Stokes Sounds Off: General Conference Predictions

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Thursday, March 10, 2016

General Conference Predictions

It's that time of year again, friends, when I post my General Conference predictions. In an effort to make my General Conference predictions more accurate, I have done research back as far as 20 years and have looked at the patterns I've observed. These predictions are the fruits of that research. I have particularly looked this time for patterns as far as how often the general authority seventies speak. The predictions for April include for the first time my educated guess as to the end of the year Church statistics for 2015. Some of the numbers, such as those for stakes and districts, and the number of temples dedicated and rededicated last year were easy to find. For the numbers of full-time missionaries, Church-service missionaries, Church members, ad wards and branches, I used a different formula than I have in years past. I won't try to explain how I arrived at these numbers, but rest assured, it's all been researched. I have also included my list of potential temple sites that President Monson may announce in April. I had a list of 30, and then did some statistical research to fine-tune that list for this prediction.

There are only a few things I am not sure of: whether I've got the correct seventies in the correct slots, how many seventies will speak (which varies based on the length of talks of all other speakers), and who exactly will represent the Presiding Bishopric in speaking at General Conference. With the changes announced shortly after the October General Conference, we have one member of the Bishopric (Bishop Waddell, the second counselor) who has not had a chance to speak in General Conference since his first talk as a general authority several years ago. So he could be the one asked to speak this time. However, in checking on the patterns of Presiding Bishopric speakers, it has typically been (at least for the last few years) in this order: Presiding Bishop, Second Counselor, First Counselor. Since Bishop Causse as the first counselor spoke in April 2015, it would make sense if he, as the Presiding Bishop, spoke this go round, as Bishop Stevenson would have been the one in October had he not been called to the apostleship. But a new bishopric may mean a new pattern. The pattern seems to be for a PB member to speak in the priesthood session every other conference, and its been more than a year since we had a PB member speak in the Priesthood Session. Bishop Causse is the one I put in this time, but we'll see what happens. Just know that if it's not Bishop Causse, it will likely be Bishop Waddell, and that it is more than likely that the PB member will speak in the priesthood session.

 I am excited about this general conference. It will mark the first time since they were called last conference that the newest apostles will be giving a full-length talk (15-20 minutes). There are likely to be several new temples, several new General Authorities, and a change in the Primary General Presidency. We will also get the chance to ratify by sustaining of the changes in the Presidency of the Seventy and the Presiding Bishopric. And while I don't know all of the Area Seventies that might be released this conference, we have quite a few that have been called to be mission presidents. So those changes are at least pretty definite.

That being said, here are my predictions for all of you that want to follow along.

April 2016 General Conference Predictions (Text in brackets indicated what actually happened.)
Session
Conducting
Speaker
General Women’s
Rosemary M. Wixom
Linda K. Burton


Cheryl A. Esplin


Neill F. Marriott


President Henry B. Eyring
Saturday Morning
President Dieter F. Uchtdorf
President Henry B. Eyring


President Russell M. Nelson


Elder Gerrit W. Gong


Mary R. Durham


Elder Yoon Hwan Choi


Elder Per G. Malm


Elder Gary E. Stevenson
Saturday Afternoon
President  Henry B. Eyring
President Dieter F. Uchtdorf (Sustaining of Church Officers)

Church  Auditing Department Report, 2015
Kevin R. Jergensen

Statistical Report, 2015
Brook P. Hales


Elder Ronald A. Rasband


Elder M. Russell Ballard


Elder Patrick Kearon


Elder Mervyn B. Arnold


Elder Neil L. Andersen


Elder David A. Bednar
Saturday Priesthood
President Dieter F. Uchtdorf
Elder Dale G. Renlund


Bishop Gerald Causse


Stephen W. Owen


President Dieter F. Uchtdorf


President Henry B. Eyring


President Thomas S. Monson
Sunday Morning
President Henry B. Eyring
President Thomas S. Monson


Elder Quentin L. Cook


Elder Donald L. Hallstrom


Bonnie L. Oscarson


Elder Jairo Mazzagardi


Elder D. Todd Christofferson


President Dieter F. Uchtdorf
Sunday Afternoon
President Dieter F. Uchtdorf
Elder Robert D. Hales


Elder Jeffrey R. Holland


Elder Juan A. Uceda


Elder Kent F. Richards


Elder Benjamin De Hoyos


Elder Steven E. Snow


Elder Dallin H. Oaks

April 2016 Predictions for changes in General Church Leadership
Presidency of the Seventy: Elder Gerrit W. Gong sustained as a new member to replace Elder Ronald A. Rasband, who became a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in October 2015.
NOTE: Elder Rasband’s call to the apostleship in October 2015 left a vacancy in the Presidency of the Seventy that was not filled during General Conference but a couple of days later. Elder L. Whitney Clayton was named the new senior president of the Seventy (a position previously held by Elder Rasband), and Elder Gong was called to fill the vacancy. It makes sense that Elder Gong’s call will be ratified by sustaining vote during this conference.
RESULT:
First Quorum of the Seventy: Elder W. Christopher Waddell released in view of his new calling as Second Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric; new members sustained from the Second Quorum of the Seventy, Area Seventies, or the Church at large.
NOTE: Elder Waddell’s call as the new Second Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric had been announced in October 2015, shortly after General Conference. It makes sense that this change, along with any sustainings, will be ratified by sustaining vote during this conference.
RESULT:
Second Quorum of the Seventy: New members sustained from Area Seventies or Church at large.
NOTE: Members of the Second Quorum of the Seventy are usually sustained in April and released in October, so it makes sense that any sustainings would be presented in April.
RESULT:
Presiding Bishopric: Bishop Gary E. Stevenson released as Presiding Bishop in view of his call to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles; Bishop Gerald Causse released as First Counselor and sustained as the new Presiding Bishop; Bishop Dean M. Davies released as Second Counselor and sustained as the new First Counselor; Bishop W. Christopher Waddell sustained as the new Second Counselor.
NOTE: When Bishop Stevenson was called to the Twelve in October 2015, he retained the calling of Presiding Bishop until the changes noted above took place a few days after the conference, so these changes will need to be ratified by sustaining vote during this conference.
RESULT:
Area Seventies: Releases and sustainings for several Area Seventies.
NOTE: It seems to be a common practice for most releases and/or sustainings of Area Seventies to happen in April, when President Dieter F. Uchtdorf leads out in the sustaining of Church officers, while only a few releases and sustainings of Area Seventies happen in October, when President Henry B. Eyring leads out in the sustaining.
ADDITIONAL NOTE: We know that, at the very least, the following currently-serving Area Seventies, who have been called to be mission presidents, will be released: Kent J. Allen, Jeffrey D. Cummings, Hernán D. Ferreira, Brent J. Hillier, Alfred Kyungu, D. Zackary Smith, Wenceslao H. Svec, and Fabian I. Vallejo.
RESULT:
Primary General Presidency: Rosemary M. Wixom released as President, Cheryl A. Esplin released as First Counselor, and Mary R. Durham released as Second Counselor. New Primary General Presidency sustained, perhaps with Mary R. Durham being sustained as the new Primary General President or one of the counselors.
NOTE: Rosemary M. Wixom, the Primary General President, and her First Counselor Cheryl A. Esplin, have served since April 2010, a period spanning 6 years. In the earlier days of the Church, tenures of general auxiliary presidencies were not set to any specific length of time. But for at least the last 20 years, tenure lengths for general auxiliary presidencies are generally set at 5 years (with a minimum of 6 years if new presidency members are sustained without a total reorganization of the presidency). It makes sense that Sisters Wixom and Esplin would be released. It has been a relatively common practice for members of General Presidencies who have been in a year, as Mary R. Durham has, to be retained in a newly called presidency. So it would make sense if the changes above take place.
RESULT:

Prediction for Church Statistics at the end of 2015
Stakes
3,174
Missions
417
Districts
580
Wards and Branches
30,061
Total Church Membership
15,683,533
Children of Record Increase
114,655
Convert Baptisms
307,541
Full-Time Missionaries
84,091
Church Service Missionaries
32,102
Temples Dedicated
5 (Cordoba Argentina, Payson Utah, Trujillo Peru, Indianapolis Indiana, Tijuana Mexico)
Temples Rededicated
2 (Mexico City Mexico, Montreal Quebec Canada)
Temples Operating
149


Temple Predictions: 3+ temples announced around the world, with the most likely candidates being American Samoa (Pago Pago); Arkansas (Bentonville); Paraguay (Ciudad del Este); Utah (Layton or Lehi); Brazil (Belo Horizonte); Venezuela (Maracaibo; temple proposed by President Hinckley); Philippines (Davao); Bolivia (La Paz); Texas (Fort Worth); Colorado (Colorado Springs); Austria (Vienna); Arizona (Chandler); Mexico (Guadalajara); Guatemala (Villa Nueva); Ecuador (Quito); New Zealand (Auckland); Texas (Katy); Idaho (Pocatello); Zimbabwe (Harare); Uganda; Kenya (Nairobi (proposed by President Hinckley); Nevada (Henderson); Peru (Iquitos);  California (Long Beach); Philippines (Quezon City); Mongolia (Ulaanbaatar) and Mexico (Cuernavaca).

Well, what do you think? 


10 comments:

  1. Great job, as always! Don't forget under "Temples Dedicated" the Provo City Center Temple.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That one doesn't count for those dedicated in 2015, as it will be dedicated in March of this year. That one will be listed under temples dedicated in 2016, which will be in the statistical report read in the general conference of April 2017. Thanks for the comment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting thoughts, especially about the temple predictions. I have a feeling there might not be many this time around, but I hope I'm wrong. Regarding your specific predictions, I think an Arkansas temple isn't far away, and as a former missionary in La Paz, Bolivia, I'd love to see one there, although I think it's still a few years away. A temple in Mongolia would be fantastic. Even a quick glance at a map shows that the stake there is the most isolated stake in the church (measuring distance to the nearest stake), and I'm sure those people would love to not have to travel to Hong Kong. Regarding Guadalajara, there is already a temple there. Are you predicting a second temple for that city? Do you have information that says that usage there is sufficient to warrant a second temple?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't have any of the inside information that Matthew Martinich seems to have, but I do follow the ldschurchtemples.com website, which, though not an official Church website, has a webmaster whose information comes directly from Church headquarters and tips by local members. I based my temple predictions on the following factors: 1. The number of operating stakes in each region. 2. the reported distance to the nearest temple (as President Monson's goal seems to be to ensure that every temple-worthy saint is no more than a 200-mile distance to the nearest temple. 3. My knowledge about the growth of the Church from reading Matthew Martinich's blog(s) 4. My careful following of Church-related and temple-related developments worldwide. (I know, for instance, that growth of the Church has really increased in the Central and South America regions and in the African regions). 5. Some temples have been proposed by those of the apostleship, and in many (if not all cases) the apostolic blessing has been that they will see a day when temples dot their lands (with temples being proposed, as mentioned in previous posts, specifically in New Delhi, India (proposed in 1992 by Elder Neal A. Maxwell); Vilnius Lithuania (proposed in 1993 by Elder M. Russell Ballard); 4 by President Gordon B. Hinckley (Nairobi Kenya Temple (proposed in 1998); Maracaibo Venezuela Temple (proposed in 1999); Singapore Temple (proposed in 2000); Southwest Salt Lake Valley Temple (proposed in 2005; already discussed in the comments on Matthew Martinich's blog)); Managua Nicaragua Temple (proposed in 2012 by Elder Russell M. Nelson); and the Kasai Region Democratic Republic of the Congo (proposed in 2016 by Elder Neil L. Andersen). Obviously, there are many apostolic promises made, and not all of them have come to fruition. But as I mentioned in another blog post, the faith of members combined with an apostolic promise can work wonders for the miracle of temples dotting the earth. For example, members in South Africa were recently promised in a regional conference address by President Dieter F. Uchtdorf that if they had faith and lived the gospel, a groundbreaking date for the temple would soon be able to be announced. So the faith of the members and apostolic promises given under the direction of the Spirit play an important role. I do know from talking to my team leader at work (whose family live in Arkansas) that a Bentonville Arkansas temple announcement may be imminent. Guadalajara was one of two or possibly three countries I am predicting a second temple for. As to my particular predictions, they are more hobby than actual study, but I worked overtime to get these as accurate as possible. It is always interesting to see just how accurate my predictions are. I have averaged around 60-80% accuracy per conference, and some things are a matter of routine to predict. Not so sure about some of them, but time will tell just how right or wrong I am. I believe that temples may also be imminent for Layton, Lehi, and Orem Utah. But that's another prediction for another time. In the meantime, thanks for the comment, and thanks for visiting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Orem is unlikely as a temple location. The Tabernacle Temple will now be the temple for Provo and Springville, and the old Provo Temple will be the temple for Orem (and for the MTC). With other temples so close in American Fork (Mt Timpanogos) and Payson, there's not really any need for more temples in central Utah valley. (And we've been scolded recently that the AF temple is sitting idle too much of the time, so I don't think we can expect that the existing temples are bursting at the seams.) More likely, if you want to predict another Utah Valley temple, would be Saratoga/Lehi up north, but then they're a short drive to the Draper or American Fork temples.

      Delete
  6. I am predicting a temple for Layton or Lehi, but in looking particularly at the number of stakes in several Utah towns, I see a day where every major city and town in Utah will have a temple. I know that attendance is down lately at the Mount Timpanogos Temple, but with what I know of how busy they still are at the Provo temple, and with what I've heard already about the level of busyness of the Provo City Center temple just one short week after its dedication, a temple in Orem may not be as far distant as some think. Since I worked at the Mount Timpanogos Temple for six years, I am in a position to tell you that the people of Orem made up about 50% of the attendees at the Mount Timpanogos temple when they fell under that district, and the busyness of the Provo Temple is now likely to really take off since Orem stakes were moved to the Provo temple district. I strongly believe we will see an Orem temple one day, but time will tell. In the meantime, I think my predictions regarding Lehi and Layton are pretty solid. Thanks for the comment, and sorry I didn't see it sooner.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not sure I agree that all the publicly proposed temples are likely for an immediate announcement. American Samoa is much closer to an existing temple than some other Pacific island locations, for instance.

    I've never followed your predictions before this conference, but it seems like you've done a good job of analyzing past patterns. I've done this a bit in the past but never published anything. I will be checking on the Women's meeting tonight to see how you did (among other reasons, of course).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I meant to say your predictions of speakers, in case it wasn't clear. I do wish you hadn't put your temple predictions and speaker predictions in the same post, since all of the other comments have been about temples. But, good work!

      Delete
  8. Thanks for the comments, Brycen! I was not aware of American Samoa being close to a Pacific Island nation with a temple. In general, I'm not much of a geography buff, but I do have a semiannual interest in geography regarding what countries newly called area seventies are from, and what quorum and area they are in. In regards to the speaker predictions, I've been doing some form of them since 2007. My predictions have gradually been fine-tuned and researched to the point that, lately, as far as speaking order is concerned, I have a 60-80% accuracy rate. What I do is I assign three possible "points" to each speaking or conducting slot. If I get the right speaker in the right session in the right order, I give myself 3 points. A speaker who spoke in the session I predicted but not in the order I predicted would get me 2 points, and one point would be awarded if I got it right that they spoke at all. Then I just divide the number of points earned by the number of points available to "grade" my predictions. I may have to settle on having a different system for the statistics, temple announcements, and changes in general Church leadership. I realize that this post is a bit cumbersome to wade through, but I have found that those who follow my predictions like to have them all in one post. You're the first person to ever let me know that you would have liked it more as separate documents. I do have several documents on General Conference patterns and orders and statistics but found that I like to have them all in one post. However, I do appreciate your comment, and that will be something I take under advisement in regards to considering how all such future predictions are handled. Thanks again for the comments.

    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.