Any other speakers are where they are during this General Conference because that has made sense according to the usual rotational pattern. But I did also want to note that if President Monson and Elder Hales do speak back to back in the Sunday Morning Session, there may be reason to believe another speaker may be called upon that is not listed here, likely another General Authority Seventy.
Aside from these notes, the only thing I wanted to note is that I have changed my list of temples somewhat since I last posted it, and I hope you all enjoy those changes. If you have any feedback for me, please let me know in the comments below. For now, thank you for the privilege of your time, and may the Lord be with each and every one of you until my next post.
October 2017 General
Conference Predictions
Speaking Order
(Text in brackets indicated what actually happened.)
Session
|
Conducting
|
Speaker
|
General Women’s
|
Joy D. Jones
|
Christina B.
Franco
|
|
|
Sharon Eubank
|
|
|
Bonnie L.
Oscarson
|
|
|
President
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
|
Saturday
Morning
|
President Henry
B. Eyring
|
President
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
|
|
|
Bishop W.
Christopher Waddell
|
|
|
Jean B. Bingham
|
|
|
Elder David A.
Bednar
|
|
|
Elder Massimo
De Feo
|
|
|
Elder O.
Vincent Haleck
|
|
|
Elder Jeffrey
R. Holland
|
Saturday Afternoon
|
President
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
|
President Henry
B. Eyring
(Sustaining of
Church Officers)
|
|
|
President
Russell M. Nelson
|
|
|
Elder Dale G.
Renlund
|
|
|
Elder Larry Y.
Wilson
|
|
|
Elder Joni L.
Koch
|
|
|
Elder Ian S.
Ardern
|
|
|
Elder Quentin
L. Cook
|
|
|
Elder Ronald A.
Rasband
|
Saturday
Priesthood
|
President Henry
B. Eyring
|
President
Thomas S. Monson
|
|
|
Elder D. Todd
Christofferson
|
|
|
Elder Patrick
Kearon
|
|
|
President
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
|
|
|
President Henry
B. Eyring
|
Sunday Morning
|
President
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
|
President
Thomas S. Monson
|
|
|
Elder Robert D.
Hales
|
|
|
Elder Juan A.
Uceda
|
|
|
Neill F.
Marriott
|
|
|
Elder Gary E.
Stevenson
|
|
|
Elder Adilson
de Paula Parrella
|
|
|
Elder Brian K.
Taylor
|
|
|
President Henry
B. Eyring
|
Sunday
Afternoon
|
President Henry
B. Eyring
|
Elder Neil L.
Andersen
|
|
|
Tad R.
Callister
|
|
|
Elder David F.
Evans
|
|
|
Elder M.
Russell Ballard
|
|
|
Elder Taniela
B. Wakolo
|
|
|
Elder Jose L.
Alonso
|
|
|
Elder Dallin H.
Oaks
|
Changes in
General Church Leadership
Presidency of
the Seventy: Elders Donald L. Hallstrom and Richard J. Maynes released from
the presidency, Elders Juan A. Uceda and Patrick Kearon sustained.
NOTE: These
changes, announced on May 3, became effective on August 1. For that reason,
they will likely be ratified by sustaining vote. However, because there has
also been a time or two when such changes have not been so ratified, I would
not be surprised if this is not noted. Until further notice, I have felt it
would be wiser to include the information.
RESULT:
|
General
Authority Seventies: Elders Stanley G. Ellis, Larry R. Lawrence, and W. Craig
Zwick released as General Authority Seventies and granted emeritus status.
NOTE: Elder
Ellis turned 70 in January this year, just as Elder Zwick did in June, and
Elder Lawrence did in August, so it would make sense if these men were
released and granted emeritus status.
RESULT:
|
Area Seventies:
Releases and sustainings.
NOTE: It has
been customary for most changes in area seventies to take place in April,
when President Uchtdorf leads out in the sustaining vote, and for only a few
to take place in October, when President Eyring leads out in the sustaining.
Since we are talking about an October General Conference, it would make sense
if only a few changes happened this go-round.
RESULT:
|
Temple
Predictions:
3+
temples announced in any of the following locations:
ADDITIONAL
NOTE: After thinking further about those temples I feel are most likely in the
near future, I first narrowed down then expanded, then revised 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. As always,
these are nothing more than my own thoughts, backed up by either research or
the opinions of others I have trusted in this matter. The Lord decides where He
needs His temples to be built, and those decisions are manifested to those
authorized to receive such revelation (the prophet, or, in our current
situation, those authorized to represent him in so determining).
Africa
Southeast: Antananarivo Madagascar; Maputo Mozambique; Lubumbashi DR Congo;
Cape Town South Africa
Africa
West: Benin City/Lagos Nigeria; Kumasi Ghana; Freetown Sierra Leone; Yamoussoukro
Ivory Coast; Monrovia Liberia
Asia:
Phomn Penh Cambodia; Jakarta Indonesia; Taichung Taiwan; Ulaanbaatar Mongolia;
Singapore; Hyderabad/Rajahmundry India
Brazil:
Belo Horizonte; Salvador
Caribbean:
San Juan Puerto Rico
Central
America: Managua Nicaragua; San Pedro Sula Honduras; Guatemala City Guatemala
(2nd temple)
Europe: Praia
Cape Verde; Budapest Hungary; Vienna Austria; Edinburgh Scotland
Mexico:
Puebla; Queretaro
North
America Central: Missoula Montana; Green Bay Wisconsin; Rapid City South Dakota
North
America Northeast: Richmond Virginia
North
America Northwest: Salem Oregon
North
America Southeast: Bentonville Arkansas
North
America Southwest: Fort Worth Texas; Flagstaff Arizona; Henderson Nevada
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: Maracaibo Venezuela; Santa Cruz/La Paz Bolivia; Iquitos Peru
South
America South: Valparaiso Chile; Neuquen Argentina
Utah
North: Layton Utah
Utah Salt
Lake: Tooele Utah
Utah
South: Heber City 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. Regarding the Africa West Area, the LDS
Church growth blog reports that, if current growth trends continue, that area
could have 13 temples by the year 2030. Along with that, we know that there are
two dedicated and one announced in that area already. And I figured the 4 in
the list above might be more likely sooner rather than later. So that means
that 7 of the 13 may have been identified. 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. If and when I feel I can narrow down or add new options,
I will do so.
8. In the
Pacific, I know that the first 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. Further study which I did in late July confirms that the
other two locations listed may be possible.
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 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. I added Heber City in late July after a couple of comments led
me to do so. Each of these seem likely. I also know that we are still waiting
to have the Southwest Salt Lake Valley temple mentioned by President Hinckley
announced at some point. Some have said that this temple has been announced
already, but the research I have done proves otherwise.
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.
RESULT: The following temples were announced, much to my great delight:
No comments:
Post a Comment
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.