Stokes Sounds Off: Temple Site Possibilities: South America South Area, Part Six--Potential Future Temples in Chile

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Temple Site Possibilities: South America South Area, Part Six--Potential Future Temples in Chile

Hello again, everyone! In continuing to discuss the potential future temples that could be built to help serve the Saints within the South America South Area, we now turn our attention to Chile. Until we see which of Chile's 77 stakes and 16 districts are going to be part of the Concepcion Chile Temple district, it will be difficult to tell if and how soon another temple might potentially be needed. That said, it would appear that the driving force behind the Concepcion Chile temple is the fact that the Concepcion Saints currently have a journey of 310.5 miles, which is over 100 miles further than President Monson's 200-mile goal.

That said, I do want to explore the likelihood of potential future Chilean locations I can see in which the Church could build other temples. The first is the city of Antofagasta. The Saints in that city currently travel 847.7 miles to the Santiago temple. And the Saints in Antofagasta are even further away from Concepcion, as the distance between the two is 1,156,2 miles. So a temple there makes sense.

There may also be a chance that the Church could opt to announce a temple for the Chilean city of Los Angeles. Saints in that city currently travel 319.4 miles to get to Santiago, and that distance will be cut down to 79 miles once the Concepcion temple is dedicated. While that dedication could very well push back the time-frame in which a temple could be built in Los Angeles Chile, it still seems potentially possible, if not immediately, then perhaps at some point.

But perhaps my favorite option for Chile's third temple is the city of Valpaiaiso, which has been on my list for a while now. While it is only 71.6 miles from the temple in Santiago, it will stay with that temple district once the temple in Concepcion is dedicated, since Concepcion is 375,8 miles from Valparaiso.

Again, in examining these options, we see that the Church has a few for potential future temples in Chile. So that does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. Until my next post (which should come at some point tomorrow afternoon to wrap up my coverage of this area, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

1 comment:

  1. In my coverage above about Chile, have I overlooked anything at all? I will be accepting any comments from any of you until the week before the April General Conference, when I will need to finalize this list. So just let me know. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete

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.