Wednesday, March 13, 2019

Potential New Temples - March 2019 Edition

I have updated my temple prediction map in preparation for General Conference in April. Data used to identify likely locations for future temples include the number of stakes and districts, the number of wards and branches, age of the oldest stake, trends in church growth, distance to the nearest temple, number of endowment sessions scheduled at the nearest temple, and member and missionary reports regarding member activity, temple attendance, and convert retention.

With this most recent edition of my temple prediction map, I have added another category of potential new temples that may be announced. There are now "likely temples to be announced" and "less likely temples to be announced." I made this distinction as there are some locations that appear likely to have small temples announced given recent trends in temple announcements. Most of the less likely temples to be announced would be small temples that would service membership who live in remote areas where the Church appears capable of supporting a small temple. I have added 34 potential less-likely-to-be-announced temples to the map. I also added five additional likely new temples to be announced to the map since October 2018. These locations include:
  • Angeles, Philippines
  • Cape Coast, Ghana
  • Heber City, Utah
  • Kampala Uganda
  • Pachuca, Mexico
The Church announced 19 new temples during 2018. This is the second most temples ever announced in a single year after 1998 when there were 27 new temples announced. As a result, it is unclear whether the Church will announce additional temples in the upcoming General Conference given there were so many new temples announced last year. Also, there are a large number of planned temples (22) that have yet to have groundbreakings announced. As a result, the Church may delay additional temple announcements until more planned temples begin construction. Nevertheless, the Church has had a trend of accelerating temple construction in recent years. See below for my top 10 picks for the most likely temple announcements:
  • Benin City, Nigeria
  • Colorado Springs, Colorado
  • Freetown, Sierra Leone 
  • Monrovia, Liberia
  • Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea
  • Ribeirão Preto, Brazil
  • Rogers, Arkansas 
  • Santa Cruz, Bolivia
  • Tacoma, Washington 
  • West Valley City, Utah
Red squares on the map below are temples which are in operation, under construction, or officially announced. Yellow squares are likely potential new temples that may be announced in the near future. Blue circles are less likely potential new temples that may be announced in the near future. As part of the semi-annual tradition, your predictions for new temple announcements are appreciated and encouraged.


1 – 200 of 210   Newer›   Newest»
Unknown said...

I Have heard, from a Patriarch and current SLC temple worker, that if the SLTemple goes to film, Tooele, UT will get a temple. Until then, it won't happen since the SLTemple workers from Tooele Valley number 500+.

Chris D. said...

Matt, 2 new ones on list are also on James Stokes list also.

L. Chris Jones said...

I think if an area provides a high number of workers and temple patrons, they are more likely to get a temple. That shows they are motivated and showing more readiness to have a temple of their own.

William P said...


Japan get another? The church of Jesus Christ temples website lists the Sapporo with only 3 stakes and 2 districts in the temple district. Its a fairly large temple 48,000 square feet the Japanese saints need to utilise what they already have in my opinion.

Anouncment of the renovation of the Brisbane Australia temple, the busiest in the country. There's not any land to expand the building unless council approves something similar to the HK China temple high rise. The church owns a block of land across the street which is a field of grass used for overflow parking. Turn that into a parking complex and the current underground parking under the temple can be rebuilt as a lower floor extension of the temple-problem solved. (This is my local temple)

Also, I predict a mini temple for Christchurch New Zealand as travel to the north island is a good distance there and back.

Auckland New Zealand a 2nd temple a mini if the already announced temple is small and becomes overcrowded due to expanded membership growth in the region.

Mini temple in the Cook Islands, undue long distance travel needed to go to NZ or Tahiti temples.

2nd temple for Alaska USA, mini, as lengthy Alaskan travel in the such weather conditions is bad. Similar to circumstances which met the Manitoba temple announcement.

When I say mini temple I'm talking humble and low maintenance something similar to the current Kinshasa DRC temple-in size and function and probably smaller too just make the architectural design more appealing if it needs be.

Fredrick said...

My recently made top ten picks for likely announced temples:

1. Charlotte, NC
2. Rogers/Bentonville, AR
3. La Paz, Bolivia
4. Jacksonville, FL
5. Missoula, MT
6. Heber City, UT
7. Colorado Springs, CO
8. Fort Worth, TX
9. Salem, OR
10. Valparaiso, Chile

David Tilton said...

A temple in El Paso, Texas, would be greatly appreciated. There are three stakes in this area, four if you count Las Cruces, New Mexico.

Many members are too timid to travel across the border to Ciudad Juárez and refuse to go to the temple there. Some members do not have passports for legal reasons (residency or visa problems) and cannot cross the border. U.S. military personnel are not allowed to cross the border. The Fort Bliss Ward of the El Paso Texas Chamizal Stake is comprised entirely of military and their families. Other military members live in and attend other El Paso-area congregations. There must be hundreds of Church members serving in the military who are prohibited by the Department of Defense from crossing the border.

The closest U.S. temple for those who will not or cannot travel to Ciudad Juárez is in Albuquerque (ABQ), New Mexico, a four-hour drive from El Paso. An El Paso temple would be a one-hour drive from Las Cruces, New Mexico. Those Saints now travel three hours to ABQ to attend the temple.

Conversion of the historic Douglas Avenue Chapel (built in 1931) may be a possibility for a temple in El Paso.

William P said...

Forgot to mention a 2nd Taiwan temple apparently there's a rumor (which I do agree with) when Taiwan gets her 20th stake this temple will be announced, she's at 17 right now. Won't be surprised if this happens before 20, wait and see.

Anonymous said...

500 temple workers is a lot. When you run three shifts a day, five days a week, you end up with 33 or so temple workers from Tooele per shift. Now, thinking about it, this may be almost enough to staff a medium-sized temple (similar to Brigham City, for example) as is.

The problem that I think has held back Tooele is simply the size of the Salt Lake Temple (and its resulting capacity), and how compact the temple district population would be. There is practically no way that anything other than the Tooele Valley and the Wendover District would be assigned to that temple, while Brigham City on the other hand had stakes from the Bear River Valley to work with, as well. Plus, Tooele to Salt Lake is not particularly far and the drive along I-80 is typically not too affected by traffic, except during rush hour.

This is why I'm still a fan of a Morgan Utah Temple, rather than a temple in Evanston. Evanston has two relatively small stakes, and even with help from Lyman/Bridger Valley, Kemmerer and Rock Springs, I would be worried about staffing a temple there. Especially in the winter, when I-80 is often closed east of Evanston. Morgan, on the other hand, could take the Evanston stakes and the Lyman Stake from Wyoming, the Huntsville Stake (which, from what I hear, is very likely to split in the next year or two), the Coalville Stake (which travels over an hour to Ogden, which is rather far by Utah standards), and then the two (soon three) Morgan Valley stakes. Nine stakes, of which six are in a relatively small area, could probably staff a small temple. The round trip time shaved off for members attending the temple from Lyman, for example, would be a good hour or so. Not bad.

Fredrick said...

The two stakes in Elko, Nevada would also assigned a Tooele Utah Temple. 11 stakes total. While I think there are enough stakes to justify a Tooele Temple, the fact that SLC Temple couldn't operate with a Tooele Temple in place, leaves me to believe that a Heber City Temple is more likely to happen. There are five stakes in the Heber Valley, plus one in Park City, Kamas and Coalville each, plus the three in Wyoming. 11 stakes that would serve Heber, same as Tooele. The Provo Temple is always busy with the nearby MTC and BYU, so build a medium sized to smaller temple in Heber to take some pressure off (albeit five stakes) would make sense.

Fredrick said...

Based on the map, I think a West Valley Temple is quite possible. 67 stakes serving the Jordan River Temple and 35 serving Oquirrh Mtn - both of which are overwhelmed from what I hear. I'd say West Valley would be announced before Heber City.

EP said...

I would hope that Salt Lake never changes to a film presentation; it's a nice touch and experience to have a live presentation of the endowment. Also, I see West Valley thrown about, is that including Herriman? I swear I remember reading that President Hinckley set aside some land in Herriman for a temple, and the growth of that city has been nothing but stupendous. I'm going to predict that Utah doesn't get a temple this time around unless there are 15+ announcements, in which case, Heber is likely.

Gary said...

Charlotte would be nice considering Columbia SC is over-crowded.

Fredrick said...

I didn't ever think of Charlotte as a possibility because of Raleigh and Columbia having temples but after looking at the map it makes sense. There are four stakes in the Charlotte metro area - and one right outside of it. Three stakes in the Greensboro/Winston-Salem area, one in Asheville and one stake in eastern Tennessee. There are also two stakes in Greenville, SC which is the same distance from Charlotte as it is Columbia. That's 10 to 12 stakes that would serve a Charlotte Temple.

Eduardo said...

The isolated islands make a lot of sense to have their own temples. To me, if you can only do a few sessions per week for people who cannot travel by boat and plane and bus and taxi (think about that for logistics, it is probably right), then it is worth it. That was the intent of the original smaller temples in Monticello and Snowflake. What a blessing for them!
I wish West Virginia and Wisconsin would get temples. Where would be a good place in Vermont?

L. Chris Jones said...

Could the build a new stake center across the street from the Brisbane temple and then expand the temple. But I like your idea of building a parking garage across the street and integrate the existing parking structure into the temlple.

L. Chris Jones said...

Land for a future Southwest Salt Lake Valley temple when the need arises was announced at the same time as the Oquirrh Mountain temple.

L. Chris Jones said...

I can't wait for each state in the USA to get a temple. Only 13 of the 50 to go. Also 2 of the 5 inhabited U.S. terretories have temples announced. I also look forward to the day that every country has a temple.

Mon Chou said...

I'm just curious about your thoughts on a potential temple in Victoria, B.C.?

As a Vancouver, BC resident, I know that technically the Vancouver Temple (which is actually located in Langley and is not really readily accessible by public transport) is only 125 km (80 miles or so) a part. Seemingly, the two cities seem close enough, but because of the exorbitant price (we're talking extremely high -- e.g. $100 bucks each way per vehicle -- not including the price of individuals within the car) to take the ferry from Victoria (which is on Vancouver Island) to Vancouver, many members on Vancouver Island find it difficult financially & time restraining to do so. While I certainly know other members in the Church worldwide have it much, much worse -- I'm just curious if anyone has heard any rumblings about Victoria, BC being a possible candidate?

Bryan Dorman said...

How about a post where we try to guess the location of the two temples that were already announced but no specific city has been mentioned.

Interesting that you would put Saratov for the Russian temple. It would be more centrally located for the members down in the south and those coming in from Ekat, and I also understand that Moscow though that is the obvious choice, would be extremely tough if not impossible to build the temple in the oblast much less the actual federal city. And Piter (St Pete) would be off the rails as it is comparatively close to Helsinki.

Mon Chou said...

Obviously, Pres. Nelson is reigniting the huge development of Temples (as readily evident by last GC), but where does this whole mindset that he is expected to cut the 200 mile distance (the goal of which temples should be accessible to the Saints) to 100 or 50 miles come from? Are there any sources on this? I read this on another blog...

Don't get me wrong, I would be extremely happy and supportive of this, but I like to know sources... and don't want to get my hopes up. haha.

The Accountant said...

One reason the Columbia SC temple is so busy is because of the renovation of the Raleigh Temple. They added 11 stakes to the temple district during the renovation. Once it is dedicated this year it should return back to normal levels. With that being said, Charlotte I believe will have a temple announced in next couple of years. This is one of the cities spoken of by Elder Vaughn J Featherstone in the letter he placed in the Atlanta temple cornerstone in 1980. So I believe it is only a matter of time before we hear the announcement.

I am curious to see how the redesigned small/mini temple concept is used going forward. Also I have noticed that one issue with land being acquired for some recently announced temples is being solved by knocking down an existing church building and building a temple in its place. This certainly would speed up temple building just because the land is already zoned for a religious building and so all the hoops they have to jump through is eliminated greatly. Also it will save on costs as well in not having to acquire new land where it may be in limited supply.

The theme of no Moroni on the temple is also showing itself again and again in these new renditions as mentioned and contended against in a post last month. I think it will become a theme going forward as a cost saving measure as well as to a lesser extent a sign that we worship the Lord and not an angel or Mormon.

James Anderson said...

They were not planning an Angel Moroni on the Atlanta temple when first built. But a newspaper story got published in the biggest Atlanta paper that asked 'Why no Angel statue?' as the writer had seen a few other temples with the statue. Someone sent the clipping to President Hinckley, who promptly asked that one be put one on Atlanta when he read it.

So maybe at some future date one will show up. But they would have to be rather small on the smaller temples, and the three where these were announced are in areas that are at high risk for string tropical systems Category 3 or greater and those winds could simply rip the statue clean off. Also, Los Olivos's design, being like Mesa or Laie, isn't conducive to placing a statue despite its larger size.

And I just heard another major rumor within the last hour of a major change in a church program, but due to it being rumor, will not say what I heard but it may be out before General Conference with the general details as the specifics will not be ready for prime-time yet.

William P said...

We'd love to hear that rumour, what are the details? Before every general conference behind the scenes on church member run websites and blogs people always have their own lists of predictions of what changes are coming to which church policies and programs. They're either kept quiet or shared for readers to see, I'm sure yours isn't a big deal normal to hear rumors around this time before GC. I.e the 2hr block and the ministering program was once a rumour had people talking before GC.

James Anderson said...

This time the rumor mill has been quiet, heard very little morning. But I heard this one will hit before General Conference and not during it although there easily can be some reference to what is about to happen then after it has.

But basically, it involves the seminary program and curriculum shifting to line up with everything else or so I think I heard.

Eric S. said...

I think we will continue to see an increase or steady number of temple announcements over the next several years with a high focus on decreasing long travel for members around the world. Most of these temples will be on the smaller side and can be built rather quickly compared to larger ones so that there doesn't become a very large backlog that becomes stuck for a long time. I predict for this conference anywhere from 5-12+ new temples announced. I created a list by geographical area due to the wide possibility of new temple locations, arranged in somewhat order I think may be possible by area. I apologize in advance if this is too lengthy, but I included a lot due to the number of possibilities and trying to guess some surprise picks as well.


Freetown Sierra Leone
Benin City Nigeria
Antananarivo Madagascar
Lubumbashi OR Mbuji-Mayi DRC
Cape Town South Africa
Monrovia Liberia
Kumasi Ghana
Kampala Uganda
Maputo OR Beira Mozambique


Ulaanbaatar Mongolia
Taichung Taiwan
Bacolod OR Tacloban OR Legazpi/Naga Philippines
Singapore OR Jakarta Indonesia
Dubai OR Abu Dhabi UAE
Osaka Japan


Vienna Austria OR Budapest Hungary
Oslo Norway
Edinburgh Scotland
Barcelona Spain
Dublin Ireland
Tirana Albania


Port Moresby Papua New Guinea
Tarawa Kiribati
Neiafu Vava’u Tonga
Pago Pago Samoa
Noumea New Caledonia OR Port Vila Vanuatu

Eric S. said...


Santa Cruz OR La Paz/El Alto Bolivia
Iquitos OR Chiclayo OR Cusco Peru
Antofagasta OR Valparaíso Chile
Neuquén OR Bahía Blanca Argentina
Cali Colombia

Belo Horizonte
João Pessoa OR Natal
Ribeirão Preto
São Paulo #2 OR Santos
Florianópolis/São José
Santa Maria


Kingston Jamaica
Port of Spain Trinidad and Tobago
Santiago Dominican Republic

Central America
San Pedro Sula Honduras
Cobán OR Guatemala City #2 Guatemala


United States
Bentonville/Rogers Arkansas
Missoula Montana
Charlotte North Carolina
Austin OR El Paso OR Fort Worth OR McAllen Texas
Heber City OR West Valley OR Smithfield Utah
Rapid City South Dakota
Flagstaff Arizona
Colorado Springs Colorado
Tallahassee OR Jacksonville Florida
Madison OR Milwaukee Wisconsin
Elko Nevada
Bakersfield California
Augusta Maine

Eduardo said...

Thanks for the tease, James.
They have announced Mongolia for a temple, or no?
Chile should have more temples, for sure.

phxmars said...

The one temple announcement that was made that really surprised me in October and makes me think that a massive temple wave is coming is Yuba City, CA. In itself, it makes no sense being so close to Sacramento although dividing up the 22 stakes Sacramento serves may be the goal, to get it down to 10 or so for small temples.

OC Surfer said...

Yuba City area and surrounding towns have a lot of Latter-day Saint ties. In fact, the town of Gridley north of Yuba City was founded by Mormon farmers from SE Idaho. Gridley Stake was created in fact at the same time as the first Sacramento Stake in the early 1900s. A lot of the temple workers and patrons for the Sacramento Temple are from the Yuba City area. Also the Sacramento Metro area is growing more north towards Yuba City/Marysville, so perhaps this Yuba City temple is to accommodate future growth.

Fredrick said...

So Eric S, of all of those you listed, what are your top ten picks for the most likely announced temples?

Brian McConnell said...

Sharon, VT

Eric S. said...

If I were to pick a top ten it would probably be, in no particular order:

1. Santa Cruz, Bolivia
2. Freetown, Sierra Leone
3. Benin City, Nigeria
3. Bentonville/Rogers, Arkansas
4. Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
5. Missoula, Montana
6. Charlotte, North Carolina
7. Vienna, Austria
8. Antananarivo, Madagascar
9. Austin, Texas
10. Dubai, UAE (for the surprise announcement)

Mon Chou said...

@ Brian McConnel -- I like your statement on Sharon, Vermont. The Church is known for placing temples in historical areas... I've been thinking about this location for awhile. But I can see them opting for Montpelier instead if that is where a larger portion of Saints reside... But... how wonderful it would be to have one in Sharon! :)

Mon Chou said...

Speaking of historical temples... while I know the Kansas City, Missouri Temple is indeed VERY close geographically to the Church Historical Areas of Missouri (Far West, Haun's Mill, Independence, Adam-ondi-Ahman, etc.) -- do you perceive that the Church would build a Temple in Far West or Haun's Mill in the near future at all? (I purposely didn't state Independence or Adam-ondi-Ahman because I believe temple announcements there would be a HUGE announcement with HUGE implications that I don't perceive happening anytime soon...).

While I think it's safe to say the members in these areas probably don't need a temple (with their close proximity to Kansas City), I do know the Church is working on a lot of historical projects in the area... Are there any rumors for Haun's Mill or Far West?

James Anderson said...

I have seen the area north of KCMO from a truck driver's view several times, he's also broadcast US036 in the area too. There is not much population north of 435 which KC Temple is just off of. A smaller city, and a number of smaller towns. KC is adequate for now in that area.

I did get a possible date for the announcement regarding what that big rumor was about, March 22nd, and Elder Holland may be the one delivering the announcement. Not sure how or where we will hear what is said and who says it.

Brian McConnell said...

Now that is a tease if I ever heard one!

L. Chris Jones said...

I agree, I have Sharon VR on my prediction list, but only on my long term list. I feel it will be several years away. however I have been pleasantly surprised before where temples I thought were years away were announced much sooner than I thought. It seems that every time temples are announced, there are the ones on all the main prediction lists, but it seems there is at least one surprise.

Brian McConnell said...

Near Casper, Wyoming could also be the Martin's Cove temple.

Brian McConnell said...

Mongolia would be a great choice for a temple, having met missionaries from there, the people are saintly.

Mon Chou said...

Please do elaborate about this March 22nd announcement if you wish.... :)

Casper is an interesting location I haven't considered -- I must say I like the "Martin Cove" correlation! I think that is a good contender when you factor in the population of Casper! Thanks for your thoughts on that!

While a Pittsburgh, PA temple would serve a more populated region -- are there any thoughts on an Oakland Township, PA/Susquehanna River, PA Temple?? As the location of the restoration of the Priesthood and the baptism of Joseph Smith & Oliver Cowdrey -- I think this would be a highly symbolic location that would serve the needs of rural Pennsylvania/New York. Since Pittsburgh is a different part of the state, who's to say they both can't be considered? But these are just my wishful thoughts for now. hahaha.

L. Chris Jones said...

My wife is from Mongolia. A temple there would be Awesome.

L. Chris Jones said...

I like historical site temples.

Ryan Searcy said...

I can see Torreon getting a temple very soon. There are a lot of gaps in northern Mexico for places not close to a temple. This temple would easily serve 8 stakes and 3 districts. Also, temples for Culiacan, Reynosa, and Chihuahua, in that order.

Bryan Dorman said...

Ryan, as an American expat that is now a transplant in Mexico, I appreciate your enthuasiasm. Out of the northern cities, Culiacan despite its distance to the existing temples is a virtual nonstarter. Three stakes within its district have been discontinued. Torreón would cut the distance, and there´s five stakes in Torreón (plus two in Durango city and two more in Zacatecas) as well as Delicias stake which would be closer to Torreón than it is to Juárez.

Reynosa might be an option considering across the river you have McAllen, Harlingen, and Brownsville, plus Valle Hermoso, Nuevo Laredo, and Matamoros on the same side of the river. Laredo was just made a stake.

Chihuahua I don't really see. Only four stakes within its potential temple district.

Further south the Bajio region is sufficiently big now to support its own temple, but the question is where to put it. Probably Querétaro. Other options being Pachuca (who have to travel through restive Ecatepec to make it to the CDMX temple), Toluca (who have to cross the City to make it to the Temple in the Aragón neighborhood), and San Luis Potosi. Or it could go to Guanajuato state if they can split one of the three stakes there or make Salamanca or Guanajuato city into a stake.

Cancún is another option, four stakes in the immediate area plus Tizimin (where Chichen Itza is located) and Chetumal (on the Belize border). Might also grab the two Belize districts and the Havana district.

So my predictions are (for Mexico) (0-10 scale based on probability)

Bajio region (HGO, SLP, QRO OR GTO): 8. Two Bajio temples: 2

Reynosa: 5.5

Torreón: 5

Cancún: 4

Culiacán: 2.5

Chihuahua: 1.5

Surprise: Mexico City II : 3. Probably at or near old CEBA/new Mexico MTC as that is on the northwest side of the city near the exit to Queretaro on one end and another that goes to Toluca on the other end.

Bryan Dorman said...

As for my American temple picks here I go with same probability meter:


Heber (8)
Tooele (6.5)
Washington Co. III (4)
Price (4)

Western US:
Bakersfield CA (4)
Eugene OR (5)
Southern SEA-TAC WA (3)
Elko NV (7)
Las Vegas NV II - probably west side (6)
Phoenix AZ II - probably west side (Buckeye, Goodyear etc) (4)
El Paso TX - because military cannot cross into Juárez (6)
Colorado Springs CO (4)
Missoula MT (7)

Madison WI (3)
Church Historical Sites in MO (1)
Wichita KS (4)

Austin TX (5)
Fort Worth TX - now nearly 30 stakes in DFW Metro area (6)
McAllen TX (5.5) if Reynosa announced previously (1)
NW AR (8) Honestly could be placed anywhere in Ozark territory though this would be the best location.
Charlotte NC (5) Good stake growth in region make this more of a likelihood
Knoxville TN (4)
Jacksonville FL (5) Relative distance to existing temples in Orlando, Atlanta, and Columbia.
Tallahassee FL (5) See Jacksonville.
Jacksonville AND Tallahassee (1)

Kirtland OH restored (3.5)
Pittsburgh PA (3)
Albany NY (2.5)

Bryan Dorman said...

Other Latam countries

Guatemala III (6). Becomes a (7) for Cobán or a (5) for Huehuetenango. (2) for both.
San Pedro Sula HN (7)
San Miguel ES (5.5)
Cali CO (4.5)
Medellin CO (4.5)
Cali AND Medellin (1.5)
Iquitos PE (6) - Three stakes in relative isolation plus congregations upriver and downriver.
Cajamarca PE (5) Relatively distant from existing temples, or with high mountains blocking passage.
Cuzco PE (5) See Cajamarca comment.
Antofagasta CL (3.5) Salta makes this less likely yet Antofagasta is still quite far from Salta. Temple could easily serve multiple stakes from Copiapó in the south to Arica in the north.
Valparaiso CL (4) more stakes here but close to existing temple in Santiago.
Osorno CL (5) relative closeness to Puerto Montt and southern Chile region of Aysén. Also close to Bariloche AR and other nearby congregations on AR side.
Punta Arenas CL (3) Nearly completely isolated from the rest of the world. Southernmost stake. Would serve Ushuaia, Rio Gallegos, maybe Comodoro Rivadavia AR.
Neuquen AR (5) could serve as substitute for Osorno CL. (1.5) for both Neuquen and Osorno.

Tri Border Area PY,BR,AR (4) Six hours one way to Asunción, the closest temple.

Belo Horizonte MG BR (6) Let's see how Rio and Brasilia do first.
Sao Paulo State II (7.5) Favored cities in order: Ribeirao Preto, Sorocaba, Jundiai, Sao Jose dos Campos.
Sao Paulo Cidade II (7.5) Favored area: Guarulhos (NE side of Sao Paulo. Existing temple is on the west side. (4.5) for two temples, one in the city, another in the state).

Santiago DR (3) Might relieve Santo Domingo a bit.

Bryan Dorman said...


Cape Town ZA (3) Relative distance from Joburg and Durban.

Freetown SL (8) Probably the next nation to get a temple. Would serve new converts from Guinea and Senegal though for language purposes might be served by Abidjan CI. Guinea Bissau would be served by Praia CV. Liberia probably gets served too especially if the decision is made to put the temple in Bo being equidistant from Freetown and Monrovia.

Monrovia LB (7) Could easily get announced before Freetown. Both Freetown and Monrovia: (5). With Bo instead of Freetown (3).

Kumasi GH (6) Would serve central and northern Ghana, maybe Cape Coast Ghana (unless a temple gets called there soon).

Cape Coast GH (4) would serve western and Central Ghana, unless Kumasi gets called first.

Benin City NG (7) rapidly growing area, somewhat far from Aba and Lagos. 50 stakes in the country.

Abuja NG (4) would serve central Nigeria which is far from both Lagos and Aba, as well as Benin City. If another stake created there and if Jos becomes a stake this becomes a very likely proposition.

Lumbumbashi DC (4) Rapidly growing area in SE DR Congo. Would take Zambia too.

Antanarivo MD (6) Though only two stakes in the center, would be plausible due to isolation from other temples even after Durban, Kinshasa, and Nairobi get built. (6) becomes a (2.5) if Beira MZ is announced.

Beira MZ (3) See Antanarivo comment. Becomes a (1.5) with Antanarivo annoucement.


Austria-Hungary (4) Both Wien and Budapest relatively far from existing temples.

Russian city named (2.5). Favored spots: Saratov, Moscow, Yekaterinburg, St Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Samara, Kazan', Volgograd, Rostov in that order.

Edinburgh UK (3) Relative distance between Preston and London. Six stakes in Scotland plus two in Ireland. Might bring in members from Faeroe and Island though they might prefer the existing temple in Kobenhavn for culture/language reasons.

Barcelona ES (2) Could be an option now with three stakes in the Barcelona immediate area. Could grab Basque country in the north and Valencia and Balearic islands in the south, plus immediate areas of Andorra and Aquitania sector of France.


UB MO (6) Very isolated from the rest of the world. Would definitely be helped out by a Russian city announcement of Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk which would lower the probabilty to a (2). Closest temple is Hong Kong, two countries away or Seoul (likewise, two countries away).

Dubai UE (2.5) A suprise pick to be sure. Would serve members living in the Arabian Peninsula plus isolated members in the IRI and Pakistan.

Five Egyptian Temples (0.1) This is prophesied in Isaiah, though at current, won't happen soon and could be a Millenial fulfillment.

Jerusalem (2.5) Rumors have the Jerusalem Center as being convertible to a temple. Prophecies of it being constructed however by the Jews would need to be considered. In either case, would serve members who are in countries at peace with Israel (read, Egypt and Jordan).

Singapore (3) was considered to be a favorite until ward consolidations coupled with Bangkok and Phnom Penh announcements.


South Island NZ (4) Christchurch could get a small temple, relative distance between it and North Island a consideration.

Tonga II (4) Northern islands, think Vavau or Neiafu.
Pago Pago AS US (6) Existing stakes could support a small temple.

coachodeeps said...

Ha! The rumor mill! ;)

James G. Stokes said...

Interesting thoughts, as always, Matt. It has been awe-inspiring to see what has happened with temple developments within the 14 months since President Nelson became Church President. I know some have said here that due to the currently-existing backlog of announced temples, perhaps no new temples might be announced next month. While I understand the rationale behind that opinion to a certain extent, within 2 months or so of next month's General Conference, the number of announced temples (in other words, those for which we are awaiting a site announcement and/or groundbreaking) will have been slimmed down to 22. And given the fact that there will have been 8 temples in total which have a groundbreaking before the end of the first half of 2019, I am anticipating that at least 3-5 others could also have a groundbreaking in the latter half of this year, if not more than that.

And everything I have heard seems to indicate that, as the apostles minister in various areas of the world, part of what they have been doing is gauging the feasibility of potential temple locations that may be under consideration. I don't have anything too specific to back that up, but with what I have heard, that seems to be more than a slight possibility.

I also heard (but have not yet confirmed) that the preliminary groundwork has been accomplished sufficiently to the point that President Nelson could (and likely will) detail the extent and timing of his plans. And based on other things I have heard elsewhere, I am reasonably certain that at least a dozen new temples will likely be announced in General Conference in roughly 3 weeks.

A reference was made earlier on in this thread to my list of prospective temple locations. I believe that list speaks for itself. Rather than detailing my picks here, I would refer any who are interested to the post I have published on that subject on my blog recently, which can be found at the address below:

Anyone who wants to comment on that list at the location of the post is welcome to do so.

In the meantime, it is not surprising at all to hear that a major announcement relating to seminary is anticipated to be made later this month by Elder Holland. He is currently the senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles who serves on the Church Board of Education, and also heads up the Executive Committee of that Board, so any announcement relating to seminary or institute would naturally be made by him with the approval of the First Presidency.

And I did want to mention one other thing: Around 12 hours ago, I became aware of the following news release on the Church's Newsroom website:

While a Worldwide Celebration for a milestone birthday of a Church President has become somewhat traditional, this is the first time in several decades (if indeed it has ever happened before) that the first milestone birthday of a recently-ordained Church President will be his 95th. By all reports, President Nelson continues to make it hard for his Brethren in the apostleship to keep up with him, and is consistently acting, looking like, and having the energy and enthusiasm of men 2-3 decades younger than he is. So I have a feeling that this birthday celebration could be the first of at least 3-4 such celebrations that the Church holds in honor of President Nelson. And that is amazing to think about.

My thanks once again to Matt for all he does relating to this blog, and for allowing me to share the latest from my own blog here, and my thanks also to all of you for everything you continue to do to contribute to my ongoing understanding of and appreciation for the subject matter that is covered in our conversations here.

Unknown said...

I am hiping for several new temples to be announced. My top picks are Santa Cruz, Bolivia, somewhere in north Luzon, Phillipines, Kiribati, Christ Church, New Zealand, Freetown, Sierra Leone, Benin City, Nigeria, Kumasi Ghana, Cape Town, South Africa, Lumbumbashi, DR Congo, Bahia Blanca, Argentina, Iquitos, Peru, San Pedro Sula, Honduras, Durango, Mexico, northwest Arkansas and Tooelle, Utah.

Unknown said...

I expect both. With the emphasis on growth we will just ask the Salt Lake Stakes to come up with more temple workers.

Unknown said...

Both Rhode Island and Delaware seem extreme long shots for temples. I can see either Maine or New Hampshire getting a temple by 2022, but both seems unlikely before 2030. Mississippi also seems a long shot, and Iowa has two temples less than 5 miles from its border.

Arkansas is most likely the next state to get its 1st temple. After that probably Wisconsin. New Jersey is an outside candidate considering the fact driving into Manhattan is hard and commuting in by other ways from Morristown and beyond is time consuming. West Virginia is a possibility but Pittsburgh and maybe Buena Vista Virginia seem more likely to fill that gap in the short run.

Unknown said...

I could see American Samoa getting a temple soon. The Virgin Islands dont have a stake and the Northern Mariana Islands are in the Guam Stake so both unlikely

How long till every state of Brazil or Mexico has a temple. I could see a temple for Florianopolis which would give the 4 southernmost Brazilian state a temple each.

Unknown said...

Well 50 miles could give us a Lansing Temple in Michigan, and then a Traverse City Temple announced when that district is made a stake. Also a 3rd temple in DR Xongo (I know Lumbumbashi is not announced yet, but I hope)

Unknown said...

Some places knocking down buildings is its own super difficult task. Some may be historic protected which can make rebuild hard. That made Copenhagen a longer process. Although using buildings with past meaning and rebuilding as temples is nice to see.

Unknown said...

Since seminary is done school year and not calendar year that might be hard. Although new seminary start in January with people in 8th grade for a total of 4 and a half in the program and something special for the seniors would be awesome.

Unknown said...

Sacramento is 19,500 so almost twice the size of most temples dedicated 1999 to 2001. Still half the size of Dallas and a 4th the size of Las Vegas. Dallas and Las Vegas have about the same number of stakes but Las Vegas Temple is twice the size so Fort Worth will get a temple ling before Summerlin.

With Yuba City getting a temple I could see Bakerfield getting one.

Even once Benin City gets a temple there will still be more than 30 stakes in the Aba Temple district with the temple being 11,000 square feet. This is why I think they will put a temple in Akwa Ibom state. Maybe on a cite in some small village where people were meeting in the name of the Church in the 1960s

I would love to see a temple in Anthiny Obinna's village, but that is north and maybe a little west of Aba, not south and east where Akwa Ibom and its 12 stakes are. Also I think Obinna's village is still a branch in a district. Still if we can have a temple in Star Valley we can have one in villages in Nigeria.

Another totally outside idea is Abuja. It would raise the profile of the Church in Nigeria and with the two Abuja stakes clise to being 3 and Jos close to a stake could serve 4 stakes. I would live to see a visitors center built with the temple there and this used to leverage growth in the northern two thirds of Nigeria. Also splitting Abuja off as a seperate mission from Enugu would be a good move. Enugu was where the Cannoms and Maybees lived on their mission, it is within the Igbo and related heavily Xhristian especially Pentecostal south-east part of the country. Abuja is majority Muslim but not Sharia law.

Unknown said...

Gridley got a stake in 1935. Everywhere outside the US that had a stake by then now has a temple.

Unknown said...

I hope they build a temple in Harmony Pennsylvania.

Unknown said...

If Missouri gets a 3rd temple it will probably be in Springfield.

Ryan Searcy said...

I was initially skeptical of Bakersfield getting a temple for a number of reasons: business of their assigned temple, crime, and pollution.

Business - The few times I went to the LA temple between 2011-2012, the sessions I attended were extremely small, with the session filling in the first three rows, with each person sitting in every other seat. These are extremely large rooms for so few people to attend. I cannot speak for current temple attendance. I do know that the LA temple is staffed by a lot of workers from Bakersfield. Based on recent trends, if Puebla was announced given the reported dismal attendance from members within Mexico City, then Bakersfield stands a pretty good chance of getting a temple. It would also spare some members from having to go to Fresno, which is roughly the same distance away.

Crime - Bakersfield is a pretty rough area. Based on stories from other missionaries, the northern portion of town is much safer than the southern and especially the eastern part of town. Norther Bakersfield also has large tracts of undeveloped land that are steadily being developed into new housing. Last I heard, the mission office was located in this area.

Pollution - Bakersfield is the number one city in the US for the worst air quality, sometimes trading places with Fresno, which is number two. On most days, the smog is thick enough to where you would be unable to see the mountains, and to the surprise of one missionary I served with, he had no clue he was in a valley for several months of service there. White shirts very quickly became yellow as the smog got absorbed into the clothing. There was a recent post on Facebook that I read about air quality, and according to this post, Aba Nigeria has far worse air quality than Bakersfield, so if there is a temple there, smog shouldn't be an issue (even though Fresno is almost level with Bakersfield, and they have a temple too).

Unknown said...

Harmony would help those on the outside not have to go to center cities in Philly and NYC, but it still seems a long shot. Clearly would not impact a Pittsburgh Temple.

Wishfull Thinking said...

Im adding 2 to your American Temple predictions list.

Richfield, UT I know its a relatively close proximity to Manti ( 1 hour ), but this would encompass
The following stakes

Richfield East
Castle Dale


William P said...

Hi, the march 22 is already elaborated on in the comments above. You'd have to look for it, something to do with the seminary curriculum ending and beginning anew to match our current Come Follow Me Sunday school manuals.

William P said...

William P

3 words, 1 country. Papua New Guinea. Isn't this the nation with the most stakes and no temple? Well there you go. I also hear from James's blog that land has already been held in reserve for years in the capital Port Moresby. Also the physical island is split into 2 nations PNG on the east and Indonesia to the west called West Papua, this would also serve members in Indonesia a Jakarta temple wouldn't be needed.

James Anderson said...

Bakersfield though would help as there is a massive development planned near the bottom of the Grapevine near the I-5/CA-99 split. That in the end will only aggravate traffic on both those roads plus I-5 itself as well up the Grapevine and over Tejon Pass. That already sees congestion and one false move by some driver and an accident can tie up traffic for miles, sometimes both ways, and depending on the severity of the wreck, the accident could take some time to clear.

William P said...

Apparently when Hinckley proposed these smaller temples they were designed to be added onto and extended when the time arrived. I've only seen the Anchorage Alaska temple meet such a fate and by an architectural aspect its not what you'd call beautiful. It has its own taste are there any other Hinckley temples which have been through such a process?. I don't want 'my temple' the Brisbane looking like this in the beautiful city Brisbane CBD.

Michael said...


Suggesting that a temple in PNG (close to West Papua in Indonesia) would mean no need for a temple in Indonesia would be akin to saying "Oh we'll just build a temple in Tijuana Mexico, then no need for a temple in the U.S." especially if the majority of U.S. members lived in Washington D.C. and nearly no members lived in L.A. (hypothetical situation)...there are few to no members in West Papua; nearly all the members are on Java and most are in Jakarta which is nearly 3,000 miles away.

William P said...

Sorry its not Unknown its William P

According to Newsroom Indonesia doesn't even have 8000 members and PNG over 27,000. Mainland South East Asia has 2 temples announced/under construction and if with an additional PNG, wouldnt Indonesia be already well serviced. I mean there are members in Micronesia who travel to the Philippines and Hawaii (which is a world away) for temple and have been for decades long until Guam that is. Also the New Celedonia and Cook Island saints have been doing the same to go to New Zealand for decades long.

Fredrick said...

While Wishful Thinking does make an interesting argument for a Richfield, UT Temple, I think a Price Utah Temple makes more sense. Richfield is relatively close to Manti and a Richfield Temple would take away too many nearby stakes.

On the other hand, based on the map, Price is actually closer to Payson than Manti because Manti is separated from Price by a mountain. There are five stakes in the Price area and three south of it. Those eight stakes could really benefit from having a Price Temple due to longer than it appears road distance from Manti.

Lucas said...

Ribeirão Preto? No way!
you have Belo Horizonte, which is a large city without a temple nearby.
You also have northeast of Brazil Natal would be a good prediction.

Other than that If it were to be another temple in Sao Paulo state (Ribeirao is in Sao Paulo State) pretty sure it would be Sorocaba.

Fredrick said...

I believe there won't be a temple announcement in Brazil for the next few conferences. With Rio, Brasilia, Salvador, Belem still awaiting construction or completion, and Forteleza about to be dedicated, I believe the Church has Brazil well covered for now. Belo Horizonte won't get a temple until years after Rio opens. Natal doesn't have many stakes and is fairly close to Recife.

Mon Chou said...

PRICE!!! Yes, that seems reasonable.

Eduardo said...

Price, Utah! How many stakes would that garner? Richfield?

Wow, let's go Zion.

Throw down those power dunks.

Mon Chou said...

While I know the United Arab Emirates would be a likely candidate for a "Middle Eastern" Temple (if that surprise announcement were to be made), could not South-Eastern Europe be a likely candidate as well? I'm not talking about Austria or Budapest (although I agree those would serve Central-Eastern Europe very well), but like Greece or Bulgaria?

Yes, both Greece & Bulgaria have a small LDS population and growth is extremely stagnate/declining (Greece is a notoriously hard mission), but they would be much more accessible for the LDS communities in Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, Israel, Cyprus, etc. than Rome is (albeit this is a considerable improvement from traveling to Bern, Switzerland).

Yes, technically a Temple could be built in UAE, but members who are Israeli citizens would not be able to go to the UAE, but could go to South-Eastern-Europe without any problems (while most members in Israel are expats, there are dozens who are Israelis who converted abroad or married a LDS member in Israel, etc. -- I lived there as an expat for 3 years). Besides, Bulgaria/Greece/Albania is much closer to Turkey, Israel, Cyprus, Jordan, Egypt, etc. than the UAE is..... and could help with the few stakes in actual south-eastern Europe.

Although it would be spectacular to have a UAE Temple (for the "Eastern" side of the Middle East) -- it just seems more practical to have one in Southeastern Europe to meet the needs of the "Western" side of the Middle East.

But why not both? It's not an either/or thing. It just seems southeastern Europe would be more likely, no?

Eric S. said...

I think Albania would be the most likely location for a temple in the South-Eastern part of Europe since it is currently the only country in the area with a stake. I agree it would be a good location to help serve members in the area.

Anonymous said...

Martin's Cove Wyoming Temple haha (I have no idea how that would work logistically with road access during winter) but it would sure get packed during the summer when many stakes in Utah send kids out for youth conference. Could service Casper Rawlins maybe?

Michael said...

I’m not arguing against a PNG temple; I’m saying that your comment that “a Jakarta temple wouldn’t be needed” because they’d have a temple 3,000 miles away is an odd one.

James G. Stokes said...

Just by way of reminder to you all, the groundbreaking for the Pocatello Idaho Temple is taking place tomorrow morning. I see there are some wide-ranging opinions on temple locations, which is to be expected. I believe that temples are possible (if not equally likely to be imminent) for both PNG and Indonesia. I am also convinced there are likely several dozen (if not a hundred or more) locations that have a strong case in their favor for a temple. I also believe that the 200-mile distance goal set by other prophets (whether that is one-way or round-trip) will be halved or quartered at some point. We have seen several of the apostles visiting certain cities recently, and given that some of the temples announced last year were announced after one or more of the apostles visited many of those locations, perhaps the recent travels and ministry of the apostles can provide more insight into probable locations.

I have some additional thoughts on some other things that have been said here recently, but will save them for a time when I am a little more coherent than I currently am.

Mon Chou said...

Thanks, James, for your reminder! Not in the area, but I hope Pocatello has a very enriching day tomorrow!

Just curious: Where does this hypothesis about the 200-mile distance goal being halved/quartered at some point come from? I'm all for it, but was just curious what sources are behind this? Is it more of a general prediction ("someday") or do we know for sure that efforts/statements are being made to meet this the goal?

William P said...

William P

I know that's what you mean and that I've already explained my thinking on that subject.

Have a good day.

William P said...

William P

Thailand, Cambodia, PNG (possible). Those are the 2 South East Asian temples. Travel distances are not too much compared to what Melanesians+others have been doing for decades. That's all I'm saying

coachodeeps said...

Some thoughts on potential Utah temple. I lived in West Valley for over 7 years. I loved it the, but I don't think there will be a temple announced there. The congregations are shrinking in the area (west Salt Lake County) as many members are moving to the south Salt Lake County areas or more rural areas in Northern Utah. I did and many others are, too. Plus the distance for those in the area to go to the Jordan River Temple isn't that great.

Tooele is a more reasonable place for a temple and/or a second in south SL County. Herber City is also a good candidate with the growth in the area. Price is an interesting thought as Utah State University Eastern (formerly College of Eastern Utah, orCEU) located in the city and the road business from Manti. Those roads between are some of the more dangerous/ most different prone in Utah. Another temple in southwestern Utah (Washington County) may happen in 4 to 8 years due to all the growth. What about Mesquite, NV instead?

coachodeeps said...

Also, I hope TempleRick enjoys the groundbreaking today! My wife's cousin and her immediate family will all be there! How exciting! My wife loved in Pocatello for years and as many great friends and family in the area! Going north from Box Elder County, Utah that will be the next nearest Temple to me and my family after Brigham City. Love that gap is being filled!

coachodeeps said...

Some have suggested a 2nd Guatemala City temple or 3rd in the country of Guatemala. GC2 is not likely as the temple isn't that busy. I served in Guatemala and members I know well say many sessions have very few patrons.

I could see a temple in Coban or Huehue before a GC2. Coban had very strong membership, faithful Mayan people. The closest I would venture to a second in the GC area is Antigua. But overall, I think a 3rd in the country is 5 to 10 years away, though some good congregational growth had happened the last couple of years. The are just other areas of the world more in need of temples nearby.

Christopher Nicholson said...

I would welcome a change to the seminary program. Frankly, I hated almost every minute of it. I felt like the curriculum was dumbed down to Primary level, and every class was derailed every two minutes by the teacher asking my classmates who didn't want to be there to be quiet.

I'm wondering why nobody ever guesses a temple for Orem. It has 25 stakes currently serviced by what to my knowledge is still one of the busiest temples of the Church.

My wild card prediction is Punta Arenas, Chile, which would service the one stake in Chile and at least two districts, possibly three districts and a stake, in Argentina. Not the greatest numbers, but these units are an insane distance away from existing temples, and if Winnipeg can get one, so can they. Really, I would no longer be surprised to hear a temple announcement for literally anywhere. Temple district sizes don't seem to matter nearly as much as they once did.

Grandpa and Grandma, Missionnaires extraordinaires said...


Antananarivo (Anta-nana-rivo)
Pasadena, CA
Tooele/West Valley
Kinshasa #2
Heber City

Alison said...

In February, the Government of Kuwait granted its Official Recognition of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

James Anderson said...

The Seminary crriculum has changed dramatically since 2012, the biggest change was from scripture mastery to doctrinal mastery, still has 100 key scriptures, but even there some have changed twice.

Scripture chases are still out but some teachers are holding on to games like Jeopardy! The curriculum has and is changing twice. The lessons are much more robust. Whatever comes next week is only going to raise the bar relating to Seminary. You can read the curriculum both teacher and student, plus the doctrinal mastery material and core document, on or under Seminary and Institute > Seminary on the Gospel Library app.

Eric S. said...

Newsroom article on the Pocatello Temple groundbreaking that was held this morning:

James Anderson said...

And a new page,, is now live (this was the old Scroll down and you will find an Easter invitation. One minor cosmetic issue, that form says enter 'city or ZIP'. Everywhere else that is called a 'postal code' or similar, so some outside the US may find some confusion there.

James G. Stokes said...

If I may, I'd like to offer some additional thoughts here. Just as many of us may have our own strong feelings about certain locations potentially getting a temple, many of us also have experiences with certain areas that may indicate such prospects are not as imminent as some would suggest. I would say the one difference between any of us offering our thoughts in that regard and Matt doing the same is that he has surely done the research on many relevant factors of a wide variety and scope to provide the support behind the rationale of each choic he lists. He hasn't necessarily offered his rationale behind each choice, but he doesn't necessarily have to do so. I have watched with great appreciation as Matt has time and time again called locations that few (myself included) saw coming. So I send my appreciation to Matt for sharing his current list with all of us here.

That said, are there indications as to the imminent likelihood of any location named? Absolutely. But as the Lord reminds us, His ways and thoughts are higher than our ways and thoughts. If anyone had told me this time last year that temples would be announced in the April 2018 General Conference for both Russia and India, I would have dismissed that as an impossibility due to what I know about the religious and political situations of those nations.

If memory serves, Matt had both nations listed among his potentials for the April 2018 General Conference. I'd also like to add the thought that we may be entering somewhat uncharted territory here in terms of the future of the temple-building program of the Church. We have heard much said within the last year about President Nelson's plans to greatly expand the number of temples worldwide. And given the fact that some major preliminary steps have been taken towards whatever the plans involve and entail, it would not shock me at all if President Nelson both outlined his plans and announced at least a dozen new temples, but perhaps more. The announcement of the 19 temples last year was highliy significant, in that precise locations were named for 17 of those 19, which, as one of my seminary teachers used to say, is, by the way, a high percentage.

And 3 of those 19 will have had a groundbreaking within 7 months of their announcements. The San Juan, Yigo, and Praia temples could very well have been a "test case" or "pilot" to see how quickly approval could go through. And if that turns out to be the case, then smaller temples worldwide may once again become the "new norm", in which case any location may not be off the table. Will the Church continue to build medium- and larger-sized temples? Of course, because there are still world areas that would be benefited by that occurring. But could the San Juan, Yigo, and Praia temples be the start of a new effort to both "fill in the gaps" and "bring temples to the people" at a scale beyond what we saw in the late 1990s and early 2000s? Absolutely, especially since President Nelson has said more lately about how there will be an acceleration of the work.

I believe, therefore, that at least a dozen new temples may be announced in General Conference in a few weeks, and I am equally as confident that we will continue to see temples announced in locations on Matt's list, some from each of our personal lists, and in unexpected places. Either way, we had better be prepared, because I can just about guarantee that when we think we have temple locations figured out, the rules and the game will be changing in ways we cannot now expect and foresee. Of course, these are just some additional personal thoughts, for what they are worth. Either way, I think that the April 2019 General Conference will come with surprising developments we cannot now anticipate, just as was the case in April and October of last year. I for one will be taking President Nelson's advice to take my vitamins and get my rest. Hopefully all of you will go and do likewise.

Mon Chou said...

Are there any blogs or other links that discuss April 2019 General Conference predicted announcements/changes (aka... "rumors," but not by trolls... ya know?)?

Mon Chou said...

Bordeau/Toulouse/Barcelona are an interesting idea for a temple location. I was thinking the same thing!! Both Paris and Madrid temples are rather far for southern France/northern Spain. But do you think they would announce one there so soon after the Paris dedication and the upcoming Lisbon one?

Any thoughts for a temple in northern Spain/southern France? How is the LDS population in the region?

James Anderson said...

Google only turned up one discussion, but nothing of any real substance came up. Seems the semi is still at the rumor mill waiting to be loaded but perhaps the mill machinery broke down...

William P said...

I googled 'LDS conference predictions' a full page of blogs turned up with rumors for Oct 2018, don't know where this years rumors are all at. Sorry

L. Chris Jones said...

I hope for temples in Kirabati, Paupa New Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Mongolia, Arkansas and many more soon.

Derrill Watson said...

Why don't you rank Chile higher? I don't have the kind of data that you do, so I'd like to know more.

All I have is the number of members per temple in a country (once all currently announced temples are built):
Chile - 291,000 members per temple
Philippines and Bolivia - 195,000 members per temple each
Honduras and Venezuela - 165-170k

Logan H said...

Logan H

I think Pittsburgh, PA could be an alternative to Cleveland, OH especially if Kirtland as a historical place could play into Cleveland getting a temple. This can be a one or the other, or both get a temple… eventually.

Love the idea of Rapid City SD, considering its distance from Billings, MT and Bismarck, ND, and how good it would be for WY, SD, and NE. I’ve thought of it many times because it’s an ideal location to close distance gaps. However, because there are only two stakes right now it could serve, and Pierre district recently dissolved I wonder. This is one of the places I view like Elko, NV where it might only serve a small number of members but be very beneficial.

I like the thought of a Casper, WY temple and it makes sense. Elder Bednar visited there a few years ago and stated that Casper could have a temple in the future (like twenty years depending on membership). This seems reasonable down the road as there are only a few stakes right now it would serve. Casper (which could split), Riverton, and then Gillet and Rapid City if you don’t consider Rapid City getting a Temple. The thought of Martin’s Cove is very interesting as this would make it more accessible for the Riverton stake (30 min closer) as well as Rawlins wards, but I don’t think it makes sense over Casper with how remote Martin’s Cove is.

I also love the thought of Wichita, KS which would be great for Kansas and the same with Augusta, Maine and Charleston, WV. It is exciting to think of every U.S. state having a temple, but I don’t know about some like Vermont, Rhode Island, Delaware, New Jersey, and Mississippi and how long before increased membership would make these more likely. Then again with the hasting of the work, strong temple attendance, and Winnipeg as one example it goes to showing it is not impossible.

Logan H said...

Logan H

If I was to do a top 15 it would be the same as Matt’s top 10 except, I would say Lubumbashi, DRC OR Mbuji-Mayi, DRC instead of Ribeirão Preto, Brazil and then add:

San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Bacolod, Philippines
Missoula, MT
Jacksonville, FL

I’ll add these 5 as surprises because I think they are unlikely; but with their great distances and President Nelson’s recent announcements I think they are possibilities.
Dhabi, UAE
Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Tarawa, Kiribati
Antananarivo, Madagascar

I also want to add to Matt’s list of Less Likely New Temples. I could not back all these additional places up with reasons thus some might be wishful thinking. I have noticed others list some of these places. These additional places are food for thought, especially if smaller temples start being announced.

My additional Less Likely New Temples in no particular order:

Lindon/ Orem, UT
Smithfield, UT
Longview, TX/ Shreveport, LA
Pittsburgh, PA which I have mentioned as an and/or with Cleveland/Kirtland, OH
Burley, ID
Modesto, CA
Herriman, UT because of Pres. Hinckley’s statement
Tampa, FL
Juchitán de Zaragoza, Mexico
Maceio, Brazil
Tarija, Bolivia
Cusco, Peru
Santa Ana, El Salvador
Yerevan, Armenia (when there is a stake)
Wellington OR Christchurch, NZ

Matt said...

Thanks for all of your comments. Here are some locations I think will likely to have temples announced in about 5-10 years if current growth trends continue. Most of these are in Africa.

Luanda, Angola
Port Vila, Vanuatu
Abuja, Nigeria
Calabar, Nigeria
Ibadan, Nigeria
Onitsha, Nigeria
Lome, Togo
Yamoussoukro, Cote d'Ivoire
Yopougon, Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire - temple in construction is a small temple
Beira, Mozambique
Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo
Kinshasa, DR Congo (2nd temple) - temple about to be dedicated is a small temple

BTW, I finding it extremely unlikely that a temple in PNG would service Indonesia. There is significant conflict between Papuan peoples and the Indonesian government in Irian Jaya (Papua Province). However, a temple in PNG would likely service the Solomon Islands where the Church is growing rapidly.

Eduardo said...

Sounds like Madagascar is a good candidate for a temple based on some positive comments from an apostolic visit. Elder Stevenson?

Kenny said...

Someone mentioned a wish for a temple in Pasadena CA. I don't see that ever happening for multiple reasons.

1 - even with traffic, getting to the LA temple is about 1 hour.

2 - the LA temple is huge and highly under used.

3 - the stake gave away likely temple property next to the stake center to the Boy Scouts years ago. Yes there is still a baseball field, but extremely low chance.

James Anderson said...

Pasadena is too close. Traffic is not bad if you know what freeways and surface roads to use to get to LA/Santa Monica.

What I see as an eventual possibility is Oxnard. While it is freeway all the way, getting to the LA temple takes you through some of the most notorious traffic anywhere there, first the 101 then the 405 through the pass. One false move by some driver and that can cause backups, even on a midday Sundays it can be bad.

PCH from Oxnard is longer, but that is surface road so you have to pass through a significant gauntlet of traffic lights. And the lower speed limits.

OC Surfer said...

Another Southern California temple location at some point sooner than later, could be Temecula or Murrieta in SW Riverside County. That area (for California standards) is pretty strong with 5-10% of the population being Latter-day Saints. I can imagine that temple district with 8 stakes to include:

Riverside County:
Temecula Stake
Murrieta Stake
Menifee Stake
Lake Elsinore Stake
Hemet Stake
Corona Stake

San Diego County:
Escondido Stake
Vista Stake

Anonymous said...

Dark horse candidates, based almost entirely on distance/travel:
Rio Branco, Brazil
Cuiaba, Brazil

Ryan Searcy said...

I do not see a temple being built in Oxnard in the near future, unless it's solely to be a centralized location. Camarillo would be better candidates and aren't too far away. Within the last decade, Oxnard has gone from 6 wards to 3 wards. There is plenty of land behind the Camarillo Stake Center for a temple. Only issue at that particular stake center is the park next door regularly hosts tribute bands that is well attended by the community. The Church has allowed access to the parking lot for the community, and I have been an usher for a couple of those events, which was pretty fun to do. The stake center is also very easy to get to being just a couple of blocks away from the 101 via the Carmen Dr exit. Looking at all of the other chapels in Ventura, Oxnard, and Camarillo, there just isn't enough room for a temple on those lots. The chapel on Elm Street I've heard was closed and sold, but then on LDS Maps, it showed the chapel was still in use for Sunday services. With only 3 wards remaining in the city, it would not be efficient to have 1 ward in each building, so if the Church does indeed still own the chapel on Elm St, that could be razed and the temple built there.

Ryan Searcy said...

Looking again at LDS Maps, the Elm St Chapel is not listed.

Bryce said...

@Alison you posted that last month the government of Kuwait granted official recognition to The Church, that's awesome! I was trying to google a source but coming up empty-handed, do you have a source you can share? Thanks!

@Jamie you posted last month (under Updated Country Profile - Martinique) that the Church announced the translation of the triple into Guarani, and that the triple had been announced in Kazakh and Macedonian. That's also awesome but I can't find the sources for those 3 announcements either, do you have link(s) you could share? Thanks!

Mon Chou said...

I was looking for the same thing re: Kuwait. I'd appreciate that too

Cory said...

The Church News has reported over the past month the travels of the Apostles as they conducted the annual area reviews. Many of them visited more the isolated stakes of the areas. Many of those, are cities that have been recently discussed on this blog as potencial temple locations.

Elder Stevenson - Uganda and Madagascar
Elder Bednar - United Arab Emirates
Elder Soares - Santiago Dominican Republic, and Trinidad and Tobago.
Elder Renlund - Antofagasta Chile and Ushuaia, Argentina
Elder Cook - Cancun, Mexico
Elder Anderson - Vienna, Austria

Elder Uchtdorf and Christofferson also vised Sao Paulo and Guatemala City, which have been discussed as metro areas that could receive second temples. Of course, an apostle visiting a city does not necessarily mean that they are scouting out locations for temples. The Apostles visit many cities all the time, with big or small member populations. But it could be possible that some of these locations are being considered. In particular, the article about Elder Renlund stated that one of the primary goals of the trip was to visit more isolated cities.

Mon Chou said...

Nice analysis (both Cory for his post above and for Matt for his blog)! Thanks for taking the time to delve into this deeper. I like the concise list of which regions the apostles have visited (that match up with some of the predicted temples) -- how fascinating!!

Jamie said...

@Bryce: Unfortunately, the only links I have come through the Leader and Clerk Resources. If you have access, they are listed under the "Official Communications" link:
• Kazakh Triple Combination announcement:
• Macedonian Triple Combination announcement:
• Guarani Triple Combination announcement:

If you don't have access, you can try the links, but I didn't have success accessing them without signing into LCR.

Also, the Church recently announced the completion of the translation of the Triple Combination into Slovak:

Justin said...

A number of people have mentioned Valparaiso, Chile as a possibility. It's interesting to note that Matt put his guess on Viña del Mar instead of Valparaiso. I would place my bet on Viña too; it's a much better city. The local members were talking about the possibility of a temple in Viña ten years ago.

Rodrigo Jofre said...

Unfortunately, Americans have created confusion with the use of the term city. For most of the planet, a city is an urban area and a munipality is an artificial division for administrative purposes. Valparaíso and Viña del Mar are the same city and are part of the same metropolitan area known as Gran Valparaíso or Greater Valparaiso in English. The metro area is comprised of at least five municipalities and up to fifteen depending on different criteria. Ten stakes exist in this area of Chile. Furthermore, three other stakes and two districts would benefit from having a temple located in the Valparaiso Metropolitan Area. Valparaíso and Viña del Mar are neighboring municipalities.

Thomas Jay Kemp said...

Earlier L. Chris Jones wrote...
I think if an area provides a high number of workers and temple patrons, they are more likely to get a temple. That shows they are motivated and showing more readiness to have a temple of their own.

I am curious to know if members generating family file cards/sharing names to the general Temple file is also a leading indicator of enthusiasm for a Temple as areas are considered for a Temple?

Now that the new tools, particularly "Ordinances Ready" operate like 'modern manna' - all members need to do is click and instantly print cards. Are we seeing members of all ages responding and doing this? Elder Renlund in his broadcast 2 weeks ago encouraged 10 year old youth to begin doing this. The age for engagement keeps dropping. Very encouraging. We've heard consistently that this is protection to the members making this consistent effort & to the Church itself.

Unknown said...

The Winnipeg Temple has two stakes, Halifax no more than 3. Are the people of Price forever to lack a temple? Do only big cities deserve temples?

Unknown said...

Papua New Guinea is likely to get a temple, but even it was built on the border of West Papua, on both sides with dual entrances, it would in no way effect the likelihood of Jakarta getting a temple. I think if the Jakarta stake is able to grow to a poibt of splitting what with two other stakes in the country a temple will be announced. If Malaysia gets two stakes we will probably see a temple announced for Singapore.

Unknown said...

Many temples in the eastern US have 8 or fewer stakes. That is a reasonable number for a temple.

Unknown said...

I think the best place in south-east Europe for a temple would be Istanbul. That city is probably closer to getting a stake than anywhere else in the region. Albania seems to close to Rome to really help.

Unknown said...

I think a temple in WVC 8s just what is needed to reverse the trends of out migration. Of course I also talk about the day when we will get a Detroit City Center Temple so I am starting to work out a vision for 1000 temples by 2030.

Unknown said...

I have to admit I always found the seminary curriculum very engaging. It helped I had a very dedicated and prepared teacher. I need to be more like that as a Sunday School teacher.

Unknown said...

How would aBarcelona Temple play out with Catalan seperatism.

Unknown said...

Chile has very low rates of activity. Venezuela has had high levels of emigration.

Unknown said...

East Texas should get a temple in Enoch just outside of Gilmer. That place has deep hostory connected with the restored Church.

Unknown said...

I find this more likely in the short run than Ventura County. Ventura County has seen a decline in number of wards, but I could be wrong. Yuba City gives me hope for lots of places.

Unknown said...

Anchorage was smaller than temples like Brisbane when first built.

Noachj said...

Here is my thoughts on the temples. It took 151 years to announce the first 100 temples, it took 19 years to announce the next 100. At that rate it should only take 2.5 years to announce the next hundred, but we know it won't happen that fast. However I could see the church using the smaller more remote temple idea in places where it is difficult to get to a temple. This could include distance, time, country boarders, etc. But part of it has to fact in is growth in the area, retention, developing of leaders, and individuals submitting names to the temple, including the youth. With that being said and I have no ideas when it comes to number here are my top picks for places for a temple to be announced in no particular order:
Outside of the United States
1. Cobán Guatemala
2. Ulaanbaatar Mongolia
3. Taichung Taiwan
4. Monrovia Liberia
5. Antananarivo Madagascar
6. Vienna Austria
7. Kingston Jamaica
8. Torreón Mexico
9. Freetown Sierra Leone
10. Barcelona Spain

11. Dublin Ireland
12. Istanbul Turkey
13. Tarawa Kiribati
14. Belo Horizonte Brazil
15. Valparaíso Chile
Inside the United States
1. Colorado Springs, Colorado
2. Pensacola, Florida
3. Rodgers, Arkansas
4. Charlotte, North Carolina
5. Price, Utah
6. Springfield, Missouri
7. Augusta, Maine
8. Missoula, Montana
9. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
10. Casper, Wyoming
11. Heber City, Utah
12. Madison, Wisconsin
13. Wichita, Kansas
14. Sharon, Vermont
15. Fairbanks, Alaska
This would give us 30 so we would be a 1/3 of the way to the next 100. I only think they will announce 10-15 temples this time, but hey I remember when they said they would build 32 in conference and everyone was surprised, and so they did over time.

Mon Chou said...

I would think an Istanbul Temple would be more likely than the UAE. But I'd be happy either way.

Go Istanbul, Barcelona, & Vienna/Budapest!

Mon Chou said...

Supposedly only 2 more days until Holland's announcement of changes in the seminary program. Thoughts?

Mon Chou said...

Is there any source/documentation that the LDS Church has officially been recognized/licensed in Kuwait (in Feb. 2019)? I am unable to find info regarding that as one of the previous posters suggested. I would love to be directed to further info.

Mon Chou said...

Any new announcements or changes (other than more temples) that any of you predict for April 2019? Thoughts on length of time for missionary service? No longer waiting a year between civil marriage and sealing (as done in Europe)? Possibility of a woman being a Sunday School President? Shorter Proxy-endowment sessions? Or really... anything...

OC Surfer said...

I would love to see more care and attention given to the singles of the Church, which make up the majority of the adult membership of the Church. Currently only 5-10% of singles over age 30 are active in the Church. We lose 80% of active men, and 40% of active women post divorce, who feel kicked to the curb, judged with no support. 50% of active YSAs at age 30, go inactive if there are not established Midsingles 31-45 programs in their stake or region.

As a church, we are one of the only Christian denominations, that do not provide an organized church-wide divorce or single parent support group program. Many churches use which provides a 13 week class and group addressing different topics to help people heal. Having a Latter-day Saint version, would not only help singles members of the Church, but also can be used as a community service and missionary tool.

The big mega non-denominational churches especially use this approach of providing dozens of different kinds of community support groups and integrate these support groups as a way to help build their churches. Why can't we provide a similar approach? LDS Family Services really don't provide these services.

People nowadays are less initially interested about dogma and doctrine, and tend to seek a church that provides real-world solutions to their everyday lives. Having more community based support groups by the church can be another tool for the greater community to see the value in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, as well as better minister to singles who feel marginalized at Church.

Fredrick said...

OC Surfer - you couldn't have said it better. The singles have been largely ignored in the Church. When I turned 31, I feel completely alone and largely unwanted when I moved to my family ward. Even though I made great efforts to build friendship, I was met with fierce backlash by some. Overall, I think the problem is deeper. For some reason, I believe the LDS people have become very stand-offish towards one another. We embrace each other at arms length. And with people so quick to judge one another, its no wonder so many people suffering in isolation.

James G. Stokes said...

I think in that respect, we are blessed by who we have in our current First Presidency. Presidents Nelson and Oaks both have been widowers for a couple of years while serving as apostles. And President Eyring did not get married until after his 29th birthday. So I am sure that, in view of those circumstances, these Brethren are in a unique position to understand (and may thus begin to do something about) any issues of isolation that exist for any Church member.

That said, I would like to note something: The Brethren can certainly suggest, recommend, or mandate any practices that would help to ameliorate suchh feelings among the membership of the Church. But if personal choice or a neglect of stewardship is occurring at the local level when it should not be (which is a major contributing factor in some cases of this sort, from what I hear and observe), then the blame cannot or should not be laid at the feet of the Brethren offering such counsel if it is not taken. I am reminded of the old proverb: "You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink."

In addition, regardless of what any leader of the Church is or is not doing to help prevent such problems before they become wide-spread issues, if all of us do not take seriously the opportunities the Lord presents us to reach out with a hand of fellowship, in every way we have been directed, then if any of His sheep fall by the wayside, the fault for that will be squarely on our shoulders.

I fear we may become so busy pointing out the problems we see in the Church that at times we forget to focus on what we can do to be part of the solution to such problems. There are certainly some who have a stewardship that should be honoring it in all such cases, but I think the Lord made it clear when He said: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." The reverse is also true, as the Lord tells us: "Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me."

As our hymn "A Poor Wayfairing Man of Grief" teaches, we don't need to have a calling or stewardship to love and serve others as each of us would undoubtedly love and serve the Savior. May I suggest that our time would be much better used if focused on what we can do to solve the problems we see rather than focusing on anything or everything others are not doing to solve the problems we can see? It's food for thought, which I present for what it may be worth to any of you. Having said that, I will now step off my personal soapbox, and get back to doing what I can to uplift and inspire others.

Unknown said...

I think at all levels we need to minister to people more proactively. In general I felt included in my ward as an over 30 single, but it helped I was in a ward where I already knew lots of people. Better addressing the struggles people go through in divorce might help. I still think much of this could be accomplished by implementing ministering as intended.

Whizzbang said...

Slight correction to Unknown, Winnipeg has a stake and a district.

James Anderson said...

People are looking for both solutions, and to hear scriptural teaching and doctrine. That is one complaint I run acros occasionally and regularly on Christian radio, and once in a while a particular church (typically just individual congregations) are spoken of derogatorily.

Heard years ago, I think 2012, of a speaker who went to a church in north Texas and he wanted those there to open to the second chapte of Acts. That is a linchpin chapter in evangelical theology, and even we have a verse from it in our Seminary program's doctrinal mastery (formerly scripture mastery) verses although the present verses from that have changed recently.

Well, no one had a Bible. So the pastor there went to his offices, none there. He went to a back area where classes were held and found five copies and brought them in, then the problem was no one knew where the Book of Acts was.

That may be an extreme example. Yet I heard someone on a talk show say 'Ask any Mormon, they will tell you they don't read the Bible', and that probably came because they visited a meeting where the Book of Mormon or D&C was heavily used or a sunday school class that year was not studying the Bible due to the rotation we follow.

Still others who do teach doctrine are passed notes afterward asking for help or thanking the speakers for teaching them doctrine from the Bible and that the church they just heard that speaker at did not teach from it hardly at all. So for us we can let people know we use and teach the Bible, and although we teach our other two books on rotating years, two out of the four years rotation are from the Bible

And one other thing. The restoration started with the reading of two verses in the Bible, James 1:5-6, that one is also a doctrinal mastery passage in Seminary

OC Surfer said...

James, you are assuming all singles are being adequately fellowshipped and ministered by others. In my experience as a regional singles rep, I can tell you, that is sooooo not the case. Most singles are completely forgotten and ignored by their wards and church leaders. How would you like it if every week you were treated like a leaper because of your single status? If 90-95% of singles over the age of 30 are inactive, then that means the status quo isn't working.

If this blog is truly about discussing church growth, one of the best ways to retain and grow the church would be to better serve singles.

Brian McConnell said...

Done, semi-aligned starting in June 2019 or new school year, whichever comes first.

R.J.Phillips said...

OC Surfer: I would be interested to know exactly what you mean by "forgotten and ignored"; what specifically have you observed? I really would like to know. I don't doubt singles in family wards feel at least somewhat outcast (and that's a shame), however I'd need a lot of convincing to think it was malicious intent. My guess is probably those that are married or in leadership positions just don't know what the needs of singles are or really how to help them. Maybe singles don't know either. You mentioned being treated like a leper, but then also mention a support group solution. How does that solve the leper problem? Perhaps if the prophet just asked married members to just invite childless singles over to their house more often to include them in family life that would solve at least part of it. That's another issue: divorced singles, divorced singles with kids, and never married singles probably all have slightly differing needs that there are no best practices for. Member may even just assume that you prefer being single. Maybe because it feels taboo to even talk about it amongst ward members outside of ward council. So, it's just ignored; just like a lot of singles feel. Here's another funny thing to consider: When I got married at 29 a lot of my single friends dropped me off the map. I knew it would happen because I had done the same thing when I was single shame on me. This may be an anecdote but it's possible the distancing is happening from both sides it's just more difficult being the minority of the group.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@OC Surfer

Hear hear!

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@R. J. Phillips:

I don't believe the stigma against singles is out of malicious intent, either (most of the time). But we can't ignore the fact that we have cultural preconceptions against single members, either. That comes both from our general history of focus on eternal marriage, and from things said from the pulpit.

Some specific instances:

I moved into my current stake (just having "graduated" from a singles' ward in another area). The first week or so, I was introduced to the stake president's wife, and the topic came up that I wasn't married. I offhandedly commented that, "I'm in no hurry right now to get married." She (kind of jokingly) said, "Oh, do you need to talk to the stake president about that?"

Now, she's a sweet lady, and I don't really bear her ill will, but that comment belied a stereotype that I've come across over and over against single men of the church: that if we're not married, we're somehow rebellious sinners.

Another example:

My former bishop (same stake) of the family ward I attend calls me into the office one day, accusing me (based on reports from a couple of married members) that I'd been inappropriate with the young ladies of the ward. No evidence was provided to me, no witnesses were provided, nor was I really allowed to defend myself. This bishop simply banned me from attending temple trips with the youth for awhile. I had to find out from my brother-in-law what I was even being accused of. One instance was that I had been playing in the swimming pool with the daughter of one of my good friends at a youth activity, and the married member never asked me anything about it, they just went to the bishop, assuming I was some kind of pervert. By the way, I later went to the young lady's parents and explained the situation to them, and both her parents LAUGHED OUT LOUD when they heard I'd been accused of anything like that. I'd known them for a few years (I actually introduced them to each other), and I've been an artistic mentor to their daughter, so have kind of an uncle/niece relationship. The other instance was of a new young woman who came to Sunday School for the first time. I could tell she seemed shy and introverted, so I drew a caricature for her (she had on a pretty green dress and flaming red hair) and gave it to her. She installed smiled, showed it to her cousin and the other classmates, and felt more included in the new ward. The next week, I talked to her about the drawing in the hallway (surrounded by other youth and leaders and adults) and asked if it was okay if I posted that drawing with my other caricatures on my Instagram account. She said it was fine. Apparently, that was the other incident that I got reported for. Side note: I'm friends with that young lady's family, too, and have never been accused of anything by her family members who've gotten to know me. Perhaps if I'd been a married man things would have been different in that situation. Perhaps people are just uncomfortable around artists. Perhaps it's the fact that I have a well-trimmed beard. Maybe those are just three unforgiveable strikes against me, but I definitely felt that I was being unfairly prejudiced against for being a single man trying to interact with other members of my family's ward.

Another example:

My good, stalwart, spiritual single buddy attends his singles' ward in Southern Idaho. The bishop and stake president tell him he can't attend anymore, because they're changing the rules to cut men off from the ward at age 25, because they, "Don't want the older men in their late 20's seducing the younger women."

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

One last example:

My stake president at BYU at stake conference forcefully chastises us that, "The only reasons any of you should be here is for your education and to get married!" And I'm sitting there, thinkin,' "Look around, man! Have you even talked to anyone in this room? What else do you think most of these people came to BYU to do? To party? This is the stone-cold sober capital of the college world!"

Two more examples:

My buddy from earlier attends institute. He's told by the speaker that, "If you singles don't get married in this life and don't attain the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom, it'll be your own fault!"

I attend institute (the very last time I did, I might add). The speaker tells us how his daughter made a mistake in not marrying either of the two last guys she dated, and that now he's afraid she's "going to have to settle." And I'm thinkin',"I don't think your daughter would appreciate you telling this personal story about her in such a negative light to a group of total strangers. Also, what do we really know about her last two relationships? Maybe the guys were jerks and you couldn't see that. Maybe the Spirit answered her prayers to tell her to find someone else?"

To answer your statement, "My guess is probably those that are married or in leadership positions just don't know what the needs of singles are or really how to help them."

My experience has been that's because they don't ask. They don't get to know them as individuals. They just assume they're layabouts or sob-stories like they've heard of somewhere.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

To answer you statement, "Maybe singles don't know {what they want} either."

That one's easy. Singles want to be treated with respect. They want to be treated like peers to the married members of the church. They don't want to be constantly reminded of their single status. They don't want to be constantly told they need to get married. They don't want to be told they should only attend singles wards, or mid-singles wards. They want callings and to be treated like they're useful and worthy members.

But we don't treat them that way. We treat them like they're unworthy scum. We treat the men like they're rebellious sinners or "menaces to society" and the women like they're "sweet-spirits" or sob-stories to pity.

This is a large part of what lead to my best friend leaving the church. He felt "forgotten and ignored and outcast."

Perhaps single and divorcee support groups aren't the answer, but it would be nice to see the church experiment with different approaches then we've been taking the last few decades to deal with single and divorced members.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

It would be nice to not have to dread going to the semi-annual rebuke at General Conference Priesthood session where the single men are told what slobs we all are, and how we're not honoring our Priesthood, because we haven't been fortunate enough to find a wife yet.

It is nice to see an uptick in the amount and frequency of Church Magazine articles and General Conference talks that address singles in a more compassionate way over the last few years. Although, I would love to see a talk in General Conference or Priesthood session from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve praising the singles of the church for their stalwartness in dealing with all prejudice and heartache they have to go thru, rather than condemning them for what's missing in their life. It would be nice if those talks were frequent, and it would be nice if they were particularly aimed at the men of the church (Just because, in my experience, the ladies have been treated with a bit more compassion from the leaders on this subject. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, ladies.). I really think changing the way we talk to and about singles from the highest pulpit can eventually change how the lay-members treat them and talk about them.

One last thing:

I'm a 36 year-old single man in this church. Despite the stake president's wife wanting me to talk to her husband about it, I'm still "not in a big hurry" to get married. That doesn't mean I don't want to get married, or that it's not my eternal goal. That mentality is based on my own personal answers to prayers, wherein the Lord has told me to be patient, and from my own experience that trying to rush relationships only leads to more anxiety and more heartache for me and others, whether it be romantic relationships or just friendships.

P.S. @R. J. Phillips:

I'm sorry your single friends abandoned you when you got married. I've tried to keep up the friendships with my married friends. My experience is that some of my married friends just move on and focus on their marriage for a few years as newlyweds. I've heard from other married members that they still want to be friends and pal around with the singles and do the fun activities and dances and game nights like the singles do. One married couple in my area who "graduated" from the mid-singles hosts a game night at their house every month for all their single friends (some of their married friends) and it's a blast. So, your idea of "Perhaps if the prophet just asked married members to just invite childless singles over to their house more often to include them in family life that would solve at least part of it," is an idea that I think has promise. We as singles need to get over ourselves as well. We have the responsibility of throwing ourselves into the work wherever we're at and ignoring the jerks who don't treat us with respect. That's on us.

Sorry this post is so long, guys and gals, but since I'm a 36 year-old single man in the church, marriage and singledom has gotta be the only thing that could possibly be on my mind, right? ;)

William Loveland said...

I would like to give my opinion on the topic of singles. I am someone who has been fortunate enough to serve in a bishopric and am currently in a stake presidency. Because of this I have had the opportunity to interact with singles in a leadership role while also seeing the larger picture of what the needs and concerns of the other members are. Let me say from the beginning that no group in the church is the recipient of so much discussion and concern at meetings, benefactor of out of meeting actions, not to mention what they are given in time, talents, and resources as the singles. The singles are often discussed and have time and money spent on them often to the point that other members are neglected. Some have said that the reason so many singles are inactive is that they feel like a "leper" around other members. I have seen members of all ages reach out to the singles even to the point of appearing foolish in their attempts to fellowship those members. However, when I have visited with inactive singles about why they are inactive I have typically received answers such as "church is too early and I can't get out of bed in time", "church is boring", or "I play video games when church is happening." The singles can do better than that! I am not saying that local leaders or members are perfect or that all the blame is on the singles. What I am saying is that there is a two-way street. Singles must also be willing to give up video game time to come to church.

As far as the comment about the "semi-annual rebuke at the Priesthood Session". The same can be said for those of us who are married with children. We also hear at every Priesthood Session that we are mean, grouchy, irritable, etc. towards our wife and children. The rebukes don't end when you get married. The Priesthood Session has always had more of this feel than the Women's Session. I strongly believe that is simply because of the difference in men and women's nature. Men have always (at least until men began to be feminized in our society) responded better to direct advice. This is why the best way to befriend a boy in high school is to punch him on the shoulder a few extra times. In short if you are a male member of the church you will always get rebuked at the Priesthood Session, and that's the way it should be!

I hope that none of you will think with my comments that I am excusing the actions of individual members or local leaders. All I am trying to do with my comments is give the larger view of this topic.

coachodeeps said...

@Johnathan Whiting, I am saddened by the stories you shared, not because you shared then, but because they happened to real people and members of the church. Unfortunately, these are not the only instances of singles being mistreated. I was single for some time after my mission. I often heard I was a menace to society, need to be married, should attend the area's single ward, and I was frivoliously wasting my time and life away being single. I was quite active in my family ward with my parents, but never fully embraced. I heard many stories of others that were maltreated, spoken to rudely by members, and shunned.

The Stake later created a YSA ward for our stake specifically. I attended the organizing meeting more to see who the leadership would be. The Bishopric spoke and the Stake President. They each stated the ward was to be a place the attendees (didn't even mention the word singles, which was refreshing) could learn and live the gospel to its fullest. I was called almost immediately to serve as the Executive Secretary to the Bishop. They were kind and fully inclusive of me and my talents. They sought out my thoughts, feelings and insights as they organized the ward, made decisions and fought the direction of the Lord.

These are the best of Brethren who wanted nothing but the best for each ward member. They wanted us as singles to do just as they said, learn and love the gospel. They knew as we did, the results would be we would become better individuals and in many instances we would become the people we needed to be. A side benefit of this individual growth would be marriage, but they never focused on that. It was great. They just had the best interest of those standing in mind. These were young adults who they knew, cared for, loved and lived near. (They did say to me the only way I should be released would be through marriage and only because the ward was designated as a YSA ward.) That was the only way it happened. I became a better person while in the ward and serving with these incredible men. Eventually, almost despite myself, I found the one to marry and I was reluctantly released. To this day, I cherish the experiences I had with each of them. I am grateful they were so inclusive and focused on the doctrine of the restored gospel. As we personally do this, we're are strengthened and can strengthen those around us. When we forget the true focus of wards and meeting together, we often let the worst out of ourselves.

coachodeeps said...

*Sought the direction of the Lord... not fought. ;)

OC Surfer said...

William Loveland, your experience must be with the younger side of YSAs, college-aged singles. No one in my Midsingles Ward 31-45 or in the Single Adults 46+ throughout the region ever say they don't go to church because of video games. Or because church is too early. Our ward meets last in the building at 12:00 pm.

However, I can see "boring" being a genuine concern, since especially in family wards all the comments and lessons are geared towards families, and not to single parents, divorced singles, or never been married singles. There's no very outreach and friendship in family wards. Very rarely especially single men are given callings in the ward, and single women get thrown often into Primary where they are never able to socialize with other adults in the ward.

Very few stakes have an organized Midsingles 31-45 or Single Adult 46+ Program, and if they do, they never really advertise it or let other stakes in the region know about it, so most singles are left in the dark, assuming there are no other singles around in the area.

There's not an one size fits all approach to serving singles, since the needs are all different by age and life experience.

I can tell you personally that the comments Jonathan Whiting made are very spot on.

Logan H said...

These are some more Less Likely New Temple places I have considered:

Another Las Vegas Temple considering nearby St. George/ Washington County temples that cover about the same number of stakes. Plus, the Las Vegas temple is far smaller than the St. George temple. However, I do not know how temple going members in Las Vegas compares to Washington County, Utah.

The same goes for all the following places where temple going members and the number of people that would support a new temple is more important than a place’s distance from an existing temple. I do not know temple attendance numbers, only numbers of unites that these less likely new temple districts could serve.

Knoxville, TN could serve 5 stakes if Asheville, NC is included
Buena Vista, VA could serve 5 stakes
Morelia, Mexico could serve 5 stakes and 1 district
Poza Rica, Mexico could serve 5 stakes

Huancayo, Peru which is about 7 hours travel from Lima could serve 9 stakes and 1 district. The farthest stake, Pucallpa, could cut 3 hours off travel if they went to Huancayo instead of Lima.

Port Harcourt, Nigeria which could serve 7 stakes and 1 district. Would this take too much away from Aba? Again, I don’t know how strong temple attendance is from these areas.

These are places I have previously listed but have added here the number of units they could serve:

Longview, Texas/ Shreveport, Louisiana could serve 5 stakes
Modesto, California could serve 7 stakes
Cusco, Peru could serve 3 stakes and 5 districts
Tarija, Bolivia could serve 2 stakes and 3 districts
Maceio, Brazil could serve 9 stakes
Port Vila, Vanuatu could serve 1 stake and 3 districts, 2 stakes if consider Noumea, New Caledonia

I also find the recent visits of apostles to Trinidad and Tobago; Ushuaia, Argentina; Mongolia; Madagascar; and other places exciting.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@William Loveland:

I want to say that I appreciate many of the leaders of this church (like you) and the time and talents and commitment you put into your callings. I’m not trying to be overtly negative with my statements here, it’s just that @R. J. Phillips asked for specific examples of singles being mistreated, so I provided them from my own experiences. I’m not out to attack anyone personally, but I do have a bit of a chip on my shoulder because of how I’ve been treated by certain leaders and members. If possible, I’d like to help correct stereotypes and mindsets that I find are more hurtful than helpful.

I agree with you that there are probably plenty of single men out there who are just skipping church because they think it’s boring or they want to play video games or some other excuse. But not all of us. And the problem arises when those of us who are “willing to give up video game time to come to church” are being treated exactly the same as, or lumped in with, those who aren’t coming.

I agree with you that the married men of the church are also rebuked at Priesthood Session. However, there is a slight difference. Usually with the married men, you’re given advice that you can immediately turn around and implement. When an Apostle tells you that you’re not saying “I Love You” to your wife or kids enough, you can immediately go home after the session and say it to her and them, or buy her flowers, or mark your calendar for your anniversary, etc.

Single people don’t have that luxury, and usually aren’t given specific enough advice (in my opinion) that they can immediately implement.

For example, there was a talk recently in General Conference where a Seventy told a condensed story of his courtship. He related that he came home from his mission, made a list of all the qualities he was looking for in wife, and BADDA BING BADDA BOOM! he was married shortly thereafter. And he acted like it should be just that simple for every single person to get married that way.

Now, I’m glad he figured it out. I’m glad the Lord blessed him with good fortune to find a wife and create his eternal marriage early. That’s great for him. But it’s not so simple for each of us.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

Many of the single men I’ve known have hardly even a clue as to how to even talk to or approach a woman, much less ask her out, much less get engaged, much less get married to her. It’s like they’re at the bottom of the ladder blindfolded, and being reprimanded for not immediately being at the top, and not being shown how to take each rung one step at a time.

My parents were old when I was born. They had completely forgotten how to date or what single life was like by that point, and the things they did remember from the 50’s and 60’s mostly didn’t apply at all to a kid trying to date girls in the 90’s and 2000’s.

I had to almost completely teach myself how to date by learning from my peers or from reading about interpersonal relationships in books (Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win Friends and Influence People” was a big help).

And that’s another issue we have when we talk about dating and marriage. Most of the rhetoric is, “Why aren’t you people dating or getting engaged!?” And little focus on the specifics of building strong friendships or relationships. But there are also many men I know who can’t even make friends with other men, much less women. I wish we would teach the universal examples of how to just build relationships in general (like what Dale Carnegie and others talk about in their books), rather than just assuming people can innately figure it out for themselves. Because not everyone can. Some people have been given the gift to be naturally charming and attractive and charismatic, and others haven’t. But we tend to praise those with these natural gifts for how successful they are in having gotten married and had children at an early age, and we condemn those who haven’t been so fortunate as if they’re intentionally try to disobey.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

I wish to address your comment that, “Men have always (at least until men began to be feminized in our society) responded better to direct advice. “

This is kind of what I’m talking about. Approaching all men as if they are exactly the same personality type, and should all respond to the same type of preaching and fellowshipping in exactly the same way.

A personal example:

I used to walk up and slug other guys in the arm as a token of friendship in high school, too. A friend from my ward (who played basketball and football) came up to me one day and told me if ever did that again he’d deck me (and he said he wasn’t the only one). I learned from that that not everyone responded kindly to that kind of interaction. I also eventually learned (from being hit a few times) that I didn’t care for it that much either.

One of my nephews has downs syndrome, a couple of others have autism and ADHD, and I can tell you right now that physical contact like that would be the absolute worst way to try to make friends with them.

One of the big problems I’ve seen that stems from our western United States pioneer heritage is that we still assume every man in the church should be living the “Code of the West” or something. We assume that everyone should be a tough jock or cowboy, and ignore that high school (and the church) is also full of guys who want to be members of the AV Club, the Yearbook Club, the Drama Club, Choir, the Math Club, the Art Club, etc.

I don’t know if it has as much to do with “men began to be feminized” as it is that we as a society started to realize there are more than one ideal of manhood we could strive for. Not everyone wants to be, or should be expected to be, John Wayne or Clint Eastwood or Porter Rockwell or John McClain or Arnold or the Dukes of Hazzard.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

To answer this statement, “In short if you are a male member of the church you will always get rebuked at the Priesthood Session, and that's the way it should be!”

I’m sorry, but I disagree wholeheartedly with this statement. This is the true and LIVING church of Jesus Christ. Anything living experiences change and growth. That’s one reason I follow this blog, and appreciate Matt’s analysis of different approaches we can take in the future when we encounter people from different societies and cultures. He also points out the types of approaches that haven’t been very successful so far.

I previously mentioned my friend who has since left the church. When he was a kid in scouts, he told the other boys he wasn’t interested in sports or fighting (he’s a very talented musician, by the way). The other boys promptly beat the crap out of him. They harassed him and stuffed his clothes in a port-a-potty. I personally experienced similar treatment from the other guys when I was a kid in scouts because I wasn’t into skiing or snowboarding or cars or football.

I think we’ve moved past the era where bullying and physical assault were cute and acceptable. It’s not acceptable anymore to call guys “sissies” or “girly” or “feminine” or “wusses” or “homos” or “fairies” or “fags” or “queer” or “weird” or whatever simply because they don’t like punching each other or aren’t into football and drag-racing.

I’m sorry to use those terms here, but they’re all words I’ve heard (or personally been called) at church by the more popular “normal” kids (and leaders at times).

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

Our Lord approached people differently. Yes, he whipped the money-changers out of the temple, because that’s what they needed in their situation. He spoke harsh words against the Scribes and Pharisees, but he also showed compassion to the lowly of heart, the downtrodden, the poor and the meek.

He knew how to approach each personality and situation differently. And yes, He was perfect, but our whole purpose in this church is to try to be like him, so I think it’s fair to learn more from his example.

After all, this is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and not The Church of John Wayne of Country-Western Machismo.

Joseph Smith approached different people differently, too, and he was a fine example of a “man’s man.” He showed that “When I am with the boys, I try to make as much fun for them as I can,” and was into wrestling and stick-pulling and all sorts of traditional manly sports, but he showed compassion to the poor and the meek and the Lord taught him that the manly approach didn’t always work with everybody.

D&C 121:

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

45 Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men...

As single men, we’ve had a heapin’ helpin’ of “reproving betimes with sharpness.” My experience has been that we haven’t had an equal portion of “showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy”

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

That’s why I appreciate Elder Jeffrey R. Holland so much. His talk, “Like a Broken Vessel,” states that it’s not enough for some men (and women) to simply square their shoulders and pretend like they can just “cowboy-up” and their depression and anxiety will be fixed. He admits that he knows personally what that kind of depression and anxiety are like. He is someone who has admitted that he “doesn’t know what it’s like be picked last for the sports team or to not have a date to the prom,” but he still reaches out to those of us who have experienced those things.

In an address he gave to the CES program on 8-8-2000:
“Can you try a little harder to teach so powerfully and so spiritually that you can take that student-that boy or girl who walks alone to school and from school, who sits alone in the lunchroom, who has never had a date, who is the brunt of every joke, who weeps in the dark of the night-can you unleash the power in the scriptures and the power in the gospel and “cleanse” that leper, a leper not of his or her making, a leper made by those on our right and on our left and sometimes by us?”

Please don’t try to tell me that what that lonely kid (or lonely adult) needs is for someone to come up and “punch them in the arm” to make them feel welcome, or that they need to be emotionally “punched” every General Conference by a rebuke from the pulpit. Some of us just need kindness and an understanding friend.

Whizzbang said...

As a 40 year old divorcee with an unbaptized son, I can weigh in on being single in the Church. Simply put the reality is where I live, women don't live. They all live elsewhere. I don't know them, how do I get to know them, email? carrier pidgeon? how do you date someone two provinces over? I don't have a million dollars to keep flying back and forth. How do you build a friendship with someone you've never met? Unless God moves someone here, I am stuck being single. I never follow advice from people who have never lived with the consequences of their own advice, it's easy to say whatever but unless a woman moves here, it's all whistling in the wind. My PB talks about choosing someone and what qualities to look for, you can't do that unless you have someone to choose? So, I wait until God moves someone here, other than that I welcome a million bucks.

James G. Stokes said...

OC Surfer, I assume your comment above was directed to me. In that comment, you implied that I knew nothing about being ostracized, isolated, ignored, or shunned. And if you made that comment in response to the last thing I said on this thread, you might have a point. That said, there are some things you might want to know about me. At birth, I was diagnosed with cerebral palsy and hydrocephalus, and I have had a life-long variety of health challenges as a result. For the first 16 or 17 years of my life, prior to having a surgery that enabled me to have a change in my balance, gait, and movement, I would use my whole body in my effort to walk. And since many elementary school kids have a history of being cruel to people who are different, until people got to know me, I did feel isolated and misjudged.

When I started fourth grade, I had a best friend whom I first met three years earlier. For reasons that still aren't clear to me, he became the target of some vicious and cruel teasing, and because I would neither drop him as a friend nor join in on the teasing, I was picked on in the same manner.

In the wards I attended, I always felt welcome, appreciated, and included. But when it came to dating, I was classified by my female peers as one who was a "good friend" and a "great guy", the kind of individual they liked talking to, but didn't care to date. It took my service at the temple to lead me to someone who as not intimidated by my health situation, and who was interested in what she saw in me that went beyond physical appearances and mortal circumstances. It was enough for her that I was committed to the Lord and His gospel. And I appreciate that she continues to have that mindset to this day, as we observed our 8th wedding anniversary a few months ago.

James G. Stokes said...

I have one more example: In October 2015, my wife and I moved into our present home (located in a ward where most of the housing units are meant to be for a temporary period). Because we live in a non-permanent residence within the boundaries of this ward, not long after we moved here, we quickly figured out that those in the more permanent homes who were long-time members did not make much of an effort to reach out to those like us who are in more temporary housing.

And that situation got all the more complicated when, about a year later, we both started having significant health issues that continue to this day. We can easily count on one hand the number of times we have been well enough to attend Church within the last year, whether in our ward, or in the Sacrament Meeting for the one other ward in our building. And the current situation in that respect is really not good. For a while, we only ever received the Sacrament if we reached out to someone about it first, though the Young Men presidency has been more diligent in their reach out of late. Aside from that and from my wife's ministering sisters, who are attentive almost to a fault, the only other time we hear from anyone else in the ward, leader or member, including our ministering brothers, is if we reach out to them first.

Let me be clear: If there ever comes a time when we are well enough to attend Church consistently again (which I hope will happen at some point), and we were then to conscientiously choose not to do so, we will surely be responsible for that choice on our part, but there is really no valid reason why we should have to feel isolated, forgotten, or misjudged in our current situation when we cannot help our lack of regular Church attendance at present.

My comment earlier was more to point out that some single adults, whether they are older or younger singles of the Church, do not make the effort to stay involved when they know they can or should, and then are relentless in talking about how they feel isolated and alone. I say that as one who knew a few people in just that kind of situation, including my own brother, who voluntarily cut himself off from the Church, then continually freaked out when people called him on things he was doing which he knew deep down were wrong.

I am sorry if the reasoning and wording of my previous comment was misunderstood, but I hope you will acquit me of the claim that I have no idea what it is like to feel isolated, misunderstood, forgotten, ignored, or ostracized, because I do, and these are just the initial examples which came to the forefront of my mind. I mean no offense and hope none is taken, but there is a lot of truth in the line from the hymn that says "in the quiet heart is hidden sorrow that the eye can't see." I think it very much would benefit all of us to consider just how much we don't know about the background of individuals on this thread, nor the reasoning behind what they said, why they said it, etc. I bear you no ill will, and hope this comment has provided clarification of my previously-offered statement.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@coachodeeps and @OC Surfer:

I appreciate your sympathy and your backing me up on some of the points I made about singles. Like I said, I didn't comment here just to be overly negative, but to show some real-life examples of cultural problems we can benefit from acknowledging and working on.

I love this church, this Gospel, our Savior, and the Brethren, and I'm trying to love and forgive the other members of the church (even the ones who've mistreated me). On the other hand, I'm trying to improve myself and cast the beam out of my own eye, too.

Bryce said...

@Jamie: I do not have access to LCR, however, apparently if you go to then sign in using your LDS Account info, the announcements are available in the Official Communication Library. I would never have thought to find this, glad your pointing it out, thank you!

coachodeeps said...

I had fun with my potential temple list this year and created a March Madness-like 64 temple bracket by region. Gave to my family and a few friends. They are excitedly filling out their choices. ;)

Matt said...

I added a few more less likely new temples to be announced to the map, including a second temple in Sao Paulo city; Longview, TX; Maceió, Brazil; and Casper, WY.

Eric S. said...

Coachodeeps, that sounds like a fun idea! I love that! I would enjoy that more than a basketball bracket since I know nothing about basketball, or any sports for that matter. Lol

In the months since last October conference I created my own list of potential temples on a Google maps doc for fun. I've thought about near, mid, and long term potentials and, as of this past weekend, have a list of just over 130 locations. Granted, many of them are probably long shots but it sure fun to guess! :)

Eric S. said...

*it sure is fun

Easy to make mistakes while posting on mobile.

David Todd said...

Ok, I definitely am going to do the temple bracket thing.

Downtownchrisbrown said...

Sometimes it takes a stroke of luck to get married. I was never really a compotent dater. However when I was 23 I managed to get my first girlfriend. About 10 days after we started dating I ACCIDENTALLY proposed. To my surprise she said yes. We prayed for confirmation and felt it was the right decision. I don't say this to brag, I say this to give hope to others out there who have Social Anxiety but who push through anyway. Maybe you'll do what I did, say something you probably shouldn't but get blessings out of it anyway. I imagine if I hadn't married at that point I would still be single and better understand the struggles that have been mentioned. My hope is that we can all approach each other with kindness and not treat each other as single-ites, divorced-ites, widowed-ites, and married-ites, but as brothers and sisters.

OC Surfer said...

The church already has land for a 2nd Las Vegas Temple in Summerlin. Would not surprise me it gets announced sooner than later.

coachodeeps said...

Where do I find a list of stakes/ districts possibly to be covered by an announced temple? Looking for the stakes that the Layton Utah Temple will cover.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


Well said. Everybody's got their own journey to follow as far as dating and marriage goes. I like to look at it as if the Lord is this great Author, and he wants everone to have their own unique stories to experience and tell. Otherwise, life would be dull and we'd all go back to the arranged-marriage system.

Kind of like in Fiddler on the Roof, where the parents and the society have these preconceived ideas of how the daughter's lives will turn out, but each of them end up making choices that make the story (and their marriages) more varied and memorable.

If you want more examples, take a look in the old Presidents of the Church Institute Manual (something I did once) and read each of the Prophet's varied experiences of their courtship and marriage. Some of them are quite surprising and different than we might think.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I agree!

That March Madness Temple Bracket sounds like a great idea!

Would you be willing to share it so caN use it as a template to make my own?

coachodeeps said...

@Johnathan Whiting I just looked up a blank bracket for 64 teams. Then filled in the blanks with the most likely temples. Some are very low on the list likely for this conference. How do I share it with you?

coachodeeps said...

Try this:

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

That's perfect. Thanks!

OC Surfer said...


For the Layton Temple, I would imagine stakes from Clinton, Sunset, West Point, Clearfield, Syracuse, Layton, Kaysville and perhaps South Weber are included in the new Layton Temple District taking stakes from both the Ogden and Bountiful Temple Districts.

That would be my guess.... 37 stakes or so in total.

From Ogden District (16 Stakes)
Clearfield Utah North Stake
Clearfield Utah South Stake
Clearfield Utah Stake
Clinton Utah North Stake
Clinton Utah Stake
Clinton Utah West Stake
South Weber Utah Stake
Sunset Utah Stake
Syracuse Utah Bluff Stake
Syracuse Utah Lake View YSA Stake
Syracuse Utah Legacy Park Stake
Syracuse Utah South Stake
Syracuse Utah Stake
Syracuse Utah West Stake
West Point Utah Lakeside Stake
West Point Utah Stake

From Bountiful District (21 Stakes)
Kaysville Utah Central Stake
Kaysville Utah Crestwood Stake
Kaysville Utah Deseret Mill Stake
Kaysville Utah East Stake
Kaysville Utah Haight Creek Stake
Kaysville Utah South Stake
Kaysville Utah Stake
Kaysville Utah West Stake
Layton Utah Creekside Stake
Layton Utah East Stake
Layton Utah Holmes Creek Stake
Layton Utah Kays Creek Stake
Layton Utah Layton Hills Stake
Layton Utah Legacy Stake
Layton Utah North Stake
Layton Utah Northridge Stake
Layton Utah South Stake
Layton Utah Stake
Layton Utah Valley View Stake
Layton Utah West Stake
Layton Utah YSA Stake

coachodeeps said...

Thanks, OCSurfer! That is about the same as I got when looking at the stakes in the area.

Cory said...

Okay, you also inspired me with the Temple bracket Idea. So I made a printable pdf of a braket:

I divided it up by world regions and picked and ranked my top 15 picks for each of the four divisions. If one of your favorites is not included, you can fill it out on one of the four blank spots.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@ Cory Ward

That's very useful, thanks. I'm thinking of printing yours out and using it for our upcoming FHE activity.

Chris D. said...

@ OC Surfer,

For Layton District, I only used Layton and Kaysville (21 stakes) + the "Fruit Heights Utah Stake" = 22.

Any thoughts?

James G. Stokes said...

As I may or may not have mentioned before, I have access to a few different resources for the information I have provided both here and on my own blog. Here is a teaser from one of those resources: If you thought 19 temples being announced last year was an exciting development, then taking Elder Cook's reference to a ten-fold increase in the number of temples at its' word may be some indication of things to come, especially perhaps in the very near future. I have also indirectly confirmed that it is almost definite President Nelson will be outlining the extent and timing of his plans. Just another reason I suggest we all pay attention in General Conference. I think I should leave things at that for now.

OC Surfer said...

@ Chris

With Ogden Temple having 62 stakes in its district, operating most of the time at full capacity, it made sense to take some of the pressure off and include the Davis County stakes in the Ogden Temple District to be included in the new Layton Temple District.

So Bountiful Temple serves South Davis County, and Layton Temple serves North Davis County. Ogden Temple continues to serve Weber, Morgan counties along with Coalville, Evanston WY, and Lyman WY.

Cory said...

Great, that would be fun.

Chris D. said...

For the new Kinshasa Dem. Rep. of the Congo Temple District, I have predicted these Stakes and Districts assigned from the Johannesburg South Africa Temple District (24 + 5) :

Brazzaville Republic of Congo
Kananga Democratic Republic of the Congo
Katoka Democratic Republic of the Congo
Katuba Democratic Republic of the Congo
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Binza
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Kimbanseke
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Lukunga
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Masina
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Mokali
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Mont Ngafula
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Mpasa
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo N'Djili
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Ngaba
Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Ngaliema
Kisanga Democratic Republic of the Congo
Likasi Democratic Republic of the Congo
Luanda Angola
Lubumbashi Democratic Republic of the Congo
Luputa Democratic Republic of the Congo
Makelekele Republic of Congo
Mbuji-Mayi Democratic Republic of the Congo
Mwene-Ditu Democratic Republic of the Congo
Ruashi Democratic Republic of the Congo

Douala Cameroon
Kolwezi Democratic Republic of the Congo
Ngandajika Democratic Republic of the Congo
Pointe-Noire Republic of the Congo
Yaounde Cameroon

But it may temporarily also include the stakes and districts from Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Etc. On my list, I have already assigned those to the Nairobi Kenya and Harare Zimbabwe Temple Districts.

Chris D. said...

Also, for the new Fortaleza Brazil Temple District, I have predicted these 19 + 1 Stakes and District, assigned from the Recife Brazil Temple District.

Caucaia Brazil
Fortaleza Brazil
Fortaleza Brazil Benfica
Fortaleza Brazil Bom Jardim
Fortaleza Brazil Bom Sucesso
Fortaleza Brazil Castelao
Fortaleza Brazil Ceará
Fortaleza Brazil Dunas
Fortaleza Brazil East
Fortaleza Brazil Litoral
Fortaleza Brazil Messejana
Fortaleza Brazil Montese
Fortaleza Brazil South
Fortaleza Brazil West
Juazeiro do Norte Brazil
Maracanaú Brazil
Maracanaú Brazil North
Mossoró Brazil
Pacajus Brazil

Araripina Brazil

Unknown said...

I think one problem I have seen is when my stake started a mid-singles magnet ward my bishop's response was to only even try to send active members there. Some less active members might have responded to an invite to a new situation.

I did once have a former stake president admit there had been consideration of splitting the YSA ward due to seduction concerns. This was in reaction to an actual incident and in a ward that then cut off at 35 not 31. Recent issues have caused rethinking of uneven relations.

Another thought, events that are singles events should not be morphed into general srake events. I saw one case where a stake singles fireside was changed into a stake adult fireside. The change outraged some.

Lastly, in many ways as a 31-year-old single I felt most out of place in singles events and most in place at elders quorum. Singles events had lots of widows who had grandchildren older than me elders quorum had men my age.

I was always welcomed to participate in youth temple trips so I cant directly speak to that exclusion.

One nice thing was while as a primary teacher I had to be two deep this was applied to all male teachers. I can understand worry on these issues but we need to avoid throughing people under the bus.

Unknown said...

In my experience the relief society tried hard to reach out and include those in primary.

8n my experience people tried to make lessons applicable to all who attend.

Probably more couldbe done, but the situation is more complex. I think though the focus has to start with reading scriptures bot reaching Church.

Unknown said...

I have to admit this was a problem in some singles units. We needed people as leaders who would work with us on dating plans. I almost wonder if we need senior missionary couples working with some people pushing them to date more regularly. On the other hand this might turn people off more. Then we cant forget that many singles are divorced and maybe not ready to start dating again. Also issues for single parents are complex.

Unknown said...

I would have said about the same until I met my wife. She was only two units away but not coming to stake singles activities. If I had given up earlier I would have missed out. I know it is hard but have faith.

Brian McConnell said...

Thanks, James. Exciting times these are.

Ben H said...

May I make a suggestion for a blue dot. I recently looked at taking a new job in Northern Indiana. I suggest South Bend or Fort Wayne Indiana. This area is two hours from Indianapolis, Chicago or Detroit. There are 4 stakes in the area that could benefit. Fort Wayne Indiana, South Bend Indiana, Valparaiso Indiana and Kalamazoo Michigan.

Logan H said...

@ Ben Hunt

I like the idea of South Bend, Indiana, but feel like Grand Rapids, Michigan would be more likely as it could serve 5 stakes and 1 district, including South Bend. In which case South Bend may slightly benefit being 15 minutes closer to Grand Rapids than the Chicago temple. However, I agree South Bend would be a great location if there are enough members there to support a temple.

Logan H said...

My mistake, Grand rapids would only serve 4 stakes and 1 district being: Grand Rapids, Michigan; Lancing, Michigan; Kalamazoo, Michigan; South Bend, Indiana; and Traverse City Michigan District.

David Todd said...

Parts of the Midland, Michigan stake are very close to Grand Rapids, also. Even if it was assigned to Detroit, I am sure some of the wards and branches would attend in Grand Rapids if given the opportunity.

Homer1978 said...

I read a rumor on one of the blogs that ground was recently purchased in the Queen Creek Az area for a future temple. Has anyone else read or heard that rumor

Logan H said...

@ Homer1978

I have not heard of a rumor about land recently bought in the Queen Creek, AZ area, but that makes sense to me. Queen Creek/ Apache Junction is one of the places on my extensive list where I think a temple could be years down the road. I think there is tons of land (even though most of it is county) in that area where the population can grow and also membership.

James G. Stokes said...

I have not been able to substantiate the report of land in Queen Creek Arizona either. But FWIW, if I am correct in my theory that the Church is not quite ready to announce multiple temples in the same region, state (outside the "Mormon corridor"), or nation (outside the US). Arizona may be a bit tricky in that respect. I heard through the grapevine (via a few sources I have available for temple information) that the next Arizona Temple location will likely be Flagstaff. With that said, if we are entering unprecedented territory, it could very well be that all bets are off.

Homer1978 said...

Flagstaff would be interesting. If my memory is correct there is only one Stake in the greater Flagstaff area. Perhaps a temple that is smaller is size, similar to the models in Puerto Rico and Guam, would be appropriate in this area.

JAMES are you aware of or suspect that these smaller sized temple 15,000 sq feet or so, will be a Trend for the next few years?

James G. Stokes said...

Homer1978, it appears that there are actually two stakes in the Flagstaff area, but a temple there could serve at least a dozen nearby cities as well. Another Arizona prospect I hear a lot about is Queen Creek, which may have a higher likelihood of a larger temple in the near future. As to your question, my understanding is that the Church has hired and will continue to seek many more employees for the Temple Department, and that is mainly being done for the purpose of accommodating a large and significant surge in temple construction.

I have voiced my opinion in the past that the temples announced last October for Yigo Guam, Praia Cabo Verde, and San Juan Puerto Rico may have been "test cases" to see if getting faster approval for temples that are significantly smaller would be feasible. And I also understand that President Nelson is doing everything he can to make sure the Church is not wasting money, time, or resources on anything unnecessary. Many of the Hinckley-era smaller temples built in the late 1990s-early 2000s were under 11,000 square feet, and some were even smaller than that.

What that means for the future may be unclear, but what I do know at this point is that the construction on the 3 temples I mentioned above is anticipated to take roughly 2 years. And I also know that everything seems to indicate a large number of new temples are on the horizon. With that in mind, it seems likely that temples of a smaller size that could obtain easy approval and be constructed within 2 years or less may become the new normal standard yet again, although I anticipate that there will still be a few medium- and larger-sized temples as well.

Either way, it is apparent we are entering territory in relation to the temple construction program of the Church that will almost definitely be unprecedented in nature. So it seems likely there will be many surprises ahead. And part of that could involve temples that are again around 11,000 square feet, or perhaps even smaller than that, with a greater focus on the absolute essentials.

And it also seems likely that a minimum of a dozen new temples may be announced next weekend, but that there could easily be several more than that announced. It will be interesting to see what happens in relation to all of that. Hope that answers your question.

James Anderson said...

There has been that rumor of a Queen Creek temple but that may if normal patterns hold not be announced for a few years. Although Phoenix overall has over 250k members it only has three temples, one being only around 30k square feet but the other two are larger. Mesa is down, FGilbert is packeed regularly during that.

The location I heard possible does not have development close to it but about five miles away to the west and south there are new and being built developments, some of those are large. Salt Lake approved five buildings for the area around and south of Ocotillo a year ago, the temple property is rumored to be where the yet unbuilt SR-24 freeway will cross Ironwood, or close to that.

Queen Creek also apparently goes somewhat further south, Ironwood becomes Ganzel at Ocotillo and is 4-7 lanes with many stoplights and development al along that. So wee are looking at an eventual city that like Mesa, is larger than St. Louis in population eventuall.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 210   Newer› Newest»