Temple Site Possibilities: North America Southwest Area, Part One--Area Overview and List of Current Temples

Hello again, everyone! With Church and temple news having slowed down in recent days, I am back to talk about the current and potential future temples within the next North American area of the Church, which alphabetically is the North America Southwest Area.

This area includes the entirety of the following five states: Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas. In addition, this area of the Church also covers the northwest quarter of Arkansas, the southwest portion of Colorado, and the southwestern third of Missouri, along with small portions of California, Kansas,  Louisiana, and Utah. Because it is an area of the Church that has 15 temples operating (just under 10% of all the operating temples), I have determined it would be best to approach the discussion of the present and potential future temples in a unique way. I will explain that more after I provide a list of those temples falling within the boundaries the Church has established for this area.

Those 15 are grouped by the number of temples in each of these states, then alphabetically as follows:  6 in Arizona (The Gila Valley, Gilbert, Mesa, Phoenix, Snowflake and Tucson Arizona Temples);  4 others in Texas (the Dallas, Houston, Lubbock, and San Antonio Texas Temples); 2 in Nevada (the Las Vegas and Reno Nevada Temples); the Albuquerque New Mexico Temple; the Monticello Utah Temple; and the Oklahoma City Oklahoma Temple.

That is a lot of temples to get through, so the unique approach I have chosen to take for this area is to do specific and distinct posts for the temples within each state (for Arizona and Texas), yet another one covering the two in Nevada, and the ones in Albuquerque, Monticello and Oklahoma City, and then round out the posts about this area by sharing those possibilities I see for the near future. So this post served to introduce what I will cover, and there will be four others coming before the end of the day today.

That does it for this post. While I don't anticipate any comments being made about this post, if any of you have any general thoughts about the approach I am taking, I would welcome and appreciate hearing from you. 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.

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.