Latest Apostolic Statistics: Part One--Updated Data for President Oaks, President Nelson, and Longest-Serving Apostolic Groups

Hello again, everyone! While I have no desire to distract or take away the focus from the discussion on future temple prospects, or from the post I put up earlier today in honor of President Oaks’ 86^th birthday today, another 6 weeks have come and gone since I last posted updated information on the latest apostolic statistics (on Sunday July 1, 2018). Since this 1.5 months have seen an impressive number of changes in the data related to that information, it seems appropriate to do so again.

As always, before we begin the discussion of that updated data, I wanted to recognize that there may be many of you who are not interested in the information I will be providing. So I will not in any way be offended or bothered if any of you prefer to bypass this information (which will, as always, be covered over the course of two posts).

As usual, all data is current as of today (Sunday July 1, 2018). This update will again feature the data in the same order as previous updates. We will start with some data about the Presidents of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, then turn our attention to the Presidents of the Church. After discussing those things, the first post will end, and the second (to be published shortly after the first) will then highlight the latest data about all 15 of our apostles, including information on those who have had a birthday recently and those whose birthdays are getting closer.

So let’s begin with some information on President Oaks’ current tenure length as President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, which will include exploring how soon he will move up on this list. The length of his service has currently spanned 6 months and 29 days. As noted in previous updates, he will be marking 2 additional tenure milestones before the end of this year, and will be marking 5 others in 2019.

Just over a month from now, on Sunday September 16, he will become the 26^th longest-serving Quorum President, as by that time he will have served longer than President David O. McKay. After another month, on October 22, he will become the 25^th longest-serving Quorum President, having served longer in that capacity than President Gordon B. Hinckley. Then in 2019, he will mark 5 milestones, one in April, two others in July (which will be observed two days apart), and the remaining two in November, and December. I will mention the specifics of those milestones closer to that time.

Moving on now to President Nelson, since he was ordained and set apart as Church president on the same day he set apart President Oaks as Quorum President, his tenure has spanned 6 months and 29 days as well. He is now 93 years, 11 months, and 3 days old.

He will observe the first tenure length milestone of his presidency in just under two months from now, on Thursday October 11 (when he will have served longer than President Howard W. Hunter). He will observe both another tenure-related and his first age-related milestone two days apart in July of 2019, with subsequent milestones more spread out in the years following that. And again, I will be detailing those more specifically closer to the time when they will be reached.

As I have also noted before, by all accounts, President Nelson remains healthy, vigorous, and fully involved in the day-to-day work of moving the Church forward. And as far as I know, neither of his counselors (who are both 7-8 years younger than he is) are suffering from any major health issues, which means that these Brethren will likely be serving together for at least the next several years, and I could easily see them at least making the list of the longest-serving First Presidencies in the Church, which will, as previous noted, occur on Sunday April 1, 2024.

And by the end of that same year, not only will the current First Presidency reach a couple of other milestones, but President Nelson will by then have become the first centenarian apostle and Church president. I know that, as recently as last year, I had offered my opinion that, if President Nelson became president of the Church, he would likely not serve for very long, but given the fact that he is considerably more healthy now than President Monson may have been for the last 5-7 years of his life (if not the entire decade of his presidency).

And as a former heart surgeon, it has been very rightly pointed out that President Nelson would know how to take care of himself. With that in mind, I would not be surprised if President Nelson is still around in 6-8 years, or even lives longer than that.

As for the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, except for President Ballard (who will be 90 on October 8, which is 3 months and 1 week from today, and who appears to be in fairly good health as well, though he may not be as healthy as President Nelson), all other apostles are younger than 80.  

With that in mind, the current members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who have served together since March 31 of this year, will most likely easily make the list of the longest-serving apostles on that same day in 2021. By the end of that same year, they will have moved up 3 spots on the list. I will give more specific data in this regard closer to that time.

By the end of 2021, the current group of apostles in the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles will have made and moved up on the list of other apostolic groups to become the 12th longest-serving such group in Church history, and other milestones will be reached in the years following.

All of those milestones will depend on how long Presidents Nelson and Ballard live and serve, and on how much they (or anyone else) are affected by health issues. I continue to track the health and ministry of these Brethren and will keep you posted.

With that said, I want to conclude this portion of the update. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe.

Until my next post (which should be the second one on this subject and will be published here within the next few minutes), I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

President Dallin H. Oaks Celebrates His 86th Birthday

Hello again, everyone! I am back in the early-morning hours of August 12 to pay tribute to the final apostle who has his birthday this month. President Dallin H. Oaks. He is marking his 86th birthday today. So let's dive right into this tribute post.

Dallin Harris Oaks was born in 1932, to Dr. Lloyd E. and Stella Harris Oaks. His mother traces her ancestry back to Martin Harris, who, as we know, was one of the three witnesses of the Book of Mormon. His first name was given in honor of the last name of an artist with whom his mother had worked (as the model) for a statue in Springville Utah.

His father, an opthalmologist, died when young Dallin was age 7 from complications of tuberculosis. Being the oldest child of his family, the death of his father gave him some unique opportunities to help his mother and to be an example to his younger siblings, which was one thing of which he has frequently spoken.

After his father died, his mother was able to earn a graduate degree at Columbia University and support her family by working to provide adult education opportunities for those who needed it. She also went on to become the first woman to be part of Provo's City Council, and to serve for a time as assistant mayor.

In the meantime, Elder Oaks attended Brigham Young High School, where he played football and became a certified radio engineer. Once he started attending BYU, he took many opportunities to be the radio announcer at high school games. At one of those games, he was introduced to June Dixon, whom he dated and would later marry.

He was unable to serve as a full-time missionary because he was a member of the National Guard, and there was a possibility he could have been called up to serve during the Korean War. Dallin and June were married in 1952, and he graduated from BYU two years later with a degree in accounting. He went on to study law at the University of Chicago, graduating with his degree 3 years later.

He spent the early part of his professional career clerking for Chief Justice Earl Warren of the US Supreme Court. After that, he practiced law at Kirkland and Ellis. He left that job in 1961 to become a professor at Chicago Law, While in that capacity, he served as interim dean.

During that time, the University of Chicago was desperate to get Dr. Russell M. Nelson, a renowned heart surgeon, on their staff, and Professor Oaks was asked to try and talk him into coming. Although those efforts proved unsuccessful, that encounter led to a lifelong friendships for the Nelsons and the Oaks. He also served on the foundational board of a a Mormon thought periodical. He was also chairman of the university's disciplinary committee,

He took a leave of absence from the University while serving as legal counsel to the Bill of Rights Committee of the Illinois Constitutional Convention. He left the law school for good in 1971 when he was appointed the new president of BYU (for which many candidates, including Brother Nelson, were considered), a position he held for nine years.

He then went on to serve for five years as chairman of the board of directors for PBS, and eight years as chairman of the board of directors of the Polynesian Cultural Center. In 1980, he was appointed a justice of the Utah Supreme Court, an office he held for the next four years. He was rumored to have been considered by two US Presidents (Gerald Ford and later Ronald Regan) for a nomination to the US Supreme Court.

However, a surprise change in direction for him came in 1984. President Gordon B. Hinckley, then a counselor to the ailing Church President, Spencer W. Kimball, tracked him down via phone call to let him know that he had been selected to become an apostle and member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, filling the second of two vacancies that had risen due to the deaths of Elders LeGrand Richards on January 11, 1983, and Mark E. Petersen exactly one year to the day later. (Due to the ill health of President Spencer W. Kimball, neither vacancy had been filled for over a year prior to April 1984.) Elder Oaks became the junior apostle to Elder Russell M. Nelson, though the two were sustained in the same General Conference.

Although both were called at the same time, Elder Oaks was unable to be present at the General Conference at which the two were sustained. President Hinckley, in leading that sustaining, offered the following explanation:

"With reference to Dallin Oaks, I should like to say that while we nominate and sustain him today, he will not be ordained to the apostleship, nor will he be set apart as a member of the Council of the Twelve, nor will he begin his apostolic service, until after he completes his present judicial commitments, which may require several weeks. He is absent from the city, and necessarily absent from the conference. We excuse him. "

Elder Oaks was ordained an apostle just short of four weeks after being sustained (having been sustained on April 7 and being subsequently ordained to the apostleship on May 3). He had his first opportunity to respond to his apostolic call six months later, speaking on the importance of witnesses, within the context of his new assignment to be a special witness of Jesus Christ.

He has now been an apostle for over 34 years, during which time he has filled a wide variety of assignments in his time as an apostle, and has had many opportunities to meet with and speak to Church members in various parts of the world. In 2002, he and Elder Holland were asked to be the first apostles in quite a while to live on-site in two of the Church's geographical areas, with then-Elder Oaks being based in the Philippines, and Elder Holland being assigned to preside in Chile.

In addition to the death of his father, then-Elder Oaks also experienced the death of his wife June, who passed away in 1998. Just over two years later, Elder Oaks married Kristen M. McMain, who has been by his side ever since. With the death of President Monson, Elder Oaks became the second most-senior apostle, and his apostolic seat-mate, President Nelson, felt impressed to call him to serve as First Counselor in the First Presidency, and he was set apart in both that capacity and as President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on January 14 of this year.

During his apostolic ministry, Elder Oaks has had 71 opportunities to speak during General Conference (and he had one additional opportunity to do so prior to his apostolic call). You can review any of those talks on a wide variety of subjects here. And now that he has been called to the First Presidency, we will hear from him at least 2-3 times per General Conference.

I am grateful to have been able to take the opportunity to share more about Elder Oaks. I testify that his apostolic call, along with the calls of all other apostles, has indeed been divinely directed and inspired, as has how and when Elder Oaks has moved up in the ranks of apostolic seniority. Speaking personally, I hope Elder Oaks has had a wonderful birthday, and I hope to see him continue to live and inspire us for many years to come.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Other Updated Predictions for the October 2018 General Conference

Hello again, everyone! I just now realized that I had updated some things on my predictions for the October 2018 General Conference (for both the potential speaking order and also the likely changes in general Church leadership). Those changes follow below, and I welcome feedback on that as well. So as not to disturb the flow of that information, I will end here and now as I always do.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

October 2018 General Conference Predictions[i]

Session	Conducting	Speakers
Saturday Morning[ii]	President Russell M. Nelson	President Russell M. Nelson
		Elder Terence M. Vinson
		Elder David A. Bednar
		Elder Jack N. Gerard
		Elder Gerrit W. Gong
		Elder Walter F. Gonzalez
		Elder Ronald A. Rasband
		President Dallin H. Oaks
Saturday Afternoon	President Dallin H. Oaks	President Henry B. Eyring (Sustaining of Church Officers)[iii]
		Elder D. Todd Christofferson
		Bishop Dean M. Davies
		Elder Ulisses Soares
		Elder Craig A. Cardon
		Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf
		Elder Juan Pablo Villar
		Elder Jeffrey R. Holland
Women’s Session[iv]	Joy D. Jones	Cristina B. Franco
		Michelle D. Craig
		Jean B. Bingham
		President Henry B. Eyring
		President Dallin H. Oaks
		President Russell M. Nelson
Sunday Morning	President Russell M. Nelson	President Henry B. Eyring
		Bonnie H. Cordon
		Elder Neil L. Andersen
		Elder Robert C. Gay
		Elder Takashi Wada
		Elder Quentin L. Cook
		President Russell M. Nelson
Sunday Afternoon	President Henry B. Eyring	President M. Russell Ballard
		Brian K. Ashton
		Elder Mathias Held
		Elder Dale G. Renlund
		Elder Scott D. Whiting
		Elder Paul B. Pieper
		Elder Gary E. Stevenson
		President Russell M. Nelson

Predictions for Changes in General Church Leadership

General Authority Seventies: Elder Brook P. Hales sustained as a new General Authority Seventy and Elders Mervyn B. Arnold, Craig A. Cardon, Larry J. Echo Hawk, C. Scott Grow, Allan F. Packer, Gregory A. Schwitzer, and Claudio D. Zivic released and granted emeritus status. Note: On May 18, 2018, the Church News reported that Brook P. Hales, who has been serving as Secretary to the First Presidency, will continue that role, but has been called to additionally serve as a General Authority Seventy. His call will likely be presented for sustaining vote. Each of the other seven GA Seventies mentioned above were born in 1948, and will all have their 70th birthdays before the end of 2018. While the Church has at times delayed the release of some GA Seventies for 1-4 years after their 70th birthdays, the last time something like that occurred was in the early 2000s. It is therefore my belief that each of the other men listed above will most likely be released. Result:

Area Seventies: Some area seventies released, others called. Note: In the past, when some area seventies have been called as mission presidents, they have retained their area seventy assignments for 1-3 General Conferences after their assignments begin. In the meantime, those called as temple presidents have almost always been released. And while area seventies have been known to serve for longer periods, the general term of service for these Brethren has been 5-8 years. With that in mind, the following area seventies may or may not be released: Newly-called mission presidents: Elders Daniel F. Dunnigan, Tasara Makasi, Fred A. Parker, and Miguel A. Reyes. Newly-called temple presidents: Elders B. Sergio Antunes, Joao R. Grahl, Todd B. Hansen, Daniel W. Jones, Steven O. Laing, and Katsuyuki Otahara. Longest-tenured: Elders Sergio L. Krasnoselsky (who has served since April 2009), Kevin J. Worthen* (who has served since April 2010), R. Randall Bluth, Hans T. Boom & David J. Thomson (who have served since April 2011). *With reference to Kevin J. Worthen, he is currently serving as president of BYU-Provo, and as such, may either serve as an area seventy until next April, then perhaps be called as a General Authority Seventy while continuing his service at BYU, or may remain an area seventy until the conclusion of his presidential tenure, however long that may be. Result:

---

[i]While General Conferences for the last decade and longer have typically conformed to a general pattern, there have been at least half a dozen exceptions during that same time, with the April 2018 General Conference being the most recent exception. Additionally, last October, the Church announced that the Priesthood and Women’s Sessions would each be held annually, with the former every April and the latter every October. For that reason, for the next 2-4 General Conferences, I will be giving myself a small margin of error while I try to get a feel for what the new patterns might involve.

[ii]As I will discuss in more detail in “Note 4” below, an assumption is made with these predictions that no members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles will be speaking during the Women’s Session. If that turns out to be the case, then the Quorum member that would have otherwise spoken during the Saturday Evening Session will need to be fit in somewhere else, and that could be done during either the Saturday Morning or Sunday Afternoon Sessions. Since the previous two General Conferences have seen 3 Quorum members speak during the Saturday Morning Session, an assumption is made here that this will again be the case.

[iii]Last April, in the first two sessions of General Conference, President Nelson’s two counselors each led a portion of what had traditionally been a one-session combined Solemn Assembly and Sustaining of Church Officers, which makes it difficult to know which of the two might lead the sustaining vote this go-round. An assumption is made here that, since President Oaks did a tremendous job presenting the new area seventies last April that he will continue to do so every April, which would, by extension, mean that President Eyring will lead the sustaining vote each October.

[iv]It had been tradition for one of the 3 presidents of the female-led auxiliaries to conduct the Women’s Session when it rolled around every six months. I am assuming that will continue to be the case. I am likewise assuming that, since that session is now being held on General Conference weekend in October that the entire First Presidency will speak, rather than just one member of it, and that, aside from the First Presidency and one representative from each of the three female-led auxiliaries, no other Church leaders will speak during that session.

Further Blog Layout Tweaks Underway

Hello again, everyone! I would like to take care of an item of personal business. As I continue to monitor the latest Church and temple news, the process of my analysis of how to make this blog more profitable for me will result in ongoing test changes to the layout here.

I keep running into a problem where a probable fix presents itself as a good idea, only for me to find that it turns out to not pan out, which in turn leads to my having to do further tweaks. I appreciate your patience with me as that process continues. In the meantime, if any of you have any feedback for me in terms of your experience with what is working in regards to these test changes and what may not be, I'd appreciate hearing from you.

In the meantime, just a general reminder: For the next 6.5 weeks or so (until sometime around September 23-25), an open commenting period will be effective for this post in which I share my completely updated list of locations around the world which, in my opinion, are most likely to have a temple announced during the October 2018 General Conference. I would appreciate your feedback on that so that I can make any tweaks that might be needed before General Conference rolls around.

That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Updated List of Potential Locations That Are Most Likely to Have a Temple Announced During the October 2018 General Conference

Hello again, everyone! A little earlier than I had anticipated, I am posting right now to share my updated list of potential locations that are most like to have a temple announced in the October 2018 General Conference in just around 8 weeks.

I cannot be sure of anything, but if I had to venture a guess, I would say that any new temples that will be announced by President Nelson during that General Conference will be announced during his opening address Saturday Morning, unless he opts to not speak during that session, in which case any temples would then be announced the following morning or in the final session.

I have done my best to extensively notate my reasoning for this list, including locations which I added. That said, I hope all of you who review it will feel free to let me know if I have overlooked or failed to consider anything. Your comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated.

The list (along with the relevant notes) follows below. That does it for this post. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Temple Predictions: 3+ temples announced, with the most likely locations (in my opinion), on the list below (grouped first by the geographical areas of the Church under which these locations fall, then by imminent likelihood within those areas.

Preliminary note: With seven temples having been announced last April (the second-highest number of temples ever announced at once), some have offered their opinion that perhaps no new temples may be announced during this General Conference. While I understand the rationale behind that opinion, there have been an increasing number of references to the fact that President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples worldwide will outpace and overshadow what we previously saw under President Hinckley’s inspired leadership. 

As I will detail more fully in the notes below, if that plan involves lowering the maximum distance within which Saints worldwide have to travel to reach their assigned temple (which has been around 200 miles), then that, combined with whatever his plans are to expand the number of temples may mean that nothing can be reasonably ruled out. The selections which follow below represent what, to me, are the most likely prospects, sorted first by the area of the Church under which they fall, then by likelihood within that area, along with any pertinent information which was shared via the comments on my blog.

Africa Southeast[1]: Antananarivo Madagascar[2]; Kampala Uganda[3]; Maputo Mozambique[4]; Lubumbashi DR Congo[5]; Cape Town South Africa[6]

Africa West[7]: Freetown Sierra Leone[8]; Kumasi Ghana[9] Lagos Nigeria[10]; Monrovia Liberia[11]; Yamoussoukro Ivory Coast[12]

Asia[13]: Ulaanbaatar Mongolia[14]; Phnom Penh Cambodia[15]; Taichung Taiwan[16]

Brazil[17]: Belo Horizonte[18]; Salvador[19]; Florianopolis[20]; Sao Paulo area (2^nd temple)[21]

Caribbean: San Juan Puerto Rico[22]

Central America[23]: San Pedro Sula Honduras[24]; Senahu[25]/Guatemala City[26]

Europe[27]: Budapest Hungary[28]; Praia Cape Verde[29]; Edinburgh Scotland[30]; Vienna Austria[31]

Mexico[32]: Puebla Mexico[33]; Queretaro Mexico[34]

Pacific: Port Moresby Papua New Guinea[35]; Auckland New Zealand[36]; Tarawa Kiribati[37]; Pago Pago American Samoa[38]; Neiafu Vava'u Tonga[39]

Philippines[40]: Davao Philippines[41]

South America Northwest[42]: La Paz/Santa Cruz Bolivia[43]; Maracaibo Venezuela[44]; Iquitos Peru[45]; Cali/Medellin Colombia[46]

South America South[47]: Ciudad del Este Paraguay[48]; Valparaiso[49]/Antofagasta[50]Chile; Neuquen Argentina[51]

North America[52] (including the United States and Canada):

Idaho: Preston Idaho[53]

North America Central: Missoula Montana[54]; Rapid City South Dakota[55]; Wichita Kansas[56]; Lethbridge Alberta[57]; Green Bay Wisconsin[58]; Des Moines Iowa[59]; Pueblo Colorado[60]

North America Northeast: Augusta Maine[61]; Hamilton Ontario[62]; Montpelier Vermont[63]

Morristown/East Brunswick New Jersey[64]; Concord New Hampshire[65]

North America Northwest: Fairbanks Alaska[66]

North America Southeast: Jackson Mississippi[67]; Shreveport Louisiana[68]; Jacksonville Florida[69]; Knoxville Tennessee[70]

North America Southwest: Bentonville Arkansas[71]; Elko[72]/Ely[73] Nevada; Fort Worth Texas[74]; Las Cruces New Mexico[75]; Flagstaff Arizona[76]

North America West: Bakersfield California[77]

Utah Salt Lake City: Herriman[78];

Utah South: Heber City[79]; Tooele[80]

---

[1]The Church has experienced substantial growth throughout the African continent, and that applies to this area of the Church as well. Right now, the only currently-operating temple is in Johannesburg South Africa. There are 2 additional temples under construction (in Kinshasa DR Congo and Durban South Africa, both of which will be dedicated next year) and 2 others announced (in Harare Zimbabwe and Nairobi Kenya, both of which may have a groundbreaking within the next 2-3 years or less). If the growth in this area continues as it has, then several other temples may be needed, with the most likely prospects (in my opinion) and the reasoning behind each location following in the next several notes.

[2]Madagascar is currently the last of the top ten nations with the strongest Church presence that does not have a temple in any phase. Madagascar is separated by a body of water from the rest of the African continent, which means that anywhere else an African temple is now or will be built is difficult for the Madagascar Saints to get to. Currently, the Saints in Madagascar have a journey of 1,338 miles from the Johannesburg South Africa Temple. Once the Harare Zimbabwe Temple is built and dedicated, that distance will be cut to 1,082 miles. Between the great distance and the difficulty of travel, Madagascar is surely a top contender for a temple of its’ own.

[3]The Saints in Uganda (which is the sixth nation with the strongest Church presence without a temple in any phase) currently travel 2,478.5 miles to the Johannesburg South Africa temple. While other temples announced or under construction will cut that distance slightly, the major cut will only come when the Nairobi Kenya temple is built and dedicated, at which point the Uganda Saints will only have a travel distance of 403.9 miles. If that 200-mile distance goal set by previous Church presidents is lowered at all, then Uganda will be a prime candidate for a temple sooner rather than later.

[4]Right now, the Saints in Mozambique currently travel 341.5 miles to worship at the Johannesburg South Africa Temple. No other temple under construction or announced will be any closer than that. Mozambique already qualifies for a temple based on the 200-mile goal previously referenced. So if that goal is lowered at all, the imminence of such a prospect may be just a matter of time.

[5]The first temple in the DR Congo (in Kinshasa) is currently anticipated to be dedicated in early 2019. So the imminence of a second temple there may be in doubt That said, the Saints in Lubumbashi currently travel 1,319.7 miles to the Johannesburg South Africa Temple, and since the Saints in that city will be even further away from the Kinshasa temple, the most substantial cut of that distance will only occur once the Harare Zimbabwe Temple is dedicated, at which point the journey will be 645.2 miles. Since that is still 3 times further than the current goal, Lubumbashi may get a temple sooner rather than later. It is also worth noting that Elder Neil L. Andersen publicly proposed a temple in the Kasai region two years ago, but that prospect does not seem as imminent as this one, as Lubumbashi is the second-largest city in the DR Congo.

[6]The Durban South Africa Temple is anticipated to be dedicated within the next 12-18 months. The first president for this temple is currently a resident of Cape Town. Although many people have advanced George as the location for the next temple in that nation, Cape Town has emerged from my study as the more likely prospect. The Saints in Cape Town currently travel 868.4 miles to the Johannesburg temple, and are further than that from Durban. The only question may be how soon a third temple may be announced for South Africa, although it may be sooner than many (myself included) currently believe.

[7]The Church in the Africa West Area has also experienced massive and rapid growth. The LDS Church Growth Blog recently reported that, if current growth trends in the Africa West Area continue as they have been lately, the Church could go from the 2 operating and 1 announced temple to 13 in operation by sometime during 2030. With that in mind, several temples may dot this area in the near future, and the locations in this section seem to me to be the most imminently likely prospects. 

[8]Sierra Leone is now the fourth of the top ten nations that have the strongest Church presence but do not yet have a temple in any phase. With the recent expanded growth in Sierra Leone (particularly with so many districts that have been upgraded to stakes), a temple there may simply be a matter of time. The Saints in Freetown currently journey 1,243.2 miles to the Accra Ghana temple, a distance which will not be cut until the temple in Abidjan Ivory Coast is built and dedicated, at which point the Freetown Saints will be 911 miles away. Since that is still far greater than the 200-mile distance, whether or not that mileage goal is lowered, Sierra Leone is very likely to get a temple soon.

[9]Since the dedication of the Accra Ghana temple in January 2004, Ghana has seen sufficient enough growth (in my opinion) to potentially get a second temple. And Kumasi has emerged as the most likely city for such a temple. Although the Saints in Kumasi currently only have to travel 154.4 miles to the Accra temple, if the minimum mileage is lowered, then a temple in Kumasi may just be a matter of time.

[10]Nigeria has likewise seen extensive growth since the Aba temple was dedicated in August 2005. While many have offered their opinions that Benin City would be the better prospect for Nigeria’s second temple, the elements I have studied leads me to conclude that Lagos, which is 291 miles away from Aba, is the more imminent prospect. That said, I would fully anticipate that there will be temples in both Lagos and Benin City at some point within the next 10-15 years or less.

[11]In the afore-mentioned list on the LDS Church Growth Blog (which covered the 10 nations with the strongest LDS presence that do not have a temple in any phase), Liberia comes in at #9. The Saints in Liberia travel 946.5 miles to worship in the Accra Ghana Temple. Once the Abidjan Ivory Coast Temple is built and dedicated, that distance will decrease to 616.5 miles. If, as observed in note 12 above, a temple is built in Freetown, that distance gets almost cut in half to 338.8 miles, which is still well above the current mileage goal. So if the minimum distance is lowered at all, Liberia may be a prime candidate for a temple in the near future.

[12]Shortly after the Abidjan Ivory Coast Temple was announced, I heard feedback to the effect that, if growth in the Ivory Coast continues as it has lately, a second (and possibly third) temple was likely within the next 15-30 years or less. The only question is how soon that might occur. While it would be understandable if the Church held off on another temple in this nation until the Abidjan temple is further along, my research has pointed to Yamoussoukro as the next most likely Ivory Coast city to get a temple. Right now, the Saints in that city travel 478.8 miles to worship at the Accra Ghana Temple. Although that distance will be cut to 146.6 miles once the Abidjan Ivory Coast, the city would become a prime candidate for a temple if the minimum distance set by other prophets is lowered by President Nelson.

[13]Although a previous version of this list had only one temple prospect for the Asia Area of the Church, subsequent personal study on my part, combined with comments from my blog, led me to realize that, if President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples and to accelerate the process by which they are built are any indication, my personal list of prospects for both the near and more distant future needed to be expanded. The locations listed for this area seem to have the most imminent likelihood of getting a temple.

[14]Mongolia was one nation I had on my list of more distant prospects, primarily because the Church presence in that nation is not as strong as it seems to be in other Asian nations. The main argument in favor of a temple being built in Mongolia seems to be the mileage metric. The Saints in Mongolia currently travel 1,805 miles to the Hong Kong China Temple. And my study shows that no other operating or announced temple will cut that distance at all. With that in mind, a temple in Ulaanbaatar seems to be just a matter of time.

[15]Cambodia is now the seventh of the top ten nations having the strongest Church presence without a temple in any phase. So the idea of a temple in Phnom Penh makes sense. With the Bangkok Thailand Temple planned to be on the larger side, when it is dedicated, the Saints in Cambodia will only have a journey of 415.2 miles to worship at that temple. So the Church may prioritize other cities in the near future that may need a temple more imminently. That said, until I see anything that would conclusively eliminate Cambodia as a near-future temple prospect, I will be keeping it on my list.

[16]While I have no firsthand knowledge of how busy the temple in Taipei Taiwan might be, I do know that the Church has expanded quite well through Taiwan since this temple was dedicated. If and when Taiwan gets a second temple, my research shows that Taichung would be the best location for that honor. Although Taipei and Taichung are just 106.4 miles apart, until I see a reason to remove Taichung from this list, I feel confident enough to keep it.

[17]The nation of Brazil has seen strong Church growth, perhaps the greatest amount Church-wide outside of North America. With 6 temples in operation there currently, there are two others under construction in Fortaleza (where a dedication is anticipated early next year) and Rio de Janeiro (which is anticipated to be dedicated in early 2020). There are two others which have been announced in Belem and Brasilia. With these four in different phases, it is difficult to know how soon other temples might be announced for the nation. But the following locations, for the reasons I will highlight below, have a strong case in favor of a temple.

[18]Up until recently, I had had both Belo Horizonte and Salvador on my list for the immediate future, but had prioritized them in the reverse order. But the Church News reported on June 14 of this year that Elder Cook, during a visit to Brazil, had spent some time in Belo Horizonte. We have seen instances recently where members of the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve will visit areas that have recently had a temple announced, or where the Church is considering building a temple. Based on Elder Cook’s visit to Belo Horizonte, I have prioritized that city for now. If I see anything that would convince me to change the order of the two again, I will do so. 

[19]See note above on Belo Horizonte. Although Elder Cook’s more recent visit to Belo Horizonte did lead me to prioritize that city above Salvador, further digging on my part led me to another Church News report (dated March 22, 2018) which highlighted an apostolic visit by Elder Bednar to Recife, Sao Paulo, Salvador, and Brasilia.  Two apostolic visits to the same nation within a 3-month period is significant. Although there are temples in the first two cities where Elder Bednar visited (and another temple has been announced for Brasilia), there is no temple currently announced in Salvador. With that in mind, a temple could be announced there shortly as well. What will be interesting to see is whether either will be announced first, or both will be announced simultaneously, or if one could be announced while the other is in its’ construction phase.

[20]While I had seen Florianopolis as a feasible temple prospect at some point in the future, it was not until I took the reports of President Nelson’s ambitious temple-building plans into account that I felt comfortable including Florianopolis on this list for the immediate future. Right now, the nearest temples to the Saints in Florianopolis are the temple in Curitiba (which is 191.3 miles away) and Porto Alegre (which is exactly 285 miles away). Because the distances involved constitute undue hardship for the Saints in Florianopolis, a temple there may just be a matter of time. That said, it may be some time before we know how soon a temple might be announced there, if the temples in Salvador and Belo Horizonte are more imminently needed. For now though, I am confident enough to put it on this list.

[21]Up until 2016, the Church had not been known to put a second temple in any city outside the US. In 2016 and 2017, second temples were announced for Lima Peru (which will be named for and built in the Los Olivos region), and Manila Philippines (in the area of Muntinlupa City, which has yet to receive an official name). Since Sao Paulo is a strong area in terms of Church membership, a second temple there may be needed sooner rather than later, though that prospect could potentially be delayed until temples rise in Belo Horizonte, Salvador, and Florianopolis. But if the initial word on President Nelson’s temple building plans are any indication, then a second Sao Paulo temple, along with the other three locations, may be announced much sooner than anticipated

[22]Puerto Rico now ranks as the second of the top ten nations with the strongest Church presence that do not have a temple in any phase. With the construction of the Port-au-Prince Haiti Temple underway (which will be a very small temple) it makes sense that the Church might opt to announce a temple for San Juan in the near future, as the Puerto Rican Saints currently travel 251 miles to the Santo Domingo Dominican Republic, which is just about the current minimum mileage goal, but if that is lowered at all, the prospect certainly will become more imminent. The one unknown is whether or not the recent natural disasters that have struck Puerto Rico will impact how soon a temple is built there.

[23]With a temple having been announced in April for Managua Nicaragua, it may be some time before we hear of other temples being announced for the Central America Area of the Church. The case in favor of the locations on my list being announced is a strong one, so for that reason, they have made the list, but it would not surprise me in any way if the Church waits on these potential locations until the temple in Managua is further along. If President Nelson’s reported temple-building plans are any indication, however, then nothing can potentially be ruled out, and any of the prospects that are listed for this area seem to be the most imminently likely possibilities.

[24]The Church in Honduras has seen extensive growth in recent years, so a third temple in that nation seems likely. And while there may be many good potential locations where one could be built, the consensus appears to be that San Pedro Sula is the most likely prospect, and that a temple for that city could be announced sooner rather than later.

[25]In similarity to Honduras, Guatemala has also seen significant Church growth in recent years. And there are likewise many potential locations where a third temple could be built to serve the Guatemalan Saints. But the city of Senahu has emerged as the most likely prospect for that honor, and the consensus seems to be that a temple there may simply be a matter of time. That said, someone familiar with the Central America area in general and Guatemala in particular observed that Senahu is more of an isolated location that does not yet have a significant Church presence. While we have previous precedents (such as in Winnipeg Manitoba) where a temple has been built in a more isolated location to cut inordinate distances, at times, the Church prefers to wait until an area has a strong Church presence. With all of this in mind, it will be interesting to see what winds up happening.

[26]As noted above, someone who is familiar with the situation of the Church in Guatemala mentioned that a temple in Senahu may be delayed until the presence of the Church increases there. In the meantime, that same individual noted that a second temple to split the current Guatemala City Guatemala Temple district may be a more likely prospect. At this point, given the reasons I outlined in the note above, Senahu remains on my list. I have also included the prospect of a second temple for Guatemala City, but could see the merits of removing either of the two as more information comes to light.

[27]Europe, particularly in the eastern countries of its’ continent, has seen some stagnation in terms of the growth of the Church. With temples currently under construction in Rome Italy and Lisbon Portugal (both of which will be dedicated next year), and another announced for a major yet-to-be determined city in Russia, the Church may opt to wait to construct other temples on the European continent until those 3 are either dedicated or at least further along in the process. That said, on the off-chance the Church does not so opt, the cities in this section, for the reasons I will explain in the subsequent notes that will follow this one, have the greatest chance of being announced in the near future.

[28]When I began sharing my thoughts on potential future temple locations, someone who has knowledge of the growth of the Church in Europe indicated that Budapest would likely be the next European city to get a temple. My study on the matter confirms that opinion, so it has been on my list for a while. Right now, the Saints in Budapest travel 418 miles to worship at the Freiberg Germany Temple. And neither of the two European temples under construction will be closer than that, so a temple in Budapest seems likely.

[29]Although Cape Verde is technically closer to the Africa North Area of the Church, it falls within the boundaries of the Europe Area. The nation, which now ranks as the eighth of the top ten nations with the strongest Church presence that does not have a temple, will likely have a temple announced in its’ capital city of Praia in the near future. This is because the Saints in Cape Verde currently travel 2,126 miles to worship at the Madrid Spain Temple. Although that distance will be slightly cut to 1,861 miles once the Lisbon Portugal Temple is dedicated, that is over 9 times further away than the mileage goal set by other prophets, and if that goal is lowered at all, a Praia temple may simply be a matter of time.

[30]When expanding my list of temple prospects, I knew I had to look at another temple in the UK. I had a temple for Scotland or Ireland on my list for the distant future, but after numerous comments on my blog and some additional research on my part, I determined that Scotland would be the more likely location for the next temple in the UK. The Saints in Edinburgh are 184.5 miles from their assigned temple in Preston England. If President Nelson’s temple-building plans involve lowering the minimum mileage from which any Saint should be from their assigned temple, then Edinburgh would indeed qualify for a temple, which would likely also serve Ireland, in addition to some parts of England that are nearest to the two countries.

[31]Although the Saints in Austria have seen a slight consolidation in the number of Church units in that nation recently, their currently assigned temple in Frankfurt (which is closed for renovation) is 444.3 miles away. If a temple is built in Budapest Hungary, the Austria Saints may be reassigned to that temple, which would then be 151 miles away. But I would anticipate that a temple could be announced for Vienna within the next few years, if not immediately, as long as all goes well.

[32]The growth of the Church in Mexico has somewhat stagnated to the point where Church leaders began last year to do a mass consolidation of the Church units there, primarily for the purpose of strengthening the remaining units. With that in mind, it may be difficult to gauge how soon other Mexican temples might be needed. But for the locations in this section represent the most likely prospects I see for the near future. 

[33]One of the readers of my blog (who lives in Mexico) shared feedback reiterating the idea that the next temple in Mexico will likely be in Puebla, and that such a temple will likely be announced sooner rather than later. This makes sense, because even though Puebla is only 81.3 miles from the Mexico City temple, it may be the foremost prospects to split the current district. The only question might be whether or not that prospect is as imminent as it appears to be, since there is reportedly an attendance problem in the Mexico City temple. If it has not been kept busy enough, that prospect could potentially be delayed for a little while. That said, I am confident enough to list it here for now, but will be watching for anything that changes my mind.

[34]The Saints in Queretaro Mexico currently travel 135.8 miles to worship at the Mexico City Mexico Temple, and would actually be further away than that from a temple in Puebla, unless the journey to Puebla would be less of a hardship to those Saints than the journey to Mexico City. Again, the timing of the announcement(s) for the next temple(s) will depend largely on whether or not a temple elsewhere would make sense, given the apparent lack of sufficient activity within the Mexico City temple. Until more is known about that, and about President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples, I feel confident in keeping both cities on my list.

[35]Papua New Guinea now ranks as the nation with the strongest Church presence that does not yet have a temple. I also learned several years ago that land has been held in reserve in Port Moresby for a temple for a while now. With that in mind, it may simply be a matter of time before a temple is announced there.

[36]As with Papua New Guinea, I had heard years ago that land has been held in reserve in Auckland for a temple. The Church has since announced and begun a renovation for the only temple in that nation (which is located in Hamilton). Although the Auckland Saints are merely 77.6 miles away from the Hamilton temple, if President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples involves halving or quartering the 200 mile maximum distance set by other Church presidents, Auckland would certainly qualify for a temple by that metric as well.

[37]Kiribati currently ranks as the third nation with the strongest LDS presence that does not have a temple in any phase of construction. The Saints in Tarawa currently travel 1,402 miles to worship at the Suva Fiji Temple, and no other currently-operating temple is closer than that. With all of this in mind, a temple in that nation may simply be a matter of time.

[38]American Samoa ranks fifth on the list of nations with the strongest Church presence that do not have a temple in any phase. The nearest temple to the Saints in the capital city of Pago Pago is currently Apia Samoa, and the Pago Pago Saints currently travel 76.2 miles, which is not long distance-wise, but involves journeying over a body of water, which may be inconvenient. Also, if the minimum mileage goal set by previous Church presidents is halved or quartered, that will no doubt make this prospect more imminent.

[39]Tonga has recently seen impressive Church growth, which leads me to believe that a second temple may be needed to serve the Saints there. The city of Neiafu Vava’u seems to be the most likely location for a second Tongan temple, since the Saints in that city currently travel 189 miles to the temple in Nuku’alofa. Although that is within the current minimum mileage, if that minimum is halved or quartered, then that, combined with the extensive growth in Tonga, leads me to believe that a Neiafu Vava’u temple will be announced sooner rather than later.

[40]With two currently-operating temples in Manila and Cebu, and three others announced for Urdaneta, Muntinlupa City (which is the second for the Manila area) and Cagayan de Oro, the Church could opt to wait to announce any other temples for the Philippines until those 3 are further along. But I do see the imminent prospect for one additional temple in this nation, for reasons I will explain in the note below.

[41]Davao is currently assigned to the Cebu City Temple District, from which it is 335.7 miles. That distance will not decrease at all until the Cagayan de Oro Philippines Temple, which was announced last April, is built and dedicated. But even then, the Saints in Davao will still have a journey of 161.8 miles. If the minimum distance set by previous Church presidents is halved or quartered, then Davao will surely be the next city in the Philippines to get a temple. I have had this city on lists like this for a long time, so I hope a temple will be announced there sooner rather than later.

[42]The entire South American continent has experienced massive Church growth. Having previously discussed Brazil, I will focus my comments about South America on the two other areas of the Church within this continent. Starting with the South America Northwest Area, I wanted to observe that there are 6 operating temples there. 1 other (in Barranquilla Colombia) is set to be dedicated in December of this year. 1 more is currently under construction in Arequipa Peru (for which a dedication is anticipated in early 2020). Two others have been announced (the Lima Peru Los Olivos Temple, which may have a groundbreaking within the next year, if not sooner, and the Quito Ecuador Temple, which could have a groundbreaking within the next 2-3 years, though hopefully sooner if all goes well). With the South America Northwest Area having experienced somewhat rapid growth, I have long been of the opinion that several prospects were likely possibilities for this area in the near future, and I expanded the number of those prospective locations again with the increased comments about President Nelson’s ambitious temple-building plans. For the reasons mentioned in the notes below, each of the locations on this list have a strong case in their favor as prospects for the near future.

[43]Since the dedication of Bolivia’s first temple in Cochabamba, the Church in Bolivia has seen significant growth and expansion. That has been especially true of regions that would be served by temples in Santa Cruz or La Paz. Of the two, although I favor La Paz,, my research indicates a Santa Cruz temple may be more imminent. But I fully anticipate temples in both cities within the next 15 years or less, thus both are on this list for now.

[44]The temple in Caracas was announced during the October 1995 General Conference, with a groundbreaking occurring in January 1999, and a dedication for it was held the following year in August. One year prior to the dedication of the temple in Caracas, President Hinckley publicly proposed another Venezuelan temple for the city of Maracaibo, which is 432.5 miles from Caracas. Although Venezuela has political turbulence at the moment, and although there has been some Church unit consolidation there in recent years, when we combine the distance factor with the fact that temples publicly proposed during the administrations of Presidents Hinckley and Monson have gone on to be announced during the subsequent administrations of Presidents Monson and Nelson, the case in favor of a temple in Maracaibo is strong, so that prospect may be more imminent than many (myself included) might anticipate.

[45]Iquitos has been on my list of temple prospects for about as long as I have offered my thoughts about future temple locations. I removed this prospect for a time when a second Lima Peru Temple was announced, but have since rethought the need for it. Iquitos is 629 miles from Lima Peru, will be 625 miles from the Los Olivos Temple (which has not yet been built) 498 miles from Trujilllo, and will be even further away from the Arequipa temple (which is anticipated to be dedicated in early 2020). As I mentioned in earlier notes, if the previous 200-mile goal that has been sent by other Church presidents is lowered by a minimum of 50 or 100 miles, then based on that metric, Iquitos would certainly qualify, and is therefore the next most likely Peruvian city that could get a temple (in my opinion).

[46]The Barranquilla Colombia Temple is scheduled for its’ dedication in December of this year. How soon Colombia might get a third (and fourth) temple may depend on how imminently such temples might be needed. That said, the two most likely cities for Colombia’s third temple seem to be Cali or Medellin. Cali is 286.6 miles away from the temple in Bogota, while Medellin is 260.7 miles away from Bogota, and neither city will be closer to Barranquilla. The two cities are 260.5 miles apart, so a temple in either would like serve both cities, at least initially. Although the Church has been known to wait 3-10 years between announcing a new temple in a nation that has recently had one dedicated, at the same time, given President Nelson’s reported plans to expand the number of temples, both cities may have a temple announced within the next 5-10 years or sooner.

[47]As noted above relating to the South America Northwest Area, the South America South Area has likewise seen extensive and significant growth. So again, with President Nelson’s extensive temple-building plans in mind, I have considered the most imminent prospects for future temples in this area, which, for the reasons outlined in the notes below, have a strong case in their favor.

[48]In view of the need to expand my list of prospects for this area, Ciudad del Este seems to be the most likely prospect for a second temple in Paraguay, with the only question being how imminently likely that might be. When the renovation process is complete for the Asuncion temple, the Saints in Ciudad del Este will have a journey of 201.4 miles to worship there, which is already above the minimum goal other prophets have set. If that minimum distance is lowered at all, then a temple in that city may simply be a matter of time.  

[49]The one difficult thing about determining where Chile’s next temple will rise and how soon an announcement might occur is the fact that the city’s second temple (in Concepcion) is set to be dedicated in late October of this year. With a few rare exceptions, generally the Church has waited a few years after the dedication of a temple in nations outside the US before announcing the next temple in that nation, although that may change if what has been said about President Nelson’s temple-building plans are any indication. Valparaiso has been on one of my various lists for a while now. That city is 71.6 miles away from its’ current temple in Santiago, and will be further away from the temple in Concepcion. The main argument behind this temple would be to potentially split the current Santiago district, and Valparaiso may be the best way to do that.

[50]As I studied future Chilean temple prospects, Antofagasta emerged as another likely prospect. Right now, that Saints in that city are 829.8 miles away from their assigned temple in Santiago, about the same distance from Antofagasta, and even further away from Concepcion. I can therefore see temples in both Antofagasta and Valparaiso within the next 5-15 years, with the only question being which might potentially be more imminent.

[51]Although President Nelson just announced last April that Argentina’s third temple will be built in Salta, I have had Neuquen on my list of future prospects for a while now. Neuquen is 709.2 miles from Buenos Aires, 691.4 miles from Cordoba, and even further than that from Salta. Since all three distances are much further than the 200 mile goal set by previous Church presidents, whether or not that distance goal is changed, it seems that a temple in Neuquen may just be a matter of time.

[52]Although the North American continent (primarily in the United States) has seen somewhat of a stagnating growth situation, in light of the recent increased mentions of President Nelson’s ambitious temple-building plans, the likelihood is extremely high that the US and Canada will be included in whatever the plans are to expand the number of temples worldwide. The locations listed below represent what I believe are the most imminent prospects for the US and Canada in the near future.

[53]Preston Idaho is a relatively new addition to this list. Although the Church has not yet begun full-scale construction on the temple in Pocatello (which was announced in April 2017), since Idaho is part of the Mormon corridor, that opens the prospect that both temples could be under construction at around the same time. The main reason I added a temple for Preston this go-round is because it would split the current Logan Utah Temple district. Right now, the Saints in Preston travel 26.7 miles to worship at that temple. Although that may not be an inordinate distance, at the same time, if the Logan temple is as busy as the reports I have found seem to indicate, splitting the district would make a lot of sense, and Preston seems to be the most effective location to accomplish that. 

[54]According to reports I received through the comments on my blog, Elder David A. Bednar publicly proposed a Missoula Montana Temple while on assignment to a stake conference in that city. My subsequent research indicates that land has been held in reserve for such a temple for several years n. ow, and that an official announcement will occur once the right conditions are met. For that reason, Missoula has been on my list for a while now, and I could see an official announcement in the near future.

[55]Although South Dakota only has 2 stakes and 1 district, and although the districts of the Bismarck North Dakota and Winter Quarters Nebraska Temples,, which cover South Dakota, may not be inordinately large, the Saints in Rapid City travel almost 300 miles to worship at the Bismarck temple, so it seems likely that the Church will opt to build a temple there sooner rather than later.

[56]Since Wichita Kansas was on one of my other two lists, I simply moved it up to this one as a more imminent prospect. The 7 stakes in Kansas currently are split between the Kansas City Missouri Temple, the Oklahoma City Oklahoma Temple, and the Denver Colorado Temple, and almost all of those 7 have extensive distances involved. So if the 200-mile goal set by previous Church presidents is lowered to any degree, all of the distances may well be considered inordinate. For these reason, a temple in Wichita seems likely to be announced sooner rather than later

[57]The three current temples in Alberta (Calgary, Cardston, and Edmonton) were all built where the Church has firm support for them. Lethbridge seems to be the next most likely city in Alberta to get a temple, which could occur sooner rather than later. The Saints in Lethbridge are currently 131.7 miles from Calgary, 49.2 miles from Cardston, and 312.4 miles from Edmonton. If President Nelson does wind up cutting the minimum mileage within which all Church members should be from their nearest temple by either half or quarter, the distance from Cardston should be sufficient to warrant a temple in Lethbridge. If I see anything in the near future that leads me to alter or eliminate this prospect, I will do so.

[58]When I was first considering the most likely location for Wisconsin’s first temple, I had prioritized Madison (the nation’s capital) or Milwaukee. But after a lot of feedback and more research on my part, I determined Green Bay would be a more preferable location. There are six stakes in Wisconsin, all of which are assigned to the Chicago Illinois Temple District except one, which is assigned to the St. Paul Minnesota Temple district. Each of these stakes involves a journey between 90-200 miles to their assigned temple. So if the minimum distance set by previous Church presidents is shortened at all, Wisconsin is a prime candidate for a temple. And a temple in Green Bay would greatly shorten the trip for most (if not all) of the stakes in Wisconsin.

[59] Although the Church has previously built temples in sites which have historical significance, and although Council Bluffs in Iowa is one such location, given that the Saints who live in that area are less than 15 miles away from the temple in Winter Quarters Nebraska, a temple in Iowa is more likely to rise in the capital city of Des Moines. The 8 stakes in Iowa are currently divided between the Winter Quarters Nebraska and Nauvoo Illinois Temples. Of those 8 stakes, only the Saints in Council Bluffs are within 15 miles of their assigned temple. All other established stakes in this state are between 90-180 miles away from their assigned temple. With all of this in mind, Iowa would qualify for a temple, and if one rises in Des Moines, it would not surprise me at all if that temple was named for Mount Pisgah, which is another historically-significant site from early Church history, and for which the second Des Moines stake is named.

[60]A comment on my blog mentioned that the Saints in Pueblo and nearby Colorado Springs typically deal with massive and significant traffic congestion to get to their currently-assigned temple in Denver, which seems to be a very undue hardship. Since that also involves a one-way journey of 115.8 miles, I can see why a temple in Pueblo in the near future may be very likely.

[61]In view of all we have heard about President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples, Maine seems to be a prime candidate for such a temple. Although there are only two stakes in that state, the two are between 160 and 240 miles away from their currently-assigned temple in Boston. Whether or not the minimum mileage is lowered, Augusta surely qualifies for a temple of its’ own.

[62]Mormon Newsroom announced in mid-July that in mid-August, President Nelson was planning to visit 3 Canadian cities, Montreal Quebec (which has a temple), Winnipeg Manitoba (where a temple is currently under construction), and Hamilton Ontario (which does not currently have a temple in any phase). There are currently 99 congregations in Ontario, which is a large amount for the one temple in Toronto. The city of Hamilton is 42.2 miles away from Toronto, and if the Toronto temple is at all busy, a temple in Hamilton Ontario makes sense.  

[63]Vermont is the 5^th smallest of the 50 states, and has a Church presence that matches its’ size. Members in Montpelier currently travel 180.4 miles one way to worship at the Boston Massachusetts Temple. While New Hampshire may have a stronger Church presence currently than Vermont does, Vermont has a connection to Church history (as the Prophet Joseph Smith was born in Sharon), so it seems likely the Church would favor Vermont for a temple. The temple could potentially be built directly in Sharon (as the Church has a tradition of putting a temple in historically-significant locations), but my current research on the subject leads me to conclude that, unless a stake is established in Sharon before this temple is announced, Montpelier may be a preferable location, as it would provide such a temple with sufficient support from a nearby stake.

[64]The imminence of a prospective first temple in New Jersey may be difficult to determine. That said, two of the five stakes in that state are 41.6 miles away from their assigned temple. If the previous maximum distance of 200 miles which was set by other prophets is lowered at all, New Jersey would certainly qualify for a temple, which means one could be announced in that state sooner rather than later. The two cities I mentioned above are Morristown and East Brunswick, so the temple could be built in either location. While I have no reservations about listing this prospect here, if I see anything that indicates such a temple may not be as imminent as it seems, I will be sure to remove it.

[65]The merit of the idea for a temple in Concord New Hampshire relate to the fact that the Saints in that city are 67.9 miles from their currently assigned temple (in Boston Massachusetts), so if President Nelson’s plans to expand the number of temples involves quartering the 200-mile distance within which previous Church presidents have indicated they want members to be from their nearest temple, then a temple in Concord may simply be a matter of time.

[66]The Saints residing in Fairbanks Alaska currently travel 360.3 miles to worship at the temple in Anchorage. Although the Saints in Juneau do have a longer journey to both Anchorage and Fairbanks, the latter has emerged from my study as the best prospect for Alaska’s second temple. That said, I can see a day when Juneau gets one as well, which may happen sooner than expected, depending on the extent of President Nelson’s temple-building plans.

[67]Mississippi is another state that does not yet have a temple in any phase. The Saints in Jackson currently travel 174.6 miles one way to worship at the Baton Rouge Louisiana Temple, but with that temple closed for renovation, the trip is much longer to get to the next nearest temple. That presents a compelling argument for the idea that a temple in Jackson may simply be a matter of time.

[68]The Saints in Shreveport currently travel 187.9 miles to their assigned temple in Dallas, so that city would qualify for a temple of its’ own if the current 200-mile distance goal set by previous church presidents is halved or quartered. Therefore, a temple in Shreveport may simply be a matter of time.

[69]With temples operating in Orlando and Fort Lauderdale, a third temple may be needed sooner rather than later. Several people have shared their feeling that Tallahassee may be a more likely location for the third temple in that state, but between my personal research on the subject and the opinions of others who seem to know more about Florida than I do, Jacksonville has made my list. That said, I can see a day within the next 5-10 years or less when both cities will have a temple. The Jacksonville Saints currently travel 140.7 miles to the temple in Orlando, so if the 200-mile distance is halved or quartered, then this prospect may be a very high priority in the near future.

[70]The Saints in Knoxville Tennessee currently travel 180.1 miles to worship at the temple in Nashville. That may also be an inordinate distance if the minimum mileage is lowered at all, and if we also take into account the fact that a journey to Nashville may be arduous, then a temple in Knoxville seems imminent.

[71]A good friend with connections to Arkansas told me a while ago that the Church has held land in reserve for a temple in Bentonville for a while now, and that an official announcement was likely once the right conditions were met. For that reason, I believe we will see this temple announced sooner rather than later. Some have opined that Rogers might be a more likely location for the first temple in Arkansas, but my study confirms that a temple is likely in Bentonville sooner rather than later. And as observed by someone on my blog, when the first temple in Arkansas is built, it could potentially be named for the Ozark Mountain range, which is a major landmark in Arkansas

[72]The Saints in Elko currently travel 229.6 miles to their assigned temple (Salt Lake). So Elko already qualifies in terms of the within 200-mile distance. And if that mileage goal is lowered, that prospect becomes more imminently likely.

[73]The note above applies to the Saints in Ely as well, as they commute 201.1 miles to their assigned temple in Cedar City. A temple in Ely would cut the commute substantially. And I fully believe that temples in both Elko and Ely are possible in the near future, since the distance between the two is just under 200 miles.

[74]In sharing my thoughts about potential future temple locations, I learned from someone living in Texas that Fort Worth would likely be the best prospective city to split the current Dallas district. In addition, although some have offered their feedback that El Paso may be a more likely location for that honor, and although I fully believe both cities will have temples of their own at some future point, I have prioritized Fort Worth for this list.

[75]The Saints in Las Cruces currently travel 224.6 miles to the temple in Albuquerque, so a temple there may just be a matter of time. A temple in that city could also likely serve the Saints in El Paso Texas, as the two cities are 46.2 miles apart. The journey between the two cities would be a fairly easy distance if for any reason the El Paso Saints are unable to get to their currently-assigned temple in Ciudad Juarez Mexico.

[76]Although Elder Larry Y. Wilson, the Executive Director of the Church’s Temple Department, stated at last year’s dedication of the Tucson Arizona Temple that Arizona was, for the moment, well-stocked with temples. That said, my study indicates that the next Arizona temple will be built in Flagstaff. Right now, the Saints in that city currently travel 119 miles to worship at the Snowflake Arizona Temple. If the 200-mile distance is decreased by President Nelson (either by halving or quartering it), then Snowflake would be a prime candidate for a temple, and that may even help to split some of the other temple districts in Arizona as well.

[77]Bakersfield California is roughly halfway between Fresno (from which it is 109.1 miles away) and Los Angeles (from which it is 113.3 miles away). Although there have been some congregational consolidations in California in recent years, the distances involved may be sufficient to warrant a temple in Bakersfield in the not-too-distant future.

[78]In 2005, President Gordon B. Hinckley noted that land was being held in reserve for a temple in the Southwestern Salt Lake Valley, which would have an official announcement when that became necessary. Subsequent study on my part in late 2017 and early 2018 pointed me to the conclusion that the land in question was in Bluffdale, but that it has since been annexed into the city of Herriman, although it has been the subject of more than a few border disputes. I am confident enough to list it here, and since President Monson announced temples publicly proposed during President Hinckley’s tenure, I feel that President Nelson may likely do the same. Thus, a temple there may just be a matter of time.

[79]A temple in Heber City (the prospect of which has been suggested a few times) would help provide a closer option for Saints in the Heber Valley, and it would likely split the district of the Provo Utah Temple, which, by all reports, is still one of the busiest in the Church.

[80]Tooele has also been mentioned repeatedly as a potential prospective city for a temple. While the Saints in Tooele do not have to drive an inordinate distance to reach their assigned temple in Salt Lake City, I feel a temple there may simply be a matter of time. And since a temple in Herriman would still create a drive (along a U-shape) for those Saints, it seems safe to assume that Tooele could (and likely will) get a temple soon.