Thursday, October 31, 2019

October 2019 Monthly Newsletter

Click here to access the October 2019 monthly newsletter for www.cumorah.com.

58 comments:

Reed said...

Please explain your corruption index. What does "29" mean? What is high and low? How is
it measured. I thoroughly enjoy your reports and read every one of them! Reed

James G. Stokes said...

While I am not sure what Reed means by a corruption index, I appreciated this newsletter Matt. Thanks for all the wonderful work you do. That said, I had a question on my mind that I wanted to ask about here. I know that you, Matt, have done a new version of your list of the top 10 nations with the strongest Church presence without a temple every time a new set of temples is announced. And since Papua New Guinea and Sierra Leone, which, per your newsletter, ranked first and second on the April list, I am assuming there will be changes in that list, whenever you might be able to publish your next edition thereof. Am I correct in assuming that all other nations just moved up two spots on that list, with two new ones which have not been on any previous list added to it, or will some nations have swapped places with others on that list? If anyone else has the answer to this question, you are, of course, welcome to weigh in on this, but I did wonder how the latest announcements and the recent growth may have impacted that list. My thanks to you, Matt, for your continued diligence in reporting on all matters relating to Church growth. Thank you.

Chris D. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
coachodeeps said...

Here's a couple of questions about the countries with the most stakes/districts before a temple was announced. What are the 10 countries that had the most stakes/districts before a temple was announced for the country for the first time? And how many did the cities have at time of announcement? The ones on the list Chris just shared only have 3-6. Those seems fairly low, but perhaps that is how each country has been prior to the first temple announcement.

coachodeeps said...

Not cities, but countries.

James G. Stokes said...

Hey, Chris! Thanks for the answer to my question, which served as a springboard for further personal research I did on my end. Based on, past histories of that top ten list, when Matt does the newest version thereof, I believe the top ten nations will be listed in the following order: Kiribati, Uganda, Mongolia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Malaysia, Vanuatu, Indonesia, and Micronesia. My research shows that a few of the nations have switched places since April's list, based on the increase in Church membership and the total number of congregations I was able to track down.

Of course, since Matt is the expert, once that list is published here, I'd welcome his corrections or clarifications on the data I have tracked down based on your information, Chris. I will also be doing further research into the relevant distances involved for the Saints in each nation to get to each temple to which they are currently assigned, and I will hope to post some additional analysis in that respect on my own blog ASAP after Matt posts his latest list here. In the meantime, Chris, thanks again for providing the foundation and basis on which I could do further research. I appreciate it.

James G. Stokes said...

Chris, I just realized something, which may change the game. Micronesia had a temple announced in October 2018 for Yigo Guam (which is now in the early phases of construction), so apparently that nation does not count in our consideration here. If we exclude Micronesia, what would be the next nation we can look at? Thanks.

And, coachodeeps, I hope Chris and/or Matt can answer your question, because I have no idea on any of that.

James G. Stokes said...

After taking two hours to search through the relevant options (which involved a country-by-country examination of each general global subdivision of the Church), I believe I am able to answer my question. Bearing in mind that Matt also looks at Church membership when formualting each top ten list, it appears that the two nations that may be included on the next edition of that top ten list for the first time this go-round may be the Republic of the Congo and Indonesia. So Matt's next list of the top ten nations may include, in this order: Kiribati, Uganda, Mongolia, Liberia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Malaysia, Vanuatu, Republic of the Congo, and Indonesia. That's what my research showed, Chris. Let me know if you'd like any of the more specific data I compiled while researching all of that. Thanks again.

Eduardo said...

Any temple location progress in Russia? How about prospects for the Baltics or Poland?

James G. Stokes said...

Eduardo, my research indicates that the Ruissa Temple will take a qhile to get construction underway, and also that when the location is officially announced, there is around a 85% chance it will be built in Moscow. And I am considering Warsaw Poland as a temple prospect for my April 2020 General Confernece list. Thanks.

Bryan Dorman said...

This is an interesting story about the obstacles the Church faces concerning the building of a temple in Russia.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2019/09/10/building-temple-russia/

The Russian Orthodox Church basically rules over life there and there is a governmental decree that establishes that government officials MUST have access to each and every building within the federation for any time and for any reason. That in itself would prohibit a temple from being constructed in Russia until that law is repealed (Right now, there is more likelihood of a temple being constructed inside the Haram al-Sharif mosque in Mecca than that happening).

Russian law refers to four faiths as the traditional faiths of Russia: Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism. Other faiths are referred to as minority or nontraditional faiths. The traditional faiths and especially Orthodox Christianity has always enjoyed preferential treatment. Even Islam, which is listed as a traditional faith, has problems getting permits for mosques to be constructed as there are FOUR mosques in all of Moscow for the use of 1 MILLION Muslims. Imagine all the hoops the minority faiths have to go through.

We have something like 24,000 members in all of Russia. Less than a tenth of the average number of Muslims per mosque in Moscow.

If a temple goes up soon, it DEFINITELY won't be in Moscow. Perhaps in Saratov, or somewhere nearby where tolerance for other religions is a lot greater (looking at you Kazan).

But until that law requiring government access to all buildings is torpedoed, or at least until an exception is made for specific religious structures, I could guarantee that a temple WON'T be built there.

John said...

I've heard the government access story regarding Italy, France and Zimbabwe. They all have temples at least announced.

Eric S. said...

James, in addition to the greater geographic region in Oceania called Micronesia which Guam is a part of, there is also the country of Micronesia. More accurately called the Federated States of Micronesia.

This the country that Chris is referring to on his list, which Guam is not part of.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_States_of_Micronesia

James Anderson said...

There are procedures for when there is a medical emergency--I know of one story where someone went and died during a session. Those manning certain places at the temple know what to do.

All temples have a two week maintenance closure, part of this is likely to allow for occasional building inspections, and inspections of the systems used for electrical, heat, etc., closure dates are obviously public for the members' information but this also helps all the others.

PS: Saw a Youtube video for a new extension to a computer game, American Truck Simulator, this time it is Utah, has St. George, and they placed for claiity although it is really not as close, the St. George Temple, in the game. Manti may be in there as they have all of US-89, what others may be in are not yet known.

Eduardo said...

Haram as-sharif is in Jerusalem.

JMR said...

James Anderson, I am a temple worker in the Mount Timpanogos Utah Temple and in one of our training sessions we discussed a situation in this temple a few years ago where there was a patron who was being belligerant and acting in an irreverant and apostate way. The session was stopped, all patrons (except for this woman) were removed, and the police were called to respond. When they arrived at the front door a member of the temple presidency escorted them up to the endowment room where she was handcuffed, placed under arrest, and taken away. Also, fire marshalls regularly come into the temple to do regular inspections. A member of the temple presidency is usually always present and aware of these situations.

James G. Stokes said...

Eric, thank you for that clarification on the FSM. I appreciate it. That makes a lot of sense. As to the temple in Russia, I know that conventional wisdom (such as the rationales set forth in that Salt Lake Tribune article) would suggest that the Russian temple could not possibly be built in Moscow, and that it will take a while for construction on it to get underway. While that may be true, the article also cites Church members in the area who fullly belive that "with God, nothing is impossible". And we have definitely seen lots of examples lately that prove that the ways and thoughts of the Lord truly are higher than those of man. We have a European apostle in Elder Uchtdorf who may be able to affect the timing whereby progress can be made. We have a Russian citizen currently serving in the Europe East Area Presidency as an area seventy. And we have a prophet who has boldly declared that, despite any possible obstacles, there will be a temple in Russia. According to Elder Uchtdorf, when the Russian Saints are ready for their temple, a way will be open for it to be built. And there are many rationales I could cite contrary to the information in that SL Trib article that indicate that Moscow may not only still be a viable contender for a temple in that city, but that Moscow will likely be the chosen location. For now, though, I will leave my comment on this note: All miracles in the Church are wrought by faith on the part of the members through which such miracles occur.The announcement of the Russian temple was such an act of faith, as was Elder Uchtdorf's apostolic promise to the Russian Saints that the way will be opened for that temple to be built where the Lord wants it to be built when the time is right and the members in that nation are ready for it. I rest on those apostolic promises, and would recommend that we all do the same.

Chris D. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
James G. Stokes said...

Chris, thanks for this additional comment. One of my own in return: For a few of these nations, I was able to pull additional data from the "Reaching the Nations" profiles at cumorah.com. And based on the information I found there, there are more members and a higher number of congregations in both Indonesia and the Republic of the Congo than there appear to be in the FSM. So for that reason, I'd assume that the two new nations added to the top ten list when Matt gets it done would be Indonesia and the Republic of the Congo. Hope this information is helpful to all who read it.

Christopher said...

My great grandfather was a member of the temple presidency in Cardston Alberta Canada in the 1930s. My grandmother tells me that he used to give tours of the temple to visiting dignitaries who were not members. I don't know how the policies have changed over the years but there is some wiggle room about nonmembers having access to the temple in certain situations and still maintain its sanctity.

Christopher Nicholson said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
L. Chris Jones said...

Even in the U.S. are there cases when nonmembers may need access to the temple. For example, a temple patron may have a medical emergency and paramedics may need to come in. What about regular fire or other government inspections? How often do buildings (including temples) in the United States (and maybe other countries) need to be inspected? I am sure that not every jurisdiction has a temple worthy person available to do a fire inspections. In order to keep ordinances sacred, could inspections be done when no ordinances are being performed such as Mondays when most temples are closed or after hours or during the semi-annual closures for cleaning and maintenance? Is there a way to do this without defiling sanctity? Could there be mini-rededications for such purposes.

James Anderson said...

That access matter is what I was referring to earlier, and there was the matter, and I do not know what exactly did, where patron just simply died during a session.

In Utah it is fairly simple, but in other areas I would think that needed government inspections would happen on days the temple is closed like on Mondays or cleaning/maintenance periods.

Don't forget mechanical system breakdowns too, although much of that is out of view, repairmen can probably be admitted even when the temple is operating where systems are away from the areas where ordinances are done.

Reed said...

Adding to what JMR said, I worked on the recommend desk at the SL Temple for several years. Whenever there was a medical emergency, we immediately let in whoever showed up, whether member or not. There was a room near the baptistry where those having problems were moved---if that was possible---and the emergency crews came in the baptistry entry and helped out. But if the problem was anywhere else in the temple, the emergency crews, with or without recommend, were immediately taken to that spot to do what they needed to do. We never had a fire, but firemen would have been admitted the same way if they had shown up.

James G. Stokes said...

As I have mentioned previously, I worked at the Mount TImpanogos Utah Temple for a period of six years. During that time, whenever emergencies or safety questions came up, the temple presidency had been able to speak to the Fire Marshal, who in that case happened to be a Church member. At one point, we had roughly 115-120 patrons waiting at the end of the night to attend a session. Shift leaders wondered whether the best course would be to split them into two smaller sessions, or just try to get them all into a single session (which would be faster). On that occasion, the fire marshal just happened to be one of the patrons waiting to do a session, and, as a result, gave the safety approval for my shift leaders to accommodate all patrons in a single final session for the day, as long as it could be done in such a way that the exits were not blocked. That is what wound up happening in that case.

On another note, with the information Chris shared in a prior comment in mind, I wanted to provide a look at the information for Micronesia vs. the information for both Indonesia and the Republic of the Congo. In June of this year, Matt provided a link to the updated Reaching the Nations profile for the Federated States of Micronesia. I am assuming that the information provided in that profile is more current than the year-end 2018 numbers released by the Church. According to that updated profile, there are 6,238 Church members living there, and a total of 22 congregations.

Matt also did a new Reaching the Nations profile for Indonesia recently, which was mentioned on this blog in mid-September. Assuming the numbers in that updated profile are the latest applicable ones, there were 7,477 Church members and a total of 24 congregattions at the time that profile update was noted. And given that it appears that the most current statistical information we have for the Republic of the Congo was the updated year-end 2018 statistics released earlier this year, which shows that there were 7,903 members of the Church served by a total of 24 congregations. So in terms of membership and congregations, which are the two chief statistics Matt appears to use in determining which nations make that top ten list, I'd assume that the higher numbers at play for the Republic of the Congo and for Indonesia by comparison to the Federated States of Micronesia, that it will be the former two that are given priority as the newest locations on the next top ten list, whenever that might occur. Hope this clarifying information is helpful to all who read it.

John Pack Lambert said...

The growth in Mindanao and Palawan is quite encouraging.

There has been significant unit growth in Utah. Two new Tongan language wards were formed in the Salt Lake area, as well as serveral other new units in various parts of the state.

California recently saw two new Spanish language branches organized, as has the Lancaster Pennsylvania Stake.

John Pack Lambert said...

Guam is not part of the nation of Micronesia.

Canada had 3 stakes before a temple was announced. Brazil and Mexico I believe both hit 100 stakes before getting a second temple announced, but I would have to look deep to find their numbers before their first temple. Switzerland, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and New Zealand all had no stakes when their first temple was announced.

I will look into this matter more in the future.

John Pack Lambert said...

Actually, no, having a law that degrees government access does not stop the building of a temple. Mexico and Guatemala had such laws at least when the first temples were built. The theory was that if the sanctity of the temple was ever broken than it could be rededicated. As far as I know the government never chose to enforce such a law.

It is government stalling on approvals that will hold up the temple in Russia, and this will be more due to not paying bribes than anything else.

John Pack Lambert said...

Something I was once told at the Detroit Temple suggested that they have a person of another faith enter the temple to do inspections weekly, but I may have misunderstood or misremember. I am also not sure where exactly they are. I also have a friend who at her wedding their of a different faith photographer got past the reccomend desk. Incidents like that may be part of why they enclosed the front porch area so there is now more interior assembly area before one enters the temple.

Christopher Nicholson said...

There's also the fact that it's not unheard of for people to sneak into temples with fraudulently obtained recommends. If we had to rededicate a temple every time that happened, it would be a real hassle.

Christopher Nicholson said...

There's also the fact that it's not unheard of for people to sneak into temples with fraudulently obtained recommends. If we had to rededicate a temple every time that happened, it would be a real hassle.

John Pack Lambert said...

Today we had a special stake conference with President Ballard as the main visiting authority. He was primarily in Michigan to conduct meetings with the two coordinating councils, and also held a conference with the Michigan Detroit Mission.

At the stake conference they called a new stake young men's presidency. The new stake young men's president is a member of the high council, but his two conselors are not. They have not yet redone the stake sunday school presidency to fit this pattern.

In his talk President Ballard mentioned autziliaries, which per what Elder Cook said is no longer the accepted term.

On an unrelated note, the fee that is charged per boy to belong to scouts by the national BSA organization has gone up 80%. This may make migration of boys into troops not sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints even less likely. The fee went from $33 to $60. This is not by any means the whole cost of belong to scouts. I think many people do not realize how much cost the Church covered in the way it ran scouting. Most other troops the boys pay a stanadard fee for activities, a standard fee for awards and patches, and some other cost. Some councils also charge a fee. It can run to $200 a boy or more, not couting the $95 for a scout "uniforms" (read shirt), and the cost of going to summer camp.

Oddly enough the cost for leaders to register rose from $33 to $36. Why leader registration was not pushed up as much as the cost for boys, I do not know. I am going to write a few more thooughts on this at my blog, so if you want to see more analysis go there.

James G. Stokes said...

JPL, interesting to hear what President Ballard said in your stake conference today. In reference to his using the term "auxiliaries", which, as you noted, was no longer correct per the information shared in General Conference by Elder Cook, a thought did occur to me: Although Church leaders have encouraged the implementation of the changes announced during that conference to be done ASAP in each congregation and congregational group, they did note that, if needed, local leaders would have until the end of this year to implement those changes.

While delays in that respect are being discouraged, it did occur to me that President Ballard in that case perhaps used the terminology with which most people in your stake would have been familiar in view of the fact that the implementation of those changes is still pending. If that is the reasoning behind what he said, the rationale could be that President Ballard took an approach of which the Savior would approve: adapting what he said in his message to the understanding of those to whom he spoke. It would not surprise me if that is exactly what happened and why it occurred.

But I can guarantee that, once this year is over, the former terminology will be retired in all references. When it comes to the general level of Church government, it is easy to make that change in terminology from what it once was (as evidenced by the fact that what was formerly known as "The Sustaining of Church Officers" is now known as "Sustaining of General Authorities, Area Seventies, and General Officers of the Church". Local-level changes, which are taking and may yet take longer to implement, might necessitate visiting leaders using the terminology with which members are familiar, and which are, for the time being, colloquially correct. Hope that helps.

miro said...

I too had stake conference yesterday. In my stake all the members of the young men's presidency are members of the high council. High counselor responsible for young men (president), young women (first counselor) and primary (second counselor)

Responsibilities where not assigend yet.
My stake is outside the US.

James G. Stokes said...

Hello again, everyone! New information received through the comments on my blog today indicates that sites have been acquired for the Managua Nicaragua, San Pedro Sula Honduras, and Coban Guatemala Temples, and that each of them could have a groundbreaking announced during the first half of 2020. That information came from a Church member living in the Central America Area, who in some way heard it from the Central American Area Presidency. So that brings the total number of temples that could have a groundbreaking at some point within the next year to 14 or 15, which will be huge. Hope this information is helpful to you all.

James Anderson said...

San Pedro Sula should be a little larger than Coban, Coban may have two stakes and a district with not a lot of extant growth.

Coban's district will likely include possibly Huehuetenango, a town in between that is home to the Cunen district, or is that the branch name. The other stake is in Coban itself. There is not a lot in Quiche and Alta Verapaz departments which explains low growth in the region of those two departments. What's ultimately built may be the size of San Juan PR.

San Pedro Sula has multiple stakes, and east of there two more and the main highway does not have much connecting south of those two cities. More on the ordeer of maybe slightly larger than Kinshasa but could end up larger.

James G. Stokes said...

James Anderson, my understanding is that the three temples in question will not only help alleviate the strain on the other temples to which their cities are currently assigned, but that likely the entire composition of most temple districts throughout Central America will be impacted through the construction of each of these temples. I also know that the temples in San Pedro Sula and Coban will particularly alleviate the strain on each of the prior two temples in both nations. So I have a feeling that the way in which the boundaries will be redrawn once each of these temples is completed will be unexpected and perhaps unprecedented.

If my Central American contact is correct, and each of these temples do have a groundbreaking next year, then I could each dedicated in 2022 or 2023, depending on their size and how construction does or does not progress. I can't wait to see it all unfold. But, aside from the Puebla Mexico Temple, I could see at least 9 temples haivng a groundbreaking between now and the end of June 2020. There may be more than that, however, depending on how fast Church leaders are able to move things along in that respect. Hope these additional observations, such as they are, are hlepful.

Eduardo said...

It strikes me as very ironic that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is very simple at its core (love God and love one another) yet there is so much of the devil in the details.
It works for some and their appetite for novelty and nuance, and repels or bores others.
It is great that the Church is still expanding despite the high expectations of membership and the extensive learning curve to grasp.
Africa is robust, as it is apparently for a few other faiths.

Bryan Dorman said...

Russia still will take a long time imo though now after looking up information from the airports, I am seeing Samara as another option.

Samara is centrally located between all the congregations in Russia. Though it is only a district, the airport goes to more destinations than Saratov, in fact, it goes to pretty much every city within the temple district minus Vladivostok (which I would think would remain in Korea's district given that Seoul is MUCH closer than Moscow, Samara, or Saratov.

Another plus is more diversity in the region as there are more religious minorities there with a better and more harmonious presence. Up in Kazan' (a city that has a branch that belongs to the Samara district) there is a Temple of All Religions currently under construction. Jehovah's witnesses have had problems there, but then again, they have had problems in all the country as they are now a banned organization there.

Then again I might be surprised and the temple ends up being built in Moscow or St Petersburg.

But just some food for thought.

James G. Stokes said...

Eduardo, it was well-observed in the Book of Mormon that the people in the days of Moses who were bit by the serpent had a very simple task to perform: looking at a brazen serpent. But because of the "easiness and the simpleness of the way", many failed to do so. We also have the biblical example of Naaman, who, when afflicted with leprosy, was instruced by the prophet Elisha to wash in the River Jordan seven times. At first he refused, but his servant pointed out that if Elisha had asked him to do some great thing, he would have done it, then asked him why he wasn't doing the simple thing the prophet instructed him to do. Only then did Naaman humble himself.

I think that, in a lot of ways, so many of us overcomplicate gospel living. There are simple and basic things we are asked to do, but so many (including at times we ourselves) overcomplicate every one of those things we have been asked to do. And what we have seen President Nelson do is to look at what is needed with precision inspiration and strip away Church programs to what is absolutely needed so that the focus can be shifted to highlighting the simple things. But there are those who at times lose sight of that, and continue to overcomplicate things. And that may be the root cause of the problems you described in your comment.

James G. Stokes said...

Bryan D, I know a lot of people have offered the opinion that the Russia temple may take a while. And if we are just looking at the political and infrastructural situation of that nation, along with how faith groups are regarded in general, then I could see why many people seem to think that. But I know that in 2017 and 2018, if anyone had told me that, within a year, temples would be announced in India and in Russia, I would have (and actually did) dismiss that as impossible for the most part, since both prospects seemed a decade or two out based on what my personal study on that showed. I was grateful to be proven wrong in that respect.

In India, since last year's announcement, the prophet, the apostles, and other leaders indicated that when the Saints were ready for tat temple, things would move forward for it. And in May of this year, Bishop Davies noted that the designs and location for that temple would hopefully be released before the end of this year. So things are moving forward for that one well ahead of what any of us (myself included) could have expected or anticipated.

Earlier this year, Elder Uchtdorf commented on the Russia temple, promising the Saints there that it would be coming when they were ready for it, but also noting it might take a while. My point in laying all of this out is to note that, since things transpired so swiftly for the Bengaluru India Temple (with President Nelson announcing it unexpectedly two days after being prompted to do so), I don't think we can rule out a similar miraculous hastening of some kind for the Russia Temple.

Above and beyond that, however, when it comes to the location for it, due to the work I do on my blog, I have developed a mini-network of contacts for temple information. One such contact is someone who is familiar with temple matters due to having worked on several such projects for the Church. According to information I received from him (and he has been privy to meetings where such things were discussed), it is almost certain that, however long it may take to build the Russia Temple, Moscow will be the location for it. That is, of course, subject to all of the relevant approvals and the inspriation of the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and Presiding Bishopric, who would have the final say in that regard.

James G. Stokes said...

Unless and until it is otherwise noted, based on what this individual told me, I am going to assume that the information I have received is correct. And although I don't anticothipate approval or a groundbreaking for at least another year or two at minimum, I for one would not rule out the Lord and the Brethren (especially President Nelson and Elder Uchtdorf) somehow getting all the pieces in place to eliminate all obstacles to the Russia Temple ASAP. "If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth." And I for one very much doubt that the Lord would have inspired our prophet to announce a temple in Russia if there would be impossible obstacles to that prospect. Will it take a bit longer than some other temples might? Probably. But will it be half a decade or longer before anything further is done on it? I for one prefer to believe that when the Saints in Russia are ready for it, the prospect will be able to move forward swiftly, just as was the case with the Bengaluru India Temple.

I understand the worries about any potential delays for that temple, but the Lord has worked miracles in the past that no one could have seen as being possible, and yet, they were done in His great majesty and power. I have no doubts whatsoever that the Lord can work the miracles needed to get things going with the Russia Temple far sooner than any of us expect. And I find it no accident that that temple was announced by a prophet who, prior to being set apart and ordained as such, had direct oversight for Eastern European nations (including Russia) and may thus have connections from that period of time that could enable the process to press along much more swiftly than any of us can currently foresee or anticipate. I intend no offense here, and hope none is taken. I also similarly hope these thoughts are helpful to all who may read them, and not just to those to whom they have been addressed.

Eduardo said...

Russia is very enigmatic, and holds puzzles to humanity. With a strong bevy of great writers over the centuries, many of them were religious and thought about the "church" and humanity. The country and its empire went communist in 1917, embracing the Marxist revolution, which at its core was supposed to alleviate poverty and bring equity to all.
They stultified the major religion, Russian Orthodox, and then clamped down on all religions.
They are battling royally with religious freedom today. Better than Israel or most Muslim countries today.
I wonder if the new temple and the Spirit of God and Elijah might impact the Russians in ways that the temple in former East Germany affected that great people.
As Russian leaders learn more about the Restored Church, perhaps their hearts will be softened like judgmental leaders in Ghana did a generation ago.

Christopher Nicholson said...

Ironically, the Russian Orthodox Church is now once again a huge part of Russian identity and is a major active player in the current discrimination against every other religion, especially American ones (and for obvious reasons, even faithful Latter-day Saints in Russia openly call theirs an American church). The whole spiel about anti-terrorism measures is an obvious smokescreen. Of course, even before the latest anti-religious freedom laws, our church wasn't exactly thriving in Russia, and I'm surprised anyone felt threatened enough by it to take such drastic measures.

JMR said...

I believe that the adversary does whatever he can to thwart the work of God around the world. If it masquerades as an anti-terrorism law or "nationalism", he doesn't care. The truth often stirs up darkness and animosity. Just my two cents.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

Any new units created on Nov. 3rd?

miro said...

I read today in the german Liahona (Ensign) in the local news part, that the Trier Branch in Germany (Heidelberg stake) was reinstated last May. The Article had a picture of there first meeting and the branch president called was mentioned. But on the church's meeting house locator and in CDOL in find no evidence of the exestance of that branch. Maybe the branch was reinstated as a group and the article writer did not make the distinction.

Eric S. said...

Site announced for the Washington County Temple!

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/temple-site-announced-for-washington-county-utah-temple

coachodeeps said...

It will be in St. George, 5th city to have a 2nd temple in its boundaries. It will be 10-15 minutes away from the original St. George Temple. This is a great location. I think another could be announced in Washington City or Hurricane within 7 years. The area is growing quite rapidly.

James G. Stokes said...

coachodeeps, I have previously referenced on my blog something that Elder Steven E. Snow, a St. George native, said while presiding at a stake conference in St. George a while ago. He said that the Temple Department Executive Director (who at that time was Elder Larry Y. Wilson) told him that, based on the relevant Church growth discussions at headquarters regarding southern Utah, a third temple would be needed to serve the Washington County area within So the next several years. So I'd anticipate that the announcement of such a propsect could happen within the next 3-5 years.

In conjunction with this announcement, in the comment threads of my blog post on this development, I posted some thoughts about whether a different name for that temple could be announced and, if that happens, what it could be. This is a verbatim copy of the relevant part of what I shared there: "First of all, in the second temples that have been or are being constructed, the naming conventions for them have been markedly different. Neither temple in South Jordan bears the name of that city, with the first being known as the Jordan River Utah Temple, and the second being known as the Qquirrh Mountain Utah Temple. We also have the Provo Utah and Provo City Center Temples, the Lima Peru and Lima Peru Los Olivos Temples, and the Manila Philippines Temple and its' counterpart, for which an official name is still pending. For that second Manila temple, as I have previously mentioned, I believe it will perhaps be known as the Muntinlupa City Philippines Temple.

"So with some of these second temples paying homage to the city in which it is built, and with others having nothing in connection therewith, given the location of this temple, I am not convinced that the Washington County name will stick, which seems to be the general consensus in things I have read online today in connection with the location announcement.

"So what could it be called? If the name of the city remains in the name of the temple, it could be known as the St. George Utah Washington FIelds Temple. But if the Church decides that is too lengthy a name, I could see the name being announced as the Washington Fields Utah Temple, which would be more concise and uniquely suited to the area in which it will be built.

"At this point, we don't have any indication from the First Presidency that the temple will be given a different name than the one by which it is now known. But if that happens, those are the two possible new names I could see for it. Time will tell. Hope these musings, such as they are, are helpful to you all." I express the same hope here.

But we have no firm confirmation that more official names will be nannounced for either of the second temples in Manila Philippines and St. George Utah. Beyond my own study on the matter, I can't tell what (if anything) might be done. Just some food for thought, for whatever it may be worth to anyone who reads it here.

John Pack Lambert said...

I am not sure saying that St. George is the 5th city with multiple temples is justified yet. I am not sure the two Manilla Temples will actually both be in the same city.

James G. Stokes said...

JPL, I can understand why confusion exists on this point. You are slightly correct. The two Manila temples will not be in the same city, but the Manila and Greater Manila Philippines Temples are both based out of Metro Manila, which is a single administrative region of the Philippines. And the two cities are barely 20 miles apart. So as far as the Church's definition is concerned, for all intents and purposes, the temple to be built in Muntinlupa City is the second temple in the Manila Area, so that absoutely counts as far as the parameters we are considering are concerned.

Also, just another note, technically Orem and Provo are in the same metropolitan area as well, which means that the newly-announced Orem Utah Temple will be the third therein. Aside from that, one last note for Matt. It appears that the above comment left by monica may be spam. FWIW, just my additional thoughts on recent comments here.

James G. Stokes said...

Another quick note on the two Manila temples. The official news release shared when the Greater Manila Philippines Temple notes the following: "A temple to be built in the greater Manila, Philippines, area will mark the second temple in Manila." Since the Church has not subsequently clarified or retractred that part of the news release, it is obvious that the Church considers that temple as Manila's second. 'Nuff said.

James G. Stokes said...

Also, in these 3 news releases about Nelsonian temple announcements, the reference is again made to 2 Manila temples:

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/new-temples-april-2018-general-conference

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/temples-announced-october-2018-general-conference

http://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/eight-new-temples-april-2019-general-conference

John Pack Lambert said...

The Provo Metro Area is co-terminous with Utah County, so the Orem Temple will be the 6th temple in that Metro Area.

James G. Stokes said...

The cities in Juab County (in which, of course, no temples have been built yet) are included in that metro area as well. It appears that, at least in the United States, the metro areas are far bigger than I originally anticipated. Hard to imagine. I will be interested to see which United States cities get temples next go-round.

John Pack Lambert said...

I had always seen Provo metro considered coterminous with Utah county. Metro areas are tricky. It might be more useful to look at urbanized areas. Although my cousin who lives in Juab County has a husband who commutes to Utah county.

James G. Stokes said...

JPL, according to a few sources I found (not just Wikipedia), in Utah (and perhaps in other states) certain metro areas can encompass parts or all of 2 (or at times, even 3) counties. I am not sure how this would work in larger states like California, but that appears to be the case through most of Utah. The Salt Lake City metro area, as another example, comprises Salt Lake and Tooele Counties. And apparently those metro areas are the next division of statistical areas.

I found out that the Salt Lake City-Provo-Orem, UT Combined Statistical Area comrpises 3 major metropolitan areas (Ogden-Clearfield, Provo-Orem, and 2 micropolitan areas: Heber City and Summit Park. All told, the combined Statistical Area in question comprises the following counties: Box Elder, Davis, Juab, Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, Utah, Wasatch, and Weber Counties. Again, I am not sure how to compare or contrast that to other parts of the United States or elsewhere in the world, but this is what I could find regarding the areas with which I am most familiar. Hope this information is helpful in putting the current conversatiosn into cotext.