On this blog, I, James Stokes, share insights and analysis covering the latest news and developments reported about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. My specific emphasis and focus is on the ministry of our current apostles, General Conference, and up-to-date temple information. This site is neither officially owned, operated, or endorsed by the Church, and I, as the autthor thereof, am solely responsible for this content.
Search This Blog
Friday, August 19, 2016
Yet another update to the list of temples that may be announced soon.
6 comments:
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.
In an article about the new temple in Hartford it mentioned the importance of Farmington since Wilford Woodruff was born there. It made me think about other places prophets were born withou temples nearby. There aren't many.
ReplyDeleteVermont. Sharon for Joseph Smith and Whitington for Brigham Young.
England. Milnthorpe for John Taylor.
Though Preston is fairly close.
Ohio. Mantua for Lorenzo Snow.
Missouri. Far West for Joseph F. Smith. Eventually to be built one day I'm sure.
Utah. Huntsville for David O McKay. Again close by is Ogden.
Idaho. Then close to a prediction of Pocatello are both Clifton for Harold B. Lee and Whitney for Ezra Taft Benson.
As far as current apostles the only two are New Jersey, Princeton for Pres Eyring and Czechoslovakia, Ostrava for Pres Uchtdorf.
Just some thoughts.
I could see a temple in Vermont someday, but it would be more likely to be in the Montpelier area, and likely not for a while. In England, Birmingham may be a better possibility. In Ohio, I would likely say a temple in Columbus is a better option. Far West will likely be built someday, but not for a while, I'd wager. Huntsville is not, in my mind, nearly as much of a priority for a Utah temple above and beyond cities that have more of an LDS presence. Pocatello is the most likely possibility for a temple in Idaho. I could see a temple in New Jersey someday, but it is not as imminent in my mind as some other locations. A temple in Prague is a dark-horse possibility. I see Bentonville as the most likely place for a temple that has ties to a current apostle, as land has been purchased there already and such an announcement is only a matter of time. For the moment, I don't see any other temples mentioned as immediate possibilities. But I have no doubt they will each make the list at some point when the time is ripe for that. Thanks, as always, for the comment.
ReplyDeleteColumbus already has a temple, but I'd like to see one in the Cleveland area. They'd probably put it in Kirtland, which would be pretty cool.
DeleteI don't have a source for this, but I heard a rumor once to the effect that the Church is attempting to negotiate the purchase of the Kirtland Temple from the Community of Christ. It would be great if those negotiations were successful. The CofC has given the Church the option of buying major historical sites from them in the past.If there is any truth to that, it would be fantastic! Thanks for the comment.
DeleteJames, there are a lot of excellent candidate cities listed here. Well done. I'll just make a comment about Florida. You may consider Jacksonville over Tallahassee for Florida's third temple. Although Tallahassee offers a nice central location for members in North Florida, including the panhandle, the highest concentration of membership is in the Jacksonville area where the Church continues to steadily grow. It is generally preferred to have temples in cities with multiple stakes, not only for the convenience of patrons but also for the practicality of staffing the temple without requiring temple workers to drive long distances. There are currently three stakes in Jacksonville, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a fourth in the next few years.
ReplyDeleteThanks for that feedback, Brother Satterfield! I agree, based on what you've observed, that that Jacksonville is the superior of the two candidates. I will make that change. Thanks again.
Delete