"There are exciting things ahead. This work is moving forward at an accelerated pace. I can just hardly wait to bounce out of bed each morning and see what the day will bring. We invite all people to come unto Christ, to become more like Him, to experience the joyous blessings of the Holy Temple and to have eternal life,” He then went on to say that more temples and other announcements were coming for the October General Conference. (Note: The bold emphasis is my own).
I shared my initial thoughts on what some of those "other announcements" could be on this blog at the end of August, but given all that has happened since that time, and some additional thoughts which have come to me, I wanted to now post my revised and revisited thoughts in that respect. Firstly, as I noted in that prior post, the pluralization of the term in question, and the fact of the statement itself implies that there will be more than one "other announcement" aside from new temples.
But the wording of that statement also implies to me that whatever may be coming down the pike is not the everyday, ordinary, run-of-the-mill, or traditional announcements that are part of a usual General Conference. So we can safely infer that whatever those announcements may be, President Nelson was not referring directly to the processs of the Sustaining of Church Officers, which is presented as a matter of due course every six months in accordance with the doctrines and practices of the Church (as found here).
So my first observation would be reiterating my suggestion made in that prior post from my blog that a change and/or restructuring of area seventies Quorums could be coming down the pike. As was correctly observed in the comment threads of that post, aside from the initial sustaining of area seventies, Church leaders have not announced changes in area seventies Quorums in General Conference. But with President Nelson having been proven to be willing to buck tradition, the prospect of such changes being announced in General Conference may not be able to be dismissed out of hand.
The current geographic division of each of the Quorums is kind of vast, making it harder for each Quorum to meet together as often as may be necessary for training. So that alone would be enough reason to split some of these Quorums as they now stand. Above and beyond that, however, 3 of the 6 Quorums of area seventies are within 20 members or less of being the doctrinally-specific 70. So those two factors may be enough to warrant such a split.
I also mentioned among my predictions for the upcoming General Conference that I anticipated the release of several area seventies. This is how that list now looks:
The following area seventies may be released for the following reasons:
Called as mission presidents: Aley K. Auna, Walter Chatora, J. Kevin Ence, Jose L. Isaguierre, Bryan R. Larsen, George Kenneth Lee, W. Jean-Pierre Lono, Khumbulani Mdletshe, Hoi Seng Leonard Woo
Called as temple president: Milan F. Kunz; Yutaka Onda; ’Aisake K. Tukuafu; Juan A. Urra
Longest-tenurediv: Ruben Acosta, Frederick O. Akinbo, Omar A. Alvarez, Grant C. Bennett, Wilson be Calderon, Hernando Camargo, M.T. Ben Davis, Robert J. Dudfield, E. Xavier Espinoza, Meliula M. Fata, Sam M. Galvez, Claude R. Gamiette, John A. Koranteng, Jose E. Maravilla, Joaquim J. Moreira, Adeyinka J. Ojediran, Gennady A. Podvodov, Abraham E. Quero, Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza, Gordon H. Smith, Raul S. Villanueva, Hoi Seng (Leonard) Woo, and Kevin J. Worthen
And if all of those I listed above were to be released, the total number of area seventies released by Quorum and the new total number of members in each Quorum would break down as follows:
Quorum
|
Total Number of Likely Releases
|
Resulting Totals if All Are Released
|
Third
|
10
|
42
|
Fourth
|
10
|
54
|
Fifth
|
4
|
42
|
Sixth
|
3
|
52
|
Seventh
|
1
|
43
|
Eighth
|
7
|
41
|
So admittedly, without knowing how many area seventies are actually going to be released, if all the changes I noted come to pass, only 2 of those Quorums would be within 20 members or less of needing to be split. The biggest rationale behind such a change would likely thus be for purposes of easiing the process whereby each Quorum can regularly meet by making the Quorum composition more geographically close.
In the prior post to which I alluded earlier, the post and comment threads disucssed more of the prospects, and the same was true of the coverage and resulting comments on the Church Growth Blog. Aside from what was noted in those posts and the threads thereof, there could be a few surprise announcements that few (if any) of us can currently see coming. So the one other thing worth mentioning here is a revision to my previously-offered assertion in that earlier post that while new temple announcements were coming, there would likely not be any mention of President Nelson's temple expansion plans, aside from just general information.t
A revision of those thoughts is necessary because, while I still believe that 14-16 ne w temples will be announced, the recent temple developments reported on this blog have led me to believe that a minimum of 12 temples could have a groundbreaking within the next year (ie before the October 2020 General Conference; and both aside from and in addition to the previously-announced groundbreakings for the Saratoga Springs Utah and Puebla Mexico Temples). As I noted in the comment threads of my last post, if each of those 12 temples does have a groundbreaking (also excluding however many temples are going to be announced during the upcoming General Conference), the queue of announced temples will then go down to 15.
With that in mind, given the string of recent temple-related announcements which have been made by the Church since the beginning of August, it is obvious that President Nelson is being very methodical about how quickly temples will begin to move from being announced to having a groundbreaking to construction, and on to dedication, which would be a major way to greatly expand the total number of operating temples in a very short period of time. And that is just my assessment based on the recent string of such announcements we have seen thus far.
My point in mentioning that is that, if President Nelson is able to put the Church in a position where roughly 15 new temples would be able to see construction begin every year as a matter of course, and if what we have recently seen regarding temple announcements keeps occurring, it may not be long at all until President Nelson releases at least the initial details of his plans. And what better time would there be to do that than in a General Conference 1-2 months after a massive number of announcements impacting currently-announced temples has occurred?
I have no idea whether anything Matt or myself or anyone commenting on our priror posts will match what is actually announced. But the one thing I can say unequivocally is that whatever actually is announced will be in harmony with the Lord's will for His people at this time. If any of you do not have such a witness for yourselves, I urge you with all the energy and sincerity of my heart to do what it takes to get such a witness. And if we listen with our hearts, minds, and spirits, the Lord will convey messages, through spoken word, song, and especially through the promptings of His Spirit, the messages we need to hear, even and especially if those messages are not necessarily what we want to hear.
I have appreciated the opportunity to share these thoughts with you. I continue to monitor all Church news and temple updates and will do my level best to bring word of those to you all as I become aware of it.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 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.
I have appreciated the opportunity to share these thoughts with you. I continue to monitor all Church news and temple updates and will do my level best to bring word of those to you all as I become aware of it.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 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.
There are some other clues given as to temples by some of the renderings this year. The midsize (30k-70k sq. ft.) are used in regions where there are more members close by. But it is the smaller ones where I think we have another thing coming.
ReplyDeleteLook at the fronts of both the Kinshasa and Port-au-Prince temples, and count the window openings on eithe4r side of the entrance. Typically on these there are three each side and both are under 12k sq. ft.
Look at the other new renderings for those with the same configuration, there are either 1, 2, or 3 windows each side. 3 windows indicate to me that those will be about the same size as Haiti or DR Congo.
But the other two sizes, the ones with one or two windows each side, will be even smaller. This find may explain why no angel Moroni statue on the three we know about, not sure if an angel was included on a two-window version or not, nd while DR Congo did not get a statue either for certain other reasons, that design is large enough that one could be placed if desired, as Haiti and DR Congo are about the size of the Hinckley period smaller temples. Puebla may be in this size category.
These very small temples will be relatively inexpensive to build, maybe in a range similar to meetinghouses in expense. A Detroit-area newspaper said they had heard that the temple there ran $5 million to build, with inflation, that is a little more now so the even-smaller ones that while small, they may be about that. We may never know the true cost there, but the guess seems reasonable.
James Anderson, thank you for stopping by to share these observations. It is clear from your comment that you have paid close attention to temple designs lately, and I appreciate your analysis as posted in your comment. Your explanation helped me put these newest designs and styles into perspective. I appreciate you providing some insight as well into how and when the Church may determine whether or not to put an angel Moroni on certain temples. I am sure that on the Moroni question, cultural and economical factors play into all of that as well.
DeleteBased on what you have observed, we have insight into some of the parameters that go into designing certain styles of temples. But I am still hopeful that President Nelson may provide general preliminary details about how and within what kind of timing the first part of his plans may come to fruition. And as I observed in my post above, there are around 12 temples or so that could easily, based on what is now known, have a groundbreaking within the next year or sooner. But there could also be more than that that wind up having a groundbreaking within that time, and I fully believe that, in almost all cases, the days when temples are stalled for 5 or more years between their announcements and groundbreakings may b3e long over. There will be one or two exceptions among the current crop of announced temples (with Russia being one prime example), but I would be very much surprised if most others do not have construction begin within 3 years of their announcements. Time will tell. Either way, thanks again, James Anderson, for taking time to comment.
I wanted to mention a few other things here that are not directly related to the above post or the comments in this thread thus far. Today marks the final day of open house tours for both the Frankfurt Germany and Raleigh North Carolina Temples. Given that the tours of the Frankfurt temple were set to wrap up at 9:00 PM Frankfurt time, because of the relevant time difference (8 hours later there than it is here in Utah), it is now almost 9:30 PM Frankfurt time, and tours have wrapped up. That temple will now undergo a roughly 3-week period of final preparation before its' youth devotional is held on Saturday October 19, at which Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles will preside, with him set to rededicate that temple in 3 sessions the following day.
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime, with today also being the last day for tours of the Raleigh North Carolina Temple, those tours will wrap up at 8:00 PM Raleigh time, which is now around 4.5 hpoours away Utah time. Following the conclusion of those tours, the following two weeks will see General Conference weekend occur and the temple undergoing final preparations for its' rededication, which will occur in a single prviate session the week before the rededication of the Frankfurt Temple. Acting President M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles will preside over that event, along with a devotional for youth in the temple district the night before.
And, as some of you may recall, one week after the October 2019 General Conference occurs, the one-week open house for the Asuncion Paraguay Temple will take place. And a week after that wraps up, the one-week open house for the Baton Rouge Louisiana Temple will be held. The end of that open house will coincide with the weekend during which the Asuncion temple will be privately rededicated. Still no word on who may be asked to preside over that event. And two weeks later, the rededication of the Baton Rouge Louisiana Temple will follow, over which Elder Quentin L. Cook will be presiding. I continue to monitor all Church news and temple updates and will bring word of those to you all as I become aware of them. In the meantime, my thanks once again to you all for your continued interest and ongoing support.
I think there will be some larger changes coming down the pipeline. In the past a common thread has been to prepare us via our local leaders. All of ours now just say be prepared and study.(we did change stakes a few years ago, so not sure if that plays into it.). I would love them to give us some more doctoral meat in conference. For example, I would love just one talk once a year about something like the "davidic covenant" or any other of a number of things. I also am personally under the impression that some of the changes coming in the future will really test testimonies of even the strong. I honestly would not be surprised if in the next 10 to 20 years we will see polygamy come back. (Again another subject that could be thought in general conference). I have many reasons that have influenced this feeling besides the above mentioned. I do not believe the saints are ready for this yet(I sure am not).
ReplyDeleteI also feel like we are getting new scripture soon. Just a feeling the other day. Some may say we do not read what we have. To that I say "to those who read will be blessed". The "train"is moving faster all the time. There is not time to wait any longer.
Most of the general conference guesses I hear from people stem from their personal wishes or thoughts that the church is ran by popular demand (like they would allow same sex marriages in the temple). I do not understand how they don't understand that it does not work that way.
I hope we can pray to know God's will when significant changes happen. Small changes are big to some and big changes are small to others.
Hello. Thank you for taking time to comment. I have a few thoughts about what you said. As far as doctrinal "meat" is concerned, Church leaders have periodically referred to 1 Corinthians 3, wherein Paul notes in verse 2: "I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able." In the following verse, Paul further outlines the reasons for saying that, which surely have some applicability today: "For ye are yet acarnal: for whereas there is among you benvying, and cstrife, and ddivisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?"
DeleteBut further, especially lately, Church leaders have been stripping down many programs and practices to the barest essential elements, to concentrate on what really matters. In other words, when it comes to doctrine, at least for the moment, until the Lord indicates otherwise, we need to focus on the milk we are being given before we are sufficiently prepared as a Church and the word to digest the meat. And since the conditions of the Church to which Paul referred in verse 3 are some of the same conditions in our day and time, I imagine that the apostles would have a similar response as did Paul on that issue.
As for changes that test Church members and the world, we have seen some of those recently. People got so used to the status quo and routine of home and visiting teaching, and to the bulk of significant gospel learning taking place inside the walls of our Church buildings. So for many, the changes that have come in the last year have been the faith-testing kind, as will be the new youth initiative as detailed in the broadcast from earlier today. These recent changes have tested and will yet test the commitment of the worldwide Church to put into Church whatever they expect to get out of it.
DeleteAnd President Nelson's BYU devotional address (which was carried to young adults worldwide) mentioned the reasoning and approaches behind the October 2015 policies impacting children of same-gender parents and the subsequent decision last April to make appropriate adjustments. For many, even stalwart and faithful Church members (along with more than a few who had no direct personal connections to any impacted by either decision), both adjustments were a HUGE test of faith. With that said, I agree that we have not yet seen an end to those kind of changes, and that if we have a testimony of the inspiration behind such decisions, that will carry us through such tests of faith.
As to your suggestion that polygamy may come back at some point, with the Lord, anything is possible, but I'd refer you to the following articles for more information on that:
https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mormonism_and_polygamy/Relationship_to_the_modern_Church
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng
And I will interject here that in this final resource, President Hinckley was pretty clear on the plural marriage question:
churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1998/11/what-are-people-asking-about-us?lang=eng
In the section particular to polygamy, the prophet said the following: "More than a century ago God clearly revealed unto His prophet Wilford Woodruff that the practice of plural marriage should be discontinued, which means that it is now against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows polygamy, the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage."
And Jacob 2 and several sections in the Doctrine and Covenants which were revealed around the time the Lord instructed Joseph Smith to reintroduce polygamy make it clear under what conditions polygamy had been or would be practiced. So unless a subsequent Church president determines President Hinckley was just speaking for himself and not for the Lord in what he said on that subject (which doesn't appear likely), I wouldn't hold my breath for anything to happen in that respect for at least the next century, if at all. But you are certainly entitled to your own opinion on that.
As to your hope for new scripture in the future, while it is true that nothing new has been canonized since 1980, we receive new scripture as the word of the Lord every six months in General Conference in everything that is said and done. The Lord noted the following in D&C 68:3-4: "And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall bspeak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.
"And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the aHoly Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the bpower of God unto salvation."
And as the Lord reminds us in D&C 1:38: "Whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." I apologize for this lengthy response, but wanted to provide the most thoughtful feedback I could on your input. Thank you again for taking time to comment.
In line with the idea of new scripture, I would love to see the Family Proclamation be officially cannonized as Official Declaration 3 in the Doctrine and Covenants.
ReplyDeleteHello, Scott! Thank you for taking time to comment. I have felt for a while that the Family Proclamation and the Living Christ would both be canonized, and with only 5 left of the 15 apostles that were serving during the time when both documents were released, the time could be now. But based on some of the factors I observed in my response to the previous comment above, a part of me wonders whether the documents actually need to be canonized. And that is a question that perhaps only the current apostles can answer. I wouldn't be surprised either way, though. Thanks again for stopping by to comment.
DeleteWouldn't it make more sense to place the Family Proclamation and the Living Christ in the Pearl of Great Price. That's where the Articles of faith are found which are no official declarations but more clarification and statements of belief which both the Proclamation and Living Christ documents are. They are documents which emphasize certain church doctrine not creating new doctrine.
DeleteHello, William! Thanks for stopping by to comment. I suppose that if/when the Family Proclamation and the Living Christ are canonized into scripture, they could theoretically go in either the Pearl of Great Price or the Doctrine and Covenants. But in the Doctrine and Covenants, the sections now appearing as 137 and 138 were initially placed in the Pearl of Great Price, then moved to the Doctrine and Covenants. So it appears that the prophet, under direction from the Lord, can put new canonized scripture in either book. At least, that's my take on this. Thanks again for taking time to comment.
DeleteSince President Nelson informed the church that there will be temples announced this conference, I thought it would be fun to compile a matrix of all of the lists of anticipated temples to be announced that have been posted here on your site and on the Churchgrowth Blog. See the following link to see the compiled matrix - sites.google.com/view/templematrix. Enjoy!
ReplyDeleteNate, thank you for sharing that information. It certainly helped me to see how my predictions compared to that of others. I have a feeling that we have just begun to see things accelerate as far as the Church's temple program, and I look forward to seeing whatever's next in that respect. Thanks again.
DeleteI know I am late to the party on this one, but here are my thoughts on upcoming temple announcements.
ReplyDeleteI believe there will be 12-15 temples announced. The following are most likely to be announced:
Bo or Freetown, Sierra Leone
Benin City, Nigeria
Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea
Tarawa, Kiribati
Indonesia or Singapore
1-2 possible in the Philippines (Bacolod, Angeles)
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Santa Cruz, Bolivia
Kingston, Jamaica
Heber Valley, Utah
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Other high possibilities:
Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Antananarivo, Madagascar
Monrovia, Liberia
Port Vila, Vanuatu
Iquitos, Peru
Kingston Jamaica
Punta Arenas, Chile
Rogers, Arkansas
Texas (El Paso or McAllen)
I have others as a third group that seem less likely.
Hello, coachodeeps. Thanks for taking time to comment. Based on recent comments made over the weekend on the Church Growth Blog, it seems more likely than not that the number of temples announced this weekend in General Conference will be in the teens. And in some of those same threads, there have been a variety of opinions on where temples could be announced, and the most viabbetle and likely prospects in that respect.
DeleteI remain reasonably confident in my offered assertion that the number of temples announced will be somewhere between 14-16 at minimum. In the meantime, I also know that there is no shortage of opinions on which locations might possibly have a temple announced. And I know the logic behind the way each of us puts our own lists together differs greatly. With that in mind, I agree with most of the general locations you mentioned, and I have a feeling that we may have no idea in terms of what may actually be coming this weekend, not just in terms of temple announcements, but in terms of everything else. Thanks, coachodeeps, for taking time to comment.
Coachodeeps, I agree with James comments regarding your list of likely temples, thanks for adding it to the conversation. I have included your list as part of the matrix. Thanks again!
ReplyDeleteNate, thanks for stopping by to share that. The matrix you put together was very informative. I would just add that I'd be very much shocked if none of the locations in which a temple is announced are on anyone's list. But anything's possible. Thanks again.
DeleteNate, Here are my guesses for Temple locations:
DeleteAntananarivo Madagascar
Bahia Blanca Argentina
Darwin Australia
Edinburgh Scotland
Florianopolis Brazil
Freetown Sierra Leone
La Paz Bolivia
Missoula Montana
Port Moresby Papua New Guinea
Rapid City South Dakota
Rogers Arkansas
Singapore
Tarawa Kiribati
Ulaanbataar Mongolia
Scott, thanks for stopping by to share your list. I am convinced that many of the locations thereon may have temples announced. Interestingly, yours is the second list from which I have seen Darwin Australia as a prospect. Given the many other locations that may be considered as needing a temple far more urgently, I am not sure what to make of the idea of another Australian temple. Based on what is announced this weekend, I may have to do more studying on such prospects. In the meantime, I do know at one point on my list that I had Ipswich Australia listed, so that would likely be my prioritized choice for the next Australian temple. But with President Nelson bucking tradition, anything is possible.
DeleteI also know that many people have prioritized Rogers Arkansas. While I cannot dismiss that prospect out-of-hand, a good friend of mine served his mission in Bentonville, and reported that land has been held in reserve in that city for a temple for at least the last decade. Unless there has been a border dispute between Bentonville and Rogers about the land in question, that is why I am personally prioritizing Bentonville. But I would be happy with a temple being announced in either location. Either way, Arkansas surely will receive a temple sooner rather than later. Aside from that, your other picks sound great to me. Thanks again, Scott, for taking time to comment.