Stokes Sounds Off: Temple Site Possibilities: South America South Area, Part Five--How the Church Could Potentially Divide the Cordoba Argentina Temple District

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Temple Site Possibilities: South America South Area, Part Five--How the Church Could Potentially Divide the Cordoba Argentina Temple District

Hello again, everyone! I am back in the early morning hours of the 26th to continue my coverage on potential future temples that could be built to help serve the Saints in the South America South Area. Having explored in my last post how the Church could potential divide the current Buenos Aires Argentina district we now turn our attention to how, when, and in what way the Church could potentially divide the district of the other Argentine temple, which is located in Cordoba. We have set the background for this topic in one of the previous posts about this area which discussed the current composition of that district. So let's discuss some possible ways that district could potentially be split.

The Saints from the Bell Ville stake currently travel 129.4 miles to worship at the temple in Cordoba. While that is 70.6 miles less than the 200-mile goal set by President Monson, if it would save the Bell Ville Saints a journey, it would make sense if they got their own temple, which could also potentially serve other stakes and districts in that region as well.

Another potential option that could work is the Argentine city of San Juan, which is 362.8 miles from Cordoba and would be a prime candidate based on the 200-mile goal. If a temple is built in Bell Ville, then San Juan would likely remain part of the Cordoba distrct, and vice versa, since the two are 475.9 miles apart.

The Church could also announce a temple for the San Luis area, as the Saints in that region have aa journey of 266.1 miles to the Cordoba. Since those Saints are even further away from Bell Ville (with a distance of 276.4 miles), they would likely remain with the Cordoba district until the time a temple is announced in San Juan, which would only be slightly closer than Cordoba (with that distance spanning 202.2 miles, which is still a little much).

The final option I'd like to present that could split the Cordoba temple district would be a potential temple in San Rafael. Since the Saints in that region travel more than twice the 200-mile goal set by President Monson (with the exact distance being 433.9 miles), a temple there might be useful to those Saints, 

If a temple is built in Bell Ville, the San Rafael Saints would likely still attend the temple in Cordoba, since Bell Ville and San Rafael are slightly farther apart (the exact distance between the two is 444.2 miles). But if either San Rafael or San Luis gets a temple, then the city that did not will likely be within that district, since the two are a distance of exactly 169 miles apart, which is considerably closer. That said, I would anticipate that both cities will be getting a temple at some point.

But these are just my thoughts on how the Cordoba Argentina Temple district could potentially be split. 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, 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 post above exploring the likely ways in which the Cordoba Temple district could potentially be divided, have I overlooked anything I should have considered? Until I finalize my overall list the week before General Conference, I will be finalizing this list. 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.