Stokes Sounds Off: Revised and Expanded List of Potential Locations in Which a Temple Could Be Announced During the October 2019 General Conference

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Friday, July 19, 2019

Revised and Expanded List of Potential Locations in Which a Temple Could Be Announced During the October 2019 General Conference

Hello again, everyone! As I previously mentioned, I have, over the last little wile, been working on a mass and large-scale revision process (which included some degree of expansion) for my list of potential locations in which a temple could be announced during the October 2019 General Conference. As a result of my completing that process earlier this evening, I am keeping my promise to share those updates here. The list, along with the relevant notes for it, follows below. An open commenting period for it continues to be in effect on this blog until Monday September 30,at which point I will take that week to put the finishing touches on it before General Conference begins the following Saturday. 


In order to not disturb the flow of that information, I will end here as I always do: That does it for now. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated, on any post at any time, as long as such feedback is in compliance 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.

Temple predictions: 14-16 new temples announced for any of the following locations[1]:

Africa Southeast[2]: Antananarivo Madagascar; Second DR Congo Temple (in Mbuji-Mayi or Lubumbashi); Maputo Mozambique; Kampala Uganda; Cape Town South Africa
Africa West[3]: Freetown Sierra Leone; Kumasi Ghana; Monrovia Liberia; Benin City Nigeria; Yamoussoukro Ivory Coast
Asia[4]: Ulaanbaatar Mongolia; Jakarta Indonesia; Singapore; Taichung Taiwan; Hanoi Vietnam
Asia North[5]: Osaka Japan
Brazil[6]: Belo Horizonte, Florianopolis, João Pessoa, or Ribeirão Preto Brazil
Caribbean: Kingston Jamaica[7]
Central America[8]: Coban Guatemala
Europe[9]: Edinburgh Scotland; Berlin Germany; Barcelona Spain; Oslo Norway; Vienna Austria
Europe East[10]: Vilnius Lithuania
Mexico[11]: Torreon or Queretaro Mexico
Middle East/Africa North[12]: Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates
Pacific[13]: Port Moresby Papua New Guinea; Tarawa Kiribati; Savaii Samoa; Christchurch New Zealand
Philippines[14]: Tacloban or Bacolod Philippines
South America Northwest[15]: Santa Cruz Bolivia; Iquitos Peru; Cali Colombia; Maracaibo Venezuela
South America South[16]: Bahia Blanca Argentina; Vina del Mar Chile; Ciudad del Este Paraguay
                                                                    
North America (including the United States and Canada)[17]:
North America Central[18]: Missoula Montana; Green Bay Wisconsin; Wichita Kansas; Des Moines Iowa; Pueblo Colorado; Rapid City South Dakota
North America Northeast[19]: Cleveland Ohio; East Brunswick New Jersey; Montpelier Vermont;
Augusta Maine
North America Southeast[20]: Jackson Mississippi; Knoxville Tennessee; Savannah Georgia; Jacksonville Florida; Charlotte North Carolina Shreveport Louisiana
North America Southwest[21]: Bentonville Arkansas; Fort Worth Texas; Las Cruces New Mexico; Queen Creek Arizona; Elko Nevada
North America West[22]: Victoria British Columbia; Fairbanks Alaska; Bakersfield California
Utah[23]: Herriman Utah; Evanston Wyoming or Preston Idaho; Heber City Utah; Washington County Utah (Third Temple)




[1]Having announced a record-breaking 27 new temples during his first 3 General Conferences as Church President, some have suggested that President Nelson could focus on clearing the existing backlog, which could result in a hiatus on temple announcements. While I understand that opinion to a certain degree, we have heard much more from apostles, other Church leaders, and those privy to such information regarding President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples. With that in mind, I believe at least as many temples as I have suggested here may be announced, though it could be more. I also believe that the expansion of the number of temples will be done with wisdom, order, and common sense, which may mean that President Nelson might not explain his plans for the near future, and instead focus on gradually implementing them with the end result in mind that the number of temples will ultimately include a ten-fold increase. The locations named below seem to be the most likely to be announced during this conference, based on the reasons I will detail in subsequent notes.
[2]The Africa Southeast Area has experienced significant Church growth. In fact, the degree to which such growth has occurred resulted in the First Presidency announcing the division of this area on June 28, 2019, which will go into effect in August 2020. There are currently 2 operating temples which are serving this area, with the Durban South Africa Temple set to be dedicated in February of next year. With 2 other announced temples for which a site confirmation or groundbreaking are pending, I have found 6 additional cities which could get a temple in the near future. Most of these candidates are on the list based on either the mileage to the current temple(s), travel rigor, or oversized temple districts. Additionally, Uganda, Mozambique, and Madagascar are fourth, sixth, and seventh respectively on the list of top ten nations with the strongest Church presence that do not have a temple in any phase. Due to its’ isolation from the rest of the African continent, Madagascar is my top pick for this area. And in reference to a second DR Congo Temple, I have personally favored Lubumbashi, but a recent report on the Church Growth Blog pointed to the idea that a temple in Mbuji-Mayi might be more imminently needed, so both are on this list. Moreover, a temple in Mbuji-Mayi would fulfill the public proposal of a temple for the Kasai region, which was made by Elder Andersen in 2016. For some of these locations which are in political, moral, or other turmoil, the temples mentioned could provide a welcome refuge.
[3]The same factors I referenced in note 7 above (about significant Church growth, the mileage and rigors involved, and temple district sizes) also applies to the Africa West Area, as reflected by the 5 candidate cities listed here. With only 2 temples currently operating, 1 more under construction, and 1 which has been announced, the Church Growth Blog has noted that West Africa could have at least 13 operating temples by 2030. Only two of the five candidate locations in this area do not have a temple in any phase: Sierra Leone and Liberia, which rank as the second and fifth respectively on the aforementioned top ten list.  Sierra Leone is my top pick for this area, and also for Africa overall. And while it may be difficult to know how soon a second Ivory Coast temple and a third Nigerian temple may be announced, I have felt confident enough in these picks to include them here.
[4]The Asian Saints, whose ability to practice their faith has been somewhat limited at times by governmental regulations, are nonetheless very faithful, as evidenced by recent temple announcements for that continent. With 2 temples currently serving the Saints in this area, one other is under construction, and two more have been announced. The factors first mentioned in previous notes above also apply to the Asia Area, which is the largest geographically in the Church. Of the locations listed, Mongolia is my favored pick, since that nation is eighth on the aforementioned top ten list. Additionally, President Hinckley publicly proposed a temple in Singapore around 2 decades ago, and Vietnam is a dark-horse pick that I included based on reports of Church growth in the area.
[5]The Asia North Area of the Church has seen some stagnated growth. But President Nelson announced a temple for Yigo Guam in October 2018, and a temple for Okinawa Japan last April. As a result, Osaka is on my list, with the main reasoning being that the Saints in Osaka are roughly 1.5 times further away from their temple than the 200-mile distance specified by previous prophets.
[6]Brazil has been a Church stronghold for a while now. With seven temples currently in operation, the Rio de Janeiro Brazil Temple will be dedicated within the next 4-8 months. The Belem Brazil Temple had a groundbreaking ceremony 7 weeks prior to this General Conference, and the Brasilia Brazil Temple is anticipated to have a groundbreaking prior to the end of this year. One other temple (in Salvador Brazil) is awaiting a site announcement and groundbreaking. Although any or all of the candidate cities I listed above appear to be likely prospects for the immediate or near future, President Nelson visited Saints living in the Sao Paulo region roughly 5 weeks prior to this General Conference, so another temple in that area may be the priority.
[7]This city is another dark-horse pick, but is on the list due to the factors mentioned previously, and also because someone suggested it elsewhere. And given what President Nelson has done in terms of the 27 temples he has announced thus far, Kingston could be another location for a smaller temple. I say that because the Kingston Jamaica Saints travel 298 miles one-way overseas to worship at their assigned temple (in Port-au-Prince Haiti, which was dedicated 5 weeks before this General Conference). Given President Nelson’s attention to remote areas, it seems more likely than not that a temple in Jamaica may be in the works for either the immediate or near future.
[8]I have previously referenced information on prospective temples in Central America from someone who lives and works in Guatemala. Based on the information received from that individual, when Guatemala receives a third temple, the best way to split the current Guatemala City district would be for a temple to be built in Coban. My personal research has confirmed that opinion. But above and beyond that, during the same tour that saw President Nelson in Brazil, he also made a stop in Guatemala, and could perhaps have been assessing Coban as a temple prospect. So a temple in that city may simply be a matter of time.
[9]The situation of Saints living on the European continent is somewhat interesting. Where there are centers of strength, significant growth has occurred. But there has been some stagnant growth through the continent in recent years. Having said that, both the Rome Italy and Lisbon Portugal Temples were dedicated this year, while construction is underway on the Praia Cabo Verde Temple (which falls under the Europe Area, even though it is geographically closer to West Africa), another temple has been announced in Budapest Hungary. And most or all of the factors I have mentioned previously apply in equal measure to the Europe Area, making it likely that any of the 5 locations I mentioned here could get a temple this go-round. With Barcelona and Berlin being new additions to this list, I have prioritized the latter over the former due to Elder Uchtdorf’s recent visit there. And the odds of a temple in Austria, which was also visited by Elder Uchtdorf recently, may depend on how soon work is able to get underway on the temple in Budapest, which is Austria’s closest neighbor with a temple in any phase.
[10]The Church in Eastern Europe is an interesting case to consider. With one temple currently operating in Kyiv Ukraine, one other has been announced for a major, yet-to-be-determined city in Russia. Based on the political climate of Russia, it may take a while for the Church to get the temple there approved and built. In the interim, a temple in Lithuania, which, insofar as I can tell, would have no political obstacles, may be the best option to help with the currently-reported activity levels at the Kyiv temple. Additionally, although no stakes are currently established in Lithuania, which would make the nation more of a dark-horse pick, there have been recent examples of President Nelson announcing temples for other cities where no stakes are established. Above and beyond that, in the mid-1990s, then-Elder M. Russell Ballard visited the Saints in Lithuania and publicly proposed a temple there, so I have felt confident enough to list such a prospect here this go-round.
[11]Mexico presents an interesting anomaly. With some significant growth in areas of strength, the mass consolidation of units in that nation continues. A temple was announced in Puebla last October, and it is difficult to know how soon another temple may be announced for that nation. But the cities of Queretaro and Torreon have been identified by a Church member living in Mexico as likely to get a temple in the near future, so both are on this list.  
[12]The bulk of Church membership in this geographical area is comprised of US military personnel. The fact that such personnel are only there for a comparatively short amount of time led me to conclude for a while that a temple for this area would not occur for a decade or more from now. But given the unprecedented, out-of-the-box thinking President Nelson has demonstrated in the temples he has announced (particularly in announcing temples in locations that I felt were unlikely to see a temple for another decade or more), and given the fact that the UAE represents a Church stronghold in the area, I have put a temple for that nation on this list. And although it seemed that there was an equally-likely chance such a temple could be built in either Dubai or Abu Dhabi, after further research on my part, I have concluded that the latter is the more imminently-likely prospect.
[13]The Pacific area is another stronghold of Church growth. With 10 temples currently operating there (and 3 others announced), it seems logical to assume that other temples will be needed to serve the area. Most (if not all) of the factors I mentioned previously apply equally to this area. Additionally, New Guinea, and Kiribati are ranked first and third respectively on the aforementioned top ten list of nations. So I have no doubt the Pacific Area will see temples announced in each of these cities within the next 5-7 years, if not sooner.
[14]The Church has two operating temples in the Philippines (Manila and Cebu City). The temple announced in October 2010 for Urdaneta is now under construction, with three more announced for Muntinlupa City, Cagayan de Oro, and Davao. If that is any indication of what might happen in the future, then other temples may be needed for the Philippines, and the cities mentioned here seem to have the highest likelihood of having a temple announced, due to difficult travel which may constitute an undue hardship for reasons outlined in prior notes.
[15] The entire South American continent has experienced massive Church growth. Having previously discussed Brazil, in reference to the South America Northwest Area, I wanted to observe that there are 7 operating temples there. 1 more is currently under construction in Arequipa Peru (for which a dedication is anticipated before the end of this year) Two others, the Lima Peru Los Olivos and Quito Ecuador Temples, are both now under construction. And while I have personally-favored La Paz as the candidate for Bolivia’s second temple, my research shows one in Santa Cruz may be more crucially needed. And although I had two candidate cities each for Peru and Colombia, further research has enabled me to narrow each down to the most likely location. Also, President Hinckley publicly proposed a temple in Maracaibo, and further research on my part suggests the time may be right for that prospect.
[16]The South America South Area has likewise seen very significant and rapidly expanding growth. So again, with President Nelson’s extensive temple-building plans in mind, I have considered the most imminent prospects for future temples in this area, and the factors mentioned in previous notes hold true here as well. Currently, this area of the Church is served by 6 operating temples (1 of which is closed for renovation), and there were 2 more announced for this area last year. With that in mind, the 3 locations listed in this section seem to have the strongest case in their favor of a temple announced in the near future. In reference to Argentina, I received word of a report that Saints in the city of Bahia Blanca were lobbying Salt Lake City for a temple of their own. And in view of President Nelson’s visit to the Buenos Aires area 5 weeks before this General Conference, it seems probable he went there in order to personally assess such a prospect in addition to visiting with Church members there.
[17]Although the North American continent (primarily in the United States) has seen somewhat of a stagnating growth situation, in light of the recent increased mentions of President Nelson’s ambitious temple-building plans, the likelihood is extremely high that the US and Canada will be included in whatever the plans are to expand the number of temples worldwide. The locations listed below represent what I believe are the most imminent prospects for each of the now-6 North American areas of the Church.
[18]As mentioned in previous notes, on the one hand, it may be difficult (if not impossible) to gauge the imminent likelihood of any locations. But as also mentioned, in view of some of the relevant factors, I can see the merits of each location listed here. Particularly, I heard a report of a public proposal of a temple for Missoula Montana. Pueblo made the list due to a report I received of high attendance numbers at the Denver Colorado Temple. For Kansas, Iowa, and South Dakota, mileage is the main factor driving my choices, and a temple (if only a smaller one) seems likely for all three states in the near future. And a temple in Iowa could be named for Mount Pisgah, a significant landmark in the pioneer history of the Church.
[19] Given the steady growth of the Church in Ohio and Pennsylvania, second temples for each seem to be likely sooner rather than later. And New Jersey, Maine, and Vermont may each be eligible for a temple of their own given the distance factor, and the rigors of travel involved in getting to their currently assigned temples.
[20]Since the Saints in Jackson currently have an arduous journey to get to their assigned temple, it is my opinion that a temple will be announced in that city sooner rather than later. And an arduous journey also factors in to my reasoning for temples in Shreveport, Jacksonville, Knoxville, and Savannah. If, as I anticipate, President Nelson plans to prioritize the mileage factor and also filling in the gaps that exist in temple district coverage, then any or all of these may simply be a matter of time.
[21] For this area of the Church, the Saints in some cities currently assigned to temples across the Mexican border may, depending on what happens in the future, have a hard time reaching those temples. With that said, I am basing my theories on the potential location of an Arkansas temple on information from a friend indicating that land has been held in reserve for a temple in Bentonville for several years now. And I am basing my picks for temples in Texas and New Mexico on the opinion of someone living within the current Dallas Texas Temple district. This individual noted that Fort Worth would almost certainly be the next city in Texas to get a temple. So if border issues arise, those could be ameliorated by a temple in Las Cruces, which would likely also cover El Paso for the time being. Arizona and Nevada both fall under the “Mormon corridor”, and, based on further research on my part, I have prioritized Queen Creek due to recent growth in that city. And although Elko and Ely Nevada once seemed to have an equal likelihood of having a temple announced, after further research on my part, I have chosen to prioritize Elko this go-round.
[22]With this area having been consolidated in August of this year with the North America Northwest Area, there are a total of 3 locations for which I feel a temple announcement is most likely. Victoria was mentioned by name to me by someone living there, who reports the hardship of rigorous travel and the expense involved, which makes a temple a feasible prospect. Fairbanks is one of two Alaskan cities for which I anticipate a temple will be announced in the near future (the other being Juneau), but my research shows the former as being the more imminent prospect. And although there has recently been some stagnant growth in California, Bakersfield has been on my radar for a variety of reasons, many of which have been explained in previous notes. Additionally, in my opinion, the fact that a temple was announced in Yuba City last October does not at this time eliminate the likely imminence of a temple for Bakersfield.
[23]Since one new temple has been announced in the Utah Area of the Church within each of the last four sets of announcements, more are surely in the works. Particularly, a temple site was publicly mentioned as being held in reserve in April 2005 for a temple in the Southwest Salt Lake Valley. Though no official confirmation has occurred, if my research is correct, the land in question has been the subject of a border dispute between Herriman and Bluffdale cities, but is currently owned by the city of Herriman. For Heber City, Preston, and Evanston, they all seem to have an equal likelihood of having a temple announced in the near future. And Elder Steven E. Snow, who was born in Washington County, recently told the Saints there at a stake conference that someone from the Temple Department had indicated to him that a third Washington County temple would be needed in the not-too-distant future. For these reasons, I couldn’t narrow any of these selections down, at least not for the moment.

41 comments:

  1. James

    As usual, a full report of the possible announcements of temples.

    Hopefully they are announced in places that are needed now or soon, sometimes the saints do not attend because of the enormous distances, money and time.

    It would be wonderful a temple in Viña del Mar, Valdivia and Punta Arenas, La Serena, Rancagua in Chile for the distances and money that families do not have to attend, I think it would make them more faithful and strong in the Gospel and their testimonies

    Thanks for your time and dedication, a hug from Chile

    Omar Valenzuela E
    Santiago de Chile

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your continued research and information regarding temples. The members of the Church in Central America are overjoyed with the announced temples for Managua Nicaragua (April 2018) and San Pedro Sula Honduras (April 2019). The workload on the Guatemala City temple is heavy with about 30 stakes in the city and nearby towns. The temple is located in a part of the city that is difficult for most members to attend easily or regularly. For that reason I see the need for a second temple in the city, perhaps in the south outskirts around Villa Nueva. Cobán continues to be an excellent location for a smaller temple with two stakes in the city and two new stakes about 2 1/2 hours away in the Polochic Valley. Perhaps having two temples in the planning stages another one at this time might have to wait a year or so.
    Patzicia

    ReplyDelete
  3. Omar, thanks for offering your feedback. President Nelson appears to be approaching temple announcements in a few different ways, with a focus on filling in the large gaps, accounting for difficult or expensive travel, and also on dividing many of the larger temple districts.

    Additionally, I know that several people (myself included) had anticipated that President Nelson would both outline the extent and timing of his temple expansion plans and announce a massive number of temples in General Conference last April. And there were some who were surprised and disappointed when "only 8" were announced at that time.

    But after further research on my end, I have concluded that the ten-fold increase in the number of temples will occur gradually, methodically, and systematically over the next decade or two within which President Nelson is anticipated to serve as Church President.

    With that in mind, the 8 temples announced last April built slightly on the 7 announced in April of 2018, which is why I am anticipating 14-16 new temples will be announced in October, to build upon the 12 which were announced last October.

    If such a pattern continues to occur, that will be a great way to accomplish the ten-fold increase within the next couple of decades.

    But no matter how many, if any, may be announced, I will be happy either way. In the meantime, thanks for taking time to comment. I always appreciate hearing from you, Omar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No problem, Omar. Thank you for your continued feedback on my posts here. I always appreciate hearing from you and hope my responses to your feedback are helpful.

      Delete
  4. Omar and Patzicia, I am using one comment to respond to what you each said on additional future temple prospects. Omar, I have a few Chilean cities on my radar. Vina del Mar made my official list for this General Conference, but I will keep the others you mentioned by name in mind for the future. And Patzicia, I know that with the Managua Nicaragua Temple announced in April 2018, and with the San Pedro Sula Honduras Temple announced last April, some have thought that a third Guatemalan temple will be delayed.

    But with President Nelson's planned visit to Latin America in just over a month, I have heard information indicating he may use some of the time he spends in Guatemala, Colombia, Argentina, and Brazil looking over potential temple prospects. For that reason, I wouldn't dismiss the prospect of a new temple in Guatemala being announced in October.

    The only thing I am not sure of is whether a temple in Coban or Villa Nueva would be given the priority. For the moment, though, I have Coban on my list.

    With that said, thanks again, Omar and Patzicia, for taking time to comment on these future prospects.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  5. Before the conversation (which I hope will continue for a while) gets too much further, I should also probably mention that there were a few areas of the Church listed above for which I have adjusted the prioritized order of future prospects. And I can particularly note that was the case for my picks for the Europe Area (for which Berlin Germany and Barcelona Spain are new additions). The same is true for most of the 6 North American areas of the Church, where further study on my part verified that changing the prioritized order of the listed locations made sense this go-round. Thanks again, everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The following was posted by blog reader L. Chris Jones on another thread of this blog, and, with his consent, is being reposted here:

    On July 25, 2019 at 10:22 PM, L. Chris Jones wrote:
    It's an exciting time in history for temples. I look forward for more remote areas to get them. I am also excited that areas with nearby temples get more because that means that the nearby temple is being utilized sufficiently to warrant another temple (such as Utah, Manila, Lima, and in the metro area of Sao Paulo/Campinas). It could mean more temples in the 50 to 100 mile range from each other rather than the suggested 200 mile goal. (200 miles man mean that temples are up to 400 miles apart with the stakes halfway between being 200 miles from a temple. I look forward to closer temples for all, especially remote areas such as Tierra del Fuego, Kirabati, Vanauatu, Puapa New Guinea, and Lubumbashi DRCongo,Mongolia Sierra Leone, and Liberia among other places far from the nearest temple.

    And I will just reiterate here what I said in response to Chris's comment on that other thread: I anticipate temples to be announced in the near future for all of the locations Chris mentioned, many or most of which appear on my list above. That said, I'd like to thank Chris for taking time to comment, and for his willingness to allow me to reproduce that comment here. My thanks again to all of you as well.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hello again, everyone! The main page of the South African Newsroom website has me wondering if I need to reprioritize my Africa Southeast Area picks. The article shares impressive and rapid growth occurring for the Church in Mozambique:

    https://www.mormonnewsroom.co.za/article/the-church-is-growing-rapidly-in-mozambique

    Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. james

      It would be wonderful if they had their temple, regardless of whether it is used on a daily basis, I understand that there are standards to be met, provided that a country for a few baptized people, if their members are faithful and strive, should be blessed with a temple.

      a hug from Chile

      Delete
    2. Hello. As I mentioned in the other thread, the comment you posted here originally at 2:28 AM this morning Utah time was somehow deleted without my knowledge or consent. I have done what I could to restore it, by reposting it below. I apologize for this inconvenience, which I did not intend to happen.

      In the meantime, regarding your comment above, with the 27 temples announced by President Nelson thus far in his first 3 General Conferences as Church President, we have seen him in some ways throw out the previous rule book and doing things differently. So I am confident that will mean a game-changing method when it comes to future new temple announcements. There are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of places where a temple could have easily been built under the parameters used by previous Church Presidents, and with President Nelson establishing new trends in that respect, anything is possible.

      With that said, I anticipate that we will see him continue to announce temples every six months in General Conference for the time being, and to do what he can to clear the backlog of currently-announced temples in between each General Conference. With the month of July drawing to a close, the annual July recess for the General Authorities of the Church will also conclude, and when normal Church operations thus begin again in a few days' time, I anticipate that several other currently-announced temples will have a groundbreaking between the beginning of August and the October General Conference, so the queue can be cleared out a little more before President Nelson announces additional new temples. It will be interesting to see it all unfold.

      And Africa in particular has seen outstanding growth, so there are a lot of candidates, both in the short and long-term that will likely need temples of their own on that continent. At some point, when the time is right, President Nelson will detail the extent and timing of his plans as well, and his doing so may give us some indication of what will be coming in the years ahead in that respect.

      In the meantime, I look forward to any number of temples being announced next October, and I thank you for taking time to comment.

      Delete
  8. First, thanks for your time and dedication.

    In general conferences always the most awaited by me, are the announcements of the temples, especially if my country is Chile "long and narrow" that at the time was very strong in its spiritual influence, I hope one day it will improve.

    I do not know if many people will go to the temple of conception, hopefully so, with the temple of Santiago that has many stakes and districts well distant, I hope to spend full of members doing their ordinances.

    In my case I work daily in family history and I see a lot of enthusiasm in it, the FAMILYSEARCH website is very good, despite the improvements it needs it has been and is a blessing. A friend from another stake, asked me for the names to take them to the temple and I started to see them and I found many earrings, for which the work of the temple could be done, thinking about it if they all do it will require more temples for our deceased family for generations

    The temple is and should be the most important as a goal, despite being excommunicated, I appreciate that there are more temples.

    a hug from Santiago de Chile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for this additional comment as well. The subject of future temples is one dear to my heart, and I look forward to any temple announcements every six months. The fact that 27 new temples were announced by President Nelson during his first 3 General Conferences as Church President tells me he is serious about wanting to bring temples closer to the people.

      I know that in prior comments, you have talked about being excommunicated, and about your enthusiasm for the gospel and for temple and family history work, and that is very commendable. Not many people who have been excommunicated continue to do family history work, and the fact that you are doing so is very commendable.

      I hope at some point, given some changes the Church has made regarding those in your situation, that you will feel you can come back to the Church. But even if that is never the case, I appreciate you sharing your story with us here, and I appreciate your enthusiasm for the subjects covered here, and for family history work and temples in particular. Thank you for taking time to comment.

      Delete
  9. I am using this comment to restore a prior one that somehow was deleted without my consent.

    On July 28, 2019 at 2:28 AM, Historia Familiar Valenzuela Escobar wrote:

    James
    It is a pleasure to read your articles, answers and comments, thank you very much, it is obvious that you feel love for the gospel, despite all the difficulties you have been through.

    Other temples in countries and cities where they already exist, in my opinion it is necessary, although they are still lacking in many parts, the distances are wide, I understand that although the church considers to build sometime, that will take time.

    Hopefully not so many years go by and once they are built, they are used.

    a hug from Chile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In response to my reposting this comment from Historia Familiar Valenzuela Escobar, I would just apologize again that the original somehow got deleted. I did not intend for that to happen, and I am glad I was able to restore it to the degree I did above. And regarding what was said in the comment in question, I appreciate your thanks for my efforts. The gospel of Jesus Christ has always been a large part of my life, and I would not be where I am today without it. And although health challenges I have had in the last couple of years have kept me essentially homebound, the chance to pass along the news and developments I share here has kept my faith burning brightly.

      As I said a few different times before as well, the parameters for temple announcements have changed somewhat, and what we have seen President Nelson do in his first 3 General Conferences as Church President is to in some ways throw out the rule book in terms of how and under what circumstances and at what point temples are announced.

      I have heard his plan is to keep the backlog of announced temples between 30-35, no doubt as motivation for the Temple Department and the Temple and Family History Executive Council of the Church to stay on-task in dealing with that backlog. With the planned groundbreaking for the Belem Brazil Temple (which is set to occur in mid-August), there will be 29 announced temples remaining in that queue.

      That is why I feel that 2-4 other temples may have a groundbreaking between now and the October General Conference, in order to make room for however many temples are announced by President Nelson during that conference. It is my feeling that 14-16 such temples could be announced, but I will be happy to see any announced. And in the meantime, I have been madvancing the opinion that some degree of unconventional, out-of-the-box thinking may be necessary in any further assessment of future prospective temple locations.

      I hope at least 14-16 temples may be announced in October, but will be happy with any number of temples that are announced. And I fully anticipate that future temple announcements will take the temple construction efforts of the Church in an entirely different direction than we have heretofore seen. I cannot wait to see what's next in that respect. I particularly have 3-4 Chilean locations I am watching for the immediate or more distant future as temple prospects. The Lord seems to be very mindful of Chile, and of all nations through South America and Africa in particular, so I have a feeling that the Church has only scratched the surface of what is to come in the future in those areas.

      With all of that said, thank you for stopping by to comment. Again, my apologies to you that the original was somehow deleted without my approval, and best wishes for a wonderful rest of your Sabbath Day.

      Delete
  10. Kiribati is going underwater. Probably Vanuatu would be the better long term land for a temple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eduardo, thank you for stopping by to comment. You make a good point. And a cursory internet search would seem to justify your well-taken observations. But your comment led me to dig a little deeper on this issue, and I found the following resource, backed up by references that would serve more to illustrate what is actually going on with Kiribati:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiribati#Environmental_issues

      The article, backed by appropriate sources, notes that a 20 inch water rise is anticipated to affect Kiribati by sometime in 2100. So I would first say that, if such an increase happens, it would be incremental and not alarming at least for the next several decades. The second thing I would mention is that Kiribati now ranks as the nation with the third-strongest presence that does not have a temple in any phase. The main metrics Matt uses to rank the nations on that list are the number of members, the number of Church units, and the nearest temple. The membership in that nation and number of established congregations would not be as significantly high as it now is if the Church felt that there was any imminent or even long-term danger to the members in that area. The fact that there has not even been a whisper of that occurring tells me the Church may continue to thrive in that nation for decades to come. Could a mass evacuation of the citenzry (including the Latter-day Saint populace) occur at some point? Perhaps.

      Delete
    2. But that brings me to my final point. Weather experts may insist that Kirbati will be fully submerged in water in a century or much sooner. However, the Lord reminds us that His ways and thoughts are higher than our ways and thoughts. If we were able to ask any weather experts that may have been around in Noah's time, they would have likely insisted that the forecast did not show rain, and certainly not at a scale to eliminate all life on earth that was not protected in an arc.

      But yet, at that time, the rains came, and the inhabitants thereof who were not on the arc perished for not believing the prophet. Years later, the Earth would see the ministry of a Man who was capable of stilling any tempest, tempering any storm, and healing anyone and everyone who would believe in His power to do so. I see no reason to believe that the Man who chided the billows and hushed the wind could not spare the island of Kiribati from the effects of a storm which, according to experts, would wipe out the island completely less than a century from now. In fact, if Kiribati were to get a temple in the near- or long-term future, I believe that the temple would provide the safest place for members to be in the event of such a disaster, if it were to occur as anticipated. President Nelson has indicated as much when speaking of the safety that temples provide.

      With all of this in mind, I feel confident in my pick of Kiribati for now. That may change in the future, as more is said and done, or left unsaid and undone in relation to the prosperity (or lack thereof) of the CHurch on this island going forward. In the meantime, though, you make a good point about Vanuatu. Right now, that island ranks as tenth on Matt's aforementioned list. I will have to check to be sure, but I believe Vanuatu is on one of my other two lists, for the nearer or more distant future. As other nations on that top ten list have a temple announced (which should occur in fairly quick order, since each set of temple announcements made by President Nelson thus far has taken 1-3 nations off the current list), I am sure the Church presence in Vanuatu will warrant a higher place on the list, and will be more likely to get a temple at that point.

      I believe out-of-the-box methods and reasoning may be needed for future temple prospects, and perhaps that means that Vanuatu will get a temple before Kiribati does. In my case, I have felt inclined to prioritize Kiribati for now. But I fully believe that there will be temples in both nations perhaps within the next decade, if not indeed sooner.

      I hope I have not in any way sounded dismissive of your well-taken observations, and going by earthly measures alone, you are correct in your assessment of Kiribati. But we are in a time when President Nelson is defying usual stereotypes and traditions at every turn. And he has been very clear about just how much of what he does has been inspired by the Lord. If and when the Lord inspires him to announce a temple in Kiribati, the blessings promised through such an announcement, as ground is broken, and as a temple is dedicated, would remain in full force for the nation of Kiribati in general, and for a Kiribati temple in particular. In the meantime, thanks so much for taking time to comment here. I always appreciate hearing from you.

      Delete
  11. Not necessarily the most likely, but my personal picks from this list (some of these will be the same as the ones I chose in April):

    Temples I would have a personal connection to:

    Missoula, Montana (Place I grew up)
    Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (Had a few friends from Mongolia)
    Bahia Blanca, Argentina (friend on my mission served there)
    Barcelona, Spain (friend of mine served his mission there)
    Maracaibo, Venezuela (several visa-waiters on my mission ended up serving there)
    Heber City, Utah (used to go there once a month for a year to visit my friend's family)
    Fort Worth, Texas (used to date a girl from there)
    Vilnius, Lithuania (had a dance partner from Estonia, a close-by Baltic country)
    Monrovia, Liberia (used to know a guy from there)
    Singapore (had a classmate and some roommates at BYU who were from there)
    Des Moines, Iowa (dated a girl from Iowa back in college)
    Green Bay, Wisconsin (a good friend of mine and roommate from BYU is from Wisconsin)
    Jakarta, Indonesia (had a Muslim friend from Indonesia at college)
    Edinburgh, Scotland (a lady in my home ward grew up in Edinburgh)
    Vienna, Austria (a couple of friends of mine studied abroad there and it is supposed to have some of the most beautiful architecture in the world)
    Torreon, Mexico (mission companion of mine was a visa-waiter and served the rest of his mission there)
    Fairbanks Alaska (one of my best friends is from Alaska, and a temple in Fairbainks would greatly reduce travel distance for those having to travel to Anchorage)
    Wellington or Christchurch, New Zealand (several of my friends are from New Zealand, including my next-door neighboor, and it would be nice to see a temple in the capital of Wellington or farther south than the current temples in the north of the country)
    Cleveland, Ohio (Lebron James got me obsessed with Cleveland for years. Also, it would be nice to see a temple in a city that has for so long been considered the punchline of jokes in the U.S.)


    Out of curiosity, I would like to see if the following temple announcements happen (Some of these I have chosen because they would be the first (or second) temple announced for their country or state, or would significantly reduce travel times. Others I have chosen for the reasons stated below in parentheses.):

    Herriman, Utah (most likely predicted/proposed by President Hinckley)
    Bentonville/Rogers, Arkansas
    Rapid City, South Dakota

    Hanoi, Vietnam
    Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
    Tarawa, Kiribati
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea
    Oslo, Norway (would be nice to see a temple in the traditional land of the Vikings)

    Freetown, Sierra Leone
    Antananarivo, Madagascar

    Iquitos Peru
    Ciudad del Este Paraguay
    Santa Cruz Bolivia
    Berlin Germany

    El Paso, Texas/Las Cruces, New Mexico (would help members on the U.S./Mexico border to not have to make the border crossing to visit the Ciudad Juarez Temple)
    Benin City Nigeria (likely due to the fast growth of the Church in Nigeria)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jonathan Whiting, thanks so much for stopping by to share your thoughts on this list. I find it amazing at times to consider how each individual Church member may, through various personal associations or relationships, have connections to multiple cities all over the world. I myself have indirect or direct connections to several of the locations I mentioned in my list above. And in an era that has seen President Nelson focus so much of his messaging and actions on temples and temple work, there seems to be mucch to which we can look forward. There seems to be many locations where having a temple would be useful, and in some places, that would be as much in order to prepare for the future as it would be to meet the needs of the present, if not more so. I know I particularly look forward to seeing what the temples in Winnipeg Manitoba and Yigo Guam, for example, do to help the growth of the Church in both nations.

      I also honestly have no idea from oen General Conference to the next whether any or all of the temples that will be announced are on my list. But in a period of time when our prophet has announced 27 new temples in his first three General Conferences as Church President, I have a feeling that very few of us know exactly what's ahead for the temple construction program of the Church.

      I look forward to seeing how that shapes up in October. In the meantime, Jonathan, thank you again for taking time to offer your input. I am glad to hear of your personal connections to so many locations on my list this go-round. Thank you again for your feedback and for taking time to offer it. If you have anything else you'd want to comment on, whether that be for this list, or any other content here, I'd welcome your thoughts as well. While I don't know what exactly may be ahead for the temple construction program of the Church, I am grateful we are living in somewhat unprecedented territory in that respect, and I cannot wait to see what's next in that respect. Again, Jonathan, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

      Delete
  12. Whittling this list down a bit further:

    12 of the Temples I would most like to see announced in October:

    Missoula, Montana
    Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
    Bahia Blanca, Argentina
    Maracaibo, Venezuela
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
    Hanoi, Vietnam
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Heber City, Utah
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Vienna, Austria
    Oslo, Norway


    12 others that I think are a safe bet to happen in October:

    Herriman, Utah
    Benin City, Nigeria
    Freetown, Sierra Leone
    Monrovia, Liberia
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Bentonville/Rogers, Arkansas
    Iquitos, Peru
    Ciudad del Este, Paraguay
    Wellington or Christchurch, New Zealand
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Santa Cruz, Bolivia
    Rapid City, South Dakota

    ReplyDelete
  13. Whittling the list down even more:

    5 of the Temples I would most like to see announced in October:

    Missoula, Montana
    Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
    Bahia Blanca, Argentina
    Heber City, Utah
    Cleveland, Ohio

    5 that I think are a very safe bet to happen in October:

    Herriman, Utah
    Iquitos, Peru
    Freetown, Sierra Leone
    Monrovia, Liberia
    Bentonville/Rogers, Arkansas

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jonathan, thank you for these additional comments as well. I am sure that many (if not all) of the specific locations you mentioned in both of your comments may be up for a temple with the next round of announcements. I have mentioned a few different times, both in this thread, elsewhere on this blog, and on various threads for Matt's blog that I believe 14-16 temples might be announced.

    In additiojn to that belief, however, I have churned out a lot of new content within the last week or so. One mini-series took a look at the potential future time-frame for anticipated temple events which will occur during the next five year. But another, done directly after that, provided a 3-part analytical look at Nelsonian temple announcements thus far, and at what the patterns of those announcements could potentially tell us regarding what we might expect with future temple announcements in general, and those likely to be made during the October General Conference in particular. I don't know whether or not you'd be interested in my thoughts in that respect, but I will post the web address for that particular post here in case you may want to read and comment on that as well:

    https://stokessoundsoff.blogspot.com/2019/08/additional-thoughts-and-observations-on_17.html

    If you want to weigh ni on that post, I'd welcome your thoughts. But whether you do or not, I appreciate your additional comments here. Thanks again, Jonathan.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Winnowing the list down even further to a combo of 5 of the ones I would most like and that I think are likely to be announced this October:

    Missoula, Montana
    Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
    Freetown, Sierra Leone
    Monrovia, Liberia
    Herriman, Utah

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jonathan, thank you for this additional comment. As I observed in the post to which I shared the address in my last response to you, I am anticipating 2-3 African temple prospects. The only way I would see 2 being announced for either the Africa Ssoutheast or Africa West Areas is if 3 new African temples are announced, and one of them is not for UAE in the Middle East/Africa North Area.

    That said, assuming that one each in Africa Southeast and Africa West are announced, my pick for the latter would be Sierra Leone, which is higher up on Matt's latest list of the top ten nations with the strongest Church presence without a temple (Sierra Leone ranks second on that list, and Liberia is fifth). My choice for the former area would be Antananarivo Madagascar, which is separated from the rest of the African continent by a body of water, making travel to any temple to which the Madagascar Saints are or will subsequently be assigned a difficult hardship. While it is only seventh on that latest top ten list, the fact of the difficult and expesnsive travel may hold more sway. An additional thought: If a temple is announced for Sierra Leone, then the journey for the Saints in Liberia will be cut quite a bit. Right now, the Liberian Saints travel 949.2 miles to get to their assigned temple (Accra Ghana). That distance will decrease to 618.7 miles once the Abidjan Temple is dedicated (which is anticipated to occur in roughly 1.5 years or so). And if a temple is soon announced for Freetown, that would further cut the one-way distance to 322.3 miles for the Liberian Saints.

    So I feel that temples in Madagascar and Sierra Leone might be the African priorities this go-round. That said, a temple in Monrovia seems possible within the next 2-5 General Conferences, but certainly sooner, if all goes well. Your other choices seem pretty solid. But given that other Utah locations have been given preference before Herriman, it could be a Heber Valley Temple is announced first. I don't know for sure that will be the case, but just some food for thought, FWIW. I hope that several temples on many people's lists are announced within the next 3 years or less. And my thoughts, with respect to next General Conference, could be entirely off. Either way, I will be happy for any temples that are announced anywhere. Thanks again for stopping by to share your thoughts, Jonathan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would be glad to be wrong about Herriman if Heber Valley is announced in its stead.

      Delete
    2. I really do hope that a Herriman temple is not too far off. Presidents Monson and Nelson have a history of announcing temples publicly proposed during the administrations of their prophetic predecessors, so if the land mentioned by President Hinckley in 2005 is now indeed in Herriman (which seems more likely than not, based on what I've read in my research), then hopefully the announcement of that prospect won't have to wait too much longer to be made official.

      With my Utah Area selections, some of them may be almost interchangeable. And with President Nelson having announced temples for Northern and Southern Utah, along with one last April for the Salt Lake Valley, who knows what the next Utah location will be?

      The one thing of which I am absolutely certain is that another Utah prospect will be announced in October. In the meantime, thanks again Jonathan, for taking time to comment.

      Delete
  17. Jonathan, I feel somewhat stupid. I somehow forgot that, last April, President Nelson announced two temples for the Pacific Area, and I likewise forgot Matt's assessment that, if current Church Growth trends continue, the Africa West Area is on track to have 13 temples in various phases by or before 2030. With those two facts in mind, it may be entirely possible that, regardlless of whatever might wind up occurring in terms of temple announcements for the Africa Southeast and Middle East/Africa North Areas, the Africa West Area could indeed get two temples. If that happens, then Freetown Sierra Leone and Monrovia Liberia would likely be the top two contenders, unless a second or third temple is announced in one of the other nations within the Africa West Area. I apologize for that oversight in my analysis above, and I thank you again for taking time to comment. You have clearly put a lot of thought into what you have shared about future temple prospects, and I appreciate hearing from you. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True. Thank you for saying that. Based on many of my past experiences, all too frequently, what I say and how I say it sometimes results in a misunderstanding about the mode and manner of how I express myself. So I appreciate your understanding in this situation.

      I also know there are many who still believe that a mass number of temples will be announced in October. But I expected the same in April, and I know that many were disappointed when "only" 8 temples were announced at that time. Since April, further research on my part shows that the ten-fold increase of which has been spoken will likely be the endgame goal, rather than an immediate destination on the way to an even bigger increase. That's why I've suggested a target between 14-16 temples. And that target has led me to be more conservative in my by-region breakdown by area for October than I might otherwise have been. But I will be happy with any number of temples which may be announced. In the meantime, thanks again for taking time to comment, Jonathan.

      Delete
  18. Roughly applying the longer list of potential temples above to your proposed quota of 14-16 possible temple announcement for this October 2019, I have come up with the following predictions as an exercise.

    I've narrowed the choices down a bit by the areas you mentioned as likely to have temples announced in them soon. The reason I have included multiples in some areas is due to: (a) either one or two temples being just as likely as another in that area (in my opinion); (b) me not wanting to leave one or another off the list due to personal preference; or (c) me not having enough information at this time to make an informed enough decision to choose one over another.

    Criteria I used for these predictions were: (a) number of stakes & membership in the pertinent country or state; (b) proximity to closest temple; (c) difficulty in traveling to nearest temple (i.e. driving or flying in a 1st world country versus driving or flying in a 3rd world country or island nation); (d) whether or not the temple in question had been publicly proposed by a general authority (or privately proposed, as in the rumor that Elder Bednar proposed a Missoula Montana Temple at a stake conference a few years ago); (e) whether or not said temple would be the first temple announced in that country or state; (f) if not the first temple, then taking into account how many other temples said country or state already contains (either fully completed or announced), and how recently those other temples had been announced or completed; (g) whether or not the the potential temple would follow some of the recent patterns introduced by President Nelson (i.e. temples recently announced in island nations that have low membership but long distance to nearest temple - such as Cape Verde, Guam, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico); (h) how fast the Church has been growing in said country or state in recent years (i); personal bias.

    2-3 temples in Africa:
    1 in Africa Southeast: Antananarivo Madagascar or Kampala Uganda
    1 in Africa West: Freetown Sierra Leone or Monrovia Liberia
    (possibly) 1 in Middle East/Africa North: Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates

    1-2 in Asia (Asia and/or Asia North):
    1 in Asia: Ulaanbaatar Mongolia or Singapore
    1 in Asia North: Osaka Japan

    1-2 in Brazil:
    Belo Horizonte or Florianopolis

    1 each in Central America and the Caribbean:
    1 in Central America: Coban Guatemala
    1 in Caribbean: Kingston Jamaica

    1-2 in Europe (or 1 each in Europe and Europe East):
    1 in Europe: Oslo Norway
    1 in Europe East: Vilnius Lithuania

    2-3 in North America (including 1 in Utah) or US territories:
    Utah: Herriman or Heber City Utah
    Mexico: Torreon Mexico
    North America Central: Missoula Montana or Rapid City South Dakota or Pueblo Colorado
    North America Northeast: Cleveland Ohio
    North America Southeast: Charlotte North Carolina
    North America Southwest: Bentonville Arkansas or Fort Worth Texas
    North America West: Fairbanks Alaska or Bakersfield California

    1 each in the Pacific and the Philippines:
    Pacific: Port Moresby Papua New Guinea or Tarawa Kiribati
    Philippines: Tacloban or Bacolod

    1-2 in South America Northwest and South America South:
    South America Northwest: Santa Cruz Bolivia or Iquitos Peru or Maracaibo Venezuela
    South America South: Bahia Blanca Argentina or Vina del Mar Chile or Ciudad del Este Paraguay


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, Jonathan. Thanks for taking time to provide this additional analysis of the prospects on my list based on the rough parameters I provided in my post above. I apologize for my delayed response, but I wanted to give your feedback all due consideration before sharing my reaction. First, a comment on potential African cities which might have a temple announced: It's true that I have allowed for a temple to be announced in the Middle East/Africa Central Area (in the UAE), but if such an announcement is not made, I could see a scenario where the Church still announces 3 African temples, 2 for the Africa Southeast or Africa West Areas, and 1 for whichever other areas would be thus impacted. There are quite a few African nations which, due to factors of distance, expensive travel, or larger-sized current temple districts, will need a temple in the near future, so if Middle East/Africa North is taken out of the equation, I'd anticipate a 2 and 1 scenario for the other two areas.

      Secondly, not sure whether or not you were aware of this, but since I last published the latest edition of my list in question, the Church announced in late July that Mongolia would be transferred from the Asia to the Asia North Area. That change became effective on August 1, along with other area leadership changes:

      https://www.mormonnewsroom.mn/%D3%A9%D0%B3%D2%AF%D2%AF%D0%BB%D0%BB%D2%AF%D2%AF%D0%B4/%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B4-%D1%85%D3%A9%D0%B3%D0%B6%D0%B8%D0%B6-%D0%B1%D1%83%D0%B9-%D1%81%D2%AF%D0%BC-%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BE-%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%B9%D0%BD-%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%B4-%D0%B1%D2%AF%D1%81%D1%8D%D0%B4-%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%8C%D1%8F%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%85-%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BE

      Based on that change, since Mongolia is on Matt's list of the top ten nations with the strongest Church presence without a temple in any phase, I'd prioritize that prospect in the Asia North Area, rather than a temple in Japan, and to the Asia Area prospects, I'd probably add either Jakarta Indonesia or Taichung Taiwan.

      Delete
    2. I'd be pleased if 2-3 Brazilian prospects were announced as well, and I have heard a rumor that part of President Nelson's time in Brasilia may be used to ascertain how soon the temple site in that city might be ready for a groundbreaking, and that he may also scout for prospecitve temple sites to break up the current Sao Paulo district, along with that of a few other temples in that same general area.

      And I do think Coban Guatemala is likely to be the favored choice for a Central American temple. As for the Caribbean, Kingston Jamaica appears by some measures to be a more long=shot candidate, but it was the only viable one I could find for that area this go-round. If no Caribbean temple prospect is announced, I feel we could see a scenario where two Central American cities have a temple announcement.

      The two European areas have gotten a lot of apostolic attention lately. Most recently, Elder Uchtdorf was in Hamburg, and I heard he might have publicly proposed a temple for that city. Also, if another temple is needed in the United Kingdom, I have been told Edinburgh Scotland may be the best place for it. With that in mind, Oslo may be a lesser ppriority this go-round. Also, if a Lithuanian temple is not announced, I could see the Church potentially announcing 2 temples in the Europe Area instead.

      North America is harder to gauge. One Canadian temple prospect appears to be imminently needed, Victoria British Colombia. A Church member living in that city describes difficult travel that is necessary to reach the Vancouver temple, which is based out of Langley. I'd probably prioritize both Missoula Montana and Bentonville Arkansas, since the Church has held land in reserve in both cities for the last several years. The rest of North America is difficult to gauge, but I do anticipate 1 Utah temple.

      I'm not entirely sure I would lump Mexico in with the US or US territories, but could see a temple in either Torreon or Queretaro. The fluctuation of Church growth in Mexico makes it hard to get a sense of how soon and where other Mexican temples may be needed, but it's something to think about. In the Pacific, the priority would likely be Papua New Guinea, which is now the first on the aforementioned list of the top ten nations. And if a temple in the Philippines is not announced, two Pacific-area temples could be possible, based on what occurred in that respect last General Conference.

      Finally, regarding South America, Bolivia and Paraguay are the only listed nations where just one temple currently operates. I'd prioritize Santa Cruz Bolivia for the South America Northwest Area. That area is one of only a few in which President Nelson has not yet anounced a temple, so for the Northwest, Bolivia would likely get the priority. As for the South America South Area, from what I've heard, the Saints in Bahia Blanca have been recently lobbying Church headquarters for their own temple, and it appears that part of President Nelson's scheduled visit to the Buenos Aires region may be for the purpose of scoping out that prospect, and trying to ascertain the Lord's will in that respect.

      With all of that noted, even given all the research I have done on my latest list of prospective locations for October, and on the matter of what we may be likely to see in terms of the likely breakdown of the temples that will be announced, I have still been somewhat pleasantly surprised at the methodical way President Nelson has approached temple announcements thus far, and I have a feeling that will surely continue going forward. In the meantime, thanks for taking time to share your thoughts on this, Jonathan. I always appreciate hearing from you.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for letting me know about the area change for Mongolia. Here's my updated picks in that regard:

      1-2 in Asia (Asia and/or Asia North):
      1 in Asia: Singapore or Jakarta Indonesia
      1 in Asia North: Ulaanbaatar Mongolia

      Delete
    4. Hello, Jonathan. Thank you for stopping by to comment. I wouldn't be surprised if you are right.If only one new Asian temple is announced, it will probably be for Mongolia. But if two are announced, I could see both Mongolian and Indonesia getting a temple. I guess that will largely depend on whether my target suggestion (14-16 new temples) is anywhere near accurate. Either way, I still don't anticipate a mass number of temples will be announced, nor do I think it is time yet for President Nelson to detail his temple expansion plans. But I believe that will occur in due time. In the meantime, Jonathan, thanks for stopping by to share this additional comment. I always appreciate hearing from you.

      Delete
    5. It's nice discussing these possibilities with you, too, James. Sorry I haven't answered for a few days. I've been busy irl.

      The main reason I lumped Mexico in with the US is because most of the Mexicans I know consider themselves to be a part of North America, as opposed to Central America. Conversely, Central America can be considered by some (and was explained to me by some Hondurans I knew, unless I misunderstood) to consist of only Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Guatemala. This is because of the former Federal Republic of Central America, which consisted of those countries. Remnants of that union can be still be seen in the current flag of Honduras:

      https://flagpedia.net/honduras

      Although others also consider Mexico, Belize, and Panama to be a part of Central America.

      Perhaps you can help me, though. In which area does the Church place Mexico? Central or North America? Or does Mexico have its own area by itself?

      Delete
    6. Hello, Jonathan. No worries about your delayed responses. Mexico has its' own area, with an area presidency and area seventies living locally. Interestingly enough, the Central and South American regions, including Mexico and Brazil, are subdivided, along with the Caribbean Area, between the Fourth and Seventh Quorums of the Seventy in a very unique way. But South America has the Brazil Area and two others for the continent, and the nations you mentioned by name comprise the Central America Area, while Mexico is a separate area. In another post I published here late yesterday, among other subjects, I detailed the area distribution by Quorums of area seventies. You might be interested in checking that out. In the meantime, thanks for your additional comment here

      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.