Stokes Sounds Off: Some Thoughts on Announced Temples

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Wednesday, April 4, 2018

Some Thoughts on Announced Temples

Hello again, everyone! I recently took another look at the 19 temples that have not yet progressed beyond an announcement, and I found some interesting information and updates from a variety of sources. So I thought it would be worthwhile to post now and pass along that updated information. In this update, I will focus on those 19 in order of their potential likelihood for a groundbreaking in the near future. So let's get started.

We begin in Bangkok Thailand. With the site confirmed and an artist's rendering released a couple of weeks ago (on March 19), some have speculated that President Nelson could break ground for this temple while he is visiting that city, which will be on April 20, but unless something is officially announced before he departs for the trip, a groundbreaking for that temple might only occur later this year.

Next, we turn to Urdaneta Philippines. As I previously noted, the biggest obstacles delaying a groundbreaking for that temple were obtaining government approval and announcing an official site. Since a site was confirmed earlier this year, a groundbreaking for this temple may occur soon as well, especially if the process of obtaining government approval can in any way be expedited.

We move on now to the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple. Although we are still waiting for a site to be confirmed by the Church, we do know that, shortly after this temple was announced in 2016, the contractor had stated that a year of preplanning would be needed before a groundbreaking would be held. If, as reported, that year began last March, this temple might have a groundbreaking sooner rather than later.

Moving on to Brasilia Brazil, as we know, a site was confirmed for that temple soon after it was announced last April. Some have quite rightly observed that although a site has been confirmed, and although that site has been inspected by Church engineers (which occurred last June), it may be a while yet before that temple has a groundbreaking. It will be interesting to see what happens there.

For the second temple announced in Manila Philippines, its' location was also confirmed not long after its' announcement. It is anticipated that an official name could be announced for this temple at any point in the near future. Depending on how quickly things happen for this temple. its' groundbreaking may or may not be announced in the near future.

We next move on to Pocatello Idaho. As many of you may be aware, several sites have been the subject of speculation, but we do have increasing evidence of the most likely location. Since this temple is within the "Mormon corridor", a groundbreaking might be just a matter of time, especially if a site confirmation occurs anytime soon.

I am pleased to next bring you some news that (to me) was unexpected but welcome. I received word today that designs are underway for the Saratoga Springs Utah Temple, although we are still waiting on an official site announcement. Temples in Utah have been known to get their construction underway fairly quickly after they are announced, and that is particularly true of temples being built in Utah County. So that is another one I am watching with great interest, as it will split the district of the Mount Timpanogos Utah Temple, where I previously served, and to which I can attest to that temple's high attendance level.

It is also interesting to note that the Church apparently acquired a certain parcel of land in Layton Utah just two days before that temple was announced. Although nothing hasbeen officially confirmed as of yet, if the Church does confirm at any point that the site they procured will be where the temple is built, a groundbreaking could be held in very short order.

In addition to the other six temples announced last weekend, we have 5 others that were announced in the last few years of President Monson's administration that we have not discussed yet (Abidjan Ivory Coast, Quito Ecuador, Harare Zimbabwe, Belem Brazil, and Nairobi Kenya).

Of those 5, this is what I know or have heard: Since we have seen progress made on the Bangkok Thailand Temple recently, as noted above. and since we unexpectedly had the groundbreaking for the Port-au-Prince Haiti Temple last year, the other temple announced during the April 2015 General Conference is the one for the city of Abidjan in the Ivory Coast. I have heard that growth has been sufficient enough in the Ivory Coast that a second and third temple for that nation could occur in short order. And if work gets underway on some (if not all) of the others I mentioned above later this year, it is not a stretch to believe that could occur for this temple as well, especially if any obstacles preventing it are cleared.

For the temple in the Ecuadoran capital city of Quito, while we don't have news as of yet, the time that occurred between the announcement and groundbreaking for Ecuador's first temple in Guayaquil (which was a lengthy 14 years) is not anticipated to take that long for this temple. We don't know any more right now than we did when it was announced two years ago, but that could change. The same holds true for the temple in Belem Brazil.

That brings us to the last two of the 5 I mentioned above. As I previously stated in an earlier post, I had heard in passing that the members in Harare Zimbabwe and Nairobi Kenya have recently been made aware of the site locations for those temples, even though that has not yet been confirmed by the Church. There have been passing rumors that, depending on what happens between now and then, President Nelson could break ground for both temples during his tour in both cities, which would put the groundbreaking for Nairobi Kenya on August 16, and the groundbreaking for Harare Zimbabwe the following day.

While I hope we will be abble to see groundbreakings for the Bangkok Thailand, Harare Zimbabwe, and Nairobi Kenya Temples while President Nelson visits there, I will not be surprised if one or all of those cities wind up having to wait for that to occur. I continue to monitor all developments on this front and will pass those along to you as I receive them.

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.

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.