...even looking at the pictures of that temple gives me the creeps.

Seriously, were they thinking they were going to go into a war with knights and all? Battlements are a military technology, so why use them on a temple?

Oh, even though I'm a neverMo - or maybe just because of that - I love the SLT! And also the Manti - both remind me of old cathedrals and I love to look at pictures of them. Much prettier than most of the new ones!

Why yes, in fact, a lot of them do. Look at the Cathedral of San Juan Bautista. Or Le Mans Cathedral St Julien Apse. Or St Machar's Cathedral.

Perhaps you are confusing battlements with something else, perhaps flying buttresses?

This is what a battlement is:

http://www.travelsinireland.com/england/castle/battlement.jpg

Note that a battlement contains a merlans and crenels. These simply are not in any of the pictures I looked at of the Cathedrals you listed.

But clearly, there are battlements on the SLC, Logan and the Manti Temples:

http://emp.byui.edu/SATTERFIELDB/Rel324/Salt%20Lake%20Temple.jpg
http://ny-image2.etsy.com/il_fullxfull.214373398.jpg
http://www.dlmark.net/images/tmanti3.jpg

I'm sorry, I don't mean this to offend but, as an art historian with a particular concentration on the Middle Ages, I have to say that your visual acumen on diserning a cathedral aesthetic is severely lacking. )LOL)

Mormon temples are to Cathedrals what a cheap tract house is to a Frank Lloyd Wright masterpiece.

Also, the early temple architects learned their trade studying the architecture of Europe, so it is no surprise that there would be battlements. Especially when you look at all the battles in the BoM!!

This is from wikipedia describing the Salt Lake Temple:

Castle-like battlements surround the temple symbolizing a separation from the world and a protection of the holy ordinances from the outside world.
At the base of each buttress is an earthstone. Earthstones represent the Earth, the "footstool of God". The earth itself is in a telestial state, but will transition into a terrestrial state with the coming of the Millennium, and finally will receive Celestial glory at the end of the one thousand years.

That sorta sounds the same as "lightning rods on church's are a sign of lack of faith".

Seriously, couldn't any god worthy of being called a god just protect holy ordinances without resorting to symbolism using outdated technology that no longer adequately protects anything?

Image 24 of 34 in your link, look at the symbols! How can this place be considered spiritual, religious, christian! It looks so pagan, or even satanic!

My one regret about my TBM days is never making it to the live sessions at SLC and Manti. So I have no first-hand knowledge of their interiors other than photos. However, ignorance is no excuse for not having an opinion, so I will go on record as saying that Manti seems at least more interesting than the cookie-cutter banality of the McTemples. There seems to be a sense of craftsmanship and pride in work lacking in the new, mass-produced ones.

Well, perhaps ugly is too strong of a word, perhaps irritatingly gaudy would be better.

Looks out of Ghostbuster

http://connect.in.com/manti-temple-interior-photos/photos-1-1-1-519b5b9f2decbd4f24f73a107a4a57e5.html#image_button

That picture needs to have the x-files theme playing in the background!

The Logan temple is about the same...

http://www.mendonutah.net/images/logan_temple.jpg

The churches and Cathedrals are all the same. At times they can be creepy.

I always liked the Manti temple because it had benches instead of movie theater seats. I could lay my temple packet on the bench and it would stay there. With the fold up seat it would fold up as soon as you stood up, I would lay my packet on the seat edge and it would fall on the floor. At the Manti temple you didn't have that problem and you had lot's of leg room.

I live in Europe and have traveled the world. Seen a lot of cathedrals and other holy meeting places in my time.

But when I see a Mormon Temple? 1st thought is not "that must be a house of God" but rather, what is that 1950s programatic or 1930 industrial architecture building doing THERE???!!

Now, this is not to say I find them ugly, just not cathedral-like. I happen to like all sorts of different building styles. And who am I, anyway?

I myself live temporarily in a hybrid whackjob of a 30s city townhouse building, apparently redone in the 70s (badly), then "updated" in the 90s, where IKEA has thrown up all over the inside and the landlord clearly has never lived---or wanted to.

I have heard other noMos of my aquaintance say temple buildings remind them of public railway station buildings, a public library, or a boy's indsutrial or reform school building/campus.

We have, admittedly, not seen ALL of the temples, only midwest and East Coast US buildings in person, and lots of pictures of SLC and other Utah temple building online and in books.

But you know, there are certainly plenty of other ugly or confused/badly designed or constucted church buildings out there, representing all faiths and denominations.

Funny you should mention that. I attended high school in Manti and our mascot was a Templar--actually a guy in a suit of armour.

I am nevermo but I would love to visit both the SLC and Manti temples (inside and outside) as both a cultural experience and to see them from an art/architecture appreciation perspective.

I will probably never be allowed to go inside as I think these temples don't ever do open houses and I'm not willing to go through the whole process to go there "legally", but I can dream... ;)