BREAKING NEWS: Changes to Youth Proxy Baptism Procedures and Annual Priesthood Preview

Hello again, everyone! A comment on my blog earlier today tipped me off to some big Church news that actually was released yesterday but of which I had somehow not been aware until that time.I apologize that I am late in posting about it, but it deserves to be mentioned.

In an official letter from the First Presidency, the Church announced yesterday that, beginning in January 2018, opportunities to serve in the temple would be expanded for the youth of the Church. As most of you are no doubt aware, it has been a long-standing understood practice for priest-age young men of the Church to have the authority to baptize other individuals and also to serve as witnesses to baptisms as well, but that was only for those who are living. With the changes announced yesterday, priests will be authorized to be the baptizers and witnesses to baptisms for the dead in temples everywhere.

Additionally, the First Presidency announced that young women would now be given the opportunity to assist in keeping the baptistery stocked with clean baptismal clothing. As one who worked in a temple for six years, I can say this is great news. During my time serving in the Mount Timpanogos Utah Temple, two problems were consistent: the baptistery never had enough priesthood holders to match the influx of youth that were coming to do baptisms.  And it always seemed like the laundry staff was short of people to deal with the volume of temple clothing that came through.

I don't have specific experience with either the temple laundry in general or that which came particularly from the baptistery, but I have been in meetings with my fellow male workers when our supervisors mentioned that the laundry was short-staffed and there was a scramble to ensure that was covered. If the other 158 temples of the Church are anywhere close to mirroring that situation, then these changes make sense.

Additionally, the First Presidency in that same letter (which will be read in congregations worldwide this Sunday) mentioned that, in a greater effort to ensure that Primary-age children were prepared for the priesthood and to do temple and family history work, the annual "priesthood preview" that had been attended solely by 11 year-old males of the Church in wards and stakes everywhere would be changed to be a "priesthood and temple preview" to which all 11 year-old girls and their parents would be invited as well.

This is not only great for the youth, but also wonderful for adult temple workers as well. Especially in areas where temples are busy and where ordinance workers may be needed elsewhere, this will enable the work of the baptisteries of the Church to go on uninterrupted. This will also hopefully continue to encourage youth everywhere to go to the temple.

That said, as always, there have been those that say these changes are not sufficient enough to put women on equal footing with men in the Church, and that will not happen unless and until women are allowed to officiate and serve as witnesses in the baptistery. And there are several groups pushing for the ordination of women to the priesthood that have said that this is a milestone, not a summit, and that they will continue to petition for women to be able to receive the priesthood until such requests are granted.

Of course, those who have truly studied the gospel, and particularly the doctrine of the priesthood and the Proclamation on the Family that was released 22 years ago will recognize the reasons why there is a separate but entirely equal opportunity for both men and women to serve side by side, both within the temple, and outside of it.

At any rate, as noted above, a copy of the letter outlining these momentous changes (which will take effect as of January 1, 2018) will be read in congregations throughout the world this Sunday, and the youth of the Church that have been interviewed by news media outlets about this change have reacted positively to these changes.

Not only should this be seen as a manifestation of the love the Lord has for the valiant youth of the Church who so faithfully do family history and take names to the temple for baptism and confirmation, but it is an extension of the authority those young men of age enough to be priests in the Aaronic Priesthood. And that will be above and beyond the already-significant participation of the youth of the Church in family history and temple work.

If early reports are any indication, that level of participation is likely to increase dramatically, above and beyond what it has been up to this point. For a more complete report of these changes and the responses of youth who were interviewed about them, see this article from the Deseret News (the parent company of the LDS Church News),

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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 Site Possibilities: North America Southeast Area

Hello again, everyone! While I hope that the discussion of temple prospects in areas I have already covered will continue, I wanted to post again tonight about the current and potential future temples within the North America Southeast Area, which is comprised of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, most of Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and small portions of Texas and Virginia.

Within this area of the Church, there are 10 temples in operation. Of those 10, 2 are in Florida (Fort Lauderdale and Orlando), with 2 others in Tennessee (Memphis and Nashville) and there is one temple apiece  in each of the following states: Alabama (Birmingham), Georgia (Atlanta), Kentucky (Louisville), Louisiana (Baton Rouge), North Carolina (Raleigh), South Carolina (Columbia),

I also have at least one additional location in my sights for this area in the near future, and as we talk about each of these districts, I will be sure to include any other possibilities that come to mind. Let's get right into all of that.

We start first in Florida. The temple in Orlando was the first of the two temples dedicated by President Howard W. Hunter during the brief 9 months he presided over the Church (the other being the Bountiful Utah Temple). The Orlando temple district covers 21 stakes in North and Central Florida and the Kingsland stake from Southeast Georgia. That  district seems fairly manageable. I next wanted to briefly mention that the Fort Lauderdale Florida Temple was dedicated around 3.5 years ago. That temple  district currently serves just 8 stakes in South Florida.

Next we turn our attention to Tennessee. The Memphis Tennessee Temple, dedicated in April 2000 by President James E. Faust under President Gordon B. Hinckley's smaller temple plan  is currently closed for renovation (with its exterior being given a completely different look). That temple district is currently comprised of 3 stakes in Arkansas, 2 in West Tennessee, and the Topelo stake from North Mississippi.

Before talking about the Nashville Temple district, I wanted to note a couple of interesting facts about the two Tennessee temples. During the renovation process, members assigned to the Memphis temple will be accommodated at neighboring temples, including the temple in Nashville. Nashville was announced first, but Memphis had a groundbreaking first, and President Faust dedicated the Nashville temple 4 weeks after presiding at the dedication of the Memphis Temple.

With that trivial information out of the way, we now talk about the current composition of the Nashville temple district, which takes in 8 stakes in Central and East Tennessee and 2 others in Western Kentucky. Both of the temple districts in Tennessee seem to be a reasonable size, so I don't see a need for a third temple in that state, at least not immediately. If and when it is needed, I could see such a temple in the Knoxville area.

Now we come to the discussion of the 6 states that each have 1 temple. First, a general note: Most of these six temples were part of President Hinckley's plan to bring smaller temples to the people. In addition to the Memphis Tennessee Temple, 2 others (Baton Rouge Louisiana and Raleigh North Carolina) are set to close next month.

While no expansion appears to be in the works for either temple, the design used for other smaller temples from the Hinckley era that are undergoing renovation may be given the same new exterior look that has applied for other temples of that era that have been or are being renovated.

But in getting back to the discussion of the other six temples in this area, we start in Alabama, where the Birmingham Temple was dedicated in September 2000 by President Hinckley. That temple district covers 7 stakes in Alabama and 2 others in Northwest Florida. With so few stakes, until the stagnant growth of the Church in the United States reverses, it doesn't seem likely that this district will split any time soon.

Turning our attention now to Atlanta Georgia, the temple in that city was dedicated by President Hinckley during President Kimball's tenure as Church President. President Hinckley would return to this temple as Church President 14 years and 5 months after the original dedication to rededicate the baptistry folowing renovation.

And an additional rededication was done by President Thomas S. Monson for this temple 3 years and 3 months after he became President of the Church. As for its district, the Atlanta Temple currently serves the Saints within 13 stakes in Georgia, and the Chattanooga stake from the southeastern part of Tennessee. Another fairly reasonably sized district that likely won't need to split anytime soon.

Now we move on to Louisville Kentucky, where the temple was dedicated in March 2000 by President Monson. Its district is currently comprised of 9 stakes, 5 within Kentucky, 2 from Indiana, 1 from Southwestern Ohio (the Cincinnati Ohio stake), and the Huntington Stake from Southwestern West Virginia.

Before going on I wanted to pause here for a few minutes and note that if, as I surmised in my post about the North America Northeast area, a temple is built in Richmond Virginia, then it might be built to serve both Virginia and West Virginia, which would pull away stakes in those two stakes from their current district. I do think we will see a Richmond Virginia temple fairly soon. The only question is how soon that will be.

With my apologies for all the side notes, that brings us to the Baton Rouge Louisiana Temple. Originally dedicated in mid-July 2000 (one of the rare times such a dedication occurred during the typical recess month for the General Authorities), that temple is scheduled to close for renovation, and that closure goes into effect on Sunday January 28 of next year. The Saints living within the Baton Rouge temple district will be accommodated at neighboring temples.

As for its district, the Baton Rouge Temple district currently covers 6 stakes in Louisiana and 3 others from Mississippi. Some have conjectured that a temple in Jackson Mississippi is just a matter of time, and I could see that happening, but as it seems to be a more distant prospect, I have it on my list for the future. If and when such a temple is built, it will take stakes away from the Baton Rouge district.

The Raleigh North Carolina Temple, originally dedicated in mid-December 1999 by President Hinckley, will also be closing for renovation, and that closure is set to occur 3 weeks prior to that of the Baton Rouge Temple. The only temple in North Carolina covers 12 stakes, all of which are located within the state boundaries. During the closure, the North Carolina Saints will be accommodated at temples in neighboring states. The one really nice thing about all of these smaller temples that are being closed for renovation is that there are other temples close by that can serve the Saints during that time.

One of those neighboring temples that will be accommodating Saints in this area is the Columbia South Carolina Temple. That temple, dedicated in mid-October 1999 by President Hinckley, The district of that temple covers 14 stakes, 6 from South Carolina, 5 from North Carolina, the Augusta and Savannah stakes from East Georgia, and the Kingsport stake from Northeast Tennessee.

With all of this information in mind, you may notice some missing information. In addition to the 10 temples above, this area of the Church also is comprised of Arkansas and Mississippi. So let's talk about those two states for a minute.

First, I would like to say a word or two about Mississippi. The four stakes in that state are divided between a couple of different temple districts. The Gulfport, Hattiesburg, and Jackson stakes, as mentioned above, fall within the boundaries of the Baton Rouge temple. The Tupelo stake is the only one that falls within a different district, and that district is the Memphis Tennessee Temple.

Jackson Mississippi is only a 172.2 mile drive from the Baton Rouge temple. While that may not seem to be an inordinate distance for the members in Mississippi (it does fall below President Monson's 200 mile goal), some may feel it is far enough away to warrant a temple of its own. Let me know your thoughts on that.

Turning now to Arkansas, the only other state in this area of the Church that does not have a temple, there are currently 2 missions of the Church in that state, in the capital city (Little Rock)) and in Bentonville, which was the first mission of the Church to be established in the state. Additionally, Arkansas has 7 stakes, 4 of which currently fall within the Oklahoma City Oklahoma Temple district, while the other 3 are covered by the Memphis Tennessee Temple. As both of those temples are closed for renovation, Arkansas Saints have a longer trip to get to the closest one to them.

That said, I will say this: I think Arkansas can and will get a temple very soon. The only question marks that come up on that is when will it happen, and where will that temple be located? I have an answer. When considering the most probable location for the first temple in Arkansas, I have heard three main possibilities floated around. The first is Little Rock, since the Church seems to favor the capital of any US state for the location of its first temple. A mission is within that city.

The other two are fairly close together. For both Rogers and Bentonville, they are 7.8 miles apart, so some see them as interchangeable in terms of how likely either could be to be selected for the first temple site in Arkansas. I also know that Elder Bednar has personal ties to both cities.

Some (including many experts with whom I have shared my thoughts) have advanced Rogers as the best city for the first temple in Arkansas. In general, I would trust their opinion above my own. But in this one case, I have an additional reason for favoring the city that was home to the first mission in Arkansas.

A very good friend of mine served his mission in the area and is quite familiar with both cities. According to the information he gave me, the Church has held land in reserve for a temple in the city of Bentonville for several years. An official announcement will follow when congregational growth makes such an announcement practical, and when the Church can be assured there will be sufficient member support (in terms of patrons to keep such a temple busy, and workers to staff it for the hours it will be open).

Let me be clear on this: I am not in any way discounting the fact that the Church may elect to build the temple in Rogers, as suggested by several who study Church and temple-related developments perhaps with a greater expertise and more consistently than I do. That said, I find it hard to believe that the Church would procure land for the purpose of building a temple and not use it for that purpose. It may have happened before, but it doesn't seem likely in this case. That is why Bentonville is my pick for Arkansas's first LDS temple. And that city is the only pick on my list for this area, unless I add those possibilities I referenced above.

How'd I do? Did I miss any potential locations I should be considering more seriously? What are your thoughts on the most likely location for Arkansas's first temple? It's your turn to "sound off" in the comments below. I look forward to the feedback.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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 Site Possibilities: North America Northwest Area

Hello again, everyone! Between dealing with personal health issues and significant Church News developments that, to me, warranted focus on this blog, it has been 5 days (just short of a full week) since my last post in the series I am doing on the temple prospects I see for the near future. It is time for the next post in that series. This post will be devoted to discussing the current temple districts the Church has within the boundaries of the North America Northwest Area and the possibilities I see for future temples within this area. Since I am putting in the research on all of this as I post it here, other sites could come up. I also have one potential location which I felt could have another temple announced, but which I subsequently removed from my list. There is a lot of ground to cover for this post, so let's jump right into it.

First, I need to reiterate what I have previously said about the boundaries of the North America areas of the Church: the way the boundaries are drawn means that some states, provinces, and territories fall within two or more areas of the Church. While that does make it difficult at times to determine which parts of such states, provinces, or territories are in any given area, I have found it simpler for my purposes to talk about temple possibilities within North America based on the one area of the Church in which  most of any given state, province, or territory is covered.

Those regions are as follows: Alaska, British Columbia, Oregon, Washington, and Yukon. A small portion of the northern part of California is included in that area as well. But since that is only a very small portion of that state, and since none of California's 7 temples fall within that small portion, the discussion about this area will be focused on the other 3 states, and the province and territory from Canada.

Within the North America Northwest Area, there are 7 temples in operation that serve the congregations within this area. There is 1 temple in Canada (Vancouver British Columbia), 3 in Washington state (Columbia River, Seattle, and Spokane), 2 in Oregon (Medford and Portland) and 1 in Anchorage that serves the Saints in Alaska. I will be discussing the current districts in that order.

The Vancouver temple district serves 7 stakes and 1 district within British Columbia, and the Bellingham Washington Stake from Northwest Washington. Because it is so small, the likelihood that a second temple will be needed to divide the district is not very strong.

The three temples in Washington state serve the remaining 61 stakes within Washington. The newest of those three is the Columbia River Washington Temple (which is actually located in Richland), and its district comprises 13 stakes in Eastern Washington and the Hermiston Oregon stake from the northeastern region of Oregon.

We next turn to the oldest of the three temples, which is the Seattle Washington Temple. That temple has the largest district in Washington State, which is made up of the 35 stakes found in Washington's western region. The Seattle Washington Temple has been built in the city of Bellevue.

That brings me to my next point, which is that, while it is not currently on my list, I at one point had a potential temple for Tacoma Washington. The city of Tacoma is 36.6 miles from Seattle,  A temple there could break up the Seattle district a bit. I welcome thoughts on whether or not I should include that on my list again.

The Spokane Washington Temple is the only one located in the city for which it was named. Currently, that district is comprised of 15 stakes, 7 of which are located in Eastern Washington, with 5 others in Northern Idaho, and 3 from Northwestern Montana.

If, as I conjectured in my discussion of the North America Central Area, a temple is built in Missoula Montana, those three stakes covered currently by the Spokane Temple would fall within that temple district, which would leave this district with just 10 stakes.

Next, we turn to the two temples in Oregon. The Medford Temple was dedicated in 2000 under President Hinckley's smaller temple plan, and its district covers 6 stakes in Southern Oregon and 2 other stakes in Northern California.

The Portland Temple district is comprised of 25 stakes in Western Oregon and 6 stakes from Southwestern Washington.  It is my feeling that this temple district could possibly be split, and that this would best be done by building a third Oregon temple based in the city of Salem. I welcome feedback on the likelihood of that prospect.

We round out the discussion of this area by talking about the Anchorage Alaska Temple district, which serves the 8 stakes in that state/ I could see the reason for other temples in Alaska to be built in Fairbanks, which is 359.1 miles from Anchorage, and Juneau, which is 848.5 miles from Anchorage and 732.5 miles from Fairbanks. With only 8 stakes in that temple district, splitting it might not make sense immediately. But both cities could get temples within the next 30-50 years or so.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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.

Further Updates Reported on Temples Worldwide

Hello again, everyone! I found out earlier today about some pretty significant temple progress that has been reported in several locations worldwide. This is the first chance I have had to post about those developments, however, as I have spent the better part of my day today resting and recuperating from my ongoing battle with a cold. I apologize for that delay. But I am grateful to be able to pass those developments along right now. Let's dive right in to all of that.

While the cladding process is still ongoing for the Concepcion Chile Temple, it has made progress, and is getting closer to being completed. Interior millwork continues to be installed, while light fixtures are being hung throughout the temple. The dedication of that temple is still only anticipated to occur sometime during the fourth quarter of next year, but the progress is encouraging.

We next turn our attention to the Fortaleza Brazil Temple. As I mentioned a few days ago, this temple has made tremendous progress since full-scale construction began last year. The recent progress for that temple has been that the cupola framework has been installed atop the temple. We may have at least 18 months to wait until that temple is dedicated.

As for the Rio de Janeiro Temple, the upper walls of the temple are in the process of being poured. In the meantime, the Lisbon Portugal Temple is the final one for which I wanted to report progress. At that temple site, while preparations are still underway to pour the steeple base, the construction team also is preparing to pour the base of the steeple as well.

I am so grateful for these small but significant developments. The Lord, as I always say, is clearly controlling those factors dependent on Him that enable such progress to occur, and we have often seen multiple developments occurring very quickly in these processes.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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.

Additional Temple Update: Progress Reported in Fortaleza Brazil

Hello again, everyone! Though the Cedar City Utah Temple dedication was the big temple-related development this weekend, I found an update on the construction status for the Fortaleza Brazil Temple. The framing for the tower has been installed atop that temple. It is amazing to see how quickly things have progressed for this temple, especially since it was stalled for just under five years after its groundbreaking before work began in earnest. That said, we may not see that temple dedicated for the next 20 months minimum. I continue to track any and all developments and will be sure to pass those along as i become aware of them. That does it for this post. Any comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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.

Cedar City Utah Temple Dedication Held Today

Hello again, everyone! I waited until now to report on the Cedar City Utah Temple dedication because I was waiting for all the news stories I could find on the event. First of all, I wanted to note that the report cited in an earlier post was in error. There were not 9 apostles in attendance at this dedication after all. It appears that President Eyring was only accompanied by Elder Holland from the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. You can find articles about the events of the dedication (as published by the Church News) here, here, and here, and the Mormon Newsroom coverage of the dedicatory events here.

It was amazing to read the reports of this dedication. And this marks the last temple dedication of the current group under construction that is within the US, as well as the fact that, aside from the rededications of the Jordan River Utah Temple (already confirmed for May 20) and the Frankfurt Germany Temple (which is yet to be announced), there will likely not be any new temples dedicated until the 4th quarter of next year.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time, 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.

Minor Update Reported on the Lisbon Portugal Temple

Hello again, everyone! While the cultural celebration that was held tonight and the dedication that will take place tomorrow are the big temple news items for the next 15-18 hours, I found out just a few moments ago about an update, albeit minor, to the status of the Lisbon Portugal Temple. At that temple site, preparations are being made to pour the base of the steeple, while work continues on the cladding of the adjacent meetinghouse. It is great to see such small and simple strides taking place for temples all around the world, and it amazes me that we hear of such developments as regularly as we do. The Lord is at work in the process of how, when, and in what manner temples progress. I will continue to do my best to bring updates to you all as I become aware of them. That does it for this post, Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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 Updates

Hello again, everyone! My wife Amy and I have spent most of the last week not feeling well (which in my case has involved a cold that has hung on for a couple of weeks). Our ability to get things done normally has ebbed and flowed each day based on how we have been feeling. So the posts I have done within the last week or so have come when I have had the strength to get them done. We are doing all right, just dealing with a lot, but we will get through it. We have been through worse.

In the absence of new content in recent days, I have been touched by how widely read the posts I have been able to do in the first week of this month, particularly those sharing my thoughts about temple prospects for the near or far distant future.

That said, I did want to send out a reminder: If any of you want to comment on a post I have previously done, I hope you know you can feel free to do so. When I turn my attention to temple possibilities within an area of the Church I have not covered, that is not intended to dissuade any of you who may have additional insights on such possibilities in areas I have already posted. In the last week, the new posts have been written for the purpose of extending and expanding the discussion.

If I have overlooked any possibilities in any area that I should be considering, I want to know about that. Likewise, if I have any possibilities that do not seem to be as likely, I want to know about that as well so I can make any additions or corrections to my list prior to next April's General Conference.

With those preliminaries out of the way, I would like now to turn to the purpose for this post: to provide some updated information of which I have become aware relating to the progress of temples.

In that regard, I wanted to first mention that, in order for the Church to have 200 operating temples by Saturday April 6, 2030, which will coincide with the 200th anniversary of the Church, there are now 12.32 years in which to announce and complete 18 other temples, in addition to the 25 others currently in various stages. That means that if 3-4 new temples are dedicated every full year between now and then, it could easily be done.

That is especially true in light of Elder Wilson's statement about the 80 potential locations for which the Church could announce a temple between now and late April 2032. Even if some of those possibilities are taken off or replaced by others, we may, as I have previously stated, be entering into a time when the Church could opt to announce a few temples every six months in General Conference, and have a few announced here and there between each conference. Whatever does happen in that regard, I will do my best to keep you posted on all of that.

In the meantime, I found out a little more about the Cedar City Utah Temple dedication attendees. As some of you may have seen, the Church News ran this article about how Elder Holland, a Southern Utah boy, would be returning home for the temple's dedication. That same article explains that President Eyring will preside at the dedication. As we also know from a previously published article, 7 other apostles will be participating as well.

We know as well that President Monson will not be in attendance, and we also know (from a comment on this blog) that Elder Renlund is on assignment in New Mexico and will not be in attendance either. So that leaves 10 other possibilities from which those 7 have been selected. I am keeping my eyes out for information about this weekend's events for the Cedar City Utah temple and I will pass anything new on to you all as soon as I can after learning about it.

That said, we now turn our attention to the Barranquilla Colombia Temple, where the roofing for the temple and missionary housing is nearing completion. As previously noted, the monument sign has been installed, and I also learned that scaffolding has been removed from the temple tower and that the installation of decorative fencing is underway on the temple grounds. I can see now more clearly why this temple will likely be dedicated prior to the dedication of the Kinshasa Temple.

Aside from these developments, there has been no other progress reported on temples. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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 Site Possibilities: North America Northeast Area

Hello again, everyone! Since I have time to do so tonight, I am back to talk about the current temples within the North America Northeast Area of the Church, and to share my thoughts about where future temples may be built within that same area. With 12 temples in operation in that area (one of which, the Washington D. C. Temple, will close to begin its renovation process on the same day the Jordan River Utah Temple is rededicated (May 20, 2018)), there are no temples announced or under construction within that area. As I begin this post, I have only one other candidate for a temple within that area, but if I see any promising prospects as I talk about the current temple district, I will add them to my list as I go. With that said, let's dive right in to the discussion of the temples in this area.

There are, as mentioned above, 12 temples in the North America Northeast Area. I will be listing them in alphabetical order, with the Canadian temples within that area listed first, and the US temples in that area after that. If any US state or Canadian territory or province has more than one temple, I will be grouping them together.

The three Canadian temples within the borders of this area are as follows: Halifax Nova Scotia, Montreal Quebec, and Toronto Ontario. The other nine temples within that area (that are in the US) are Boston Massachusetts, Columbus Ohio, Detroit Michigan, Hartford Connecticut, Indianapolis Indiana, Manhattan and Palmyra New York, Philadelphia Pennsylvania, and Washington D. C. Which regions are covered within each of these districts, and how many stakes are covered within them? Let's talk next about that.

Again, beginning in Canada, we first turn our attention to the temple in Halifax Nova Scotia. That temple district covers one stake each in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and the three branches of the Church in Newfoundland. The Montreal Quebec Temple district takes in 4 stakes, 3 of which are in Montreal, with 1 other in Eastern Ontario. The Toronto Ontario Temple district is comprised of 8 stakes and 1 district in Ontario. As previously noted, the smaller Canadian temple districts seem to have Canada fairly well covered with its current temples.

Moving on now to the United States, the Boston Massachusetts Temple district is comprised of 12 stakes, with 5 of those in Massachusetts, 3 in New Hampshire, 2 in Maine, and 1 each in Rhode Island and Vermont.

Next is the Columbus Ohio Temple, which has in its district 16 stakes, 13 of which are in Ohio, with two from Western Pennsylvania (based in Pittsburgh), and 1 in the Southwestern region of West Virginia (Charleston).

The Detroit Michigan Temple district is comprised of 7 stakes and 1 district, all of which are located in Michigan. The Hartford Connecticut Temple district covers 5 stakes in total: 3 in Connecticut, 2 in Eastern New York, and 1 in Western Massachusetts. As for the Indianapolis Indiana Temple, that district covers 9 stakes, 8 in Indiana and 1 in Eastern Illinois.

Turning now to Manhattan New York, that temple district is comprised of 8 stakes in Downstate New York, and 4 in North Jersey. Just as the temple in Manhattan serves New York's Downstate region, the Upstate in New York is served by the Palmyra Temple, which serves 7 stakes and 1 district within that region.

Rounding out the US temples in this area are the Philadelphia Pennsylvania and Washington D. C. Temples. The Philly Temple district covers 7 stakes in Eastern Pennsylvania and two each in Central and South Jersey and Delaware, for a total of 11 stakes. As for Washington D. C., the temple named for the capital of the United States covers 23 stakes in Virginia, 8 in West Virginia, 8 others in Maryland, 3 in Pennsylvania and 2 in West Virginia.

Most of these temple districts seem very reasonably sized to me. I ran the mileage on some of them, and particularly for the smaller states in this area, there don't seem to be any inordinate distances for the members of the Church to travel in order to reach their assigned temple. That said, the one exception I have come up with is Virginia.

A while back on this blog, when I first started sharing my thoughts on future temple locations, I went back and forth for a while on a temple for Virginia, and many people suggested several excellent candidate cities for such a temple. But after doing the research on it, I agree with the many experts on temple matters with whom I have consulted: if and when Virginia does get a temple, the most likely location for it is Richmond.

I imagine that if a temple were built there, it could cover the needs of the Saints in Virginia and West Virginia, at minimum, which would slightly draw at least a few stakes from the surrounding temple districts. If Richmond does get a temple, then the North America Northeast Area may be well stocked with temples for the immediate future.

But that is merely my own opinion. Let me know your thoughts. Have I overlooked anything? Is it reasonable to assume that Richmond is likely to get a temple? I look forward to hearing from any of you that would like to share your opinion.

That does it for this post. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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 Site Possibilities: North America Central Area, Part Two--Potential Future Temples

Hello again, everyone! Having set the background in my previous post for what the current temple districts in the North America Central Area cover, we now turn our attention to potential future temples. The possibilities I will suggest mainly qualify for a temple due to the distances involved from their currently assigned temples.

While again bearing in mind that the US in general is going through a period of stagnated growth, I have felt that we could see temples announced very soon in the following locations within the North America Central Area: Missoula Montana, Green Bay Wisconsin, and Rapid City South Dakota.  Let's talk a bit about each.

I have previously referenced the fact that I heard from someone that a temple had been publicly proposed for Missoula by Elder David A. Bednar last year or the year before. While I have not been able to verify that, I do know that the Missoula Saints, who are assigned currently to the Spokane Washington Temple (which is not within the same geographical area of the Church) travel a distance of 197.3 miles. I would think that since that is just short of President Monson's stated goal to have every member within 200 miles of a temple, Missoula would qualify for its own temple in that regard. When we add the public proposal in, that makes a Missoula temple seem even more likely.

Next, we move on to Wisconsin. When I was originally considering a temple for that state, I was absolutely convinced that Milwaukee would be the best place for it. After all, 2 of the 6 stakes in that state are based in Milwaukee, the capital city.

(Correction, added on Christmas Day 2017: As was rightly observed in the comments for this post, and as I already knew very well, Madison is Wisconsin's capital city, NOT Milwaukee as asserted in the paragraph above. As I also explained in my response to that correction, my wife and I have spent a majority of this month not feeling well, and in my case, battling the illness has not been at times very conducive to allowing me to express myself as clearly and correctly as I normally try to do so. So to twinnumerouno, I again offer my thanks for the correction, and to all of you, I offer an apology for this error. I will do everything within my power to prevent such errors going forward. Thanks for understanding)

But then several people pointed out that the Green Bay area of Wisconsin was more likely to be the best location for a temple in Wisconsin. Subsequent personal study on my part verified that completely. Saints in the Green Bay area currently fall under the Chicago Illinois district, and the distance between the two cities is 208.7. According to President Monson's goal, Green Bay qualifies for its own temple.

Finally, we move on to South Dakota. A temple in that state could rise in Rapid City. I favor this location for a couple of reasons. My dad served his mission there, and beyond that, the Saints in South Dakota travel 300.7 miles to their assigned temple in Bismarck.

These are the possibilities I came up with, and the reasons behind them. Feel free to "sound off" in the comments below with any I have missed, or if any of you feel that I should eliminate any of these. That does it for this post. Thank you for the privilege of your time. 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.