I have updated the list of the countries with the
most
members
without a temple using year-end 2022 membership totals. Temples
that service stakes, districts, and mission branches in each country are
identified. Previous lists are also available for April 2022, March 2022, November 2020, April 2020, April 2019, October 2018, April 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2013, mid-2011, late 2008, and late 2007. Countries in Italics
do not have a
stake. Indonesia was removed from this list given the
announcement of the Jakarta Indonesia Temple on April 2nd, 2023. Benin has since ascended to the list to replace Indonesia. Benin is the country on the list with the most recent Church establishment. The first branch created in Benin was organized in 2005.
1. Uganda
- 20,693 members
- 3 stakes, 3 districts
- 37 congregations (18 wards, 20 branches)
- Johannesburg South Africa Temple (Nairobi Kenya Temple under construction)
- 12,477 members
- 2 stakes, 1 district
- 24 congregations (12 wards, 12 branches)
- Hong Kong China Temple (Shanghai China Temple announced)
- 10,829 members
- 0 stakes, 5 districts
- 25 congregations (25 branches)
- Hong Kong China Temple (Singapore Republic of Singapore Temple announced)
4. Marshall Islands
- 6,832 members
- 2 stakes
- 13 congregations (12 wards, 1 branch)
- Suva Fiji Temple (Tarawa Kiribati Temple announced)
5. Jamaica
- 6,810 members
- 1 stake, 1 district
- 18 congregations (6 wards, 12 branches)
- Port-au-Prince Haiti Temple
6. Guyana
- 6,645 members
- 0 stakes, 2 districts
- 12 congregations (12 branches)
- Caracas Venezuela Temple
7. Togo
- 6,500 members
- 3 stakes
- 22 congregations (15 wards, 9 branches)
- Ghana Accra Temple
8. Federated States of Micronesia
- 5,966 members
- 1 stake, 2 districts
- 23 congregations (5 wards, 18 branches)
- Cebu City Philippines Temple (Yigo Guam Temple scheduled for dedication)
9. Benin
- 5,606 members
- 2 stakes
- 23 congregations (16 wards, 4 branches)
- Accra Ghana Temple (Lagos Nigeria Temple announced)
10. Belize
- 5,534 members
- 2 districts
- 12 congregations (12 branches)
- Guatemala City Guatemala Temple (Coban Guatemala Temple announced)
Malaysia has 25 branches but no stakes I wonder why?
ReplyDeleteThere needs to be wards to have a stake. This area has branches. In this case the equivalent of a stake is a district.
DeleteMalaysia has fairly stringent restrictions on religious freedom, which has made proselytism much harder in the past decade or so. At this point, the Church needs to add a disclaimer to any outward communication that only non-Muslims may read the scripture verse, watch the video, etc. and this includes areas which are less Muslim, such as eastern Malaysia.
ReplyDeleteKuching is probably the most likely district to become a stake (ahead of KL) but for this to happen, all five branches would need to meet the minimum requirements to become wards. I remember hearing that this has been the main hold-up for some time now.
Thanks for clarifying
DeleteUganda has been on this list since 2015, and Malaysia/Mongolia since 2018. Have to think they should be getting one fairly soon
ReplyDeleteWhy hasn’t Uganda and especially Mongolia gotten a temple yet? What’s the hold up?
ReplyDeleteMongolia's temple might not be announced yet, possibly because they may be trying to determine the best way of transporting equipment and materials to the country. The country is surrounded by Siberia and the Gobi Desert. As far as I'm aware, there are only two border points between Mongolia and China that are open to foreigners.
DeleteAnd the Church is probably also waiting for the Nairobi Kenya Temple to either be further along or dedicated before announcing a Uganda Temple.
DeleteI thought the temple in Guam was in operation.
ReplyDeleteAs of May, it was. Probably just an oversight.
DeleteI'm not sure if the Shanghai Temple will be available for Mongolian Latter-day Saints. President Nelson said it will be for nationals only.
ReplyDeleteIn mainland China locals and foreigners need to meet in separate meetings and maybe separate locations. The temple was announced as for Chinese citizens only and not tourists or expatriates from other countries.
ReplyDeleteThese all have the numbers of places that I think SHOULDN'T have temples. Not enough membership to support their operation. Uganda the one exception (maybe - assuming each stake has ~1,000 active members, there may be enough there to support a temple).
ReplyDeleteJames, the hallmark of President Nelson's temple announcement has been temples for areas that, by previous metrics used by past prophets wouldn't have been eligible for such announcements. That's why assessing future prospects by standards that haven't been applicable since 2018 may be short-sighted. And it's been proven time and time again that having temples announced and dedicated has positively affected Church growth in previously-struggling areas. At this point, the Lord knows what He's doing and inspires His prophets accordingly. And for that I'm grateful.
DeleteIs there any more information on Shanghai temple than was available a month after announcement? (Similar question on Russia)
ReplyDeleteMalaysia has a huge problem with lack of priesthood leadership or potential priesthood leadership. This is due to cultural problems with adultery that necessitate disciplining and removing leaders, or that make it so that males never get that far. Local women carry a disproportionate share of the burden of running the Church in Malaysia, and without missionaries and missionary couples, the Church would collapse there.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to see a temple functioning in that kind of climate.
@Randolph - Chinese officials decried the announcement of a temple in China, saying it never approved it. https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/04/29/plans-an-lds-temple/
ReplyDeleteFrom the article:
Within days of Nelson’s remarks, though, the Shanghai Municipal Ethnic and Religious Affairs Bureau said twice on its website it knew nothing about a “Mormon temple” being built in the city of more than 24 million people.
In response to a question posed on Weibo (China’s Twitter), the bureau first wrote, “foreigners are not allowed to establish religious organizations or areas of religious activity within China’s borders” and “the news that the American Mormon Church announced that it is building a temple came only from the American side.”
Later, the Shanghai organization repeated the statement about foreigners, insisting it “knew nothing about [the American Mormon Church … building a so-called ‘temple’ in Shanghai].” This second statement added, “wishful thinking, not based in reality,” according to an independent translation.
Since that time, the Shanhai temple news was removed from the church's website, at least last I had checked.
The Shanghai Temple is still on the list.
Deletehttps://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/temples/details/shanghai-people%E2%80%99s-republic-of-china-temple?lang=eng
James, the Shanghai Temple is in fact still on the original news release and has never once been removed. In the course of my ongoing updates on temples, I frequently check every news release on new temples in case there is new information added to those OH releases. So I'm not sure where you were looking or where you heard it was dropped from that release, because that has never happened. If it were to drop off of the list, the Church would retract that part of the official announcement.
DeleteI don't have the date, but I believe it was around May 7th that the Kearns Utah western hills stake was discontinued. It looks like the wards were split between The Kearns Utah stake, and the Kearns Utah Central stake.
ReplyDeleteThe Singapore Temple is right next to Malaysia. This will be a great blessing for the Church in at least East Malaysia.
ReplyDeleteWest Kalaysia is still quite removed from where the temple will be. The issues there are complex.
Uganda I keep hoping will soon get a temple. With Kenta having reached 3 stakes in March I am more hopeful a temple will be announced in October. Of we could see even more stakes there I would have more hope.
With Benin and Togo having 5 stakes between them that is looking like a place to build a temple.
The Shanghai Temple will be limited to Chinese citizens. Personally I am convinced that President Nelson had approval from the proper people before announcing it. The Church has never backed down from the announcement.
Since the Yigo Guam Temple was dedicated that line is clearly a misstatements.
ReplyDeleteEastern Malaysia is a majority Christuan area. Basically all the people there in the late 18th and early 20th centuries converted from their indigenous religions to Christianity. A large percentage of Christians in south-east Asia are part of ethnic groups on the margins of society.
There are a whole lot of issues at play with building The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in such situations.
You have potentially similar issues in Ethiopia. There the Church has focused ordinarily on working with Amheric speaker. Amheric speakers are less than half the population of Ethiopia and are outnumbered by Orono speakers. A large percentage of Amheric speakers are Oriental Orthodox Christians while most Oromo belong to various Protestant/Evangelical/Pentecostal denominations.
There are many complex issues at play here.
One more thought. I know that in Kenya there are many who think very negative things about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. My understanding is that these extreme negative ideas may have greatly slowed down the Groundbreaking on the temple. It took a huge amount of public relations efforts by Elder Sitati and others to get to the point where a temple could have ground broken.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if some of these same extremely negative ideas play out against the Church in Uganda as well. It may be that it will take getting some key government figures from Uganda to come to the Nairobi open house to convince then that allowing the Church to build a temple in Uganda makes sense.
We often approach these issues from a standpoint of why the Church does not announce a temple. However often the reasons for not announcing temples have to do with government opposition.
In France President Hinckley essentially said the Church wanted to build a temple there in 1998. His June 4, 1998 comments were basically you deserve a temple, pray for us to find a location. It was not until 2011 the temple was announced and it was finally dedicated in 2017.
There was a huge amount of effort to reach the point in 2017 where the temple was dedicated.
Something that is often overlooked is that the island of Ireland has both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. The 2 Stakes and 1 District work closely together particularly with Youth and try to get together often for activities. There is very much an All-Ireland approach at church even though they are two different countries. There are over 9,000 members on the Island of Ireland and a future Temple would service the whole Island rather than just the Republic of Ireland. Currently all members there need to either fly to or take a ferry to get to their assigned Temple (Preston Temple).
ReplyDeleteScotland I believe has 5 stakes, so that is possibly the most of any in a place in some ways considered a country without a temple.
ReplyDeleteI believe in the US New Jersey has the most stakes without a temple. However there are 2 literally within 5 miles of the border. I still have high hopes for a New Jersey Temple soon.
Wisconsin I believe has 6 stakes and no temple. Iowa has I think 7, although there I am not sure it is even a full mile from the border to the temples, although there is no bridge at Nauvoo so the drive through Iowa is still a few miles. South-east Iowa is in the Nauvoo Stake.
Southwest Iowa is clearly metro Omaha, the city the Winter Quarters Temple us in.
Moving to Brazil and Mexico there are states without temples. Cancun I believe is in a different state than Merida, so it lacks a temple.
Brazil we have the state where Florianopolis is, I believe Santa Catarina State, that lacks a temple. There are others.
India of course has states with tens of millions of people, some without branches ( I do not think Rajasthan had even a branch).
James, here is the reddit post from where many members discuss the removal of the Shanghai temple from the church's website: https://www.reddit.com/r/latterdaysaints/comments/hrn6yy/was_the_shanghai_temple_disannounced_its_not_on/?utm_source=BD&utm_medium=Search&utm_name=Bing&utm_content=PSR1
ReplyDeleteSo yes, it did happen.
Also, the church also hasn't retracted from the Russia temple announcement. Doesn't mean it's happening any time soon. This could be another case of the New York temple that was announced and then rescinded. Or a modern day version of the announced temples of the restoration like Independence, Far West, or Adam-ondi-Ahman temples, which never came to fruition but remain "announced."
The first comment I see there include the following text, verbatim: "The Church hasn't officially confirmed that information nor have they disannounced that temple." The situation in general is complex. But during the period of time indicated by that thread, I can personally confirm the temple in question was still listed on the Church's list. Later today, I will pull an archive of that page from that time period that verifies this. In the meantime, I would take anything on Reddit with a proverbial grain of salt. Several threads that look to be legitimately about the Church have a verified anti-Church slant and feature comments from known Church critics with axes to grind. As I said, I will provide proof later today that, during the time indicated by that thread, that temple was still on the list.
DeleteI remember reading that thread three years ago and verifying that the Shanghai temple was no longer on the temple list, while the others that had been announced were still there. There are also bunch of comments on that thread, James, and not one of them states, "nope, here it is." They're all in agreement that the temple was missing from the list.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it was only down for a day or two. I don't know - I just remember it being dropped from the list at some point.
And like I said, I'm not sure why you would expect the church to officially disannounce a temple. Especially given the optics of doing so months after announcing. I think it's far more likely that the temple simply doesn't get built for years and years, much like we'll likely see for the Russia temple.
This issue was discussed on this thread in June 2020, and James Stokes, you shared this comment at the time, "FWIW, Michael Worley was correct in his earlier comment: Following the announcement of the 8 new temples in April, only 7 appeared on the official list. Shanghai never was and likely never will be on that official list unless and until things change in the relationship between the Church and China, or in the approach of the Chinese governement regarding religious practices."
ReplyDeletehttp://ldschurchgrowth.blogspot.com/2020/06/updated-country-profile-spain.html
For a time, Shanghai was even removed from the churchofjesuschristtemples site, but it generated so many questions, that it was returned to the site. I chatted with the webmaster about this is an email in October 2020.
The important thing is the temple is identified on the official list today and the Church is working through the appropriate channels to bring it to fruition. President Kimball's words come to mind, "Is anything too hard for the Lord?"
Well, this wouldn't be the first time I was hoisted on my own petard. That is an accurate quotation from the comment I made at the time. However, I believe I noted in that same thread or one of the next ones that Shanghai had been added to that list a few days later And in any case, that was the situation after the temple was announced. What the other James and I were talking about is a claim that the Shanghai Temple was removed from either that list or the announcement after it originally appeared there. So my comment then has no direct bearing on that matter. Btw, it's not uncommon for one or more newly announced temples to not appear for up to a few days after being announced.
DeleteEither way, I agree that the Shanghai Temple will.likely take a while, like Russia. But as I also mentioned in that comment, President Nelson's status as "an old friend of China" and Elder Gong's Asian-American status are factors that will almost certainly positively impact the efforts to get the Shanghai Temple built. Will it take time? Of course. But President Nelson is in a key position to bring that about, and has the necessary connections to do so, so it might be sooner than we think. I have a feeling that in the near term, a regime change may occur in both Russia and China, which might speed things up as well.
I can't help laughing at this discussion, not because you are wrong, but because we are small as grains of sand and, on the contrary, our ignorance is enormous. I remember reading that the early temple movies were set in open locations that were for a time dedicated as temples of the Lord in order to ensure proper protection for the productions. We have already discussed here the future possibility of mobile temples. Indeed, we know the story of Moses' movable tabernacle as the first temple, after millennia where believers served on simple stone altars in the fields.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I wonder if, hidden from our unwary eyes, the Shanghai temple is not already in operation on some mezzanine floor, just like the School of the Prophets or the Endowment House before it. Would it be surprising? Not for me.
Daniel Morretti- hit it right on. Family friends who were previous mission presidents and liaisons for the church, said that is exactly what was happening (prior to the war with Ukraine). They had discussed among the leaders and brethren where and when to set up the temple and it would be moved as directed to places that were dedicated for that purpose. I wouldn't be surprise if it was happening in China or elsewhere where government is more strict. (It's not breaking the country rules, but still a way to provide the ordinances needed).
ReplyDeleteChina is a sui generis situation. Of all the sensitive countries (the rest are Muslim), it seems to offer the best chances for a line of priesthood authority to flourish, transmitted by natives, underground or under the radar. After all, the people are not faithful religious; indeed, many are nominally atheists because the state prevents the spread of any faith, but perhaps they would be willing to embrace the gospel if given the chance, even as a form of rebellion against state control. So perhaps there are many of our brethren in the priesthood there, trained and ready to officiate. Of course, this whole situation could just be a wish or fantasy on my part, but let's remember that a similar situation occurred with Catholic missionaries in Cipangu during the Middle Ages.
DeleteI imagine the same would not be possible in Pakistan. Perhaps there is still not enough leadership there, and proselytizing, even if done on the sly among so many ardent Muslims, would be very dangerous and would break obedience to local law.
Daniel, there are indeed many of our brothers and sisters in China who have received the Gospel and are priesthood holders. When I was teaching English as a second language at the MTC 3 years ago, I taught a sister who was from a relatively small city (by Chinese standards) north of Beijing. Her city had a branch with about 60 people attending regularly, and she said that most of the brothers were returned missionaries. She and her mother were both converts of a few years and were introduced to the Gospel through family members. So the work will continue to go forth in China, just slowly and steadily.
DeleteThis is the perfect example that confirms our theory... It seems that the church in China is already in sustainability standards, even if the government "turns its nose"
DeleteDaniel Moretti, based on what President Nelson said about the Shanghai Temple, I could see you being right.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much we do not know at this moment.
I was wondering something here: perhaps the Lord requires a public announcement to be made for each of his holy temples, even though it may seem absurd, and perhaps this case is just the first of its kind. If the Church never brings it up again, that doesn't mean the temple wasn't built and dedicated...
DeleteJust a quick follow-up on my most recent comment above. I used the Wayback Machine website to look at archived snapshots of the temple list. Based on that, I apparently misremembered the Shanghai PRC Temple being added to the list of "Announced" temples directly after the April 2020 General Conference. The Wayback Machine shows that the snapshot of that page taken on January 1, 2021 includes the Shanghai Temple in the "Announced" section:
ReplyDeletehttps://web.archive.org/web/20210101081317/https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/temples/list?lang=eng
It did not appear in the previous snapshot (which was taken on December 4, 2020), so sometime between December 4, 2020, and New Years' Day 2021, the Shangahi Temple was able to be added. And insofar as I have been able to ascertain, that temple has not been removed from that list since then.
It's also worth noting that the Russia Temple was another example where it did not appear on the list at first, and has had different designations since it appeared on the list. At one point, that temple was listed as "Russia Administration Building". But it has since changed back to Russia.
I would just add here that I'm not convinced that the Shanghai temple is already operating as a temple of the Church. It is still listed as "Announced" on the official list. Above and beyond that, there have not been any recent reports of any apostles ministering in mainland China, and it is the apostles who have the keys (under the direction of the prophet) to dedicate temples of the Church. Also, if that temple had been dedicated, there would have been an official acknowledgment of the Church in that case, even if it was a one-sentence news release.
Plus, insofar as I am aware, the powers-that-be in China are still denying ever giving permission to the Church to build a temple. Whenever construction does begin, unless there is a change in the ruling regime in that nation, it will likely be a slow process involving extensive navigation of governmental red tape and approvals at every phase. So until there is something official from the Church on this, I'd assume that the Church is still trying to obtain the necessary approvals to start construction. No offense intended, and I hope none is taken.
Okay
ReplyDelete