Dr. Jonathan Stapley tackles a tough topic: race & LDS Temples as we conclude his deep dive into Stapley’s award-winning book, Holiness to the Lord. We tackles some of the most complex historical topics surrounding Latter-day Saint temple worship, including the ideological shift away from plural marriage, the history of racial restrictions, and the profound religious work of caring for the dead.
Dr. Jonathan Stapley concludes his deep dive into his award-winning book, Holiness to the Lord. He tackles some of the most complex historical topics surrounding Latter-day Saint temple worship, including the ideological shift away from plural marriage, the history of racial restrictions, and the profound religious work of caring for the dead.
Did Temple Work Replace Polygamy?
Historian Dr. Richard E Bennett has previously argued that as the Church abandoned plural marriage, work for the dead stepped in as its replacement. Stapley agrees there is truth to this. Before 1890, regular temple attendance was incredibly rare; most early Latter-day Saints only went once in their lives for their own endowment and sealing. Because of this, 19th-century Saints typically viewed temple robes as “burial clothing,” since they saw it more often on deceased bodies than on living worshippers.
However, following the 1890 Manifesto and Wilford Woodruff’s 1894 revelation on adoption, regular proxy labor radically transformed the Latter-day Saint experience. Temple attendance became a normative, regular practice, effectively replacing plural marriage as the core foundation of 20th-century Latter-day Saint identity construction.
Segregation, Race & LDS Temples
We also unpacked the complicated history of race & the temple. Early in the Church’s history, Black members did participate in temple ordinances: Elijah Abel was washed and anointed in the Kirtland Temple, Jane Manning James performed baptisms for the dead in the Endowment House, and historical records show that several previously enslaved women were endowed in the Salt Lake Temple.
Tragically, as Jim Crow-era segregationist worldviews hardened in the 20th century, policies shifted. Stapley highlights research by Tanya Ryder showing a period where Black members could submit their family history to the temple but were required to have white proxies perform the actual baptisms.
When asked if the temple restriction was instituted primarily to prevent interracial marriage, Stapley offers a nuanced historian’s view. While Brigham Young actively encouraged intermarriages between white settlers and Native Americans, he harbored intense opposition to Black and white intermarriage and procreation. Stapley notes that while Brigham Young’s racist views on intermarriage undeniably informed the temple ban, historians lack the specific documentation to conclusively prove it was the exact causal instigation.
Debunking the 1979 “Satan” Film Myth
Stapley also takes a moment to debunk a persistent rumor regarding the 1979 temple film. A popular story claims that the Church asked a dark-skinned or Polynesian actor to play Satan, but the actor protested the racist casting. Stapley explains that there is no good evidence for this event; the entire rumor stems from a single, unreliable third-hand source—a typed memory of a purported conversation.
Caring for the Dead
To conclude, Stapley reflects on one of the most resonant chapters of his book: the religious practice of caring for and dressing the dead. In modern society, the professionalization of medicine and funerals has largely insulated us from death. Stapley argues that the Latter-day Saint practice of dressing deceased loved ones in temple clothing provides an incredibly important religious outlet to process grief. Furthermore, this enduring ritual acts as a powerful symbol, signaling the believers’ incorporation into the priesthood as heavenly kings, queens, priests, and priestesses.
