Temple Site Possibilities: South America South Area, Part One--Area Overview

Hello again, everyone! As noted in my last post, since my wife and I are stuck at home with illness today, and since I am past the point where my body, mind, and spirit will allow me to get additional rest and relaxation, I have opted to continue putting together and publishing my thoughts on potential future temples.

While my focus now turns to the South America South Area, which will involve an area overview in this post, and subsequent posts providing an overview of temples within it, the history of those temples, the number of stakes and districts currently served by the district of each of those temples, district, and, to conclude the area coverage, the final post will share the list I have compiled of other potential locations within this area that I have felt could get a temple soon.

So let's start with the area overview. The South America South Area boundaries take in the nations of Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay. I don't know how many of you noticed or would remember this, but for a long time, the nation of Chile, which has a high concentration of Latter-day Saints, was its own area of the Church.

In 2002, Elder Holland was asked by the First Presidency to preside over that area for two years, at the same time Elder Oaks was assigned to do so in the Philippines. And at the conclusion of those two years, the First Presidency called Elder Perry to preside for one year over the Church in the Europe Central Area. So 2002-2005 marked a rare time in the Church where these apostles were sent to fill assignments that had traditionally been handled by General Authority Seventies.

While I cannot say with any certainty that these assignments may have been necessary due to large-scale issues these areas were facing at the time, what I do know thanks to dear family friends who served in the area office of the Philippines under Elder Oaks during his time there, and which appears to be true of Chile and Europe as well, during and as a result after the fact of this ministry by the three, Church growth appeared to stabilize at take off.

Anyways, my reason for mentioning these unusual apostolic assignments was to note that while Chile  was its own area for several years, in 2011, the First Presidency announced that the Chile and South America South Areas would be consolidated into one area, and would be known as the South America South Area.

I apologize for being long-winded, but I figure that these details do, to a certain degree, set the background for my coverage of this area. The next post in this series will be published hopefully later today to cover the history of the six temples within this area, and also perhaps go into the specifics of the number of stakes and districts in each nation that are served by these six. And again, hopefully, I will be able to wrap up my coverage of this area before the end of this Christmas Day, which would ideally allow me to have my coverage of the three areas in Utah published on this blog within the remaining six days of 2017.

So for now, 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.

A Brief Preliminary Word Regarding My Coverage of the Final Four Areas of the Church

Hello again, everyone! Hope your Christmas day has been enjoyable. Since my wife and I are stuck at home dealing with illness, and because my system is past the point where it will allow me to rest and relax (aside from regular sleep at night), I have decided it would be best to move on with my coverage of the final four areas of the Church (South America South, and Utah North, Utah Salt Lake City, and Utah South) I will post again in a few minutes to begin my coverage of the South America South Area, but I wanted to note a couple of important things first, which apply to these final four but are also true about those areas which I have already covered.

First, I wanted to reiterate what I have previously stated: I hope it is clearly understood that when I have opted to move on to my coverage of the next area of the Church, that is not intended in any way to signal the end of the discussion about the areas which I have already covered. I would hope that all of you know that you are more than welcome at any time to post additional feedback of any kind on any post I have done up to this point, or any or all others that I will do going forward. I appreciate any and all such comments at any time they are added.

Second, as some of you may have noticed, in my introductory posts for each of the Church's areas which I have covered up to this point, I have mentioned a specific number of posts which I have anticipated to do in focusing on each area. It is almost inevitably the case that the original number of posts I thought I would do winds up being corrected or altered as the amount of content I am covering necessitates. So for each of the final four areas I will be covering (which I hope to wrap up before the end of this year) I will not be giving any estimates about the number of posts which I will do for each of those four. The amount of content I need to post will be the determining factor in that regard.

With those two things said, I will be back later today to start discussing the first of those areas, covering the southern part of South America. And, as I indicated earlier, my hope is to have those final four covered before midnight MST when 2017 concludes and 2018 officially is rung in.

Therefore, 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 7 and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Temple Site Possibilities: South America Northwest Area, Part Seven--Exploring the Likelihood of a Second Venezuelan Temple and Area Wrap-Up

Hello again, everyone, and Merry Christmas to you all. In the early morning hours on a day when we exchange gifts with family (and, for some of you, friends) as we remember that without Christ, there would be no Christmas, I am pleased to be able to bring you my final post covering South America. In this post (as mentioned in the previous one), we will examine the likelihood of a potential second temple in the near future for Venezuela, and then I will have a few additional remarks to wrap up my coverage of the South America Northwest Area. Let's get right into all of that.

With what I noted about the number of Church units in Venezuela, including the fact that the one temple in that nation (which was built in Caracas) serves Venezuela's 34 stakes and 6 districts, many have said that there is a strong reason to believe that a second temple in that nation may be needed to help serve those congregations. As I have considered that possibility, a few thoughts have come to mind.

The first of those thoughts is that, in August 1999, President Gordon B. Hinckley was visiting the Saints in Maracaibo, and during that visit, he publicly proposed a temple for that city. With over 18 years having come and gone since that time, and keeping in mind that many of the temples that have been announced during President Monson's presidency are those that were publicly proposed at one point or another by his predecessor. So I do fully believe that a temple in Maracaibo may just be a matter of time.

In addition to the size of the Caracas Temple district and to President Hinckley's public proposal of a temple for Maracaibo, the Saints in Maracaibo currently travel 439.1 miles to get to the temple in Caracas, which is more than double the mileage distance of 200 within which President Monson has set a goal to have between every Church member and the nearest temple.

So there are three very solid reasons to believe that Maracaibo could (and probably will) be the next Venezuelan city to get its own temple. Saints in the surrounding regions would likewise be spared from travelling an inordinate distance to get to the Caracas temple.

That said, I did want to observe that, unlike most potential sites which I have considered for my list of potential temples, the idea of a second temple for the Venezuelan Saints does have one very real roadblock: some of the politicians and law enforcement officers in Venezuela seem to be somewhat, if not entirely, corrupt.

Some of you may have heard the news that a citizen of Utah by the name of Josh Holt who went to Venezuela to get married was taken into custody on ridiculous charges (unlawful possession of dangerous firearms) that cannot be true, and he has remained in the Venezuelan prison system where he has been severely mistreated and where he will likely not have a chance at a fair trial if and when he is granted one.

The senior Utah senator Orrin Hatch has promised the Holt family that he will do everything he can to get their son released and able to go home, but the chances of that occurring don't look very good at this point. If governmental and law enforcement officials in Venezuela are that corrupt at this point, until the political climate clears and more reasonable leaders are appointed to those positions, the Church may not have much of a chance to get a second temple built to serve the Venezuelan Saints. With the Lord, nothing is impossible or out of the question, but at the moment, it's very hard to know how likely it might be that a temple could be announced in Maracaibo anytime soon.

But those are just my thoughts. Let me know yours in the comments below. I would be particularly interested to know your answers to the following questions: Could Venezuela get a temple in the near future? If so, would Maracaibo be the most likely place for it because of President Hinckley's proposal for one in that city? If the government and law enforcement officers are as corrupt as they certainly seem to be, could that potentially delay a second temple in Venezuela until more reasonable leadership is in power? I look forward to your thoughts.

So, having covered the current temples in various phases and the potential future temples I could see being announced in the near future, this post concludes my coverage of the South America Northwest Area. If I missed or have potentially overlooked anything in these last seven posts I have done, please let me know.

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(s) in this series, which should be put up later this week and focus on current and potential future temples in the South America South Areas, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do. And from the very depths of my soul, I wish you all a very Merry Christmas.

Temple Site Possibilities: South America Northwest Area, Part Six--Potential New Temples for Peru

Hello again, everyone! While I had said at one point in an earlier post that six posts for the South America Northwest Area would cover everything, it turns out I will need one more as well. Therefore, this post will be the second-to-last one for this area and will focus on the potential likelihood of two Peruvian cities that could get a temple of their own. After I get this post published, I will conclude my coverage of this area with a seventh post that will focus on Venezuela's likelihood of getting a temple, and that post will also serve as the wrap-up of the content covering this area.

I wanted to first note that the difficult thing in trying to determine if the Church would announce one or more temples for Peru while Arequipa is still under construction and while progress is pending for the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple. But as we saw with Brazil, the Church did not wait until the temples in Fortaleza and Rio de Janeiro were completed, nor did the fact that the Belem temple has not progressed since its April 2016 announcement prevent the Church from announcing a temple for Brasilia. In fact, the odds are more likely than not that the temple in Brasilia, which already had its site confirmed by local leaders and inspected by Church engineers, will have a groundbreaking ceremony and begin its construction process perhaps before anything is done additionally on the Belem temple.

So because there are those four Brazilian temples in varying stages, it seems likely and even perhaps highly probable that the Church could easily announce other Peruvian temples while work continues on the temple in Arequipa and while the construction process is started for the temple that will be built in Lima's Los Olivos district.

And while we don't yet have an idea of how the stakes in Peru might be redistributed following the dedication of the temple now under construction in Arequipa (which is currently anticipated to occur in late 2019 or early 2020), or how they might be further redistributed following the construction and dedication of the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple, it is apparent that the Peruvian Saints are keeping their temples busy.

So which locations in Peru are likely to get a temple of their own in the near future? I have felt that there is a strong argument in favor of Peru's fifth and sixth temples being built in the cities of Cusco and Iquitos. As with other candidates about which I have written in this series, there is also a very good chance that both temples could either be announced at the same time or have some degree of overlap in their processes. Digging into things a little more deeply, let's examine the merits of these potential locations.

First, we look at Cusco's potential for its own temple. With two stakes based in that city, a temple there would serve, at a very minimum, the 12 wards and 2 branches within those two stakes. As mentioned, I am not by any means or stretch of the imagination a geography expert, so I am sure many stakes in the surrounding region could also be served by a temple in Cusco.

A temple in Cusco makes sense as well in terms of the mileage metric. Saints in Cusco currently travel 680.8 miles to do their ordinance work, and since the temple in Los Olivos would be even further from them than that (the distance being 691.6 miles), the Saints in Cusco are far more likely to remain with the Lima district..

When the Arequipa Peru temple is dedicated (which, as already noted, is anticipated to occur during either late 2019 or early 2020). the distance for the Saints in Cusco will be cut by more than half, to 303.8 miles. Even so, that is still over 100 miles more than President Monson's set goal to have every member within 200 miles of their nearest temple.

Before moving on to discuss specific reasons for my feeling that Iquitos could get a temple, I wanted to note that, with Cusco being a distance of 682 miles, it would not be out of the question for one or the other to be announced first, nor would it surprise me to either see them announced at the same time or to have one under construction at the time the other is announced. So I can't rule out that possibility.

Let us now turn our attention to the potential merits of a temple in Iquitos. In addition to having its own mission, the city of Iquitos is home to two stakes of the Church. A temple in that city would, at minimum, serve the Saints in the 14 stakes and 1 branch within that city. While I am, as noted, not great with geography, if and when Iquitos does get its own temple, the Saints in surrounding areas would also be spared the journey of an inordinate distance to get to their assigned temple.

Regarding the distance involved, the Saints in the Iquitos region  currently have a 629 mile journey to get to the Lima temple. As with the city of Cusco, since the Iquitos Saints are over 200 miles further than that from Arequipa (the exact distance being 882 miles), the Saints within the Iquitos region would also likely stay in the district of the Lima temple until they have a closer one either in that city or the surrounding regions.

And whenever the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple is dedicated, there is a possibility that the Saints in Iquitos could fall within that new temple district. But I can't be sure of that at the moment, since it would only cut their journey by a mere 4 miles (as the Los Olivos region is 625 miles from the Saint in Iquitos.

So there are my thoughts about these two potential candidates for Peru's next temples. I have felt that both will get their own temples at some point, but I look forward to hearing from you, my readers, on the following questions: Which temple might be announced first? Could both be announced simultaneously? What are the odds that while one of them is in the construction process, the other one might be announced? 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. I will be back very shortly with my final post, which will contain my analysis of the prospects for a temple in Venezuela, and which will wrap up my coverage of the South America Northwest Area. Until that time, 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--South America Northwest Area, Part Five--Exploration of Candidate Cities for Colombia's Third Temple

Hello again, everyone! I am back yet again to share my thoughts about two potential candidate cities in which Colombia's third temple might be built. With one temple currently operating in Bogota, and one other under construction in Barranquilla (which, as we know, is anticipated to be dedicated during the fourth quarter of next year), the candidates on my list are Medellin and Cali. Each of the two cities have a mission established. Let's now explore the merits of each.

Firstly, the Saints living in the city of Medellin are 261.1 miles from the Bogota temple. Since the temple in Barranquilla would be 439 miles exactly from that city, odds are more likely than not that the Medellin Saints will remain part of the Bogota district after the second temple in that nation is dedicated. So Medellin qualifies based on the mileage factor. Since I am not good with geographical matters, I am not sure how many other units might be served by a potential temple in Medellin, but such a temple would, at minimum, serve the two stakes based in that city, and also those in the surrounding region, which would be a respectably-sized district.

As for the merits of a potential temple in Cali, the Saints in that city currently travel 286.7 miles to attend the Bogota temple. Since the temple in Barranquilla will be further away from Cali (the distance being 700.5 miles), the three stakes in Cali will likely remain in the Bogota district. With three stakes within that city, a Cali temple would serve the 16 wards and 1 district based in Cali, and any other stakes in the surrounding region.

Just by way of comparison, the distance between Cali and Medellin is  269.1 miles, so a temple in either city could likely serve both. But which one might we see first? Whichever one is first, might the Church announce the other while the construction process is underway on the first? How likely might it be that both are announced at the same time, even if their construction timetables differ? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

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 (which will come shortly to discuss the possible candidates for yet another temple in Peru and also a potential second one for Venezuela), 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: South America Northwest Area, Part Four--Overview of Potential Temple Locations & Exploring the Most Likely Candidate for Bolivia's Second Temple

Hello again, everyone! I am back yet again, with what I intended to be the final post covering the South America Northwest Area, and in this one, we will explore my personal list of those candidate cities which I have felt could potentially get a temple, and the exploration of factors relating specifically to the likely location of Bolivia's second temple. Because of the volume of detail involved, I will need to defer discussion of the merits of other locations in subsequent posts about this area.

I have felt that the following cities could have a temple announced in the near future: Santa Cruz or La Paz Bolivia;; Cali or Medellin Colombia, Cusco or Iquitos Peru. and possibly  Maracaibo Venezuela. As I mentioned above, I will take the rest of this post to explore the two Bolivian candidates, then do other posts about those in Colombia, another for Peru, and a final post for Venezuela/ 

So, could Bolivia get a second (and possibly a third) temple in the near future? As noted in the previous post, the Cochabamba temple district takes in 32 stakes and 8 districts in Bolivia, along with 3 additional stakes located in Southeastern Peru. As I looked into the options, Santa Cruz and La Paz made the most sense as candidates for Bolivia's next two temples. Why is that, which might be announced first, could they be announced at the same time, and, if one of them is announced first, how soon might the other be? All of those questions are interesting to consider. Before exploring the answers I have found, as I noted previously, the two cities each have two missions within their boundaries.

Let's look at Santa Cruz first. The Saints in Santa Cruz currently travel 295.7 miles to reach the Cochabamba temple. A temple in that city would, at minimum, serve the 9 stakes headquartered there, drawing away at least the 54 wards and 3 branches, for a total of 57 congregations which are based in that city. Even though I am not familiar with Bolivian geography, I would imagine that other nearby Church units would also benefit from a temple in Santa Cruz.

Turning now to the merits of a temple in La Paz, that city is located 235.4 miles from Cochabamba, and would be almost double that distance from a Santa Cruz temple (with the exact mileage being 528.1). A temple in La Paz would, at minimum, take in the 5 stakes based in the city, which would serve, at minimum, the 31 wards and 8 branches, or 39 congregations, to say nothing of any of the surrounding congregations.

So my first question for any who would like to comment is, which of the two seems more imminently likely? And if both have an equal likelihood, do you think the Church might opt to announce them at the same time, or construct one and announce the other while the construction of the first continues? I could easily see any scenario for these cities, and I look forward to your 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: South America Northwest Area, Part Three--Composition of Current Temple Districts

Hello again, everyone! I am back with my third of four posts covering the South America Northwest Area. In this post, I will be discussing the composition of the current temple districts, detailing how many stakes and districts are served by each. Let's get right to it.

First of all, to me, it makes sense to approach this subject methodically, So we will start with the Arequipa, Lima, Los Olivos and Trujillo Peru temples, then turn our attention to the Barranquilla and Bogota Colombia Temples, followed by the Guayaquil and Quito Ecuador Temples, then finish with the Caracas Venezuela and Cochabama Bolivia Temples.

Starting in Peru and working chronologically, we first take a look at the Lima Peru Temple. That district currently comprises 73 stakes and 11 districts from Central and Southern Peru and the Peruvian Amazons. The temple district will be broken up somewhat when the Arequipa Peru Temple is dedicated, and will be further divided once the Los Olivos Temple is constructed and dedicated. It will be most interesting to see how those divisions occur.In the meantime, the Trujillo temple district, by comparison, is much smaller, as it takes in 25 stakes and 8 districts from the northern part of Peru.

The Bogota Colombia Temple takes in 28 stakes and 10 districts within Colombia, and that district will be divided once the Barranquilla Colombia Temple is dedicated (which is, as previously noted, anticipated to occur late next year). Again, it will be interesting, to be sure, to see how that division plays out.

As for Ecuador, the temple in Guayaquil serves the Saints in 39 stakes and 1 district from Ecuador, in addition to 1 stake and 1 district from the southwestern portion of Colombia. With the Quito temple anticipated to divide that district somewhat, it will be interesting to see what happens in that regard.

We now come to Caracas Venezuela, where the temple in that city serves 34 stakes and 6 districts. Again, the subject of whether or not an additional temple could be built in this nation to more evenly disperse those stakes and districts will be discussed in my next post.

And that brings us to the Cochabamba Bolivia Temple, which serves 32 stakes and 8 districts in Bolivia, in addition to 3 other stakes from southeastern Peru. That district is not perhaps as much in need of a split, but I will address if and how I feel that could happen in the next post.

As this wraps up my examination of the current districts within the South America Northwest Area, 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 (which should come shortly and will discuss my thoughts about potential future temple locations, which will wrap up my discussion of this area), 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: Temple Site Possibilities: South America Northwest Area, Part Two--Overview of Church Units and Temple History

Hello again, everyone! As I advised you all that I might do, I have changed my thinking since putting the last post up, and I now believe it will be more effective for my purposes to focus this post on how many units this area covers within the five countries which fall within those areas (which again are Bolivia, Colombia,Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela), as well as a review of the history of the six temples operating.

 That in turn will be followed by a third post focusing on the size of the current temple districts, and a fourth post capping off my coverage of this area will explore the possible future locations for which I have felt a temple will be announced in the near future.

With that said, I would like to pass along to you the information I have been able to gather about the number of missions, stakes, districts, and congregations (wards and branches) within each of these 5 countries that comprise this area. We will be discussing those 5 in the same order I listed above.

So, let's start with Bolivia. The one temple in that nation was dedicated on April 30, 2000 as the 82nd operating temple of the Church. President Gordon B. Hinckley, under whose leadership so many smaller temples were built starting in 1997 (and to some degree is still continuing in areas where it is more practical to have a smaller edifice), presided at the dedicatory services for the temple.

Bolivia has five missions within its boundaries: two each in La Paz and Santa Cruz, and 1 in Cochabamba, where, as noted, the only temple currently serving that nation is located In terms of congregational numbers, Bolivia has 32 stakes and 8 districts, which in turn comprise 187 wards and 68 branches, for a total of 255 congregations. As noted, I will go into specifics about the Cochabamba district in my next post.

Turning our attention now to Colombia, the temple in Bogota became the 57th operating temple in the Church when it was dedicated by Church President Gordon B. Hinckley during a three day period spanning April 24-26, 2000. The nation is also the home of 5 missions of the Church, 2 of which are located in Bogota, with the other three in Barranquilla, Cali, and Medellin.

In terms of congregations, there are currently 29 stakes and 11 districts which are further divided into 169 wards and 82 branches. Because the total number of congregations currently stands at 251, it is easy to see why the Church is building a second temple for the nation in Barranquilla. If we divide that number of congregations between the two, each temple would serve 125-126 congregations. That will be a better scenario for the Saints in Colombia, but is there a reason to believe the Church could announce another temple or two for Colombia in the near future? That will be explored in more detail in my final post for this area.

We now move on to Ecuador. As noted in the previous post, the one operating temple in that area had a 14-year wait between its announced and subsequent groundbreaking, one of the largest such time periods in Church history. The one good thing about that is that, once the groundbreaking occurred, the temple was constructed fairly quickly, and it was dedicated during August 1-2, 1999, again by President Gordon B. Hinckley, making it the 58th operating temple of the Church.

As for the number of Church units, the Church in Ecuador has five operating at the moment, 3 of which are based in Guayaquil, with the other two in Quito. With 39 stakes and 9 districts, the congregational tally, including 236 wards and 67 branches, comes to a grand total of 303. Once the temple in Quito is built and dedicated, between the two, the congregational average for each temple will be 151-152. In my final post covering this area, I will offer my thoughts regarding whether or not Ecuador needs another temple.

For now, we turn our attention to Peru. As noted in my previous post, the Church has temples in operation in Lima and Trujillo. The first was dedicated as the 38th operating temple of the Church between January 10-12, 1986, and President Gordon B. Hinckley presided at this dedication as well.  The interesting thing with that dedication is that President Hinckley had been asked by President Kimball to preside over the services prior to President Kimball's death on November 5, 1985. When President Benson succeeded President Kimball as prophet 5 days after the latter's passing, the new Church president allowed President Hinckley to fill that last assignment from his prophetic predecessor.

It was not until June 21, 2015 (almost 30 years after the Lima dedication) that the second Peruvian temple was dedicated in Trujillo. By that time, President Monson was not able to preside at temple dedications, so he assigned President Uchtdorf to preside at that temple's dedication.  It became the Church's 147th operating temple.

In addition, a third temple for Peru is under construction in Arequipa, and will either be dedicated during late 2019 or early 2020. Also as noted in the previous post, the Los Olivos temple was announced last year to help serve the Saints in Lima, which is the Peruvian capital city, and if all goes well, a site announcement and groundbreaking may occur within the first half of next year.

Peru's four temples aside, the nation has 13 operating missions serving its people, 5 of which are in Lima, with 2 others in Trujillo, and 1 each in Arequipa, Chiclayo, Cusco, Huancayo, Iquitos, and Piura. Additionally, Peru has 101 stakes and 19 districts, which are further divided into 618 wards and 129 branches, for a total of 747 congregations. If we divide that number by the 4 temples, then each covers an average number of 186-187 congregations. Could we see another temple in Peru? I will discuss that more fully in my final post covering this area.

We now come in our discussion to Venezuela, the last nation alphabetically in this area. When its only temple was dedicated on August 20, 2000 by President Hinckley, it became the 96th in operation worldwide. Home to four missions of the Church (which are located in Barcelona, Caracas, Maracaibo and Valencia), there are currently 34 stakes and 6 districts within that nation. Its congregations, which include 195 wards and 51 branches, total 246 in number. Since that is a large district, could the Church split it with a second temple to serve the nation? More on that in my final post for this area.

Having discussed all of this, the next task will be to go into specifics about the 6 temples which currently serve the district. Since that is a discussion requiring its own post, that does it for this one. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. 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: Temple Site Possibilities: South America Northwest Area, Part One--Area and Temple Overview

Hello again, everyone! While I am not anticipating many views for my blog during the next two or three days, since my wife and I will be spending our 7th Christmas together stuck at home with illness, I have time to continue my series of posts about potential temples. As we begin the discussion of the final five areas of the Church which I have not covered, we come to the two other areas of the Church in South America.

As most of you are likely aware, South America is another substantially-sized continent, and, as such, the countries within it cover large areas. The Church has established three of its areas to cover the nations in South America. Since we have covered the first of those earlier on in this series, (the nation of Brazil is sizable enough and has enough of a Church presence that it is its' own area), that leaves us with the South America Northwest and South America South areas, which cover the remaining nations of that continent.

The next several posts I will do in this series will explore the first of those, the South America Northwest Area. My current plan in beginning the coverage of this area is to do three posts for it; this first one will provide an overview of this area and the temples in it. That will be followed by a second post for this area, in which I will share a history of the dedications of those temples and the composition of each of those districts, and my third and final post for this area will be discussing the potential locations for which I have felt that the Church could announce new temples. If it turns out that I need to do more than the three posts, I will be sure to let you know of any additional ones that are necessary. With that said, let's get right into it.

The Church's South America Northwest Area covers the nations of Bolivia, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela. In terms of temples, this area has 10 temples in various stages: 6 in operation (including the Bogota Colombia, Caracas Venezuela, Cochabama Bolivia, Guayaquil Ecuador, and, in Peru, the Lima and Trujillo Temples.

Two others are currently under construction in Barranquilla Colombia (which is anticipated to be dedicated during the 4th quarter of 2018) and Arequipa Peru (which may either be dedicated in late 2019 or early 2020).

And the final two temples in this area were both announced in April 2016 for Quito Ecuador and Lima Peru (which, as we know, will be the second temple in that city, and will be known as the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple).

While there has been no indication of a site announcement or groundbreaking date for either temple, we do know that the contractor for the latter said in March of this year that it would take a year of preliminary planning for the site before a groundbreaking could take place.

This means that we could see that temple have a site announced and a groundbreaking within the first half of 2018. Speaking optimistically, I believe that will happen sooner rather than later. As for the Quito Ecuador Temple, while I don't know exactly when we might see progress there, I do not believe that this second Ecuadoran temple will be subject to anywhere near the 14-year delay that occurred between the site announcement and groundbreaking for the first temple in that nation (which was built in Guayaquil).

This wraps up my introduction to this area and the current and future temples that serve the Saints within its boundaries, 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 (which should come later today), I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Final Apostolic Age and Tenure Updates for 2017

Hello again, everyone! In the early morning hours of Christmas Eve 2017, I am back with a post that I hope will be a very special gift for many of you to read. The last time I offered a detailed report on the latest apostolic statistics was almost two months (exactly 7 Sundays) ago.

Since that time, there have been a lot of changes in those statistics, including several milestones that were marked. I am excited to share these updates in this post, and I hope the information I will be providing herein will be interesting to most of you. That said, if any of you are not interested in reading on, I wouldn’t be offended if you opt to skip this post.

For those of you that are interested in these details, I first want to note that all the figures and data I will be presenting is, as always, current as of today. That said, today’s report of that data will start, as always, with some information on President Russell M. Nelson’s tenure as President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. He has now served as Quorum President for 2 years, 5 months, and 21 days, and in view of that length, has become the 16^th longest-tenured Quorum President, a milestone he reached on December 18 of this year, having served longer than Harold B. Lee.

As I promised in the last update 7 weeks ago that I would subsequently do, with the end of 2017 drawing near, I wanted to mention the next tenure milestones President Nelson will observe, and when they will each occur. The first will take place in just three weeks, when he will become the 15^th longest serving President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles one January 14, 2018, two weeks to the day after 2018 begins, making his tenure as Quorum President longer than that of President Marion G. Romney.

Quick sidenote here regarding President Romney. After serving as a counselor in the First Presidency under Presidents Lee and Kimball, he returned to his place in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and, as the next senior apostle after President Benson, was set apart as the President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

But because he was of an advanced age and had ill health, President Romney could not function in any way as the Quorum President. So President Hunter was set apart as the Acting Quorum President, marking the only time in Church history that an Acting President was not called because the Quorum President was simultaneously serving as a member of the First Presidency.

                                                                                                                                          

Sorry about that deviation from the subject at hand, but I thought that was important to note. Getting back to President Nelson’s tenure milestones as Quorum President, aside from the one he will reach in three weeks, he will only reach the next milestone to become the 14th longest serving Quorum President just over a year and a half after that, with the exact date being Wednesday August 7, 2019. If both he and President Monson are still alive at this time, then President Nelson will take the spot currently held by the first President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in Church history, Thomas B. Marsh.

Moving on, we next will explore where President Monson stands in terms of his tenure length and age among the other 15 Church Presidents of this dispensation. Today marks 9 years, 10 months, and 21 days since he was ordained and set apart as Church President. Since he has not observed any additional milestones related to his tenure length, he is still the 8^th longest-serving Church President. As of today, he is also 90 years, 4 months, and 3 days old. So he remains currently the 7^th oldest of the 16 Church Presidents.

As for upcoming age and tenure milestones, the next three he will observe are more spread out. It is more likely than not that he will for sure live long enough to reach the first such milestone, which will occur on Friday March 30, 2018, when he will have lived longer than President Kimball.

He will mark the next milestone less than 11 months later, when, on Saturday February 23, 2019, the length of his life will exceed that of Wilford Woodruff, becoming the 5^th oldest president in the Church’s history.

And his next tenure milestone will be marked on Tuesday December 10, also in 2019, when he will become the 7^th longest-serving president in Church history. For all three of these upcoming milestones, they will obviously not be reached by President Monson if he passes away at any point prior to reaching them, which I think goes without saying.

Moving on now to a discussion of the updated apostolic statistics, since there has been no change in our current First Presidency, they remain the third-longest continuously-serving First Presidency in Church history. Assuming President Monson is still alive at these times, they will become the second-longest serving First Presidency next year, on Wednesday September 12, and will become the longest serving First Presidency on Friday July 3, 2020. It will be interesting to see what happens there.

With that information shared, we can move on to talk about the specifics relating to the long form and decimal versions of the ages of our 14 current apostles, since the Church has yet to call someone to fill the apostolic vacancy occasioned by the October 1 death of Elder Robert D. Hales.

President Monson is, as noted above, 90 years, 3 months, and 4 days old, which puts his decimal age at 90.34. Meanwhile (again, these are current as of today), President Eyring is now 84 years, 6 months, 24 days, which is 84.57 years. And President Uchtdorf, who is the youngest First Presidency member currently, is 77 years, 0 months, and 18 days, which puts his decimal age at 77.13. The First Presidency has a combined life experience of 252.04 years, which puts the average age of the three at 84.01 years.

                                                                                                                          

As noted above, because there is currently a vacancy in the Quorum of the Twelve, there are 11 members. As for their current ages, President Nelson is now 93 years, 3 month, and 15 days old, with a decimal age of 93.29 years. Elder Oaks stands at 85 years, 4 months, and 12 days old (with a decimal age of 85.37 years). Elder Ballard has reached the age of 89 years, 2 months, and 16 days old (which is 89.21 decimal years) as of today. Elder Holland, who observed his birthday three weeks ago, is currently 77 years, 0 months, and 21 days old, making his decimal age 77.06 years.

Elder Bednar’s age in long form is now 65 years, 6 months, and 9 days, which puts his decimal age at 65.53 years. Elder Cook, who is older than both President Uchtdorf and Elder Holland, has reached the age (in long form) of 77 years, 3 months, and 16 days old, which makes his decimal age 77.29 years. With exactly one month to the day between this Christmas Eve and Elder Christofferson’s 73^rd birthday, his long form age is 72 years, 11 months, and 0 days old, which means his decimal age is now 72.92 years. Meanwhile, for Elder Andersen, he is now 66 years, 4 months, and 15 days old, which makes his decimal age 66.38 years.

We have now come to the three newest apostles, though I anticipate that the current apostolic vacancy will be filled during General Conference next April. As for the ages of those three, we first have Elder Rasband, who will celebrate his 67^th birthday on February 6, which is just short of 2 weeks (exactly 13 days) after Elder Christofferson marks his 73^rd birthday.

This means Elder Rasband is currently 66 years, 10 months, and 18 days old, making his decimal age 66.88 years. Elder Stevenson, who is currently our youngest apostle (though that may or may not still be true after the newest apostle is called), has a long form age of 62 years, 3 months, and 18 days old, which puts his decimal age at 62.38 decimal years.

Before moving on to discuss Elder Renlund’s long-form and decimal age and the other information I want to share in this post, I wanted to note something which I find interesting regarding the decimal ages of Elders Andersen, Rasband, and Stevenson. Because Elders Rasband and Stevenson were both born on the 6^th (with the former born in February and the latter in August), their decimal ages are almost always .5 years apart.

Elder Andersen, meanwhile, was born on August 9. Because his birthday is three days after Elder Stevenson’s, there are days like today when the hundredths of a year in his decimal age both match that of Elder Stevenson and are .5 years less than Elder Rasband’s decimal age.

But since the decimal ages of our apostles increase by .01 years every 3 or 4 days, there are days when only two of the three relate in this way, and there are other days when the hundredths of the year for all three of them are different. Just thought that would be an interesting tidbit to pass along.

With all of that said, Elder Renlund, the least senior but second youngest apostle, is 65 years, 1 month, and 11 days old as of today, which means his decimal age is now 65.11 years. So the 11 members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have a combined life experience of 821.42 years, putting the average age of those 11 at 74.67 years. Our 14 apostles have a grand total of 1073.46 years of life experience, which puts the average age of each of them at 76.68 years.

We now turn our attention briefly to a discussion of our apostolic nonagenarians. President Nelson, who is, as noted above, 93 years, 3 months, and 15 days, ranks as the 7^th oldest apostle in Church history, a milestone he officially reached a few days ago. He will not become the 6^th oldest apostle until Saturday July 6, 2019, over a year and a half from now.

With President Monson being, as noted above, 90 years, 4 months, and 3 days old, he remains the 17^th oldest apostle in Church history. Assuming he lives long enough to do so, he will observe a few more milestones next year. To give you an idea of what those are and when they will occur, if he is still alive on Thursday March 29, he will become the 16^th oldest apostle, taking the spot now held by Spencer W. Kimball. Less than a month later (on Monday April 23), he will have outlived President Marion G. Romney to become the 15^th oldest apostle. Less than two months after that (on Thursday June 14), his age will exceed that of President Boyd K. Packer, which would make him the 14^th oldest apostle. The next milestone he will observe as a nonagenarian will only occur on Monday February 11, 2019, at which time his lifespan will have exceeded that of Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin, making him the 13^th oldest apostle in Church history.

As I have previously observed in similar updates of the past, the one unknown element in terms of the list of nonagenarian apostles is whether or not President Monson will outlive President Nelson. The latter, though just less than three years older, seems to be in considerably better health, so President Nelson could go on to be the next Church president if and when President Monson passes away. It will be interesting to see what happens in that regard.

The other 12 apostles will take varying lengths of time to join the list of nonagenarians, from Elder Ballard, who will do so in 9 months, and 14 days, to Elder Stevenson, who will do so in 27 years, 7 months, and 13 days. I am keeping an eye on all tenure and age developments relating to our apostles and will pass that information along as I am able to do so in the future.

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 hope that each of you will have a very Merry Christmas, and that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.