- Argentina Posadas
- California Irvine
- California Long Beach
- California Rancho Cucamonga
- Canada Halifax
- Florida Tallahassee
- Georgia Macon
- Idaho Nampa
- Japan Sendai
- Korea Daejeon
- New York Utica
- Virginia Chesapeake
The closure of most of these twelve missions appeared likely. As I noted
in a post in December, I believed it was likely that as many as 22 missions may close this summer albeit only five of these missions I correctly predicted (six if you count California Anaheim instead of California Irvine). These mission closures appeared likely given church growth trends, the number of stakes/districts serviced by the missions, and size and receptivity of populations targeted by missionary efforts in these locations. Stabilization in the number of full-time missionaries serving worldwide appears to be a major reason why some of these missions were closed, as six of these missions were organized in 2013 to accommodate the sudden increase in the number of members serving full-time missions due to the double-cohort that resulted from a decrease in the minimum age for missionary service (e.g. Argentina Posadas, California Irvine, California Rancho Cucamonga, Georgia Macon, Idaho Nampa, Virginia Chesapeake). Furthermore many of these missions appeared to be originally organized due to better capabilities of the Church in the United States to suddenly accommodate large numbers of full-time missions serving from the United States compared to other countries given the Church's well-developed infrastructure in the country. Furthermore, although eight of the 12 mission scheduled to close this July are located in the United States, there will still be 109 missions in the United States after these changes go into effect. This is a higher number of missions in the United States than at any time prior to 2013. There were 103 missions in the United States in 2012.Missions to open this July include:
- Democratic Republic of the Congo Kinshasa East
- Guatemala Antigua
- Perú Limatambo
- Philippines Antipolo
Democratic Republic of the Congo Kinshasa East
The Democratic Republic of the Congo Kinshasa East Mission will likely be organized from a division of only one mission, the Democratic Republic of the Congo Kinshasa Mission. Kinshasa will be the fourth city in Sub-Saharan Africa to have two missions headquartered within the same city (the other cities being Accra, Ghana [two missions since 2013]; Johannesburg, South Africa [two missions since approximately 2014 when the Botswana/Namibia Mission moved headquarters to Pretoria]; and Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire [two missions since 2014). The Church has reported a significant increase in the number of Congolese member who serve full-time missions, which has appeared to be a major catalyst for the decision to organize a second mission in Kinshasa. Also, there are now 10 stakes in Kinshasa with 1-2 more stakes likely to be organized in the near future. It is likely that the creation of the new mission will assist with the further development of the Church in Kisangani, as well as the probable establishment of an official Church presence in additional large cities in the northern portion of the country such as Bandundu where there are significant numbers of members who have petitioned Church leaders to establish an official branch (more information here). There are now four missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It appears likely that the Church will organize a third area in Africa, possibly called the Africa Central Area, within the near future to help better supervise the expansion of the Church in the region.
Guatemala Antigua
The Guatemala Antigua Mission will likely be organized from a division of Guatemala Retalhuleu Mission and the Guatemala City Central Mission. The new mission will be the Church's seventh mission in Guatemala. The Church has reported that the number of Central American members who serve full-time missions has nearly doubled in the past decade.
Peru Limatambo
The Peru Limatambo Mission will be the Church's sixth mission to operate within the Lima metropolitan area where the Church operates 44 stakes - the largest number of stakes of any metropolitan area outside of the United States. Local members report that the new mission will be organized from a division of the Peru Lima Central Mission although additional missions headquartered in Lima may also be involved. The Church also organized a larger-than-normal number of new wards in Lima during 2018 and most congregations in the city appear to have 80-200 active members.
With these changes, there will be 14 missions in Peru, and Peru will be the country with the fifth most missions in the world.
Philippines Antipolo
The Philippines Antipolo Mission will be the Church's 23rd mission to operate in the Philippines. The new mission will be organized from a division of three missions: Philippines Quezon City Mission, Philippines Quezon City North Mission, and the Philippines San Pablo Mission. With these changes, there will be five missions headquartered in the Metro Manila area - more missions in a single metropolitan area than any other city in Asia, Europe, or Africa. The Church has regularly organized new stakes and congregations in the Metro Manila area and surrounding cities during the past decade. Furthermore, there have been significant increases in the number of active members in the Philippines during the past decade. The Philippines has the fourth most missions of any country in the world.
41 comments:
Matt, thank you for this report. I appreciate your thorough analysis. I was intrigued by what you said regarding the possible consolidation of the Asia North Area into the Asia Area. Based on what you said, I could see that happening. At the same time, I wonder how that would work, since the Asia Area is the largest one in the Church (unless I am mistaken). I likewise appreciate your reiteration of the idea that the Church could possibly create another Africa Area to cover the central nations of that continent, which seem to be experiencing significant Church growth. It was wonderful to hear of the growth of the Church where the 4 new missions were created. It will be interesting to see exactly how the consolidations affect missionary work in each location. I am grateful that the Brethren have made these changes and look forward to seeing what is next for the Church in terms of its' growth this year. Thanks again for this wonderful report.
1st New Stake reported 2019 : Pleasant Grove Utah Manila Creek Stake.
http://www.fullerconsideration.com/units.php
Stakes Opened
1 Jan 09, 2019 Pleasant Grove Utah Manila Creek Stake
https://classic.lds.org/maps/#ll=40.406613,-111.754278&z=14&m=google.road&layers=stakecenter&q=Pleasant%20Grove%20Utah%20Manila%20Creek%20Stake&find=stake:2129809
Thursday, January 10, 2019
Open House and Dedication Announced for the Fortaleza Brazil Temple
The First Presidency has announced the opening dates for the Fortaleza Brazil Temple. The public is invited to attend an open house beginning Saturday, April 27, and continuing through Saturday, May 18, 2019. The temple will be dedicated on Sunday, June 2, with youth devotional held the day before on Saturday, June 1, 2019.
With the extra hour of Sunday worship looking to go outside the chapel (despite some bishoprics planning more linger longers in their churches) it will be interesting to see some things increase:
More missionaries able to spend more time tracting or more effectively spending time with families to reach out better and augment their teaching pools.
More teaching time for missionaries and member missionaries, especially on weekends when some people are more available.
More attendance in general since expectations are not as demanding.
Less need for wards to build new chapels for crowd issues.
More people attending lessons in the homes of members. A huge potential force multiplier.
I think more faithful saints will have a chance to be "mini-bishops". I know in some places former branch presidents and bishops disactivated because they felt demoted.
Now every house/home should feel promoted.
More family history, with Internet accessability at our finger tips.
The video by the Interpreter Foundation that Matt mentioned mentions another major issue that may be the real focus of the meeting schedule change although the benefit for all is significant anyway. In isolated areas church is not always going to be in a building, a house will have to do for some time, re-read the announcement--President Nelson's talk hinted of this.
Other interesting matters appear in the video about the temple whic immediately follows that first one, Matt linked to Part 7 but find Part 8.
Part 10 has detail of some interesting remarks at a Kinshasa stake conference relating to that temple. And wait until you hear about the Primary choir at the first stake conference the missionary was at after arriving in Kinshasa Also says right now they are not teaching in languages like Lingala yet, so the French speaking proselyting is going to build the base so they can expand in a major way then the time is right.
Eduardo, I need to respectfully disagree with your assessment that "expectations are less demanding". I say that because I never got the impression from anything I've read that that is the case. Many members of the Church seem to focus more on the fact that they have an extra hour on Sunday rather than on the purpose behind the changes in question. President Nelson said, "It is time for a home-centered curriculum, supported by what is taught at Church." Why did ministering replace home and visiting teaching? Because most of the Church membership were so focused on the need to visit their people each month that they weren't able to focus as much on genuinely getting to know and learning to care about those on their lists. Why was the Church schedule shortened? Because the Lord expects us as His people to use the extra hour at our discretion during the week to gather as individuals or families and discuss the upcoming week's curriculum. Some have said doing so would replace family home evening, but I didn't get that impression either. What is being asked is that, in addition to hold family home evening each week, we also need to gather our families or groups of individuals together for an hour of studying the gospel together, which will better prepare each individual and family for Church the following Sunday. Neither change is about "expectations being less demanding." They are about living the gospel, doing as the Savior would do, and placing the onus for what we get out of Church more on what we put into our preparation during the week. Some people (which at times, has included me myself) have been lulled into a false sense of security, forgetting that there is far greater accountability involved in embracing these changes than what might seem to be the case at times. Some members will not take this chance to do things in a higher, holier, better, more effective, and more Christlike way. But those who fail to do so will face having to be accountable for that. The question is, will we take this opportunity to hold ourselves, our families, and those under our stewardship to that accountability? I certainly hope so. I mean no offense by this comment and hope none is taken.
On the Kinshasa East Mission: I did some more searching on the larger cities that would likely have an official Church presence established in the coming years, as by pure statistical likelihood, there are already several members and investigators in those cities. One that stood out to me that wasn't mentioned in the video you linked, is Kikwit.
I will be honest in that I don't know that much about the cities in the DRC besides Kinshasa and Lubumbashi, but I found this video ok Kikwit and realized something else: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVUx7wzdSeo
Once centers of strength are established in these cities, outward expansion from there connecting these centers of strength will likely occur for the next few decades. While distances are vast, you apparently can't imagine that the DRC is altogether heavily forested or desert, or of any other form of landscape that would prohibit widespread population. Instead, along the roads between those major cities are countless towns, some of them probably quite large in population. And presumably, very receptive to the Gospel message.
In terms of Missionary work, Africa is such an overwhelming place overall, and I think the only way we can properly address it in the coming century is by baptizing and retaining large numbers of youth from Africa, and by enabling and preparing them to serve Missions themselves.
Getting around that country is an issue, as if you lived some distance from Kinshasa and were a member, to go to the temple you had to hitch a ride on a passing lorry, be on the outside of that going to Kinshasa, then catch a flight to South Africa, or maybe Ghana, but I understand most went to SA.
Since few drive there outside some larger places, getting to stake conference in Lubumbashi or Luputa is difficult. Some had to walk 60 miles--Provo t Bountiful--to get there, then that same distance back. I heard that even with that, they were still getting 85 percent attendance.
Utah Trivia Question - Guess which Utah County has the most stakes? Davis, Salt Lake, Utah or Weber? (I have the answer up at Mormon Wikia - List of Stakes.)
My answer could be a little bit off - The City of Draper staddles the Utah/Salt Lake County Line. But it looks like all of their stakes are in the Salt Lake County zone. Let me know if I have one of those stakes in the wrong county.
The closest building to the county line is just after you enter Salt Lake County on Frontrunner after you come out of the Jordan Narrows.
The Point and the Narrows only contain some industrial structures and the tracks and freeway, along with access roads. It may be possible that a stake from one county or the other may cross over, but there will be very few or no persons living where that stake crosses into the other county.
Rendering of the San Juan Puerto Rico Temple released. Construction to begin later this year.
https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/artist-rendering-released-for-san-juan-puerto-rico-temple
@MainTour
My guess without checking would be Utah County. 2nd guess is Salt Lake.
The San Juan temple must have been in the works a while before the announcement. I wonder if the announcement was delayed due to Hurricane Maria. Maria struck Puerto Rico a couple of weeks before October 2017 General conference. Perhaps the Church wanted to avoid the negative PR and inevitable "use the money to help the poor" comments if they would have announced it in October 2017 or April 2018. Perhaps that is a cynical way to look at it though. If not, then It looks like the temple department is getting better at streamlining temple design times. Another temple without a Moroni.
In regards to the discontinued Missions, The Argentina Posados Mission was probably discontinued for logistical reasons. I read a Mission Blog of an Elder who had to have an emergency transfer to the Paraguay side of the mission because he was about to be deported from Argentina for a Visa issues. Cross boarder missions probably are an extra burden for the Church Travel Department and the mission offices. The Argentina Santa Fe Mission (formed in 2015 with 3 stakes and 3 districts) could probably could probably take 2-3 of the districts in the Resistencia mission when the mission is realigned.
TLDR
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concise
To clarify: in chapel attendance has lesser expectations now.
For example, most of Chile has 4-5 months of cold/wet weather where the actual chapels without heating are hard to pass 3 hours in. Two makes it more tenable.
For taking the gospel to all nations - Name the two counties in the state of Utah that do not have an organized LDS stake or district. Do they have any church units?
Or in other words, James, it was really demanding to expect thousands of Chileans to sit in unheated pews and cold rooms, often after arriving wet and tired from walking (no cars, little transportation due to cost). It was phyically difficult to go to and be at church, especially in the winter.
Finally, who here has ever attended church services in sub 50, sub 40 degrees for an hour, two hours, three hours? If you did I think you would remember it it especially with elderly, infirm, youth and disabled with you.
(Sorry, not finally). Many people can blame teaching and baptizing policies that were too hasty or unsure in the mass conversion of Chileans until the 2000s. But I am pretty sure that cold, wet winters of Chile combined with little proper church heating had a bit to do with many people not attending and falling away.
Eduardo, I had no idea that you were speaking of the discomfort of meeting conditions, and not what is expected of Church members when they are not in Church. Although I do not have first-hand experience in the matter of meeting in uncomfortable conditions such as what you described, my mother's family, during their time in South Africa, met in many locations, and in one of those, they had to come in early (which entailed an arduous journey one-way) and sweep out beer bottles from the partying in one venue before it was fit for their branch to meet in. My sister and her husband, who lived on the island of St. Kitts and Nevis while my brother-in-law attended medical school, constituted most of the membership of the local branch, which also had to meet many times in less-than-ideal conditions. I have heard reports of many missionary friends of mine that talk about uncomfortable meeting conditions as well. And I have indirect personal experience with a degree of discomfort in meeting conditions. I have spent many Sundays lying in a hospital bed, and having the Sacrament administered to me in my hospital room. My latest such experience occurred in mid-November, during which time I was hooked up to quite a bit of equipment, and had to push past my discomfort and the pain to focus on the ordinance of the Sacrament. Had I known that was the context of your comment, my reply would have been markedly different. I apologize for mistaking what you meant. For anyone else offended by anything I have said, I apologize to you all as well. Any one of you can feel free to bypass any of my comments which, according to the most recent comment by "Anonymous", would fall under the textbook definition of "not concise." Brevity is not my strong suit. Again, my apologies to you all, and to you especially, Eduardo, for any offense I have given.
Back when the Richmond Virginia Temple was announced, one of the of the many excited comments on my mission's Facebook page (I served in Virginia) mentioned that they had a friend or someone they knew who worked in the temple department that knew a temple would be announced there several months beforehand. Based on that, I would suspect it is possible that in some (or maybe most) cases temples are being planned well before they are officially announced. That would make sense since there are many temples that have been announced between sessions of conference or in the case of the Paris France Temple, the local media broke the news of the plan to build the temple before the Church officially announced it.
The site for the San Juan Temple is also located next to an existing chapel and a building that housed the offices for both the local mission and the Caribbean Area. So having an existing site to work with certainly helps in speeding up the process to get the temple built.
Whatever the case is, it is certainly exciting news! Makes me wonder if we may see some of the other temples announced in 2018 have a rendering released and possible groundbreaking this year. Urdaneta has its groundbreaking this Wednesday and Bangkok follows 10 days later. Both Pocatello and now San Juan are anticipated to have a groundbreaking sometime this year. A construction fence is now up around the site for the Brasília temple and, according to a Newsroom article, Elder Anderson mentioned in a meeting with the Vice President of Zimbabwe that the temple in Harare is expected to begin later this year. So that is at least 6 temples which could have a groundbreaking this year.
I can think of half a dozen others (at minimum) which will likely also have a groundbreaking within the next year or two. Particularly if sites are confirmed soon after the temple is announced (as was the case for the Salta and Mendoza Argentina Temples), that speeds things up as well. Many other temples have had a likely or definitive site confirmed. We are likely entering an era when the wait between announcement and groundbreaking for the temples announced by President Nelson is closer to one year than 2-3 years. We may even revert back to the Hinckley-years practice of announcing, constructing, and dedicating a temple can occur in the period of a year or less. If that turns out to be the case, we are sure to see many more temples dedicated in the coming years, perhaps as many or more than were dedicated in the late 1990s and early 2000s. It will be awesome to see it all unfold.
No worries, James. No offense taken. My main wish is that people, especially our Church leaders making policy decisions, think of those with difficulties and try to ameliorate problems. Maybe blogging about it helps? I wonder how it may be in other countries. Each region has its own issues.
Incidentally, I attended the 2 hour 10 minute pilot block in Chile back in 2005. That was after Elder Holland had been there for two years.
I wonder how many chapels he attended in uncomfortable conditions.
Definitely empathize with your discomfort James; I admire your faith, verve, and tenacity, and pray you more health and ease of difficulties.
I don't mind loquaciousness as long ad there is substance, or as my UCLA professor would say, "there is 'there' there."
Happy Sabbath.
Barbara Geddes if you wish to look her up. Incidentally, two childhood friends to possibly look up: Jacob Smith at Northwestern and Joseph Hill in Alberta.
Thank you, Eduardo. It is interesting to observe the degrees to which people in leadership positions do or do not have sufficient sensitivity to those with great difficulties. I have been in wards where the leadership was fully aware of such individuals, but I have also been in wards where the outreach and understanding is severely lacking for those who are struggling a lot. I have often thought that it is easy for any of us (myself included) to see what is and is not working in terms of our individual congregations and to think about how we might do differently than that, if given the chance.
But it is also true that only the Lord knows the circumstances of each individual member and the leaders who have stewardship over them. I am glad He will be the one judging such individuals and situations. Interesting to hear about the pilot Church block in Chile in 2005. My thanks to you also, Eduardo, for your well wishes. Trials persist for me personally, and for my wife, but there is a lot of truth in the phrase: "Trials make our faith grow stronger."
However, that does come with a caveat: That can only happen if we allow it to. I have unfortunately seen far too many who throw in the towel when the difficulties in their own lives become too severe for them to handle, and as a result, choose to abandon their faith instead of using those circumstances as a way to strengthen their faith. And that's always hard to watch. That said, hopefully things are starting to look up. Progress is slow, but remains steady. Thanks again.
Th San Juan temple will be on or near the Trujillo Alto Chapel. That is the address that was on the announcement.
For taking the gospel to all nations - Name the two counties in the state of Utah that do not have an organized LDS stake or district. Do they have any church units?
|My guess is Paiute and Daggett Counties. I have no idea if they have church units. I presume they do. I just know that both counties are extremely small.
phxmars: If you look at the news release again, it actually says that the temple will be built at 123 Calle Ronda Urb Villa Andalucía in the Trujillo Alto area of San Juan, and that the meetinghouse that will be adjacent to it will be built as part of the construction process. There is no meetinghouse currently at that location. But it is very common for the Church to find sufficient land on which to build both a temple and an adjacent meetinghouse. Some have compared the size of this Puerto Rico Temple to the Port-au-Prince Haiti Temple, which could mean it might be constructed more quickly than the 2-year period the Church offered in the release, but I am not so sure about that. Until something more definitive is mentioned, all we do know is the address and what the exterior will look like, that there will be an adjacent meetinghouse, and that construction will be under way on that temple later this year.
But perhaps if most of the temples President Nelson announced last year are on the smaller side of the scale, we may see quite a few of them built and dedicated relatively quickly. I imagine that Puerto Rico's status as a US territory has helped accelerate the approval process. In addition to the already-scheduled groundbreakings for the Urdaneta Philippines and Bangkok Thailand Temples (which will both occur within the next two weeks), we know that ground will be broken at some point this year for the San Juan Puerto Rico Temple and the Pocatello Idaho Temple.
I also found out that the fence recently installed around the Brasilia Brazil Temple is a property fence rather than a construction fence, which means that the groundbreaking for that temple may not be as imminent as any of us recently thought. We do know, however, that the Saratoga Springs Utah Temple is in the government approval phase, so I imagine we will see a groundbreaking for that one later this year as well. And as Elder Andersen told the Vice President of Zimbabwe, the Church plans to break ground for the Harare temple in late 2019. It will be interesting for sure to see which other temples will see construction begin this year.
In the meantime, the Church News and the Newsroom on lds.org have released extensive coverage on the Rome Italy Temple, for which media and VIP tours began earlier today. There is and will be a lot to look forward to in terms of temple developments later this year, and I can't wait to see what's next.
Also, Frederick, you are correct that Daggett and Piute are the two counties here in Utah which do not have a stake. That is confirmed via the web page below:
http://mormon.wikia.com/wiki/Utah_List_of_Stakes_of_the_Church
In case anyone is interested in the mew mission boundaries due to the closing of the Florida Tallahassee an Georgia Macon missions:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10216740169791840&set=gm.10156801859374654&type=3&theater&ifg=1
Tallahassee and Panama City Stakes will be joining the Florida Jacksonville Mission, and the rest of the stakes from Tallahassee will go to Alabama Birmingham. Jacksonville is also absorbing most of the stakes from Georgia Macon.
Funny that of the twelve missions closing, one was my brother's (Macon, Georgia) and another was my brother-in-law's (Utica, New York). In fact, this will be the second time since he served (2002 to 2004) that the Georgia Macon mission has been dissolved. I don't know if the same is true for Utica.
In my mission we would generally leave Church after the second hour if we did not have any investigators there. We also often covered two wards, so we would be in Church 4 hours a Sunday even that way. When we covered just one ward we would normally stay the whole 3 hours.
I personally like that we no longer shunt investigators and new converts off in a seperate class. That system made intergrating new converts into the Church difficult. The new system will call on them to prepare more, but as done Gospel Principals was not really preparing some at all for understanding in the Church.
My impression is that the push is to have church as early as possible and use the rest of the day for religious study. This indicates to me the brethren do not want to use the new schedule as a reason to delay new buildings. It may mean in some places wards will be split sooner where in the past a new building would have been waited on, but I am not even convinced of that.
One of the Draper Stakes in actually in Utah county. I don't remember which one. It was split off from a Alpine Utah Stake a few years back.
The aim is also to clear out buildings much earlier on in the day. I have mentioned before that the Church building to which my ward is assigned is on the smaller side. So only two wards have met in our building during the almost 3.5 years since we moved to this area. The time for the two Church blocks, up through the end of last year, was 9:00 AM for the first, and 1:00 PM for the second. Starting this year, whichever ward has the latest time will now meet at 11:30 AM, which means that the last Church block will be over in the early afternoon hours. I gather that this will enable building resources (primarily electric and utilities) to be conserved in a very practical way.
But we have also been told that the aim in everything the Church does should be with a view of enabling measures which are more geared towards salvation (which we have been told is a personal matter) and exaltation (which, as we've been instructed, is a family matter). The shorter schedule and new resources should enable all of us to increase family unity and spirituality, and focus more fully on making the Sabbath a delight.
Most buildings are set up to handle multiple wards with a three hour block so the transition to the two-hour plan only made things easier, with a half hour between when one ward finishes and another starts while a third is halfway through. One scenario has them going at 9am, 1030am, and noon.
But a few older buildings it is not that simple. At 900 West and 100 North, Provo is a rather old building that can only run one ward at a time. The two-hour plan does make that simpler though, the second ward can run earlier. Two YSA wards use that now.
It's pretty cool that we can compare huge growth spurts of temples in most of our recent memories.
I remember being at that general conference when the mini- temples were first announced. I was hoping that Concepcion would get a temple, as usual, and I was excited to hear that the temple placements were going to the people.
Better to use the term "smaller" rather than "mini", since that was the term President Hinckley used in making the announcement. 5,000-some-odd feet cannot be considered mini. President Hinckley focused on smaller temples in remote areas, President Monson focused his temple plans on having each member within 200 miles of a temple, and President Nelson seems to be moving towards using both metrics. So I think that is additional verification that something big is coming down the pike in the future, whether or not the specific extent of those plans is ever outlined officially by him. And many of the temples announced in recent years have been for nations which have been on previous versions of Matt's list of the top 10 nations with the strongest Church presence that do not have a temple in any phase. All of that will continue, of which I have no doubt.
There have also been lots of periods of time when Church members felt a temple will be built in a certain city, only to have that impression justified by a future official announcement, which will likely also continue to be the case. The Lord is seeing the faith of members worldwide and the way they sacrifice to reach the temple, and is rewarding them for their diligence in that respect, which will also continue to be the case.
Sure, "smaller" versus "mini" is a question that can be debated, but it does not compare to "Mormon" versus "member of Church of Jesus Christ".
The original complaint was against the word "tiny" which, agreed, does not capture an accurate description of a structure bigger than 5,000 square feet.
The ultimate measure of a temple for me is not square footage but functionalty. The Philly Temple is great but it cannot handle the traffic that is required while the DC and Raleigh temples are down.
And Philadelphia is not a smaller temple, but its limits are much more pronounced than what is done at Washington D.C.
My parents building can not handle overlap not because of building size but because the parking lot is too small to handle more than one congregation at once.
Post a Comment