Stokes Sounds Off: List of Temples Which May Get a New President During 2019

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Friday, February 15, 2019

List of Temples Which May Get a New President During 2019

Hello again, everyone! On this Valentines' Day, I wanted to post now my recently-completed list for this blog, which I have been working on for the last few days. The list contains those temples for which I see sufficient reason to believe a new president will be announced at some point during this year. The 2019 list includes 4 new temples which are anticipated to be dedicated within the next 12-15 months (either before the end of this year or at some point next year), along with 63 currently-operating temples for which the presidents have served a minimum of 3 years (with a few that have been serving longer than that.)

The list follows below. So as not to disturb the flow of that information, I will end here and now as I always do: That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated, on any post at any time, as long as such comments are made in accordance with the established guidelines. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added 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.


The first presidents will likely be announced for the following new temples:
1.      Arequipa Peru
2.      Rio de Janeiro Brazil
3.      Winnipeg Manitoba
4.      Abidjan Côte d'Ivoire

List of currently-operating temples which may be getting a new president in 2019:
1.      Aba Nigeria
2.      Anchorage Alaska
3.      Birmingham Alabama
4.      Campinas Brazil
5.      Chicago Illinois
6.      Ciudad Juarez Mexico
7.      Cochabamba Bolivia
8.      Columbia River Washington
9.      Columbus Ohio
10.  Copenhagen Denmark
11.  Curitiba Brazil
12.  Dallas Texas
13.  Detroit Michigan
14.  Fort Collins Colorado
15.  Fresno California
16.  Gilbert Arizona
17.  Guadalajara Mexico
18.  Halifax Nova Scotia
19.  Hamilton New Zealand (Note: It is possible that the Church could hold off on calling a new president for this temple until its’ rededication is held in 2021)
20.  Hartford Connecticut
21.  Hong Kong China (Note: It is possible that the Church could hold off on calling a new president for this temple until its’ rededication in 2021 or 2022)
22.  Idaho Falls Idaho (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
23.  Johannesburg South Africa
24.  Jordan River Utah (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
25.  Kyiv Ukraine
26.  Lima Peru
27.  London England
28.  Manhattan New York
29.  Medford Oregon
30.  Melbourne Australia
31.  Memphis Tennessee (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
32.  Mexico City Mexico
33.  Monterrey Mexico
34.  Montreal Quebec
35.  Merida Mexico
36.  Nashville Tennessee
37.  Nauvoo Illinois
38.  Nuku’alofa Tonga
39.  Oklahoma City Oklahoma (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
40.  Orlando Florida
41.  Panama City Panama
42.  Perth Australia
43.  Philadelphia Pennsylvania
44.  Portland Oregon
45.  Provo Utah
46.  Raleigh North Carolina (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
47.  Reno Nevada
48.  Rexburg Idaho
49.  Santiago Chile
50.  Santo Domingo Dominican Republic
51.  Sapporo Japan
52.  Seattle Washington
53.  Seoul Korea
54.  Spokane Washington
55.  St. George Utah (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
56.  St. Paul Minnesota
57.  Star Valley Wyoming
58.  Tampico Mexico
59.  Tuxtla Gutierrez Mexico
60.  Twin Falls Idaho
61.  Veracruz Mexico
62.  Washington D.C. (Note: Since the current president of this temple had his service interrupted by its’ renovation, the Church could hold off another year or two on replacing him.)
63.  Winter Quarters Nebraska


5 comments:

  1. I just saw a report about missionaries being able to call or video chat with family every week. Not just on Mother's Day and Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, Chris, and thank you for taking time to comment. I happened to first hear about that when KSL reported it at the noon hour. Since I do my first daily checks of Church websites before I check the comments on my blog, I had read more details about this development and reported on it in a new post on my blog before I ever checked for new comments. This development seems to be overdue according to many, but at the same time, I have seen statements from others who worry it might be a distraction and a reason to lose focus. As soon as I saw the details about it, I felt it was going to be a very positive change, primarily because (as Elder Uchtdorf observed) this enables families to be more of an active part of their missionaries' labors.

      This is another great example of President Nelson acting decisively for the right reasons, and I am sure it will prove to be a blessing to missionaries and their families (but also the Church in general) in ways that most of us cannot currently foresee. Thanks again, Chris, for taking time to comment.

      Delete
  2. Plus just like letters and emails. The calls are only to be done on Preparation day.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That will reduce the distraction. Ot sounds like a great development.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I for one saw this development as nothing but positive. The people of the Church who worry this could be a distraction from missionary labors seem to be the same people who felt that the Church sending calls electronically would detract from or discourage family members from gathering for the openings of call letters. I disagree with both mindsets. Due to my health necessitating my living at home while rendering my part-time service, I had consistent familial support in the course of my labors, and that proved helpful to me in that scenario. So, by extension, I think this will prove to be more of a blessing for all missionaries worldwide than those who are complaining might now recognize. And since each missionary has individual say on the details of contacting their families, if any of them feel a weekly contact would be too distracting for them, such contact can & will be scheduled differently as needed. Thanks, Chris!

    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.