This morning, the Church announced plans to build a temple in Ephraim, Utah. The new temple was announced due to modifications with the upcoming renovation of the Manti Utah Temple in order to better preserve the pioneer craftsmanship of this early temple. The Manti Utah Temple was the third temple dedicated in Utah in 1888. The Ephraim Utah Temple is anticipated to be approximately the same size of the Brigham City Utah Temple which is about 36,000 square feet. The new temple is expected to service 30,000 Latter-day Saints and have four, 30-seat endowment rooms, three sealing rooms, and one baptistry. Moreover, the Church plans to schedule endowment sessions every 30 minutes once the temple is completed.
This announcement was a complete surprise to me, and it is not just because of the timing of the temple announcement on a Saturday not during a General Conference weekend (and less than a month after the most recent General Conference). Ephraim and Manti are less than 10 miles apart from one another. The new temple will likely include only six stakes in the area, including three stakes in Ephraim (two of which are young single adult [YSA] stakes for Snow College). President Nelson referenced Latter-day Saint young adults who attend Snow College as some of the beneficiaries for the new temple. The current Manti Utah Temple district includes 23 stakes in central Utah. It was a major surprise to me that a new temple was announced for Ephraim, but there remains no temple for Latter-day Saints who live in Price (five stakes in the area) or for the three stakes south of Price (Castle Dale, Ferron, and Huntington). The last time the Church announced a new temple not during a General Conference weekend was the Paris France Temple in July 2011.
The new temple will be the Church's 27th temple in Utah and the 252nd temple in the worldwide Church.
37 comments:
This is definitely a pleasant surprise! Glad to hear that the pioneer craftsmanship of Manti will be preserved.
Fun fact, this is now the fourth "E" temple (Edmonton, Elko, Ephraim, Eugene). Three of those were announced just within the last month. :)
This is crazy!
My mother informed me that a lot of people were gathering signatures to try and persuade the church to preserve the murals, so this is a big win!
I wonder how directly related to the mural removal backlash this announcement is. Could this reflect a greater willingness among the brethren to respond to the requests of members and reformers?
This opens up some things regarding the Utah temples dynamic.
Temples and colleges, there were other obvious ones, here is what I have
Provo was second, by BYU and on property BYU originally owned.
Orem: By UVU
Logan is close to USU, Smithfield will see some from students.
Taylorsville, just west of SLCC, a large college in Salt Lake.
Salt Lake, not that far from the U of U, also by Ensign College, itself a very old school,
Cedar City, near Southern Utah University
Two St. George temples, both not all that far from the soon to be renamed Dixie State
Ephraim, announced today and one thing I saw so far says it may be 'within walking distance for students'
We know Price has the College of Eastern Utah. How big of a factor are students there? How many stakes otherwise close by?
Any others I might have missed?
Although the announcement says the official site location will be announced later, it also states they hope it will be within reasonable walking distance for Many members and students. What church properties (or potential property for sale) near Snow College that might meet the term "walking distance"? It could be in the same side of the college where most student housing may be. I assume this will also reduce the need for some of the parking space and reduce the size of the needed lot. I also hope that Snow College may add more four year programs to encourage students to stay longer. Think they already have one or two bachelor degrees. But is is still largely only a two year school.
The Church seems to try to say the Paris France Temple was officially announced in general conference and so they seem to want to consider Trujillo Peru announced in December 2008 the last not announced in general conference.
Reading through the Deseret News article there are mentions to the fact that the Manti Temple requires going up stairs to move from room to room. Evidently many elderly in the area travel to Payson Utah Temple an hours drive away because the movement from room to room up stairs is too physically demanding.
It was evidently to meet these physical demands that the original plan was to remove the murals and go to fixed endowment presentation. On further consideration maybe in part from what was learned while working on renovating Salt Lake City it was decided to preserve the existing temple as much as possible. So essentially Rphraim Temple mainly exists as an accommodation to those who find Manti Temple not accessible.
If you look at the announcement as only secondarily a temple announcement but primarily an announcement that the original pioneer architecture and murals of the Manti temple will be retained, the timing makes total sense. Since first announcing plans to gut much of the Manti temple a some weeks ago the church has received significant blowback, so it seems the decision has been made to preserve the existing interior. Presumably such a decision still requires temple capacity to be added, hence the announcement of a temple in Ephraim.
As for why Ephraim and not Price however, I do not know.
The announcement said they hope to make it within "Walking distance for Many members and many students." I want trying guess possible locations using Google maps to eye vacant lots within a few blocks of Snow College campus. In particular the the East side that appears closer to the most student Housing. Using satellite view I can see a few possible locations, some adjacent to existing meetinghouses. I think it needs to be on a good street to make it easy to get to for the community as well.
For years, my friends who predict population growth have said the that Wasatch "ring" counties will be the next to see explosive growth. What are the ring counties?
The Wasatch Front is Weber, Davis, Salt Lake and Utah Counties. The ring counties are the counties surrounding the Wasatch Front. They are Box Elder, Cache, Morgan, Summit, Wasatch, Sanpete, Juab and Tooele counties. Right now, 5 of the ring counties are seeing significant growth: Box Elder, Cache, Tooele, Summit and Wasatch. The other ring counties: Morgan, Juab and Sanpete are going to be next.
A temple in Ephraim is simply early, but for me, not entirely unexpected.
If any of us are prone to dismiss questioning or criticizing the Brethren's decisions as automatic apostasy, I hope we will remember this experience in the future. No one can possibly expect me to believe this change of plans isn't a direct result of the backlash over losing the Manti murals.
Jim Anderson, the ogden and Layton temples are near the two main campuses of Weber state university. Westminster college in salt lake is closest to the salt lake temple. I think those are the only ones that were missing from your list.
@ Eric S. -- I love that you highlighted the four "E" temples. I was going to do the same thing. :)
@JPL -- Not counting the Paris Temple, then I think the Payson Temple is the last temple announced outside of General Conference. It was announced January 25, 2010. The Deseret News got it incorrect in their article.
@Jim Anderson
Good list. I was just thinking about this same thing.
LDS Business College is also just down the way from the Salt Lake Temple.
Ogden Temple - Weber State & Ogden-Weber Technical College (both just a few miles away)
Outside of Utah:
Rexburg Temple - BYU Idaho
Laie Hawaii Temple - BYU Hawaii
Idaho Falls Temple - College of Eastern Idaho (a few miles away)
There's probably more in other states/countries.
I tell you what, we've been dealt some surprise temple announcements, but this one takes the cake in my eyes. I am happy for the people of Ephraim, and I believe the temple there will be well used. That said, long term, this leaves me questioning the need for the Manti temple, based on the current temple district and my anticipated temple announcements in Price, Delta, and Richfield:
Fillmore (Delta)
Monroe (Richfield)
Central Valley (Richfield)
Richfield (Richfield)
Richfield East (Richfield)
Loa (Richfield)
Salina (Richfield)
Price North (Price)
Price (Price)
Price YSA (Price)
Helper (Price)
Wellington (Price)
Huntington (Price)
Castle Dale (Price)
Ferron (Price)
Moroni (Ephraim)
Mt Pleasant (Ephraim)
Mt Pleasant North (Ephraim)
Ephraim (Ephraim)
Ephraim YSA 1st (Ephraim)
Ephraim YSA 2nd (Ephraim)
This would leave only:
Manti
Gunnison
Add to this the ending of the Manti Pageant and the removal of live sessions, which will lead to reduced temple tourism at Manti, and I honestly don't understand this at all in the long run. Ultimately, this may hurt the prospects of a Richfield temple in the near future. Price would still be beneficial to reduce drive times to 45 minutes max in the listed temple district as opposed to the current 90-120 minute drive to Manti. Fillmore being served by a small temple in Delta (which would serve Fillmore, Delta, Delta West, and the Ely Nevada Stake) would cut driving distance by nearly an hour to 35-40 min. The current maximum drive time in that proposed Richfield stake is about 90 minutes from Loa, which would drop to 45 minutes for Richfield; however, the rest of that proposed district is within an hour's drive to Manti, which would make it less urgent.
Now, future growth can negate all of these comments, and I hope this is the case. Who knows. All I know is I'm sure the brethren know something I don't.
@Jim Anderson, Price definitely seems like a strong candidate between the 8 potential stakes served and the college campus presence. Morgan has a couple of campus extensions and 5-7 potential stakes to serve, so that could make sense too, and Roosevelt has Uintah Basin Technical College. But as for the major colleges in Utah, you got all of them, I think.
I will say, the comments made about college students driving temple work continues to reinforce my opinion that Rexburg will have a second temple announced, sooner rather than later.
Maybe Rigby instead of Rexburg#2. Or one north of Rexburg. I think Richfield may be further out. Unless we see more growth in Manti. Price would take several stakes from Manti. But there have been several surprise announcements in recent years. The same criteria we used for guessing future temples does not necessarily apply anymore. There appears to be a lot more to the dynamics for temple prospects. Judging the rural area and only about 7-8 miles from Manti, I think Ephraim was far off anyone's radar except the Lord's and his revelation/inspiration to the Prophet.
I think something that is being left out of the conversation is that Price is actually closer to Payson and Provo City Center Temples.
According to Google Maps:
Price to Payson: 1:23
Price to Provo City: 1:23
Price to Ephraim: 1:47
Price to Manti: 1:55
I don't know what the temple attending behavior of the saints in Price are, but for years they've been closer to Utah County Temple but have been assigned Manti. Of course there's nothing preventing people from attending the temple in Provo. But I believe you can only serve as a worker in the temple your stake is assigned to. I've assumed Price has been assigned to Manti to supply workers, since live sessions require more workers.
So assuming Price won't be assigned to Provo City or Payson, Price would likely be assigned to the Ephraim Temple district. So, I believe this means the stakes in Price, Helper, Wellington, and Huntington will be assigned to the Ephraim Temple. This will put the Ephraim Temple at 12 stakes and the Manti Temple at 11.
I believe the main reason for the temple in Ephraim is for accessibility reasons. The Temple may be an alternative choice for those who cannot feasibly use the stairs in the Manti ordinance rooms. I wouldn't be surprised if there is flexibility for temple workers depending on which temple they want to serve in.
I still think a temple in Price is likely. However, it would probably shave off 6 stakes from Ephraim and 2 from Manti. I agree that a temple in Richfield would decimate the Manti Temple district; it's probably not very likely in light of the temple in Ephraim. As an alternative to Delta, Nephi could be a possibility. Growth in likely in the future and Delta and Fillmore would be included.
I definitely agree on Price getting its own temple since it would serve 8 stakes and that the closest temple it is in Payson (although the stakes are assigned to the Manti Temple). I would imagine that temple attendance for those saints is low in the winter time because they have to drive through a long mountain pass to get to Ephraim/Manti/Payson.
A temple in Richfield would make the Manti Temple obsolete as you stated.
Manti had enough stakes to divide. Great stuff.
Trying to recall 2011 France announcement...
Ely is just down the road from the planned Elko temple, so I doubt a Delta announcement would send that there.
Had not heard about the satellite campus near Morgan for the larger school, it is likely smaller to accomodate students living in that area.
Again I don't know the population or status of CEU in Price, it is part of the USU system, and I also don't know of student housing arrangements for any who live there temporarily for school, but it has the right number of stakes regardless of that.
I likewise do not know the extent and mix of the student population in Roosevelt, that seems to be a really focused school so it may be much smaller.
@EP I'm currently studying at BYUI. While the temple does get busier in the afternoons and on Saturdays (Well, it did, before *Gestures Broadly*), most of the time, it's really quiet. Sessions in the middle of the day on Wednesdays consisted of about 15 people tops. I'd say maybe we could see one in Driggs, Ashton, or even Sugar City, but I would be really suprised if we saw another in Rexburg proper.
Some great comments here. I always appreciate when people respond to my scatterbrained ramblings, so thank you all.
@L. Chris Jones I think you nailed it on the Ephraim being off of everyone's radar. But the Lord knows what we need better than we do.
@Jim Anderson Delta would shave a half hour off of the drive to Elko for Ely. Not major, but it brings it closer to 2 hours (2:22 vs 2:50). That's my main thought there, that and a fourth stake to help justify the temple in Delta. I don't suspect it will happen for a while, but I can see more of these tiny temples serving 3-4 isolated stakes in the States (e.g., Grand Junction, CO) popping up eventually, and Delta fits the bill.
@General Killmore the baptistry is the main driver for Rexburg combined with the continued major influx of growth. In the next several months, you will likely see 2-5 new stakes in the Rexburg Temple District, not counting university stakes. Most of the stakes in the Rexburg district have 9-11 wards, with one being up to 14 wards now (my former stake). I expect things will be quite full once Rexburg returns to regular operation.
Yeah, and even if Rexburg does get super busy, the Idaho Falls temple is fairly close and its district will shrink substantially when Pocatello temple is done.
That is a typical attendance pattern for most temples, busier early AM when they are open early, tapering off after about 9 or 10am, then picking up roughly 4pm tp the end of the day. Typically more women than men during the midday, on account of most men having to be at work so it is common to see as many as twice to three times the number of women middays.
I am anticipating a similar pattern after the pandemic ends, but with somewhat heavier attendance early AM and late afternoon/evening and Saturdays, some work situations may end up allowing some more to attend midday, but the pattern should still hold.
But a significant increase is anticipated, after all, in Utah the Church is increasing the number of actual temples by about 1/3 if not more, and the capacity increase may be a bit more. But growth trends suggest this and future imminent growth will necessitate even more for additional capacity, and efforts to bring the less active back will add even more as that begins to succeed more.
EP,
I was interested in your reference to Roosevelt and the Uintah Basin Technical College (which has recently changed its abbreviated form to UBTech). I do not have firsthand knowledge of the Roosevelt campus but have been to the Vernal branch campus a couple times when my brother was taking classes there. The Vernal "campus" looked like a single building and reminded me of the building in New York state where I took accounting classes at a business college.
From what I saw of the UBTech branch campus in Vernal, I suspect that the Roosevelt campus has no dorms or residence halls. (It seems to me that schools with dorms, especially if they have large numbers of resident student Church members, will have a more noticeable impact on nearby temples than those that do not.) My suspicion appears to be confirmed by GoogleMaps, which shows the Roosevelt campus as what looks like a single multi-section building near the high school with a couple small outbuildings and a couple parking lots. The church does have an institute building nearby. (For what it's worth, my sister says that Ensign College in Salt Lake, which she attended when it was called LDS Business College, was also mostly non-residential but had a couple dorms for men.)
I found a little info on the UBTech website, which says the school provides low-cost occupational training ($2/hour of training, I think it said) but does not award traditional degrees. The site currently shows a little over 4000 students- I am assuming that is divided somewhat between the two campuses.
I also have the impression from radio ads I have heard that UBTech largely caters to the local community rather than bringing new people in, though there will probably be some exceptions to this. (This is probably also true of the USU campuses in Vernal and Roosevelt, which are also small. Incidentally, the USU and UBTech campuses in Vernal are close together and about a mile from the temple, and I have never heard that they had an important impact on temple attendance.)
Given the above information, it's hard to see how this school would be a large factor in the decision whether to build a temple in Roosevelt. At least it would not seem like an important factor in picking a site.
A temple in Roosevelt would serve 3 stakes in Roosevelt (about half an hour from Vernal) plus 1 each in Duchesne and Altamont (both are about one hour from Vernal and probably have one or two outlying units that are another half hour away).
Perhaps there will be a temple there someday, this is about the same district size as Ephraim, and at this point it would not be much of a shock given all the surprises we've had on that front.
My personal opinion is that Price will get a temple before Roosevelt because of a greater distance and the above-mentioned winter travel difficulties for Price.
Shelley added two wards in a realignment just Sunday, so they are up to 11 wards, as I stated that evening on another post, two of the three buildings take 4 wards now, and both have to compress the block to 1 1/2 hour to avoid overlap until the pandemic is declared over.
That stake has 11 wards, the stake president said there was growth in the area, it includes Woodville and crosses both the Snake River and I-15. Being largely north side, the stake south of it could be split with it in a 3 for 2 split to make these several 6 or 7 ward stakes. New buildings seem likely, as Shelley stake is maxed out, don't know about the one to the south.
The standard is for one building, unless it is an older building that cannot, to have four wards in it or be capable of having that. Not sure how it works overseas, have seen different designs inside some, so that might not be doable in some areas yet. That would be a prime indicator of growth or future growth is approval of new meetinghouses. Queen Creek two years ago got approval for five buildings, that's enough for 20 wards, and they are probably at least mostly full already but maybe only started with a couple wards immediately after being completed due to what is going on there.
When we look at travel time, I think we should look at the round-trip not just one way. The time saved in travel is actually double. The impact is greater, especially on a week day for those who work.
I made a statement earlier about travel distance for temples and how much time a new nearby temple may save. I think we need to consider the round-trip time. If a new temple saves an hour one-way. That is two hours savings for a temple trip.
You may not believe it, but I doubt it is. You underestimate the amount of thoughtful deliberation rhat goes into these decisions which is done beat by totally ignoring raucous protestors.
I think it is also rich that the type of people who complain most vocally about the non-historical rehab tend to be the ones who overall gripe the most about temple costa. Historical rehabs are super expensive. Some people just complain to complain.
Video: President Nelson describes the ‘prayerful foresight’ that led to the decision to build second temple in Ephraim, Utah, area
https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2021-05-05/video-president-nelson-temple-in-ephraim-manti-212564
LDS Living has some original reporting from the Saturday Press Conference in Manti. There are some quotes from the general authorities who were present, including information that the Manti renovation will only take 18-24 months instead of three years, The decision to build in Ephraim was not dependent on the plans for the Manti Temple, and some information about the Helena Montana Temple.
https://www.ldsliving.com/Rejoicing-on-both-sides-of-the-veil-12-highlights-from-the-Ephraim-temple-announcement-and-revision-to-Manti-renovation-plans/s/94261
https://www.ldsliving.com/-Ephraim-first-Manti-second-A-lesson-in-continuing-revelation-from-the-recent-temple-announcement/s/94271
Christopher Nicholson and JPL, I feel impressed to weigh in here. When the plans for the Manti renovation were first mentioned, the announcement did note the planned removal of the murals and that every effort would be made to preserve them, but a majority of those responding to those plans took issue with the planned removal while also apparently choosing to ignore the part about the Church wanting to carefully preserve the murals. In the interim, issues with the removal of the murals for the Salt Lake Temple clearly led to consideration of what could be done differently (and perhaps in a better way) for the plans related to the Manti murals. Yes, there was public outcry by those who, for whatever reason, overlooked or outright ignored the Church's original intentions for the mural. But the Church has not acknowledged in any way that the outcry molded the solution.
We do have personal descriptions from President Nelson and Elder Rasband that illustrate that the adjustments to the plans for Manti and the new temple announced for Ephraim were the direct result of late-night revelation received by President Nelson, and that the Church went into "warp speed" to get moving on both elements of the plan so both could be formally announced on May 1. The prophet particularly noted that he saw no reason to wait for next General Conference, and that it made the most sense to announce the altered plans and the new temple immediately.
Based on those accounts and additional context, I'd be shocked to learn that public outcry played in to any of this at all. It seems to be a more simple matter of the Brethren, especially the prophet, seeking for and announcing further guidance as it came. That said, anyone is free to believe anything different on this matter as they may choose to do so. But the reality of it is that anything not officially confirmed is largely open to interpretation. This is my interpretation of what might have happened based on the accounts that are available this far from those involved in the matters at hand. Take it or leave it as you will. If nothing else, let's agree without becoming disagreeable, and let's be respectful and tolerant of those who have reached different conclusions on this. Thanks.
The Layton Temple is not very close to the Weber Davis campus. Also, the Weber Davis campus is quite small, is a commuter campus and would not be an influencing factor on the Layton Temple. Very few temple plants are based on colleges nearby. This new one in Ephraim, Rexburg, and Provo are the 3 that most likely were. Maybe Cedar City. Laie Hawaii temple was the before BYU Hawaii.
@EP Well here I am 5 months later. I have to give it to you, you were absolutely correct. We just had Rexburg North announced. I'm insanely impressed right now
Post a Comment