Those predictions follow below. I am perfectly open to the idea of making any alterations that are needed, especially if there is a compelling reason to do so. And although 19 temples were announced last year, I don't see any scenario in which President Nelson will do another hiatus on temple announcements. It is far more likely that he will do whatever he can to work on the existing backlog to make room for additional new temples in the next several General Conferences.
So as not to disturb the flow of the information, I will end here and now as I always do. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated, on any post at any time, as long as the nature of such comments comply 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.
Session
|
Conducting
|
Speakers
|
Saturday Morning
|
President Dallin H. Oaks[ii]
|
President Russell M.
Nelson
|
Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf
|
||
Bishop W. Christopher
Waddell
|
||
Elder Terence M. Vinson
|
||
Lisa L. Harkness
|
||
Elder Gerrit W. Gong
|
||
President Henry B.
Eyring
|
||
Saturday Afternoon
|
President Henry B.
Eyring[iii]
|
President Dallin H. Oaks
(Sustaining of Church Officers)[iv]
|
Church Auditing
Department Report, 2018
|
Kevin R. Jergensen
|
|
President M. Russell
Ballard
|
||
Elder Scott D. Whiting
|
||
Elder Neil L. Andersen
|
||
Elder Quentin L. Cook
|
||
Elder Mathias Held
|
||
Elder Jeffrey R. Holland
|
||
Priesthood
|
President Dallin H. Oaks
|
Elder Gary E. Stevenson
|
Stephen W. Owen
|
||
Elder David P. Homer
|
||
President Henry B.
Eyring
|
||
President Dallin H. Oaks
|
||
President Russell M.
Nelson
|
||
Sunday Morning[v]
|
President Russell M.
Nelson
|
Elder D. Todd
Christofferson
|
Sharon Eubank
|
||
Elder Carlos A. Godoy
|
||
Elder Ulisses Soares
|
||
Elder Marcus B. Nash
|
||
Elder Dale G. Renlund
|
||
President Russell M.
Nelson
|
||
Sunday Afternoon[vi]
|
President Henry B.
Eyring
|
President Dallin H. Oaks
|
Tad R. Callister
|
||
Elder Anthony D. Perkins
|
||
Elder David A. Bednar
|
||
Elder Kyle S. McKay
|
||
Elder David S. Baxter
|
||
Elder Ronald A. Rasband
|
||
President Russell M.
Nelson
|
Predictions for Changes in Church Leadership
General Authority
Seventies: New General Authorities sustained from among the Area Seventies or
the Church at large (including any current mission or temple president).
Note: It is
traditional for new General Authority Seventies to be sustained each April,
so I would anticipate that occurring.
Result:
|
Area Seventies:
Some area seventies released, others called.
Note: Although
there have been exceptions in recent years, April General Conference has generally
seen a large number of area seventies called, and a few released, especially
if any of the new General Authorities are currently serving as area
seventies. I am anticipating the same will be true for this General
Conference.
Result:
|
Sunday School General
Presidency: Tad R. Callister, Devin G. Durrant, and Brian K. Ashton released,
new Sunday School General Presidency called.
Note: Brothers Callister
and Durrant have served together in the Sunday School General Presidency
since April 2014, and Brother Ashton joined this presidency in June 2015.
Since it has been somewhat standard in recent years for the Church to make a
change in auxiliary presidencies after 5 years of service. Therefore, I would
anticipate that a new presidency will be called, with the new presidency
comprised of either or both of the current counselors, members of the current
Sunday School General Board, members of the current Young Men General
Presidency or General Board, area seventies, or the Church at large.
Result:
|
Stakes
|
3,399
|
Missions
|
407
|
Districts
|
523
|
Wards and Branches
|
33,714
|
Total Church
Membership
|
16,385,309
|
Increase in
Children of Record
|
104,150
|
Converts Baptized
|
228,987
|
Full-Time
Missionaries
|
64,543
|
Church Service
Missionaries
|
30,339
|
Temples Dedicated
during 2018 (Concepcion Chile, Barranquilla Colombia)
|
2
|
Temples Rededicated
during 2018 (Houston Texas, Jordan River Utah)
|
2
|
Temples in
Operation by the end of 2016
|
161
|
Africa Southeast[ix]:
Antananarivo Madagascar[x];
Maputo Mozambique[xi]; Lubumbashi DR Congo[xii];
Cape Town South Africa[xiii];
Kampala Uganda[xiv]
Africa West[xv]:
Freetown Sierra Leone[xvi];
Kumasi Ghana[xvii]; Monrovia Liberia[xviii];
Yamoussoukro Ivory Coast[xix];
Benin City Nigeria[xx]
Caribbean: Kingston
Jamaica[xxix]
Europe[xxxii]:
Budapest Hungary[xxxiii]; Edinburgh Scotland[xxxiv];
Vienna Austria[xxxv]; Oslo Norway[xxxvi]
Pacific: Port Moresby
Papua New Guinea[xxxix]; Tarawa Kiribati[xl];
Pago Pago American Samoa[xli];
Neiafu Vava'u Tonga[xlii];
Savaii Samoa[xliii]
Philippines: Bacolod Philippines[xliv]
South America Northwest[xlv]:
Santa Cruz[xlvi]/La Paz[xlvii]
Bolivia; Iquitos Peru[xlviii];
Cali[xlix]/Medellin[l]
Colombia; Maracaibo Venezuela[li]
South America South[lii]:
Antofagasta[liii]/Valparaiso[liv]
Chile; Neuquen[lv]/Rosario[lvi]
Argentina; Ciudad del Este Paraguay[lvii]
North America[lviii]
(including the United States and Canada):
Idaho: Preston Idaho[lix]
North America Central:
Missoula Montana[lx]; Lethbridge Alberta[lxi];
Wichita Kansas[lxii]; Green Bay Wisconsin[lxiii];
Des Moines Iowa[lxiv]; Pueblo Colorado[lxv];
Rapid City South Dakota[lxvi]
North America Northeast:
Augusta Maine[lxvii]; Morristown/East
Brunswick New Jersey[lxviii];
Concord New Hampshire[lxix]
Cincinnati Ohio[lxx]; Pittsburgh Pennsylvania[lxxi];
Montpelier Vermont[lxxii]
North America Southeast:
Jackson Mississippi[lxxv];
Shreveport Louisiana[lxxvi];
Jacksonville Florida[lxxvii];
Knoxville Tennessee[lxxviii];
Savannah Georgia[lxxix]
North America Southwest:
Bentonville Arkansas[lxxx];
Elko[lxxxi]/Ely[lxxxii]
Nevada; Fort Worth Texas[lxxxiii];
Las Cruces New Mexico[lxxxiv];
Flagstaff Arizona[lxxxv]
Utah South: Heber City
Utah[lxxxviii];
Tooele Utah[lxxxix]
[i]The speaking order for
General Conferences of the recent past have generally, for the most part,
conformed to general patterns, with only a few exceptions. That said, the two
General Conferences held in 2018 saw several deviations from past patterns.
With that in mind, the speaking order I am predicting for this General
Conference is more traditional, with a few exceptions that make sense. As I did
for the two General Conferences in 2018, I will be allowing myself a very small
margin of error when calculating the accuracy of these predictions
[ii]President Eyring conducted
the Saturday Morning session for both General Conferences last year. It is more
likely than not that the reason he was asked to do so last October was in view
of President Oaks being the last speaker in that session. So if President
Eyring is the final speaker in this session this go-round, then it seems
logical that President Oaks will conduct the session.
[iii]If President Oaks does
conduct the Saturday Morning Session, since he will likely also present the
Sustaining of Church Officers in this session (for the reasons detailed more
fully in note #4 below), it would make sense if President Eyring conducted this
session.
[iv]Because President Eyring
led the Sustaining of Church Officers last October, and because President Oaks
did such a great job with the long list of new Area Seventies in April of 2018,
I feel confident that President Oaks will continue to lead that process each
April, and that President Eyring will do so each October.
[v]Although it has typically
been traditional for the counselors in the First Presidency to alternate being
the final speaker during the Saturday Morning Session and the first speaker
during the Sunday Morning Session (at times when the Church president was able
to open the former session and close the latter one), the two Sunday Morning
Sessions held in 2018 diverted from that pattern. In April of last year, all
three First Presidency members spoke to conclude the Sunday Morning Session
(because it was Easter Sunday). Then last October, President Oaks was the last
speaker during the Saturday Morning Session, and President Eyring was the first
speaker during the Sunday Afternoon Session. As a result, 3 members of the
Quorum of the Twelve Apostles spoke during the Sunday Morning Session. As I
will detail more fully in the note below, I am assuming President Oaks will be
the first speaker in the final session this go-round, and if that turns out to
be the case, then 3 members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles will likely
speak during this session.
[vi]In April 2018, almost half
(5 members) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles spoke during this session.
Then last October, 2 more Quorum members spoke, along with President Eyring.
This means that in 2018 alone, over half the members of that Quorum (7 total)
spoke during this session. So my theory for this General Conference is that
President Oaks will be the first speaker during this session, and, as a
consequence, the remaining two members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
will speak during this session as well.
[vii]As per the tradition
established in the April 2018 General Conference, the Statistical Report will
not be read out loud during the Saturday Afternoon Session, but will instead be
published on the Church website directly after that session.
[viii]Preliminary note on this
section: With 19 new temples announced last year alone (which resulted in an
existing current backlog of 30 announced temples), many have felt that no new
temples might be announced during this General Conference. While I understand
the rationale behind that opinion, Church leaders have frequently referenced
President Nelson’s great enthusiasm for the topic of temples, and have noted
that President Nelson’s legacy as the foremost temple-building prophet is
likely to outpace and overshadow what we previously saw occur under President
Hinckley’s smaller temple design. Previous prophets have established a 200-mile
minimum distance within which every Church member should be from their assigned
temples. So if President Nelson’s plans involve halving or quartering that
distance, or doubling or tripling the number of operating temples in a few
years’ time, no location may be off the table. And while it used to be standard
for the Church not to announce other temples when there has either been a
backlog on temples under construction or announced, or when one or more temples
are in various phases of construction in any given area of the Church or nation
in which the Church is established, President Nelson has broken typical trends
in that regard too. After extensive personal research and requesting feedback
from the readers of my blog, the resulting list of locations was put together,
with potential temple locations first grouped by the geographical area under
which they fall, then by imminent likelihood within those areas.
[ix]The entire African
continent has experienced significant growth, and that is also true of this
area. With only one temple currently operating to serve the Saints in
Southeastern Africa, a second (in Kinshasa DR Congo) will be dedicated the
Sunday following this General Conference, with another (in Durban South Africa)
anticipated to be dedicated before the end of 2019. In the meantime, the Saints
in Nairobi Kenya have been told that a site has been selected for their temple,
with a dedication anticipated to occur sometime during 2021 (as it will be a
smaller temple), and President Nelson spent some of his time in Harare Zimbabwe
looking at options for the temple site there. Within the next year or two (but
certainly less time than that, if all goes well), both of those temples could
be under construction. Therefore, it seems more likely than not that other temples
could be announced for this area during this General Conference.
[x]Madagascar currently
comes in as the 7th of the top 10 nations with the strongest Church
presence that do not have a temple in any phase, and it is an island nation not
connected to the rest of the African continent. For that reason alone,
Madagascar seems to me to be the second-most-likely African city to get a
temple (with the most likely location described below in note #16). Saints in
the capital city of Antananarivo currently travel 1,338 miles to worship at the
Johannesburg South Africa Temple. That distance will be cut to 1,282 miles once
the Durban South Africa Temple is dedicated, and will only be cut to 1,082
miles once the Harare Zimbabwe Temple is constructed and dedicated. Since no
other currently-announced temples will be any closer than that, it seems
logical to assume that a temple for this city will be announced sooner rather
than later.
[xi]On the top ten list
of nations first referenced in note #10 above, Mozambique comes in as the 9th.
The Saints in that area currently do not have too arduous a journey (341.5
miles) to travel to Johannesburg, but since that distance is still above the
200-mile goal set by previous Church presidents, a temple in Maputo may just be
a matter of time, especially if the minimum mileage is halved or
quartered.
[xii]Although the Church has,
for the most part, opted to ascertain how busy one temple might be in any given
nation or area before announcing a temple elsewhere in that nation or area,
that precedent was broken last year, when two temples were announced for
Argentina. With that in mind, given the growth of the Church in the DR Congo, a
second temple there may simply be a matter of time. As to the particular merits
of Lubumbashi, Saints in that city currently travel 1,332 miles to get to
Johannesburg, and they would travel even further to reach the Kinshasa temple.
The distance from Lubumbashi to Johannesburg will not be cut further until the
Harare Zimbabwe Temple is built and dedicated, at which point the Saints will
be 657.6 miles away. Since that is still well above the 200-mile distance
previously referenced, a second temple in DR Congo seems to be just a matter of
time. And although Elder Neil L. Andersen publicly proposed a temple for the Kasai
region, my research indicates that Lubumbashi is more likely to be chosen for
the location of the second temple in DR Congo.
[xiii]The Saints in Cape Town
currently travel 868.5 miles to get to their assigned temple in Johannesburg.
Since no other temple currently under construction or announced (including the
one in Durban, which will be dedicated at some point in 2019) will be closer
than that, a third temple in South Africa makes sense. While some have offered
their opinions that the city of George would be a better option for the third
South African temple, my research (and my mother’s personal knowledge of the
Church’s situation in that nation) has led me to conclude that a temple in Cape
Town is more likely and may simply be a matter of time.
[xiv]Uganda currently ranks as
5th on the list of the top ten nations previously referenced. The
Saints in that nation currently travel a distance of roughly 2,456.5 miles to
get to the Johannesburg temple. That distance will have its’ most significant
cut once the temple in Nairobi Kenya is built and dedicated, at which point the
Saints in Kampala will only have to journey roughly 403 miles. But since that
is still twice as far as the 200-mile goal, it seems more likely than not that
a temple will be announced in Kampala sooner rather than later.
[xv]The
Church in the Africa West Area has also experienced massive and rapid growth.
The Church Growth Blog recently reported that, if current growth trends in the
Africa West Area continue as they have been lately, the Church could go from
the 2 operating temples (with one more under construction) to 13 in operation
by sometime during 2030. With that in mind, several temples may dot this area
in the near future, and the locations in this section seem to me to be the most
imminently likely prospects.
[xvi]Sierra
Leone (to which I referred in note #10 above) is my top African pick for a
temple, and is now the second of the top ten nations that have the strongest
Church presence but do not yet have a temple in any phase. With the recent
expanded growth in Sierra Leone (particularly with so many districts that have
been upgraded to stakes), a temple there may simply be a matter of time. The
Saints in Freetown currently journey roughly 1,246 miles to the Accra Ghana
temple, a distance which will not be cut until the temple in Abidjan Ivory
Coast is built and dedicated, at which point the Freetown Saints will be
roughly 914 miles away from that temple. Since that is still far greater than
the 200-mile distance, whether or not that mileage goal is lowered, Sierra
Leone is very likely to get a temple soon.
[xvii]Since
the dedication of the Accra Ghana temple in January 2004, Ghana has seen
sufficient enough growth (in my opinion) to potentially get a second temple.
And Kumasi has emerged as the most likely city for such a temple. Although the
Saints in Kumasi currently only have to travel 154.4 miles to the Accra temple,
if the minimum mileage is lowered, then a temple in Kumasi may just be a matter
of time.
[xviii]Liberia
currently ranks sixth on the previously-mentioned list of the top ten nations
with the strongest Church presence that do not have a temple in any phase. The
Saints in Liberia currently travel 946.5 miles to worship in the Accra Ghana
Temple. Once the Abidjan Ivory Coast Temple is built and dedicated, that
distance will decrease to 616.5 miles. If, as observed in note 16 above, a
temple is built in Freetown, that distance gets almost cut in half to 338.8
miles, which is still well above the current mileage goal. So if the minimum
distance is lowered at all, Monrovia is almost certain to be a prime candidate
for a temple in the near future.
[xix]As mentioned in
note #12 above, the precedent of the Church only having one temple in any phase
of construction in any given area or nation seems to have been broken. With the
current growth trends in the Ivory Coast, a second (and even a potential third)
temple could be possible sooner rather than later. The Saints in Yamoussoukro
currently travel roughly 479 miles to the Accra Ghana Temple, and that distance
will be cut to 147 miles once the Abidjan Ivory Coast Temple is built and
dedicated. But if, as previously noted, the minimum distance is halved or
quartered, then a temple in Yamoussoukro may be a more imminent prospect for
the near future.
[xx]Although a temple was just
announced for Lagos Nigeria last October, since 2018 saw two temples announced
for Argentina, a third temple for Nigeria may make sense, particularly in light
of the recent growth trends seen there. The Saints in Benin City currently
travel roughly 185 miles to the Aba Nigeria Temple, and the temple announced in
Lagos would be even further away than that. So if the goal is to halve or
quarter the 200-mile distance, Benin City is a prime prospect.
[xxi]It is somewhat difficult
to project what might occur for the Asia Area in terms of other temples. In
April 2018, President Nelson noted that he had not originally planned to
announce a temple for India, but did so following a direct prompting from the
Lord which came the day before his first General Conference as Church President
began. With a groundbreaking having been held for the Bangkok Thailand Temple
in January, and with President Nelson having looked at potential locations for
the Bengaluru India Temple, he subsequently announced during the October 2018
General Conference that a temple would be built in the capital city of
Cambodia. While it is unclear whether any other temples would be announced for
this area until the three in various phases are further along, the selected
cities which follow have a compelling case in their favor for a temple. Until
we know for sure, I have preferred to not limit my list this go-round.
[xxii]Mongolia
was one nation I had on my list of more distant prospects, primarily because
the Church presence in that nation is not as strong as it seems to be in other
Asian nations. There are two main factors in Mongolia’s favor in terms of
having a temple built. First of all, that nation now ranks as the eighth of the
top ten nations with the strongest Church presence which do not have a temple
in any phase. When we add that to the mileage metric (since the Saints in
Mongolia currently travel 1,805 miles to the Hong Kong China Temple), my
research also shows that no other operating or announced temple will cut that
distance at all. So a temple in Ulaanbaatar may simply be a matter of time, and
I would anticipate that sooner rather than later.
[xxiii]As mentioned in note
#21 above, it is difficult to tell how soon other Asian locations might have a
temple announced while the temples in Bangkok, Bengaluru and Phnom Penh are in
various stages of the construction process. At the same time, a temple in
Indonesia would cut down on the amount of travel involved for the Saints.
Currently, that journey is 2,034 miles to Hong Kong. Once the temple in Bangkok
is built and dedicated, that distance will be cut to 1,921 miles. Since neither
the Bengaluru nor Phnom Penh Temples would be closer, and since the distance
from Jakarta to Bangkok is still over 9.6 times further than the 200-mile goal
set by previous Church Presidents, a temple in Jakarta may simply be a matter
of time.
[xxiv]The Saints in Taichung
currently only have to travel 106.4 miles to worship at the Taipei Temple.
Depending on how busy that temple is, and on whether the minimum 200-mile
distance set by other prophets is halved or quartered, a second temple in
Taiwan may just be a matter of time, and Taichung seems to be the best option
for such a temple.
[xxv]The
nation of Brazil has seen strong Church growth, perhaps the greatest amount
Church-wide outside of North America. With 6 temples in operation there
currently, there are two others under construction in Fortaleza (for which a
dedication is anticipated sometime in the middle part of next year) and Rio de
Janeiro (for which a dedication is anticipated in early 2020). There are three
others which have been announced in Belem, Brasilia, and Salvador. With these
five in different phases, it is difficult to know how soon other temples might
be announced for the nation. But the following locations, for the reasons I
will highlight below, have a strong case in favor of a temple.
[xxvi]With
a temple having been announced last October for Salvador Brazil, I am fully
anticipating that Belo Horizonte will be one of the next Brazilian cities to
get a temple (if not the very next city). Saints in Belo Horizonte currently
travel 369 miles one-way to worship at the Campinas Brazil Temple (to which
they are currently assigned). The dedication of the Rio de Janeiro Brazil
Temple may result in those Saints being reassigned to that temple district, in
which case that distance would go down to 275.2 miles one-way. Either way,
having a temple built in Belo Horizonte makes sense according to the current
minimum mileage metric.
[xxvii]While
I had seen Florianopolis as a feasible temple prospect at some point in the
future, it was not until I took the reports of President Nelson’s ambitious
temple-building plans into account that I felt comfortable including
Florianopolis on this list for the immediate future. Right now, the nearest
temples to the Saints in Florianopolis are the temple in Curitiba (to which
they are currently assigned, and for which a journey of 191.3 miles is
involved) and Porto Alegre (which is exactly 285 miles away). Because the
distances involved constitute undue hardship for the Saints in Florianopolis, a
temple there may just be a matter of time. That said, it may be some time
before we know how soon a temple might be announced there, if a temple in Belo
Horizonte is more imminently needed. For now though, I am confident enough to
put it on this list.
[xxviii]Up
until 2016, the Church had not been widely-known to put a second temple in any
city outside the US. In 2016 and 2017, second temples were announced for Lima
Peru (which will be named for and built in the Los Olivos region), and Manila
Philippines (in the area of Muntinlupa City, which has yet to receive an
official name). Since Sao Paulo is a strong area in terms of Church membership,
a second temple there may be needed sooner rather than later, though that
prospect could potentially be delayed until temples rise in Belo Horizonte and
Florianopolis. But if the initial word on President Nelson’s temple building
plans are any indication, then a second Sao Paulo temple, along with the other
two locations, may be announced much sooner than anticipated
[xxix]Prior to the October
2018 General Conference, in the comments on the LDS Church Growth blog, someone
mentioned the prospect of a temple in Kingston Jamaica. The Jamaican Saints are
currently assigned to the Panama City Panama Temple, and have a one-way
overseas journey of 650 miles to get there, which means their assigned temple
currently takes them out of the geographical area of the Church in which they
live. Once the temple in Port-au-Prince Haiti is dedicated (in mid-May of next
year), the Jamaican Saints may be reassigned to that temple, which would then
cut that distance to 298 miles. But since that journey will still involve
overseas travel, and since the distance involved is still so great one-way, a
temple in Kingston makes a lot of sense. That is especially true given that a
few of the 19 locations for which President Nelson has announced temples so far
will be built to serve only one or two stakes or districts.
[xxx]On
my blog recently, someone who is familiar with the situation of the Church in
Guatemala informed me that a temple in Senahu may be delayed until the presence
of the Church increases there, but also noted that a second temple to serve the
Saints in the current Guatemala City Guatemala Temple district will likely be
more of a priority. It was also noted by the same person that that prospect was
the most imminent one for Central America. My personal research leads me to
disagree with one element of that comment, which was that no other Central
American candidates were likely to be announced in the near future, so I have
tentatively added one more location to my list of prospects for this area.
[xxxi]The Tegucigalpa Honduras
Temple district currently covers the 43 stakes and 9 districts in Honduras and
Nicaragua. Once the temple announced last April for Managua is built and
dedicated, that will leave the Tegucigalpa Temple district with 31 stakes and 5
districts. Although that is more manageable, it seems likely that a second
temple will be needed to serve the Honduran Saints. And the general consensus
from previous comments seems to be that San Pedro Sula is the next most likely
location for such a temple.
[xxxii]Europe,
particularly in the eastern countries of its’ continent, has seen some
stagnation in terms of the growth of the Church. With temples currently under
construction in Rome Italy and Lisbon Portugal (both of which will be dedicated
next year), and another announced for a major yet-to-be determined city in
Russia, the Church may opt to wait to construct other temples on the European
continent until those 3 are either dedicated or at least further along in the
process. That said, on the off-chance the Church does not so opt, the cities in
this section, for the reasons I will explain in the subsequent notes that will
follow this one, have the greatest chance of being announced in the near
future.
[xxxiii]When
I began sharing my thoughts on potential future temple locations, someone who
has knowledge of the growth of the Church in Europe indicated that Budapest
would likely be the next European city to get a temple. My study on the matter
confirms that opinion, so it has been on my list for a while. Right now, the
Saints in Budapest travel 418 miles to worship at the Freiberg Germany Temple.
And neither of the two European temples under construction will be closer than
that, so a temple in Budapest seems likely in the near future.
[xxxiv]When
expanding my list of temple prospects, I knew I had to look at another temple
in the UK. I had a temple for Scotland or Ireland on my list for the distant
future, but after numerous comments on my blog and some additional research on
my part, I determined that Scotland would be the more likely location for the
next temple in the UK. The Saints in Edinburgh are 185.4 miles from their
assigned temple in Preston England. If President Nelson’s temple-building plans
involve lowering the minimum mileage from which any Saint should be from their
assigned temple, then Edinburgh would indeed qualify for a temple, which would
likely also serve Ireland, in addition to some parts of England that are
nearest to the two countries.
[xxxv]Although
the Saints in Austria have seen a slight consolidation in the number of Church
units in that nation recently, their currently assigned temple in Frankfurt
(which is closed for renovation) is 444.2 miles away. If a temple is built in
Budapest Hungary, the Austria Saints may be reassigned to that temple, which
would then be 150.8 miles away. Given what I observed in note #29 above (about
how some of President Nelson’s 19 temples announced last year would be built to
initially serve just 1 or 2 stakes or districts, the same could easily be true
for a temple built in Vienna, which is why that city made my list this time.
[xxxvi]The Norwegian Saints
currently travel 326.7 miles to get to the Stockholm Sweden Temple (to which
they are currently assigned). So Oslo would already qualify for a temple based
on the current mileage metric. If that 200-mile minimum distance set by
previous prophets is quartered or halved, then Oslo would be a prime candidate
for a temple. For that reason, Norway has made my list for the first time this
go-round.
[xxxvii]The
growth of the Church in Mexico has somewhat stagnated to the point where Church
leaders began last year to do a mass consolidation of the Church units there,
primarily for the purpose of strengthening the remaining units. With that in
mind, it may be difficult to gauge how soon other Mexican temples might be
needed, but for now, the one candidate on this list, as I will explain in note
#38 below, has a strong case in its’ favor for a future temple.
[xxxviii]The
Saints in Queretaro Mexico currently travel 135.8 miles to worship at the
Mexico City Mexico Temple, and would actually be further away than that from
the temple which was announced last October for Puebla. Again, the timing of
the announcement for the next temple will depend largely on whether or not more
temples in that nation would make sense, given the apparent lack of sufficient
activity within the Mexico City Temple. Until more is known about that, and
about President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples, I feel confident
in keeping this city on my list.
[xxxix]Papua
New Guinea now ranks as the nation with the strongest Church presence that does
not yet have a temple. I also learned several years ago that land has been held
in reserve in Port Moresby for a temple for a while now. With that in mind, it
may simply be a matter of time before a temple is announced there.
[xl]Kiribati
currently ranks as the third nation with the strongest LDS presence that does
not have a temple in any phase of construction. The Saints in Tarawa currently
travel 1,402 miles to worship at the Suva Fiji Temple, and no other
currently-operating temple is closer than that. With all of this in mind, a
temple in that nation may simply be a matter of time.
[xli]American
Samoa ranks fifth on the list of nations with the strongest Church presence
that do not have a temple in any phase. The nearest temple to the Saints in the
capital city of Pago Pago is currently Apia Samoa, and the Pago Pago Saints
currently travel 76.2 miles, which is not long distance-wise, but involves
journeying over a body of water, which may be inconvenient. Also, if the
minimum mileage goal set by previous Church presidents is halved or quartered,
that will no doubt make this prospect more imminent.
[xlii]Tonga
has recently seen impressive Church growth, which leads me to believe that a
second temple may be needed to serve the Saints there. The city of Neiafu Vava’u
seems to be the most likely location for a second Tongan temple, since the
Saints in that city currently travel 189 miles to the temple in Nuku’alofa.
Although that is within the current minimum mileage, if that minimum is halved
or quartered, then that, combined with the extensive growth in Tonga, leads me
to believe that a Neiafu Vava’u temple will be announced sooner rather than
later.
[xliii]Although Savaii is 23
miles exactly from Apia, getting there involves an overseas flight, which may
constitute an undue hardship for the Saints assigned to the Apia Samoa Temple
district. With that in mind, it might make sense for the Church to announce a
second Samoan temple.
[xliv]The Church has two
operating temples in the Philippines (Manila and Cebu City). The temple
announced in October 2010 for Urdaneta had a groundbreaking ceremony in
January. And with the last 3 sets of temple announcements, the Philippines has
seen temples announced for the greater Manila area (which will be located in
Muntinlupa City), Cagayan de Oro, and Davao. If that is any indication of what
might happen in the future, then another temple for the Philippines may be
needed. The Saints in Bacolod currently travel 141.8 miles to reach the temple
in Cebu City, and part of that involves an overseas trip. For both of these reasons,
a temple in Bacolod seems likely to be announced sooner rather than later.
[xlv]The
entire South American continent has experienced massive Church growth. Having
previously discussed Brazil, I will focus my comments about South America on
the two other areas of the Church within this continent. Starting with 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 in early 2020). Two others have been
announced (the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple, which may have a groundbreaking
within the next year, if not sooner, and the Quito Ecuador Temple, which could
have a groundbreaking within the next 2-3 years, though hopefully sooner if all
goes well). With the South America Northwest Area having experienced somewhat
rapid growth, I have long been of the opinion that several prospects were
likely possibilities for this area in the near future, and I expanded the
number of those prospective locations again with the increased comments about
President Nelson’s ambitious temple-building plans. For the reasons mentioned
in the notes below, each of the locations on this list have a strong case in
their favor as prospects for the near future.
[xlvi]It seems to be simply a
matter of time before Bolivia gets a second temple. While I personally favor
the city of La Paz (because the bishop of my parent’s ward during my late
teenage and early young adult years served there), I cannot deny that a temple
in Santa Cruz may be more imminently needed, since that city has seen more
Church growth in recent years than La Paz. The Santa Cruz Saints currently
travel 296.9 miles to worship at the Cochabamba Bolivia Temple, so that city
would qualify based on the current mileage metric alone. For that reason, we
will likely see a temple announced there sooner rather than later.
[xlvii]As I mentioned in note
#46 above, I personally favor La Paz over Santa Cruz as the location of
Bolivia’s second temple. However, because a temple may be more imminently
needed for Santa Cruz, that might delay the prospect of a temple for La Paz.
That said, since the La Paz Saints currently travel 236.5 miles to get to the
temple in Cochabamba, and since that distance is also above the current maximum
mileage goal, we might see a scenario where temples are announced for both
cities at once, or within a General Conference or two of each other.
[xlviii]The Saints in Iquitos
currently travel 629 miles to worship at the Lima Peru Temple. The Trujillo Peru
Temple is actually closer in mileage, but perhaps Lima is easier for those
Saints to access. The Arequipa Peru Temple (which is anticipated to be
dedicated in early 2020) will be further away than either of the other two.
Once the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple is dedicated, it will only be 4 miles
closer to the Saints in Iquitos than the first Lima Peru temple. Since the
distance involved is more than 3 times greater than the 200-mile goal set by
previous Church presidents, a temple in Iquitos may just be a matter of time.
[xlix]Colombia has two
operating temples currently in Bogota and Barranquilla (the latter of which was
dedicated near the end of 2018). If Church growth continues in that nation the
way it has lately, then a third and fourth temple will likely be needed before
too much longer, and Cali and Medellin seem to be the most likely locations.
This note will focus on the former, with the next note focusing on the latter. The
Saints in Cali currently travel 286.7 miles one-way to worship at the Bogota Colombia
Temple. So Cali already qualifies for a temple of its’ own based on only the
mileage metric, especially if the minimum distance set by previous Church
Presidents is lowered at all.
[l]If a temple is announced
for Cali, it is possible that a temple in Medellin might be delayed. That said,
the Saints in Medellin currently travel 260.9 miles to reach the Bogota temple,
and a temple in Cali would only be 0.5 miles closer. With that in mind, temples
could be announced for both cities at the same time, or within 1 or 2 General
Conferences of each other.
[li]The
temple in Caracas was announced during the October 1995 General Conference,
with a groundbreaking occurring in January 1999, and a dedication for it was
held the following year in August. One year prior to the dedication of the
temple in Caracas, President Hinckley publicly proposed another Venezuelan
temple for the city of Maracaibo, which is 433,2 miles from Caracas. Although
Venezuela has political turbulence at the moment, and although there has been
some Church unit consolidation there in recent years, when we combine the
distance factor with the fact that temples publicly proposed during the
administrations of Presidents Hinckley and Monson have gone on to be announced
during the subsequent administrations of Presidents Monson and Nelson, the case
in favor of a temple in Maracaibo is strong, so that prospect may be more
imminent than many (myself included) might anticipate, particularly given the
unexpected nature of many of the 19 locations which had a temple announced by
President Nelson in 2018.
[lii]As
noted above relating to the South America Northwest Area, 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, which,
for the reasons outlined in the notes below, have a strong case in their favor.
[liii]The Church has two
operating temples in Chile, one in Santiago, and the other in Concepcion (which
was dedicated in late October 2018). Given that the Santiago Chile Temple
district is still relatively large, a third (and perhaps even a fourth) temple
for this nation seems to make sense in the near future. As to the particular
merits of Antofagasta, the Saints in that city currently travel 829.8 miles to
worship at the temple in Santiago. Because that is over 4 times further than
the 200-mile minimum distance goal set by previous Church Presidents, a temple
in Antofagasta may simply be a matter of time.
[liv]As I mentioned above (in
note 53), another temple or two to serve the Saints currently assigned to the
Santiago Chile Temple district may be needed. I have had Valparaiso on my list
of prospects for the near future for a while now. The prospect of a temple in
Antofagasta may be more imminent, since the Saints in Valparaiso are only 71.6
miles one-way from the temple in Santiago, but if the Church really wanted to
break up the current Santiago district, I could see both cities having a temple
announced within the next 1-3 General Conferences, whether that occurs
simultaneously, or if the announcement of one for Antofagasta is followed by
one for Valparaiso within 1-4 General Conferences.
[lv]It is difficult to know
how soon another temple may be announced to serve the Saints in Argentina.
There are 2 operating temples in that nation currently (in Buenos Aires and
Cordoba), and two new temples were announced for that nation in 2018 (for Salta
and Mendoza). Since both temples will help break up the current Cordoba temple
district, it seems logical to assume that something similar will be done to
break up the current Buenos Aires temple district. If the Church announced
temples in Neuquen and Rosario, that would accomplish such a division. As to
the particular merits of Neuquen, it is a more isolated city, and we have seen
President Nelson announce temples in cities, nations, and areas where the
members are more isolated. But in addition to that, the Saints in Neuquen have
a one-way journey of 708.2 miles to get to the temple in Buenos Aires, which is
more than 3.5 times further away than the minimum distance set by previous
Church Presidents. With all of this in mind, a temple in Neuquen may be a more
imminent prospect than many might feel it will be.
[lvi]As mentioned in note #55
above, the two temples announced for Argentina in 2018 will break up the
current Cordoba temple district. If something similar is done for the current
district of the Buenos Aires Temple, then a temple in Rosario could help
accomplish that. Although the Saints in Rosario currently have a one-way
journey of less than 200 miles (the exact distance is 185.1 miles), that is
close enough to the 200-mile minimum distance set by previous Church
Presidents. If that minimum distance is halved or quartered, then a temple in
Rosario would make even more sense.
[lvii]If
what I have heard and read about the growth of the Church in Paraguay is any
indication, a second temple to serve the Saints in that nation may be needed sooner
rather than later. Ciudad del Este seems to be the most likely prospect for such
a temple in Paraguay. When the renovation process is complete for the Asuncion
Paraguay Temple, the Saints in Ciudad del Este will have a journey of 201.4
miles to worship there, which is already above the minimum goal other prophets
have set. If that minimum distance is lowered at all, then a temple in Ciudad
del Este may simply be a matter of time.
[lviii]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 10 North American areas
of the Church.
[lix]Preston
Idaho is a relatively new addition to this list. With the Church having
announced that the groundbreaking for the Pocatello Idaho Temple will take
place at some point in 2019, and because Idaho is part of the Mormon corridor,
that opens the prospect that both temples could be under construction at around
the same time. The main reason I added a temple for Preston this go-round is
because it would split the current district of the Logan Utah Temple. Right
now, the Saints in Preston travel 26.7 miles to worship at that temple.
Although that may not be an inordinate distance, at the same time, if the Logan
temple is as busy as the reports I have found seem to indicate, splitting the
district would make a lot of sense, and Preston seems to be the most effective
location to accomplish that.
[lx]According
to reports I received through the comments on my blog, Elder David A. Bednar
publicly proposed a Missoula Montana Temple while on assignment to a stake
conference in that city. My subsequent research indicates that land has been
held in reserve for such a temple for several years now, and that an official
announcement will occur once the right conditions are met. For that reason,
Missoula has been on my list for a while now, and I could see an official
announcement of such a prospect in the very near future.
[lxi]I had been considering the
merits of adding Lethbridge Alberta to this list for a while now. The Saints in
that city currently travel 49.2 miles to get to their assigned temple in
Cardston. Although that is not an inordinately long trip, if the minimum
mileage goal set by previous Church Presidents is halved or quartered, a temple
for Lethbridge may simply be a matter of time.
[lxii]Since
Wichita Kansas was on one of my other two lists, I simply moved it up to this
one as a more imminent prospect. The 7 stakes in Kansas currently are split
between the Kansas City Missouri Temple, the Oklahoma City Oklahoma Temple, and
the Denver Colorado Temple, and almost all of those 7 have extensive distances
involved. So if the 200-mile goal set by previous Church presidents is lowered
to any degree, all of the distances may well be considered inordinate. For
these reason, a temple in Wichita seems likely to be announced sooner rather
than later
[lxiii]When
I was first considering the most likely location for Wisconsin’s first temple,
I had prioritized Madison (the nation’s capital) or Milwaukee. But after a lot
of feedback and more research on my part, I determined Green Bay would be a
more preferable location. There are six stakes in Wisconsin, all of which are
assigned to the Chicago Illinois Temple District except one, which is assigned
to the St. Paul Minnesota Temple district. Because the Saints in Wisconsin have
a one way journey of 90-200 miles to their assigned temples, and because a
temple in Green Bay would cut that distance for most of those stakes, I am
reasonably confident that a temple could (and likely will) be announced for
Green Bay in the near future.
[lxiv]
Although the Church has previously built temples in sites which have historical
significance, and although Council Bluffs in Iowa is one such location, given
that the Saints who live in that area are less than 15 miles away from the
temple in Winter Quarters Nebraska, a temple in Iowa is more likely to rise in
the capital city of Des Moines. The 8 stakes in Iowa are currently divided
between the Winter Quarters Nebraska and Nauvoo Illinois Temples. Of those 8
stakes, only the Saints in Council Bluffs are within 15 miles of their assigned
temple. All other established stakes in this state are 90-180 miles away from
their assigned temple. With all of this in mind, Iowa would qualify for a
temple, and if one rises in Des Moines, it would not surprise me at all if that
temple was named for Mount Pisgah, which is another historically-significant
site from early Church history, and for which the second Des Moines stake is
named.
[lxv]A
comment on my blog mentioned that the Saints in Pueblo and nearby Colorado
Springs typically deal with massive and significant traffic congestion to get
to their currently-assigned temple in Denver, which seems to be a very undue
hardship. Since that also involves a one-way journey of 115.8 miles, I can see
why a temple in Pueblo in the near future may be very likely.
[lxvi]A temple in Rapid City
would serve the Saints in South Dakota who currently travel between 180-300
miles one way. The two temples which currently serve the 2 stakes and 1
district in South Dakota both have relatively small districts, but the mileage
involved may justify a temple in that capital city of this state. That said, I
would also not be shocked or surprised in any way if this prospect was delayed
until the Church has a stronger presence there, although President Nelson has,
as noted previously, announced temples which will have a comparatively smaller
district.
[lxvii]In
view of all we have heard about President Nelson’s plans to expand the number
of temples, Maine seems to be a prime candidate for such a temple. Although
there are only two stakes in that state, the two are between 160 and 240 miles
away from their currently-assigned temple in Boston. Whether or not the minimum
mileage is lowered, Augusta surely qualifies for a temple of its’ own, simply
due to those involved distances.
[lxviii]A temple for New
Jersey has been on one of my three lists of potential temple locations for the
last year or so at least. My research shows that the two most likely cities in
which a temple could be built to serve the state are Morristown or East
Brunswick New Jersey. A temple in either city would likely also serve the other
city. Currently, the stakes in New Jersey are split between two temple
districts (Manhattan New York and Philadelphia Pennsylvania). Although the
distance for each stake in New Jersey only involves a one-way journey of 16-42
miles (with one of those stakes being closer to their currently assigned temple
than either city in New Jersey), I could see the Church announcing a temple in
New Jersey to cut travel for the other stakes. The question of whether
Morristown or East Brunswick would be the best location is something which I am
still debating, so for now, both cities are on my list.
[lxix]The Saints in New
Hampshire currently travel between 39-71 miles to get to their assigned temple
(Boston Massachusetts). While that is not an inordinate distance, if the
200-mile goal within which previous Church Presidents have said they want each
member to be from their assigned temple is halved or quartered by President
Nelson, then Concord would be a prime prospect for a temple in the
not-too-distant future, even if that prospect is not as imminent as it seems to
be.
[lxx]All but one of the stakes
in Ohio fall under the Columbus Ohio Temple district. While that district is
not particularly large, I could see the Church potentially splitting it, and a
temple in Cincinnati may be the best way to do that. Right now, the Saints in
Cincinnati have a one-way journey of around 107 miles to get to the Columbus
temple, so I would anticipate that the Church would announce a temple for
Cincinnati in the near future.
[lxxi]Right now, the Saints in
Pittsburgh Pennsylvania travel 184.9 miles one way to worship at the Columbus
Ohio Temple. In my opinion, that distance is close enough to the 200-mile
minimum distance to which I have previously referred that a temple in
Pittsburgh makes sense.
[lxxii]Vermont
is the 5th smallest of the 50 states, and has a Church presence that
matches its’ size. Members in Montpelier currently travel 183.1 miles one way
to worship at the Boston Massachusetts Temple. Although Vermont has only one
stake currently (in Montpelier), the state has a strong connection to Church
history (as the Prophet Joseph Smith was born in Sharon), so it seems likely
the Church would favor Vermont for a temple. The only question is whether the
Vermont temple would be announced for Montpelier, where a stake has been
established, or Sharon. The announcement last October of a temple for Guam (where
the only stake operates in Barrigada, but the temple was announced for Yigo), makes
it hard to know what might be done for a Vermont temple, but my current
research on the subject leads me to conclude that, unless a stake is
established in Sharon before this temple is announced, Montpelier may be more
of a priority for the moment, though I would anticipate a temple in Sharon as
well at some point.
[lxxiii]The
Saints residing in Fairbanks Alaska currently travel 360.3 miles to worship at
the temple in Anchorage. Although the Saints in Juneau do have a longer journey
to both Anchorage and Fairbanks, Fairbanks has emerged from my study as the
best prospect for Alaska’s second temple. That said, I can see a day when
Juneau gets one as well, which may happen sooner than expected, depending on
the extent of President Nelson’s temple-building plans.
[lxxiv]Victoria has made my
list for the first time this go-round. Based on a comment made on my blog by someone
living in that city, getting to the Vancouver British Columbia Temple (which is
located in the city of Langley) constitutes an undue hardship both in terms of
the cost of travel and the difficulty involved in that journey. For that
reason, a temple in Victoria makes sense, and it seems likely that an
announcement of that prospect will happen sooner rather than later.
[lxxv]Mississippi
is another state that does not yet have a temple in any phase. The Saints in
Jackson currently travel 174.6 miles one way to worship at the Baton Rouge
Louisiana Temple, but with that temple closed for renovation, the trip is much
longer to get to the next nearest temple. That presents a compelling argument
for the idea that a temple in Jackson may simply be a matter of time.
[lxxvi]The
Saints in Shreveport currently travel 187.9 miles to their assigned temple in
Dallas, so that city would qualify for a temple of its’ own if the current
200-mile distance goal set by previous church presidents is halved or
quartered. Therefore, a temple in Shreveport may simply be a matter of time.
[lxxvii]With
temples operating in Orlando and Fort Lauderdale, a third temple may be needed
sooner rather than later. Several people have shared their feeling that
Tallahassee may be a more likely location for the third temple in that state,
but between my personal research on the subject and the opinions of others who
seem to know more about Florida than I do, Jacksonville has made my list. That
said, I can see a day within the next 5-10 years or less when both cities will
have a temple. The Jacksonville Saints currently travel 140.7 miles to the
temple in Orlando, so if the 200-mile distance is halved or quartered, then
this prospect may be a very high priority in the near future. The one deterrent
to that prospect may be the massive storms that regularly strike that region,
but I am confident enough to include Jacksonville on this list for now.
[lxxviii]The
Saints in Knoxville Tennessee currently travel 180.1 miles to worship at the
temple in Nashville. That may also be an inordinate distance if the minimum
mileage is lowered at all, and if we also take into account the fact that a
journey to Nashville may be arduous, then a temple in Knoxville seems imminent.
[lxxix]The 17 current stakes
in Georgia are assigned to three different temple districts (Atlanta Georgia,
Columbia South Carolina and Orlando Florida). Savannah is located in the
eastern part of Georgia, and the Saints living within the boundaries of the
stake in that city currently travel 159.9 miles one way to worship at their
assigned temple (in Columbia). Because that journey may constitute an undue
hardship for those Saints, the idea of a temple in Savannah makes a lot of
sense. And if such a temple is announced, it may allow other stakes in Georgia
and the surrounding states to have a less arduous journey to the temple as
well.
[lxxx]A
good friend with connections to Arkansas told me a while ago that the Church
has held land in reserve for a temple in Bentonville for a while now, and that
an official announcement was likely once the right conditions were met. For
that reason, I believe we will see this temple announced sooner rather than
later. Some have opined that Rogers might be a more likely location for the
first temple in Arkansas, but my study confirms that a temple is likely in
Bentonville sooner rather than later. And as observed by someone on my blog,
when the first temple in Arkansas is built, it could potentially be named for
the Ozark Mountain range, which is a major landmark in Arkansas.
[lxxxi]The
Saints in Elko currently travel 229.6 miles one way to their assigned temple
(Salt Lake). So Elko already qualifies in terms of the within 200-mile
distance. And if that mileage goal is lowered, that prospect becomes more
imminently likely.
[lxxxii]The
note above applies to the Saints in Ely as well, as they commute 201.1 miles to
their assigned temple in Cedar City. A temple in Ely would cut the commute
substantially. And I fully believe that temples in both Elko and Ely are
possible in the near future, since the distance between the two is just under
200 miles.
[lxxxiii]In
sharing my thoughts about potential future temple locations, I learned from
someone living in Texas that Fort Worth would likely be the best prospective
city to split the current Dallas district. In addition, although some have
offered their feedback that El Paso may be a more likely location for that
honor, and although I fully believe both cities will have temples of their own
at some future point, I have prioritized Fort Worth for this list.
[lxxxiv]The
Saints in Las Cruces currently travel 224.6 miles to the temple in Albuquerque,
so a temple there may just be a matter of time. A temple in that city could
also likely serve the Saints in El Paso Texas, as the two cities are 46.2 miles
apart. The journey between the two cities would be a fairly easy distance if
for any reason the El Paso Saints are unable to get to their currently-assigned
temple in Ciudad Juarez Mexico.
[lxxxv]Although
Elder Larry Y. Wilson, the Executive Director of the Church’s Temple
Department, stated at last year’s dedication of the Tucson Arizona Temple that
Arizona was, for the moment, well-stocked with temples, my study indicates that
the next Arizona temple will be built in Flagstaff. Right now, the Saints in
that city currently travel 119 miles to worship at the Snowflake Arizona
Temple. If the 200-mile distance is decreased by President Nelson (either by
halving or quartering it), then Snowflake would be a prime candidate for a
temple, and that may even help to split some of the other temple districts in
Arizona as well.
[lxxxvi]In
2005, President Gordon B. Hinckley noted that land was being held in reserve
for a temple in the Southwestern Salt Lake Valley, which would have an official
announcement when that became necessary. Subsequent study on my part in late
2017 and early 2018 pointed me to the conclusion that the land in question was
in Bluffdale, but that it has since been annexed into the city of Herriman,
although it has been the subject of more than a few border disputes. I am
confident enough to list it here, and since President Monson announced temples
publicly proposed during President Hinckley’s tenure, I feel that President
Nelson may likely do the same (announcing temples which were publicly proposed
during the tenures of his two prophetic predecessors). Thus, a temple in
Herriman may just be a matter of time.
[lxxxvii]Although the city of
Evanston is, according to the 2013 Church Almanac, technically located within
the boundaries of the Utah Salt Lake City Area, the two stakes in that city are
part of the Ogden Utah Temple district (the city of Ogden is part of the Utah
North Area). The members in Evanston currently travel 77.4 miles to worship at
the Ogden temple. Despite the fact that that is not an inordinate distance,
Wyoming is part of the “Mormon corridor”, where Church growth has continued to
be somewhat steady and regular, and for that reason, if and when Wyoming gets a
second temple, it will likely be built in Evanston, and that could happen
sooner rather than later.
[lxxxviii]A
temple in Heber City (the prospect of which has been suggested a few times)
would help provide a closer option for Saints in the Heber Valley, and it would
likely split the district of the Provo Utah Temple, which, by all reports,
remains one of the busiest in the Church, if not the very busiest. Although the
Saints in Heber City only have to travel 28.1 miles one way to get to the Provo
temple, that is certainly an inordinate distance for a Utah County city. So the
case in favor of this prospect is a strong one.
[lxxxix]Tooele
has also been mentioned repeatedly as a potential prospective city for a
temple. The Saints in Tooele currently travel 34.1 miles to worship at the Salt
Lake Temple. Once that temple closes for the renovation mentioned by President
Nelson during the October 2018 General Conference, the journey will be longer.
So the more I thought about it, the more I felt that a temple in that city may
simply be a matter of time. And since a temple in Herriman would still create
an unduly difficult journey (along a U-shape) for those Saints, it seems safe
to assume that Tooele could (and likely will) get a temple of its’ own, and
that that could occur sooner rather than later.
