Stokes Sounds Off: Temple Sites added to my list for the near future

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Sunday, July 30, 2017

Temple Sites added to my list for the near future

Hello, all! Further study on my part has led me to expand my list of temples that may be announced in the near future. I am posting today to share the newest version of that list. I feel pretty good about it, but continue to welcome feedback on it. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks.

3+ temples announced in any of the following locations:
NOTE: Since it is difficult at best to know where the Lord feels a need for a temple and temple locations are not as cut-and-dried as I have originally believed them to be, I am doing a preliminary list, which I will refine as the time for General Conference draws closer. I will look forward to seeing what happens with those possibilities, if any are announced at all. So far between 2015 and this year, the 12 newest temples were announced during the April General Conference. If any temples are announced, there may only be a few. But that is just my own opinion. So far between 2015 and this year, the 12 newest temples were announced during the April General Conference. If any temples are announced, there may only be a few. But that is just my own opinion, and the Lord has been known to prove me wrong. I continue to hope for temple announcements during every General Conference, and nothing is set in stone.

ADDITIONAL NOTE: After thinking further about those temples I feel are most likely in the near future, I first narrowed down then expanded these selections again. I am again listing them by the geographical area of the Church under which they fall and then by likelihood within each of those areas.

Africa Southeast: Antananarivo Madagascar; Lubumbashi DR Congo
Africa West: Lagos Nigeria; Kumasi Ghana; Freetown Sierra Leone; Praia Cape Verde
Asia: Phomn Penh Cambodia; Jakarta Indonesia; Taichung Taiwan; Ulaanbaatar Mongolia; Singapore; Hyderabad/Rajahmundry India
Brazil: Belo Horizonte; Salvador
Central America: Managua Nicaragua; San Pedro Sula Honduras; Guatemala City Guatemala (2nd temple); Liberia Costa Rica; Guapiles Costa Rica
Europe: Budapest Hungary; Vienna Austria
Mexico: Puebla; Queretaro; Mexico City (2nd temple)
North America Central: Missoula Montana; Green Bay Wisconsin; South Dakota Rapid City
North America Northwest: Salem Oregon
North America Southeast: Bentonville Arkansas
North America Southwest: Fort Worth Texas; Flagstaff Arizona; Henderson Nevada; Joplin Missouri
North America West: Bakersfield/Ventura California
Pacific: Auckland New Zealand; Port Moresby Papua New Guinea; Pago Pago American Samoa; Neiafu Vava'u Tonga
Philippines: Davao/Cagayan de Oro
South America Northwest: Valparaiso Chile; Neuquen Argentina; Maracaibo Venezuela; Santa Cruz/La Paz Bolivia; Iquitos Peru
Utah North: Layton Utah; Smithfield Utah
Utah Salt Lake: Tooele Utah; Taylorsville Utah
Utah South: Mapleton Utah; Price Utah

Notes about potential temple sites:
1. For the Africa Southeast Area, the two possibilities listed seem to be the most likely ones. With the growth of the Church in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a second temple seems imminent, even without knowing how the one that will be dedicated in Kinshasa will affect any potential future temples. While Elder Neil L. Andersen proposed a temple for the Kasai region, Lubumbashi seems more likely. As always, I will pass any new information along as I become aware of it.
2. In the Africa West Area, second temples for Ghana and Nigeria seem likely, especially now that all Nigerian cities have been reached by the Church. And Sierra Leone may also get a temple soon simply by virtue of being so far distant from the temple district under which it falls. Additionally, Sierra Leone and Cape Verde come in at #6 and #10 respectively in terms of the top ten countries/dependencies with the strongest LDS presence but without a temple, making them very viable candidates for the future, if not immediately. I have also heard some say that a second and possibly a third Ivory Coast temple may be announced within the next 10-15 years depending on how quickly the first one progresses.
3. While I was double-checking for additional temple sites, I quickly figured out that Asia could be a great candidate for several new temples, and these are the most likely locations that I could find. While all of them make sense in terms of President Monson’s desire to have every Church member within 200 miles of a temple, I have grouped them by the number of Church units. Additionally, I know that temples have been proposed for New Delhi India (in 1992 by Elder Maxwell) and for Singapore (in 2000 by President Hinckley). Church membership in those countries stand as follows: Cambodia: nearing 14,000; India: just over 13,000; Mongolia: nearing 11,500; Indonesia: nearing 7,300; Singapore: nearing 8,400. According to a statistical profile written by a Church Growth expert, India may not actually get a temple until there is a stronger Church presence to support. For now, it seems that the order I have placed them in may be the most likely order by which they might be announced. On July 28, I added one for Taichung Taiwan, since further research indicates Taiwan may be ready for a second temple. As more information comes to light, I will make any adjustments that might be necessary.
4. In Brazil, the two cities above seem to be the most imminent possibilities. It would also not surprise me at all if the Church held off on announcing any other Brazilian temples until the two under construction and the other two announced ones are closer to completion. As I have mentioned previously, I had felt prior to General Conference last April that Brazil's next temple would be built in Brasilia, but didn't think it would be announced until the one in Belem made more progress. So more Brazilian temples may be announced soon, but they also might not. Once more is known, I will make any adjustments needed.
5. Central America may be needing several new temples, based on what my research shows. Then-Elder Nelson proposed a temple for Managua in 2012, and I recently learned that land has been set aside for such a temple for several years. Additional research done on July 28, 2017 showed that temples could be needed in the other cities listed in the Central America Area, and they are listed in order of likelihood for that to happen.
6. While I said when posting my last list of possibilities that any new European temples might be put on hold until the Church evaluates how the dedications of the Paris France and Rome Italy Temples and the rededications of the temples in Freiberg and Frankfurt Germany have affected temple attendance for European Saints, in going over the current and future districts, I was reminded that I had heard from several people that Budapest Hungary would be the next European temple. And Vienna Austria makes sense in terms of President Monson's expressed goal to have every member within 200 miles of a temple. Until more information is known, these additions seemed to be sound.
7.      Of the many cities in Mexico, I know Puebla has been widely mentioned as the most likely site for the next temple in that nation. I have also felt at times that Queretaro could be a feasible possibility, as could a second temple for Mexico City. If and when I feel I can narrow down the options, I will do so.
8. In the Pacific, I know that these two cities have been mentioned to me as having sites purchased, and once Church growth and temple activity from these areas warrant an official announcement for them, it will happen. Of the two, Auckland seems more likely.
9. While Church growth in the United States has stagnated somewhat of late, except in the “Mormon corridor” of Idaho, Utah, and Arizona, I have heard at one time or another that each of the temples I listed above could potentially be possible. In the course of recent deeper research on the matter, I recalled that many of these cities have been mentioned to me at one point or another as very likely possibilities. As part of my efforts to expand my predictions, I decided to include these cities again on this list. Until I know more about US growth, these seem to be sound changes. I also know, as I have previously noted, that land has been set aside in Bentonville Arkansas and Missoula Montana for future temple sites, with an official announcement anticipated once unit growth and activity in the current temple districts warrant that happening.
10. As a state that is constantly expanding its outreach, Utah has 18 temples either in operation or in various stages of construction. Layton and Tooele have often been mentioned to me by name as possibilities. In the course of my study, I learned that Mapleton may be a good possibility as well. And there are any number of others that may also be announced. I didn’t want to go overboard with Utah possibilities, but if there are any strong contenders I am missing, I will hopefully be able to add them in the future.

Final note: As with everything else I put together, these are no more than my own thoughts, feelings, and observations based on the research I have done and the reports I have received. I hope that is absolutely understood and accepted. No one can know the mind of the Lord relating to His Church except those authorized to receive revelation regarding their own spheres of responsibility. While I am always gratified when my predictions turn out to be correct, I am even more appreciative of the many times developments do not take place as I project they will. At the end of the day, the Lord is the only one who can determine best how to further His work, and He manifests His will to those authorized to lead the Church and make decisions. Just wanted to end on that note.

2 comments:



















  1. for Costa Rica, it's not likely, the published schedule shows that temple only running 11 endowment sessions a week,

    For Utah, may have to wait to see how Jordan River shakes out after it reopens before any other announcements besides Saratoga Springs, Provo City Center appears to be taking a lot of traffic from Jordan River as it is deemed to be easier to get to, even with the distance. Maintenance closures when they occur aggravate busy issues with the others, and once Jordan River comes back online we will have a better idea of how things are really stacking up in Utah County. Heber City and Tooele are the most likely to go first among Utah cities, then the others due to rapid growth in the two areas and tough winter conditions and occasional but not frequent truck accidents on the highways leading to the Wasatch Front.

    Brazil: Salvador before Belo Horizonte, but both are possible eventually.

    Mexico City has an issue with attendance, and the host stake currently has none of its members as ordinance workers


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey, james anderson! Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with me. A few comments in reply, if I may:
      1. I didn't know about the attendance problems associated with Costa Rica's first temple. I can see now that, while a second (and even a third) Costa Rican temple might make sense distance-wise, other temples there might not happen until activity picks up at this first one. Thanks for mentioning that.
      2. I know that other Utah temples might not happen until we see how the reopening of Jordan River (set to happen sometime next year) and the construction (and eventual dedication) of Saratoga Springs affect temple attendance. That said, I also have first-hand knowledge of how much temples are needed, accepted, and kept busy here in Utah. So I have no doubt that at least one Utah temple (and perhaps a few more than that) are likely on the list of 85+ that may be announced in the near future. Time will tell how likely any of these locations are. I added these locations to follow advice I was given to expand my thinking about temple sites. Rest assured, I am keeping an eye on all temple-related developments. Just as my thinking has changed previously, I'm sure it will continue to change going forward. And I will pass any updates along as I feel I can. For now, I feel pretty secure in these possibilities.
      3. In terms of Brazilian temples (as with anywhere else), I'm sure all of us have different feelings about which cities will get temples and when. In the case of Belo Horizonte (which falls under the Minas Gerais area of Brazil), a temple there would serve 13 stakes and 6 districts (77 wards, 47 branches). A temple in the Salvador area (which is termed the Bahia district) would serve 10 stakes and 2 districts (68 wards, 29 branches). In terms of Church units, therefore, I don't see your point. There may be other factors of which I am not aware. But I do not think it is unreasonable to assume that both temples could be on the list of 85+. Until I feel a compelling reason to change my thoughts on this, I think I will leave them in the current order.
      4. I did not know that about the Mexico City temple. Perhaps a second temple for that city is not as imminent as I thought. However, I can see temples being feasible for both Puebla and Queretaro, and perhaps by the time both are up and running, a second Mexico City temple may be warranted.

      I hope you know, james, that I am not in any way trying to discount your excellent observations. I appreciate your analysis and comments. Temple site possibilities have been a subject close to my heart for the last two years at least. I always enjoy hearing the opinion of others, and I appreciate you taking the time to comment. As I hope I made clear enough above, the Lord knows where He needs temples to be built, and He manifests His will on the subject to his prophets and apostles. Whether I am wrong or right on any of my own thoughts on this matter, I am grateful for the chance to consider and post about this subject. Thanks again.

      Delete

In addition to my life-long love for the subjects which I cover in the posts of this blog, I have long held the belief that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. Differences of opinion are natural, while being disagreeable in expressing those differences is not. And in that sense, I have no desire to close the door on anyone who earnestly desires to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on subjects covered in the posts on this blog.

At the same time, however, I recognize that we live in a time when incivility, discourtesy, unkindness, and even cyber-bullying has regrettably become part of online interactions. With that in mind, while anyone who wishes can comment on anything if they choose to do so, I hereby reserve the right to immediately delete any comments which are critical, unkind, lack civility, or promote prodcuts, services, and values contrary to either the Church, or to the rules of online etiquette.

I'd also like to remind all who comment here that I try to respond personally to each individual comment as I feel is appropriate. Such replies are not meant to end the conversation, but to acknowledge earnest feedback as it is submitted.

And in order to better preserve the spirit and pure intentions for which this blog was established, I also hereby request that anyone not commenting with a regular user name (particularly those whose comments appear under the "Unknown" or "Anonymous" monikers, give the rest of us a name to work with in addressing any replies. If such individuals do not wish to disclose their actual given names, a pseudonym or nickname would suffice.

Any comments made by individuals who opt to not give a name by which they can ber identified may, depending on the substance and tone of such comments, be subject to deletion as well. I would respectfully ask that all of us do all we can to keep the dialogue positive, polite, and without malice or ill-will. May the Lord bless us all in our discussion of these important matters.