Stokes Sounds Off: Temple Site Possibilities: Utah South Area--Part Three: Temples in Utah County

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

Temple Site Possibilities: Utah South Area--Part Three: Temples in Utah County

Hello again, everyone! I am back to discuss the 5 temples that the Church has dedicated (and one that has been announced) to help serve the Saints in Utah County, which, as I have previously noted, has been my home for the 31 years I have been alive. So let's dive right into that.

First, some preliminary information. Utah County has 2 missions (headquartered in Orem and Provo), 161 stakes, and members in 1,407 wards and 53 branches, for a congregational total of 1,460. This means that each temple (once the one in Saratoga Springs is dedicated) will then serve an average of 292 congregations (and that is without taking into account any new ones that will likely be created).

The first temple for the Saints in this area was the Provo Utah Temple, which was dedicated on February 9, 1972 by 10th Church President Joseph Fielding Smith (note that though he composed the prayer, at his request, it was read during the dedication by President Harold B. Lee). As a result of its' dedication, it became the 15th operating temple of the Church. Some of my earliest memories are those associated with my parents leaving us at home to go do temple work in the Provo Temple.

Since the Provo Temple was (and in many ways continues to be) very busy, it has been great to see four other temples which have or will cut down on the distance the Saints in Utah County have th travel.

The dedication of three of those has left the Provo Temple district with 52 stakes based in North Provo, Orem, and the Heber Valley. While the Saints in Heber only have a 28.1 mile drive to get to the Provo Temple, I have a potential temple for Heber City on my list for the Utah South Area. I am also certain that Orem (where I currently reside) will get its own temple at some point, but that might be a few years down the road.

The next temple dedicated in Utah County was the Mount Tmpanogos Utah Temple, which, as I have already noted, holds a special place in my heart. Dedicated between October 13-19, 1999 (for which I was in attendance) by President Gordon B. Hinckley, it became the Church's 49th operating temple.

Serving 60 stakes in the northern Utah Valley, its district includes the cities of Alpine, American Fork, Cedar Hills, Eagle Mountain, Highland, Lehi, Pleasant Grove, and Saratoga Springs. With the Saratoga Springs Utah Temple announced last April, it is anticipated that that temple district will include stakes based in Eagle Mountain, Lehi, and Saratoga Springs. Right now that means that 30 stakes will be pulled away from the Mount Timpanogos district, which will split it right in half. As the Church gauges how patron attendance is at both temples, any subsequent adjustments could be made to either district.

That brings our discussion to the Payson Utah Temple. It became the Church's 146th operating temple when it was dedicated on June 7, 2015 by President Henry B. Eyring. Having a temple in Payson means a lot to me personally. I spent the bulk of my childhood years in that city, and I always felt it would get a temple of its own someday, but I wasn't convinced that would happen in my lifetime. I still hear every once in a while from some members of the ward we were in during our time in Payson just how much of a difference having a temple there has made for them.

The district of that temple serves 28 stakes which have been established in Central Utah and the Southern Utah Valley, which includes the communities of Delta, Elk Ridge, Goshen, Mapleton, Nephi, Payson, Salem, and Spanish Fork. If and when this district needs to be split, I could see the merits of a temple in either Delta or Mapleton.

The last currently operating temple serving this area, as you are all probably aware, was once the Provo Tabernacle. When a fire tragically burned that building beyond repair, President Monson was inspired to rebuild and renovate it as a second temple for the city of Provo.

That temple was dedicated just last year on March 20, and the First Presidency sent Elder Dallin H. Oaks, who had numerous personal connections to preside at two of the dedicatory sessions (since President Russell M. Nelson was in attendance at the last one, he presided at that session). That temple became the 150th in operation worldwide. As for its district. the Provo City Center Temple currently serves those 29 stakes spread through southern Provo and Springville. So it is very decently sized.

This concludes my coverage of Utah County Temples, 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 will, as already noted, be put up to discuss those temples in Washington and Weber), I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

3 comments:

  1. I agree with your assessment with Utah county. I can see potentials because of high growth, for more temple throughout the county. How long before others are announced is anyone's guess, especially before Saratoga Springs is built.

    I would say, based on current growth, future temples would be helpful from South heading North, Mapleton/Springville, Orem, and Lehi. It might be a stretch for one South of Payson especially if one was in the Mapleton area.

    One in Orem would help both Provo temples and Lego is still rapidly growing. Mount Timp will stay busy with the Alpine/American Fork/Pleasant Grove areas.

    I see more temples for now on in Utah county than in Salt Lake county due to higher membership percentage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for this comment as well, Kenny. Mapleton does seem like a good candidate for a temple for the reasons I outlined above. If the Church opts to announce one somewhere else, like Delta. But one in Mapleton would, as you say, serve the Saints in Sprinville, which would split up the Payson and Provo City Center districts a bit. I have firmly believed that Orem will get a temple of its own one day, and that would take stakes away from the Provo temple if and when that happens. And since my wife grew up in Lehi and we have seen tremendous growth there in the years since we got married, as she still has family in that area, so I think that Lehi will also get its own temple at some point.

      The one factor that will impact how soon that happens has two elements: 1. How soon the Saratoga Springs Temple is constructed and dedicated. 2. How busy it is kept after that. The subject of potential future temples, especially in Utah County, is one close to my heart, and it was my honor to cover it in these posts. Thanks for your comment, kenny!

      Delete
    2. Other than what was mentioned in the comments above, have I missed anything in my analysis above? Just let me know, since I will be accepting any additional comments on this subject until the week before General Conference in April. I will be using the week leading up to General Conference to put together the final version of my list of those possibilities. Until that time, please feel free to let me know if I have overlooked anything else.

      Delete

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.