The last update I found on that temple indicated that designs were underway, so it is possible that those plans are for the temple. However, I want to be very clear on this point: Until the Church or the city confirms that the plans in question are for the temple, it may only be speculation. But I will say this: Temples in Utah generally and in Utah County specifically have been known to get started well in advance of their international counterparts. So this development will be one to watch over the next few weeks, and, depending on what happens, there may be a possibility that this temple could be another that has a groundbreaking before the end of this year. I will have more on that as I learn of it.
In another surprise development, the Church News reported today that the first president had been called for the Durban South Africa Temple. Though I originally had six temples anticipated to be dedicated next year on my personal list of those that might have a president called soon, the Durban temple was not one of them. It was my understanding (as I noted in my post a day or two ago) that that temple was only going to be dedicated sometime during mid-to-late 2019. This development may mean that the dedication of that temple may be more imminent than many (myself included) have been led to believe.
The new president served as a mission president in Ghana, and he was born and raised in Cape Town, where he still resides. His experience as a South African native definitely makes him a good choice well suited to the task. I will be watching this development with great interest to learn more about whether this changes the timing of this temple's anticipated dedication. If it does, I will also need to change my more specific estimate. I also know from previous comments on other posts on this blog that the Church has sometimes announced such calls in advance so the new president has time to assemble his staff, which may mean there is no change anticipated or necessary for its' general or more specific completion estimates. Stay tuned for more on that as I figure it all out.
In the meantime, I again will share my list of temple presidents that have been or may yet be called. That list includes 62 new temple presidents whose calls have already been announced, along with 2 other operating temples (Veracruz Mexico and Washington D. C., with the latter potentially not having a new president announced until it is rededicated sometime during 2020). There is also a more than likely prospect that the first temple presidents will almost certainly be announced for the Fortaleza Brazil and Port-au-Prince Haiti Temples. And today's announcement also opens up the prospect that the First Presidency could additionally announce the first president for the Lisbon Portugal Temple in the near future.
The updated list follows below. I continue to monitor all temple developments and will do my level best to pass word of them along to you as I learn of 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. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of new content, please feel free to subscribe. 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.
New presidents have been called for the following
temples:
1.
Manaus Brazil
2.
Boise Idaho
3.
Denver Colorado
4.
The Hague Netherlands
5.
Oquirrh Mountain Utah
6.
Helsinki Finland
7.
The Gila Valley Arizona
8.
Brigham City Utah
9.
Stockholm Sweden
10. Palmyra
New York
11. Accra
Ghana
12. Papeete
Tahiti
13. Sao
Paulo Brazil
14. San
Jose Costa Rica
15. Albuquerque
New Mexico
16. Provo
City Center
17. Recife
Brazil
18. Cardston
Alberta
19. Payson
Utah
20. Porto
Alegre Brazil
21. Brisbane
Australia
22. Kansas
City Missouri
23. Oaxaca
Mexico
24. Regina
Saskatchewan
25. Cebu
City Philippines
26. Boston
Massachusetts
27. Colonia
Juarez Chihuahua Mexico
28. Billings
Montana
29. Houston
Texas
30. Sydney
Australia
31. Guatemala
City Guatemala
32. Hermosillo
Sonora Mexico
33. Montevideo
Uruguay
34. Indianapolis
Indiana
35. Laie
Hawaii Temple (the new president of this temple is the older brother of General
Authority Seventy Elder Donald L. Hallstrom)
36. Las
Vegas Nevada
37. Atlanta
Georgia
38. Buenos
Aires Argentina
39. Redlands
California
40. Draper
Utah
41. Tijuana
Mexico
42. Sacramento
California
43. Monticello
Utah
44. Bountiful
Utah
45. Freiberg
Germany
46. Oakland
California
47. Villahermosa
Mexico
48. Manti
Utah
49. Suva
Fiji
50. Vancouver
British Columbia
51. Tegucigalpa
Honduras
52. Fukuoka
Japan
53. St.
Louis Missouri
54. Trujillo
Peru
55. Asuncion
Paraguay (not anticipated)
56. Cordoba
Argentina
57. Taipei
Taiwan
58. Kinshasa
DR Congo (first president)
59. Concepcion
Chile (first president)
60. Barranquilla
Colombia (first president)
61. Rome
Italy (first president)
62. Durban
South Africa (first president; not anticipated)
The first presidents will likely be announced for the
following new temples:
1.
Fortaleza Brazil
2.
Port-au-Prince Haiti
New presidents may also be announced for the following
temples:
1.
Veracruz Mexico
2.
Washington D. C. Temple (Note: The Church may
opt to wait on calling a new president for this temple until 2020 when it is
rededicated)
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.