Hello again, everyone! I am back with the fourth post I promised just a few moments ago, which will discuss the two temples in Washington and Weber Counties (St. George and Ogden respectively) and which will serve as the wrap-up for this area. Let's get right to it.
The St. George temple was the 1st one dedicated in this dispensation that is still operating today. That dedication occurred on January 1, 1877, which a private dedication done by Wilford Woodruff, Erastus Snow, and Brigham Young; a public one followed between April 6-8 of that same year, with Brigham Young presiding and his counselor in the First Presidency, Daniel H. Wells, reading the prayer at President Young's request. Following a renovation period, a rededication was held on November 11 & 12, 1975, with President Spencer W. Kimball presiding.
With the dedication of the Cedar City Utah Temple about 2.5 weeks ago, that left the St. George district to serve 33 stakes from Bloomington, Hurricane, Ivins, Kanab, La Verkin, Santa Clara, St. George, and Washington City, along with the Page Arizona and Mesquite Nevada stakes. This temple district may need to be split, but I am not sure how or when the Church might opt to do so.
That brings us to the Ogden Utah Temple, which became the Church's 14th one in operation when it was dedicated January 18-20, 1972 by President Joseph Fielding Smith.. As noted in an earlier post, the Ogden temple originally looked identical in design to the Provo Utah Temple.
But when the Ogden Temple closed for renovation, its' design was completely redone to match the evolving architecture of that city. As I previously noted, that redesign was quite divisive for a while, and may still be so for the immediate future. That rededication was held on September 21, 2014, with President Thomas S. Monson presiding.
The current district of the Ogden Temple is comprised of 57 stakes in northern Utah and 4 other additionally from southwestern Wyoming. There is a possibility that the stake could be split, and that a temple in Evanston Wyoming could do the trick, but I honestly don't know how immediate or feasible a temple might be to split this district.
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 I will put up in a few minutes as my wrap-up to this series), I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.
Wednesday, December 27, 2017
Temple Site Possibilities: Utah South Area, Part Four--Temples in Washington and Weber Counties and Area Wrap-Up
I have had a lifelong love for Church history, which has extended to ongoing reports of the ministry of our apostles and prophets, General Conference, and all temple developments. This blog enables me to share that love with all who read my thoughts on these developments, which are sometimes reported multiple times per day as needed.
1 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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Just wanted to reiterate in this comment what I have said regarding the feedback for posts I have done within this series: While I am in the preliminary stages of making revisions to my personal list of potential locations, a commenting period between now and the week or so before General Conference remains open, in which I hope to be able to consider anything any of you mention which I may have overlooked. Let me know if that is the case. Thanks again to you all.
ReplyDelete