Did the Church edit out an actor from the temple film because he went astray

Undetermined

mormon-temple-draper-endowmentAt the beginning of August 2013, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who worshipped at an LDS temple began seeing something that they hadn’t seen in over 20 years, a new version of the endowment temple film. But, according to many members, that doesn’t mean that during those 20 plus years changes in the older films didn’t occur.

In 2010, many temple-attending members began to notice something different about the actor playing the part of the apostle John in one of the versions of the temple film. He looked different and the lighting on him seemed to be slightly brighter than on the other actors. It soon became apparent to members that the former John had been professionally edited out of the film and replaced with a new actor. The rumor also soon began to circulate that the reason for this change was because the former actor was gay and/or had spoken out against the Church’s stance on Proposition 8.

A petition was sent on November 4, 2009 to the First Presidency, asking them to change their position on same-gender attraction. Among the many signatures was Fred Hunting. The actor that played John and who was reportedly removed from the film was also named Fred Hunting, although it has not been verified that the Fred Hunting on the petition was for certain the same man who acted in the film.

It is also not certain as to the reason why the possible editing changes even occurred. Was it because the Church was either unhappy or embarrassed that an actor in the temple film had come out against the Church? Or did Fred Hunting ask to be removed from the temple film? Or perhaps the change had a different reason all together.

Not long after the change, members also began to notice that of the two temple films that most temples showed, the one containing the edited John began being shown less and less often. The LDS Church has never publicly spoken about the change and with the creation of a brand-new version of the temple film this is one mystery that (like the feathery hair styles of the older film versions) will be lost to time.

Actor removed from temple film
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmail

4 thoughts on “Actor removed from temple film

  • April 15, 2020 at 10:37 pm
    Permalink

    Fred is my friend also, the Church tried to digitally change his face, despite the large price tag the end result never looked right and they ultimately ditched that temple film.

    I have to say that Fred is one of the kindest and most loving people I have ever known, I admire his integrity.

    Reply
  • January 11, 2020 at 6:57 am
    Permalink

    The problem of pedophiles in the temples is so great that the focus on gay issues may indicate that the top Mormon leadership are all having sex with children. This is consistent with my experience as a child as the leadership condoned my daily sexual assaults by my stepfather ( a convicted child rapist).
    As an adult telling my story I have been receiving threatening unsigned letters from the churches lawyers at Kirton McConkie a law firm founded by relatives of top mormon leadership.
    Church leaders also accused me of threatening to bomb Mormon churches at which point I asked the FBI to investigate me regarding these lies. The FBI concluded it was completely false.

    Reply
    • May 7, 2020 at 4:00 am
      Permalink

      Well, that’s one side of the story. To help clarify, what do you mean by “condone” and from whose perspective is this word used. Second, what has the law firm’s founders religious beliefs have to do with whether or not there is a legal foundation (rightly or wrongly) to send letters or proceed with legal action. If you have a case of harassment that is valid and beyond mere speculation, take it to the Utah Bar Association. If the UBA says there is no violation on the part of the law firm, then take it up with your legislators and have the laws changed to what you think they ought to be. Thirdly, you say church leaders went to the FBI. How do you know that? Is that speculation and paranoia on your part or a dramatic statement without foundation to support your position. Also, that was very noble of you to “ask the FBI to investigate” you. If the “church leaders” thought you were going to bomb churches, why wouldn’t they have gone to the FBI”

      Your story is full of holes and drama. Even your first sentence indicates you have a bias and prejudice and a purpose to accuse rather than state facts. If you have facts’ state them. Don’t use “they” and “church leaders” and “accused”. How did they accuse you? And if they did accuse you, what did they do – come to your door or storm into your workplace? If there is any truth in what you say, it is valid to bring it out in the open, but do so openly, honestly and not vaguely with unsupported or unlikely scenarioes

      Reply
  • May 29, 2017 at 11:59 pm
    Permalink

    It’s true. Fred is my friend.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *