a letter he had received from President Stone of the Salt Lake Temple asking for permission to use Brother George L. Scott as a sealer in the temple. Brother Scott recently retired as a correspondent for the Church News and is a patriarch in one of the Bountiful stakes, and formerly served as president of the Portland Stake. President McKay authorized President Smith to confer the sealing power upon Brother Scott to be exercised in the Salt Lake Temple.

“Confidential” Magazine Article.

President Dyer referred to a previous mention in the meeting of the First Presidency of an article which appeared in the”Confidential” magazine centering around temple activity of a woman who claims to have obtained admittance to the Los Angeles Temple and then proceeded to write a story about it. President Dyer said that he had conferred with President Bowring of the Los Angeles Temple about this magazine, particularly as to how this woman got into the temple. He has not obtained this information yet, but President Dyer said President Bowring called on the phone Friday and made this report: That a television broadcast took place about a week ago presented by a news commentator by the name of Bob Dorman who lives across the street from the temple. He had on his newscast a Miss Tracy Cabot, the editor of the “Confidential” magazine, and in the interview he asked her why she permitted such an article to be printed about the Mormons. He stated that he was a Catholic and had lived close to the Los Angeles Temple and that many of his friends are members of the Church. He said he did not know of any finer people than the Mormons. The broadcast was opened up for discussion and telephone inquiries, and statements were received from all over the area. He said that the people who are not of the Church are the ones who are coming to the defense of the Church. President Bowring says that the reaction to this has been strongly in favor of the Church. A tape recording was made of the program and President Bearing says that he will send a copy of this recording to us.

Tues., 14 Jan., 1969:

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Tuesday, January 14, 1969, at 9:15 A.M., in President McKay’s Apartment

Present: Presidents David O. McKay, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

Temple Sealings for the Dead

Elder Howard W. Hunter met with the First Presidency this morning and presented to them a problem pertaining to genealogical work which he said the committee had been discussing for several months. He explained that over the years the rule has been that if a woman has had more than one marriage in her lifetime we would seal her to her first husband, everything else being equal. This would pertain only to people who are dead. If a woman had been married two or more times and had children by each marriage, heretofore she has been sealed to the first husband. If she had no children by her first husband but had children by her second marriage, many times she was sealed to the second husband so that the children could be sealed to their own father. He said there have been cases where the family has said that the mother or grandmother, whoever it might be, did not want to be sealed to her first husband, that she did not respect him and had more affection for her second or third husband, as the case might be, and sometimes under such circumstances she was sealed to the second or third husband. He said that where we have trouble is in cases that go beyond the point of memory, that, for instance, when we go to the parish records in England, and the other registries, and we find the woman has been married to several men, we do not know what her wishes or desires were and so ordinarily she would be sealed to her first husband, except in cases when we had enough information to indicate that the second or third one would be the appropriate husband to seal her to. He said all of this is a little arbitrary and is based upon lack of facts. He mentioned the recent decision of the First Presidency going into the computer program to the effect that we would go through the parish register of marriages and seal all women to their husbands wherever we found their record of marriage in the parish records. He said this results sometimes in a woman being sealed to more than one husband, that sometimes where a woman has been married more than once she is sealed to two persons. This was approved by the First Presidency. In these cases the woman would have the right of choice in the hereafter. Elder Hunter said that our brethren in the Genealogical Society who have been serving for many years have suggested the desirability of sealing women to more than one man where they have been married several times. This pertains to people who are dead. He explained that when a woman is sealed to her first husband and there have been several marriages, the matter is left in the hands of the Lord and her choice in the hereafter, but this does not give the posterity a positive line to follow. He said the brethren of the Genealogical Society have had the feeling that it would be better to seal such a woman who has had more than one husband to each of her husbands and let the children of each marriage be sealed to their parents. This would still give the woman the right to make her selection in the hereafter. He said that frequently they have people come into the Genealogical Society office and say that their great grandmother, for instance, said before she died that she loved her second husband more than the first and that they would like to have her sealing to the first man broken so that she could be sealed to the second. Elder Hunter said that they were commencing to wonder if they followed the right course through all these years. He thought it was perfectly proper that in life a woman be sealed to only one husband, but after death and many years have passed and there are posterity from the lines of several husbands, it becomes a different situation.

There was some discussion and explanation made regarding this proposed change. In this connection mention was made of the fact that in cases where a sealing was cancelled between a couple who have children born in the covenant that these children are not permitted to be sealed to anyone else than their natural parents and that the matter is left to the hereafter for decision as to whether they should go with the mother or the father. The brethren emphasized in the discussion that the fact that the work is done for these people does not necessarily mean that it will be accepted, that, however, the work must be done for everyone and it is like putting it in a bank as it were to be held subject to the worthiness and acceptance of the individual.

After a rather lengthy discussion of the matter President McKay indicated his approval.

President Tanner and Elder Hunter left the room after this discussion.

Publication of Temple Ceremonies.

President Dyer called attention to a book that was authored by William J. Whalen, a Catholic, and published by the University of Notre Dame Press entitled “The Latter-day Saints in the Modern Day World, An Account of Contemporary Mormonism.” The first edition was published in 1967 and was revised in 1968. President Dyer called attention to a section in the book which reproduces the complete temple ceremonies word for word and item for item. Everything that is said in the temple is contained in this part of the book. President Dyer said that so far as he could tell it is the authentic temple ceremony. He mentioned that it also discusses free masonry and Mormonism and intimates that perhaps the Mormons got their concepts of the temple ceremony from masonry. He said this book is widely published now. It does not disparage the Church but merely reports the facts. President McKay said he was surprised to know that such a book is in existence.

Minutes by Joseph Anderson.”

Mon., 3 Feb, 1969:

“8:45 to 10:30 a. m. Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

The following were among the matters discussed:

Temples – Sealings — Sealing of Wife to Several Husbands in Doing

Work for the Dead

President Brown calleed attention to a letter that had been prepared for the First Presidency’s signature addressed to Elder Howard W. Hunter reporting on the action taken by the First Presidency in a recent meeting of the First Presidency when Brother Howard Hunter was present, at which time President Brown was away, in which it was decided pertaining to work for the dead that it would be permissible to seal a woman to more than one husband in cases where there had been children by more than one husband and it was not known which husband she preferred. The decision was that the woman could be sealed to her various husbands by whom she had children and thus the way would be provided so that the children born to these marriages could be sealed to their natural parents and do the temple work for their parents. The woman would have the right to make her own choice in the hereafter as to which of the husbands she would wish to be sealed to. President Brown said he did not feel to favor this decision. He mentioned that some years ago when he was taking charge of these matters for me it was thought that the matter of the relationship of these people who were dead and concerning whom we had no knowledge should be left for solution in the next world, and not clutter our records with a lot of seatings of one woman to several husbands. He wondered if this had been given careful consideration.

President Tanner reported that this entire question had been discussed by the First Presidency a short time ago when Brother Hunter was present, at which time President Brown was absent. (See Minutes of January 14, 1969.) He stated that Brother Hunter’s argument, with which he agreed, was that when we seal a woman to any man in cases of those who have passed away it is arbitrarily done and we do not know whether this man was the woman’s choice or not, that where a woman had been married to two or three husbands the children were sometimes at a loss to know what to do about their genealogy, sealings, etc., that Brother Hunter argued that if she were sealed to all of the husbands, no matter what her choice should ultimately be the work would be done for all of the families. He stated that it was an arbitrary action no matter what we did. He mentioned that our former practice was to seal this woman to her first husband unless it was known that she wanted to be sealed to one of her subsequent husbands, and all of this was arbitrary, that, for instance, one family wanted her sealed to their father and another family wanted her sealed to their father, and they wouldn’t have any direct line to follow unless this was done; that if she was sealed to all of the husbands the work could be carried on by the different families and it was no more of a problem to let her and the Lord decide later than if we were to make an arbitrary decision now. President Tanner mentioned that President Smith at the time said he could see no greater problem in that event. President Dyer had at first questioned it and then thought it was the right thing to do. President Dyer commented that at first he did not think it was the right thing to do but the more he thought about it the more he realized that whenever you do any work vicariously for the dead it depends upon their acceptance on the other side and the conglomeration of marriages will have to be straightened out, that in the meantime the descendants of each of the husbands could go ahead with the temple work and the children could have the sealing blessing and know that they could be sealed to their mother and one of the husbands. President Tanner further mentioned that President Smith had made the statement in writing that there will be a transference of sealings and if that is true it would be simple to make the transfer according to the woman’s choice.

President Tanner asked me if I wanted to hold the matter up for the present and I said absolutely.

Tues., 4 Feb, 1969:

“8:45 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency held in the Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

The following were among the matters discussed:

Magazine Article – “Confidential”

President Dyer referred to the article recently appearing in the “Confidential” magazine about the garments and other Church matters. He stated that on January 28, 1969 a broadcast was held in Los Angeles on what they call “Tempo” which feels the tempo of the people in what is going on and is conducted by a TV commentator, Mr. Bob Dorman, of KHJ-TV. It seems that Mr. Dorman had an interview on the air with the editor of the “Confidential” magazine which was quite interesting, and that Mr. Dorman said that he knew many of the Mormons and they are the finest people in the world, and he challenged the right of a magazine like this to publish such an article. President Dyer said that someone had made a tape of this interview and President Bowring of the temple had obtained a copy and sent it to him, which tape he now has in his office which he thought the brethren might wish to hear. The Presidency agreed to listen to this tape tomorrow morning.

Wed., 5 Feb, 1969:

“9:00 a. m. Meeting of the Eirst Presidency. Present in the President’s hotel apartment were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

The following matters were discussed:

Magazine Article – “Confidential “

President Dyer played on a tape recording machine a tape that had been taken of an interview by the KHJ-TV television commentator in Los Angeles. This was a program called “Tempo” where they feel the tempo of what the people think, and invite listeners to call in by telephone to discuss the case being presented. The matter under discussion on this particular program was the article about the Church which appeared in a recent edition of the “Confidential” magazine. The editor of the magazine is a woman by the name of Tracy Cabbott, and the commentator was Bob Dorman. The commentator, although a member of the Catholic Church, handled the situation very well and was friendly to the Church. He made the statement among his many other comments, that it was his experience that of all the religious people that he knew the most moral and decent people he had ever met in his life were Mormons. He said he wished he could say that about his own church, the Roman Catholics. In the discussion Miss Cabbott was interviewed as to why she permitted such an article to appear in the magazine. She claimed it was true, but members and non-members alike who phoned in stated that it was not true and one Mormon woman particularly said there wasn’t a word of truth in it. Commenting upon the article after the presentation of the tape recording, which recording had been made by a member of the Church who was listening to the program in his home, President Dyer said that the article claimed that a bishop had given this woman a recommend to the temple but that was fictitious, that we can find no record of such a woman going through the Los Angeles Temple. It is also stated that this particular bishop had been an all-American baseball player but we have been unable to find any such bishop. In the article the woman who displayed the garment appeared to be a Negro but they said she was an oriental.

President Dyer suggested that a letter might properly be sent to Mr. Dorman commending him for the way he handled the matter. The brethren felt that such a letter should not go from the First Presidency but if sent might go from Brother Petersen of the Church Information Service.

Wed., 19 Feb, 1969:

“9:00 a. m. First Presidency Meeting held in the President’s Apartment. Present were President Hugh B. Brown, President N. Eldon Tanner, President Joseph Fielding Smith, and President Alvin R. Dyer.

Among the matters presented were:

Temples – Shortening of Temple Ceremonies for the Dead

President Tanner said the suggestion has been made that the temple ceremonies for the dead be shortened to do away with repetition. This would not pertain to the living but only the dead. The brethren who have considered the matter say that it would not in any way detract from the importance of the covenants, promises and ceremonies. President Tanner said that if I felt that the suggestion is worthy of consideration there could be arranged a condensed version of these ceremonies for presentation to me for my approval. President Tanner said that Elders Howard W. Hunter, Gordon B. Hinckley and Theodore M. Burton think it could be done very well and he believed that Brother Richard L. Evans felt the same way. President Brown suggested that these brethren be asked to bring in a copy of the present ceremony and also a copy of the proposed ceremony so that comparisons could be made.

I said this might be done.

Wed., 26 Feb, 1969:

“9:00 a.m. Meeting of the First Presidency at the President’s hotel apartment. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

During this short meeting of the First Presidency, the following matters were discussed:

Temple Sealings:

The question was raised of the position taken by the Father and Mother at the altar during vicarious seatings. Formerly, father knelt at the head, but for functional reason it was decided that the position of the father at the head or to the right with the mother opposite is optional.”

Fri., 28 Feb, 1969:

“8:30 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency held in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer present.

The following matters were discussed:

Ogden Temple

Elders Mark B. Garff and Emil Fetzer met with the First Presidency this morning by appointment and exhibited to them a model of the proposed Ogden Temple showing the building and grounds. Brother Garff referred to the estimated cost of three million dollars previously given, and now stated that this covered only the temple structure and not the furnishings, landscape, and other items. He explained that the proposed temple, because of its design, will handle almost twice as many people as the Salt Lake Temple, and that it should be possible for a man or woman to go into the temple, take care of all the ordinance work, and be through and out of the temple in two hours. He explained that the new design provides six rooms for use by patrons whereby they do not have to wait for other sessions, that is, that when the people in one room are ready to go through on a session those coming in after the session started will go into another room, and so on. He said that it is anticipated that in nine sessions they can accommodate approximately 4500 people in a day, whereas in the Salt Lake Temple in nine sessions only 2700 can be taken through. He said that it is estimated that the structural building will cost $3,018,300. The land development, removing the old Third Ward building and other buildings, the placing of escalators in the temple, the stainless steel kitchen equipment, laundry equipment, furnishings, special fees for engineers, contractors, landscaping, curb and guttering, sidewalks, fencing, etc., will bring the total cost to $4,300,000. Brother Garff said that they were commencing the specifications and would like to be ready for bid by the end of June. President Brown recommended that the Presidency approve the recommendation of the Building Committee and authorize them to proceed along the lines indicated. This recommendation was seconded and unanimously approved. Mention was made of the fact that this will require an additional contribution by the people inasmuch.as they were asked to donate one-third of the total cost.

Mon., 3 Mar, 1969:

“9:30-11:15 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s

Hotel Apartment. Present also were members of the Building Committee–Mark B. Garff and Emil Fetzer; and also Presidents Milan D. Smith and Julialn C. Lowe of the Washington and Potomac Stakes respectively.

Washington, D. C. Temple

Brothers Garff and Fetzer presented to the brethren drawings, pictures and models of suggestions for a temple in Washington, D. C. It was explained that the architects who have been associated with Brother Emil Fetzer in preparing these models and sketches are Brother Lawrence Olpin Wilcox of Ogden, Brother Fred L. Markham of Provo, Henry P. Fetzer of Salt Lake, and Harold K. Beecher of Salt Lake. Brother Emil Fetzer is the Church general architect.

Elder Garff explained that the Building Committee was making no recommendations, that these pictures and models were being presented to show what has been conceived in the minds of the architects and to ascertain what the First Presidency would like. He stated that this is not final in any form but simply a suggestion, that the architects have reached a point where they need some direction from the First Presidency, and that this is merely preliminary in its nature. After analyzing the pictures, models and drawings that were presented the First Presidency indicated their preference for two different designs: one, the exterior of which is more or less of a diamond shape, and the other a conventional type. The committee of architects will work together as a team on these two designs and will come back with the concepts that they develop and agree upon.

The brethren then gave consideration to the type of marble which should be used. Brothers Garff and Fetzer presented small samples of four different types of marble that could be obtained in the United States as follows: (1) A pure white marble from Alabama; (2) A sample of Danbury marble from Vermont. It was stated that this type of marble was used on the capitol building in Washington, D. C.; (3) A Lee marble from Massachusetts which has a gray-blue veining in it; (4) Georgia marble. There was also presented three samples of Italian marble. It was felt that the Alabama marble and also the Vermont marble would be whiter than the Italian marble and would be less expensive and more available. The brethren indicated a preference for the Alabama and Vermont marbles and bring them to the Presidency later.

President Milan Smith and President Lowe both reported that the people in the Washington Temple district are thrilled with the decision to have a temple there and that the contributions are coming in very well. President Smith said that to date it appears as though they have about one million dollars already which can be converted to cash.

I commented that I thought the architects had done very well.

Elder Garff suggested that an announcement be made in the papers of the names of the architects who are working on the Washington Temple. Authorization was given for the preparation of such an article for publication.”

Wed., 5 Mar, 1969:

“9:00 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith and Dyer were present.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Washington, D. C. Temple

President Brown reported that Willard Marriott had contributed as his contribution to the erection of the Washington Temple 14,000 shares of the Marriott Corporation stock valued at $504,000. It was agreed that the certificate should be placed in the Church vault.

Wed., 5 Mar, 1969:

“9:00 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith and Dyer were present.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Temples — Clothing Matters

Attention was called to a letter from Sister Belle S. Spafford, General President of the Relief Society relative to temple clothing.

The brethren agreed that temple aprons must be made under the direction of the Relief Society and only individuals who have had their own endowments and who hold current temple recommends should make the temple aprons.

I gave direction to the matter that it is not necessary to bless Temple clothing.

I also gave direction that it is permissible for individuals to be buried in laundered and clean Temple clothing rather than to go to the expense of the purchase of entirely new clothing.

Thur., 6 Mar, 1969:

“9:00 a.m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Alvin R. Dyer. President Joseph Fielding Smith meeting with the Twelve.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Temple Sealings — To Deceased Authorities

President Tanner called attention to a letter handed to him by Elder Howard W. Hunter to be handed to the First Presidency referring to a custom in the early days of the Church for a woman to be sealed to a good man in the Church, a General Authority or someone else who was still living, other than her deceased husband who died without accepting the gospel. The sealing was performed as an assurance for an eternal union in the hereafter. It is now recommended that inasmuch as President Wilford Woodruff received a revelation which altered this practice, that in such cases prior to 1890 when this ruling was made, if the woman was sealed to a deceased member of the Church or to a living member of the Church but did not live with him as a wife, permission be granted for her to be sealed also to her non-member deceased husband to whom she had been married in life. The original sealing will not, however, be cancelled. President Tanner said that it would seem that this would be particularly desirable when the woman had children by the non-member husband, that under this ruling the children could be sealed to their parents. President Tanner asked me if I could see anything wrong about such a ruling, and I said no.

Temples — Garments

Attention was given to a letter by the presidency of the Salt Lake Temple asking what consideration be given to a proposed change in the style of the ceremonial garment that is worn in the temple. The letter explains that there would be many advantages to wearing the regular garment in the temple instead of the so-called ceremonial garment, that when one goes through the temple he or she would be clothed in the garment of the Holy Priesthood by wearing the same style of garment worn when they leave the temple. Under the present arrangement the so-called ceremonial garment is placed on the individual and he or she is told to wear it throughout his or her life, and then when they leave the temple they wear the regular style garment. Then too, considerable time would be saved because one would not need to change from the regular style into the so-called ceremonial style before going into the ordinance room. Another consideration mentioned is that when the sisters wear the ceremonial garment the bottom part of the legs of the garment shows below the dresses.

Another argument is that the garment approved for initiatory work could be the regular approved style garment with the zipper at the top, which some of the approved garments now have. This would be much more modest than the present garment with the strings and would also save time. An additional reason is that there would be a considerable saving to both the temple and the patrons; the temple would save the cost of the garments and the patrons would save the amount they pay for rental.

Again, those who officiate in the temple wear the regular approved style garment and it seems logical that the patrons should be permitted to wear the same style as those who officiate.

I gave my approval.

Mon., 10 Mar, 1969:

“9:00 a. m. Short Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment with Presidents N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer. President Hugh B. Brown was in California.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Temples – Mode of Dress of Temple Patrons

Attention was called to a letter from President Stone of the Salt Lake Temple mentioning that occasionally members come to the temple who are not properly dressed, sisters wearing slacks and mini-skirts, and brethren without ties or jackets, etc. President Stone suggests the need of correcting this. It was mentioned that a letter was sent to presidents of stakes and bishops of wards, copies of which were sent to the temples August 30, 1967, regarding the wearing of slacks and mini-skirts by women who go to the temple. The brethren agreed that a letter should be sent to stake presidents, bishops and mission presidents. It was decided to look up our former letter on the subject.

Tues., 18 Mar, 1969:

“In Huntsville.

At a meeting of the First Presidency, President McKay being absent, the following matters were discussed:

Temples — Garments

President Tanner referred to approval given by the First Presidency for the wearing of the new style garment in the temple. He mentioned that the question had been raised in connection therewith as to the use of the new style garment in place of the so-called ceremonial garment in the washing and anointing rooms. The question was raised as to whether the procedure which has been followed over the years as to the manner in which the garment should be placed on the individual, one leg at a time, etc., is a part of the ceremony. The brethren did not feel that this is a part of the ritual. It was agreed to announce this new policy regarding the garments to the General Authorities in their meeting on Thursday, March 27th.”

Mon., 7 Apr, 1969:

“There was a meeting of my Counselors in the First Presidency held at 10:00 this morning. They met at the Church Building Committee’s Offices for a meeting concerning the Washington Temple. Present on the occasion were the four architects who had been assigned to the Washington Temple, Elders Mark B. Garff and Emil Fetzel of the Church Building Committee, Robert Barker, Regional Representative; Milan D. Smith, president of the Washington Stake; and Ira I. Somers, a counselor in the presidency of the Potomac Stake.

At this time the latest developments and schematic models with various perspectives for the Washington Temple were reviewed. The First Presidency had previously selected two designs to develop further. Upon this occasion the group showed their favoritism towards one particular design of a hexagonal nature and with six spires similating to some extent the Salt Lake Temple, although with modern design.

WASHINGTON TEMPLE

Meeting of the First Presidency with President McKay

At 10:30 the First Presidency and this group of brethren met with me in the hotel apartment. It was explained that in the meeting just concluded the brethren favored a particular design. The model of this was displayed to me and after a brief discussion I gave my approval to go ahead on this particular design.

(For complete details of meeting see copy of First Presidency minutes which follow)

Minutes of the meeting of the First Presidency

Held Monday, April 7, 1969, at 10:00 A.M.

The First Presidency: Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer, met at the office of the Building Committee with Mark L. Garff and Emil Fetzer, together with other architects, to give consideration to models that had been prepared of the proposed Washington, D. C. Temple . The following additional architects were in the group: Henry Fetzer, Keith W. Wilcox, Harold K. Beecher and Fred L. Markham. There were also present Robert Barker, Regional Representative; Milan D. Smith, president of the Washington Stake; and Ira I. Somers, a counselor in the presidency of the Potomac Stake. Attention was called to a former meeting held by the First Presidency with Brother Garff and Brother Emil Fetzer, at which time models that had been prepared were considered, and Brothers Garff and Fetzer were asked to develop two of the proposals for further consideration. These two proposals were now presented in model and picture form, some changes having been made in the models as originally presented. One of the models presented had one tower and the other had six towers. The six tower model originally was in hexagon shape whereas the contour had been changed to a more nearly rectangular shape. The question was raised as to whether the temple annex which would house the laundry, the cafeteria and other services essential to the temple should be in a building separate from the temple itself. It was stated that these services could be included in the temple building or in an auxiliary building adjoining it, whichever was thought desirable. No consideration was given to the proposed interior of the temple, but merely to the exterior.

Several of the brethren expressed the thought that the temple with the six towers identifies itself with the Salt Lake Temple, which temple symbolizes the Church throughout the world. The brethren present all favored the six tower structure and indicated that it could be seen from a long distance and particularly by people who would be travelling upon the freeways in that area.

President Somers, counselor in the presidency of the Potomac Stake, said he had discussed this with President Lowe of the stake and he was sure that this six tower plan is the one that he would prefer. He said that speaking for the people he thought that they would like this, that what they now need is pictures of the proposed temple which they could use in raising funds from their people. President Milan Smith concurred in the sentiment of Brother Somers that he felt sure that the people in that area would be happy with this particular plan and it would be a tremendous help to them in their fund raising program if they could show them pictures of the proposed temple. Each of the architects and the others who spoke expressed a preference for the six tower structure. The First Presidency did not express an opinion but reserved that for a meeting with President McKay.

The counselors in the First Presidency, Brother Robert Barker, President Milan Smith and counselor Ira I. Somers of the Potomac Stake, Brother Garff and Emil Fetzer then went to President McKay’s apartment in the Hotel Utah and presented to him models and pictures of the proposed new six tower temple at 10:30. President Brown announced to the President that the counselors and the architects involved, together with Brother Barker, President Smith of the Washington Stake and Brother Somers, counselor in the presidency of the Potomac Stake, had met in the Building Department office where they had inspected the models and pictures and all were unanimously in favor of the proposed six tower temple, models and pictures of which were shown to the President. Brother Garff stated that under direction of the First Presidency the architects had been brought together and given instructions as to how they should proceed and that they came up with two different selections and all had agreed upon this one plan. One of the models presented was made exactly to scale. Architect Emil Fetzer said that they had studied the building from many aspects and thought that something that would be somewhat like the design of the Salt Lake Temple and yet different would appeal to the Church members in the eastern area, and that all the architects and others involved feel that this would be an excellent design for a temple in Washington.

President Milan Smith representing the Washington Temple District, of which he has been made chairman in connection with fund raising, said he felt confident the people would share our view that this is a magnificent design that would be worthy of the Church, and on the basis of the discussion this morning all present felt unanimously to recommend this to President McKay and the First Presidency for their approval. President Somers, counselor in the Potomac Stake presidency, endorsed what President Smith had said and stated that there is tremendous enthusiasm among the saints in the Potomac Stake for a temple, and that they would like to have it as soon as possible. Both he and President Milan Smith said that it would be helpful in their fund raising campaign if they could have an architect’s drawing which they could show to the people.

Regional Representative Bob Barker said that in travelling in the Philadelphia area where his duties take him he learned that the people are very enthusiastic about the proposed new temple and are looking forward to the opportunity of contributing. He endorsed what had been said about the design. He mentioned that in Washington there is a lot of distinctive architecture but there would be nothing that would be confused or identified with this, that this would be a distinctive building identified with our church and would be a wonderful landmark for the people in that area. The counselors in the First Presidency expressed their approval of this design. President Dyer mentioned the need of having near the temple a bureau of information building that would be ample to accommodate the visitors. President Brown said he would like to move that we approve the design officially if it met with the approval of President McKay. President McKay said he could see no reason why we should not go forward with the design as presented.

It was decided to give out the necessary publicity but that first the proposal should go before the Council of the Twelve for their consideration. Brother Garff said that their next step would be to furnish an estimate of the proposed cost. President McKay gave his approval for the matter to be submitted to the Twelve next Thursday.”

Tues., 8 Apr, 1969:

“[First Presidency Meeting]

NOTE:

Following the meeting this morning with President McKay the counselors in the First Presidency, including Brother Dyer who was not present at the earlier meeting, met in the First Presidency’s office in the Administration Building to discuss a few further matters.

Among the matters they discussed were the following:

Temple Garments

President Tanner mentioned the approval given at a recent meeting of the First Presidency for using in the temple ceremonies the new style garment in place of the so-called ceremonial garment. He said this matter had been presented by President Stone of the Salt Lake Temple and two other temple presidents, also Howard Hunter and his committee. They felt, and President Tanner agreed, that it seemed inconsistent to place on the individual in the temple ceremony the so-called ceremonial garment telling him that he must wear it the rest of his life and then giving permission for him to immediately replace this garment with the modified garment normally worn by members of the Church. Then too the temple ordinance workers and even the ones who place the garments on the individual are themselves wearing the modified garment. President Tanner felt that this matter should be referred to the Twelve before this change is made. There was read for the information of the brethren the circular letter over the signatures of the First Presidency, Heber J. Grant, Charles W. Penrose, and Anthony W. Ivins dated June 14, 1923, listing the modifications in the garment that had been approved by the First Presidency and the Twelve, and stating among other things that “in order that there may be uniformity in temple work, and that expedition in the administration of the ordinances of the House of the Lord may not be impeded, we recommend that people doing temple work, whether it be ordinance work for the dead or first endowments for the living, wear the approved garment now in use.” It further states that should a person appear at the temple with the modified style they should not be refused admittance, provided they come properly recommended.

President Dyer said that he would personally see no inconsistency in placing upon the person in the temple a garment that covers the knee so that the wearer will be impressed with the idea that this is the way it should be. President Tanner thought we should advise all the stake presidency and bishops to instruct their people when recommended to the temple to be sure their garments come below the knees.”

Thur., 17 Apr, 1969:

“[First Presidency Meeting]

Temples – Proxies at the Altar

President Tanner mentioned a procedure that was introduced by President McDonald when he was president of the Salt Lake Temple, and which has been continued, which is not essentially in harmony with previous procedures. The first thing the officiator should do is give the preliminary general instructions to the proxies with reference to the proper way to join hands and the proper position at the altar, and where the various proxies should sit when not at the altar for the least possible loss of time when proxies are changed. When handling the sealing for the first name on the first sheet of each card the officiator should say: “Brother Jones, acting for John Wheeler, and Sister Jones acting for Mary Gardner” (or if it is listed as Mrs. John Wheeler, then Sister Jones acting for the mother) join your right hands in the Patriarchal grip.”

The officiator should then say: “For each subsequent name–” they go through the regular procedure for the first one, and then they have been doing this for each subsequent name in this group. The officiator, instead of saying “Brother John Jones and Sister Mary Gardner Jones” just says “Brother and Sister Jones for the parents”, and at that time, “you will join your right hands in the Patriarchal grip”. And when I say “Brother Smith for child, ” Brother Smith will place his right hand on the parents’ hands. “

Where proxies are not husband and wife the officiator will say: “Brother Jones and Sister Jensen for parents”.

President Tanner further explained that instead of saying: “Brother Joseph Anderson and Sister Mary Jones Anderson”, after they have once introduced them and given their names they say: “Brother and Sister Anderson, you take each other by the right hand”, and then he tells them all at the beginning that that is the procedure. President Tanner said it is being done that way in this temple and they feel that it is simplifying it and making it easier to carry on.

President Tanner said that inasmuch as President McDonald prepared it and the present temple presidency approved it, he thought it should have the First Presidency’s approval. He explained that it pertains to sealing of parents and children for the dead, that instead of saying “place your hands on the hands of your parents”, they are probably bringing in ten of them, one after another, and he explains the whole thing to all of them and what they are to do instead of explaining it each time. When it comes to the actual ordinance there is no change in the ordinance, just a change in procedure .

I indicated my approval.

Temples – Initiatory Ordinances for the Dead

President Tanner referred to initiatory ordinances in the temple for the dead and proposed the adoption of the following procedure:

Perform the ordinations to the Melchizedek Priesthood in advance with the other initiatory work to follow by other proxies. Under this plan one proxy would be ordained for each individual name as at present, but at one sitting he would act as proxy for several individual names. This proposed procedure would eliminate the proxy walking back to the ordaining area after completing each initiatory ordinance. Instead, the proxy would remain in an assigned ordinance booth to complete all the names on his list. This would give three proxies for the same person instead of two.

This was approved.”

Thurs., 8 May, 1969:

“8:30 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents N. Eldon Tanner and Alvin R. Dyer.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Temple Seatings — The Presiding Bishopric and the Sealing Power

It was mentioned that in the Council meeting last Thursday consideration was given to the question of whether or not the sealing power might be given to the Presiding Bishopric. It was explained that these brethren are the only ones of the General Authorities who do not have the sealing power and President Tanner thought it would be well if this permission might be granted them. President Tanner mentioned that many brethren are given the sealing power who are faithful, devoted brethren and have served as bishops and in other Church positions in various Church areas.

When the matter was discussed in the Council meeting Elder Lee indicated that the reason for not giving this authority to the Bishopric is a matter of policy, that is, that they are in charge of the temporal matters of the Church and that the sealing work in the temple is not their particular field of service. President Dyer mentioned that when this was discussed in the temple he had mixed feelings about it. He realized that there are men who are not General Authorities who have the sealing power but the Lord had given a special calling to the Presiding Bishopric to administer temporal affairs. He wondered if it might not confuse their position if they were given powers and authorities dealing with spiritual matters.

President Tanner recommended that this authorization be given unless I could see some reason for not giving it. He asked me if I had any objections and I said I did not favor it.

Thur., 15 May, 1969:

“I held no meeting of the First Presidency today; however my Counselors met in meeting in the First Presidency’s office in the Church Administration Building. Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner and Alvin R. Dyer were present. Among the matters dilscussed were the following:

Washington T emple – Cost of

President Tanner meNtioned having discussed with Emil Fetzer the matter of the cost of the proposed Washington Temple and suggested that some limit should be placed upon the amount to be expended for the temple. He stated that there is some speculation going around as to the proposed cost. The brethren were agreed that we should set the price at not to exceed $10,000,000. This would include the building, the furnishings and landscaping, in fact everything pertaining to the temple in excess of the cost of the grounds. It did not include the visitors center.

Temples — Temple Garment suggestions

Attention was called to a letter from the presidency of the North Columbia River Stake reporting the holding of a meeting regarding the temple garments with endowed members of the stake. The stake presidency submit suggestions regarding the temple garment, among other things that permission be given for the use of a two piece garment, this letter being addressed to President Joseph Fielding Smith. The letter will be acknowledged and the stake presidency informed that meetings of the kind mentioned for discussing temple garments should not be held and that it is contrary to the policy of the Church to have a two piece garment.”

Tues., 27 May, 1969:

“Temples – Temple Privileges for Women Married to Non-Member Husbands

President Tanner mentioned that it sometimes occurs that women who are married to non-member husbands from whom they have been separated for a number of years but not divorced, apply for permission to go to the temple to receive their endowments. President Tanner said he understood we have a ruling that after a man and a wife under such conditions have been separated and had no connections for ten years the woman, if worthy, might be permitted to go to the temple. He mentioned a couple in England that had been separated for 13 years, that they cannot get a divorce, and that we have another case where a woman doesn’t want to get a divorce because of the financial situation but that they have not lived together for a rather lengthy period of time. He asked me if I would feel to give the woman a temple recommend if there is nothing else to disqualify her after a separation of ten years. I agreed that this might be done.

Temples — New Name

President Tanner reported that occasionally a good patron or even one of the temple workers who is a widower inquires about how his wife’s new name which he has forgotten can be restored to him. The temple president inquires as to how this may be done. President Tanner said the instruction is that in cases where both parties are living the individuals should go to the temple again and receive this information at the veil. He wondered, however, if in the case where the husband is living and his wife has passed away the husband might go to the temple and have someone act as proxy for his wife in the temple who could restore this name to him. This was approved.”

Wed., 4 Jun, 1969:

“9:30 a. m. Meeting of the F irst Presidency held in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Temple Ordinances

It was reported that in the London Temple we are now using a tape

for the short lecture, that President Stone of the Salt Lake Temple

had talked to him and had also sent a letter suggesting that it would

help materially if we could use the tapes in the Salt Lake Temple

rather than to make arrangements for men to participate in the

various sessions. He said that if some of these sessions were put on tapes it would be much better and this is being done in some of the temples. He inquires if we would have any objection to starting to use the lecture tapes now. President Tanner said that he thought frankly it would be a better thing to do and that ultimately President Stone would like to use the tapes and films, the same as we do in other temple s .

I said I could see no objection to the use of the tape as suggested.

Temples – Garment for Seriously Afflicted People

President Tanner mentioned that President Stone is asking for approval to dispense with the use of the ceremonial garment for patrons who come to the temple in wheel chairs who are seriously afflicted, such as suffering from arthritis. He states that it is most difficult to clothe them in the ceremonial garment and would be much more convenient if they could wear the regular temple garment.

I gave my approval.”

Thurs., Jul. 3, 1969:

“President Tanner, accompanied by Secretary Joseph Anderson, met with President McKay at 12:30 p.m. and presented the following matters and actions were taken as indicated:

St. George Temple Sealers

President McKay’s attention was called to a letter from President Rudger C. Atkin and counselors of the St. George Temple recommending for temple sealers Vasco Laub and Reuben D. Law. President McKay gave his approval for President Joseph Fielding Smith to officiate in conferring the sealing power upon these brethren.

Tues., Jul. 8, 1969:

“9:00 a.m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment. President were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.

Among the matters discussed were the following:

Temples–Use of Modified Garment in Temple

President Tanner referred to an earlier consideration by the First Presidency of the recommendation by the presidency of the Salt Lake Temple that permission be given to wear the authorized modified garment in the temple instead of the so-called ceremonial garment. A number of reasons were given for this change: Members going through for their endowments would be clothed in the same style garment that they are expected to wear when they leave the temple; considerable time would be saved in that patrons dressing for temple ordinances would not be required to remove their regular garments to put on the ceremonial garment; those who officiate in the temple ordinances wear the regular approved style garments, and other reasons for the proposed change were also mentioned.

President Tanner said that when this matter was presented to the Twelve Elder Lee said that he thought we should move slowly on changes of this kind. President Tanner explained that those who wish to use the old style garment could do so.

I reiterated what I had said when the matter was formerly presented to me–that it would be all right to do this.”

Wed., 20 Aug, 1969:

8:45 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R Dyer.

Also present during the first part of the meeting were Elders Mark R Garff and Emil Fetzer of the Church Building Committee.

Washington D.C. Temple

Elder Mark B. Garff reported that the building costs of the Washington Temple, as presently proposed, could not be built for the ceiling estimate of ten million dollars set by the First Presidency. He spoke of fourteen million plus two million for furnishings and landscaping for a total of sixteen million dollars.

This projected amount was unsatisfactory to the First Presidency. All expressed the feeling that it was too high, although it was the concensus of feeling that the Temple should reflect the image of the Church in the Nation’s capital.

It was suggested by President Tanner that the increase of 16% in building costs in the Washington area, since the early estimates of cost, be added to the ten million, and that a ceiling cost of twelve million dollars be established for building costs with landscaping, driveways, and furnishings as extra. I approved of this and was sustained by my counselors.

Mark Garff was instructed to meet with the architects and advise them of this decision. This will require the lowering of the spires and other building height modifications.

President Dyer made the comment that we needed to take a new look at the cost of our temples, that the simplicity and purpose of that for which temples are erected seemed almost lost in the surge to make our temples great outward showplaces. Reference was made to the extremely high costs of the Los Angeles, Oakland, and now the proposed Washington Temple, that even the Provo and Ogden Temples were too high.

President Dyer madel mention of the fact that the Mohammedan Temple of Mecca, which received the religious fervor of three hundred million people, was nothing but a square black stone building with no windows and but one small door and that the interior was practically bare.

President Tanner stated that he felt that henceforth our temples should not exceed one or one and one half million dollars.”

Tues., Sept. 2, 1969:

“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency

Held Tuesday, September 2, 1969, at 9:00 A.M., in the First Presidency’s Office

Present: Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer

Housing for Temple Ordinance Workers in Manti

President Tanner reported that President Christensen of the Manti Temple is somewhat concerned regarding the need for housing of temple ordinance workers in Manti, that some of these people have to travel a considerable distance and that they cannot obtain satisfactory living accommodations in Manti. President Christensen feels we should give consideration to building some kind of apartment house or dwellings for their accommodation.

In this connection President Dyer mentioned four homes that are now owned by individuals on Church property near the temple which had been rented and might be used by the temple workers. The brethren felt that this would not be sufficient, that we should have a building with eight to twelve apartments. The brethren felt to approve this apartment house proposal.

Fri., Sept. 12, 1969:

“Meeting of the First Presidency

Today I was interested in the following notations of a meeting of my counselors in the First Presidency:

Temples – Marriages in Temples

President Tanner said that President Stone of the Salt Lake Temple had called to his attention the large number of marriages in the Temple and the problems involved in requiring members of families who wish to witness the marriages to remove their street shoes and wear white shoes. President Stone mentions the confusion that often develops, that shoes become misplaced and in some cases people take shoes that are not their own, etc. He wonders if this custom could not be changed and permit those who come to witness the ceremony to wear their street shoes. The brethren felt that we should continue the present rule and that street shoes should not be worn.”

Thurs., 16 Oct., 1969:

“Temple Meeting

I was interested in the following minutes from the Temple Meeting held on this day.

. . . .

I was also interested in the following minutes of a meeting of my counselors held today:

. . . .

Temples–Changes in Temple Rulings

President Tanner said he thought it was important that we endeavor to get the Book of Rules for the temple revised and also the dialogue, that we had been waiting for President McKay, hoping to have an opportunity to go over the proposed changes with him but have not been able to do so. He mentioned that Elders Howard W. Hunter, Richard L. Evans, Theodore M. Burton, Gordon B. Hinckley, ElRay L. Christiansen and himself had been working on this matter. He mentioned that most of the changes are simple changes, that in no way change the meaning but improve the language. President Dyer suggested that President Smith should be consulted in regard to these things because of his knowledge of such matter, and he further felt that no changes should be made until they are brought before the First Presidency, that he thought we should check everything where a change is involved. President Tanner said an effort would be made to set up a meeting of the committee with the First Presidency at an early date for the purpose of considering these matters.”

Thur., 23 Oct., 1969:

“I held a short meeting with Presidents Tanner and Dyer, but Dr. MacFarlane was coming to give me a complete physical so not much business was taken up.

I noted the following matter of importance from the Temple Minutes of this day:

Proposed Changes in Temple Dialogue

President Tanner mentioned proposed changes in the dialogue in the temple rituals, some of which he said had been implemented and some will be implemented on the tape and film that are being prepared. He said that some of these are intended to save repetition and others to clarify the statements made. He said the changes proposed were minor, and mentioned one or two changes as an illustration of what it is proposed to do. President Tanner said that a few of these suggested changes had been presented to President McKay some time ago by Elder ElRay L. Christiansen and had received his approval.

Elder Lee said that we must assume that all that has been done is under the inspiration of the Almighty to the Presidency and the Twelve, which is the legislative body of the Church. He said, ‘If you will tell us that you have that inspiration and you now bring that for our approval, I will have no question, but when you sit down to make changes in some things that we have had for a whole century, I have some reservations.’

The brethren discussed at some length the various parts of the ceremony and proposed changes, but there was some opposition expressed to the proposal to make changes at this time, especially without reading carefully and discussing the proposed changes. Elder Romney said he had confidence in the President, and that everything he says he would sustain. He also had great confidence in President Tanner and the other brethren, and was willing to rest on their judgment, but he did not want to pass on anything without knowing what it is. He said he was willing to leave it to the committee if it is thought that is what should be done, but if they wanted his opinion on it he had to know what it is, and wouldn’t want to vote to pass this as long as there was one person in the Council who questioned it.

Elder Hunter read to the brethren a proposed introduction and welcoming statement which he explained was not a part of the temple ceremony but is given just before the ceremonies commence in the nature of a lecture, which introductory statement the brethren approved.

Mon., 27 Oct., 1969:

“I held no meetings today.

The following matter of importance was taken up by my counselors in a meeting of the First Presidency with Elder Howard W. Hunter:

Temples–Changes in Temple Rulings

Elder Howard W. Hunter met with the brethren of the First Presidency and they discussed changes in the temple dialogue on which matter it was reported that Elder Hunter and a committee consisting of Richard L. Evans, Gordon B. Hinckley and Scott Whittaker had been working, and that others have been working with them. It was stated that they had been preparing the dialogue for the temple film and that among other things they ran into matter pertaining to the film and tape that wouldn’t lend themselves to the present situation so far as the tape was concerned. Elder Hunter said that he had been working with a committee consisting of the presidency of the Salt Lake Temple and ElRay L. Christiansen, and that the recommendations that were considered by the brethren the day before were identical with his committee’s recommendations.

Elder Hunter said that in the first instance, in the initiatory ordinances, we do not have uniformity in all the temples and have been told that President McKay had given his approval for some changes in the Los Angeles Temple some years ago, which changes the Salt Lake Temple had negver adopted, and that, therefore, there has not been uniformity.

Brother Hunter mentioned that the ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood is not uniform so far as ordination for the dead is concerned.

The brethren discussed the various proposed changes and indicated their approval of the list of changes as recommended.”