See below for an analysis of the eight new temples announced today by President Russell M. Nelson. This marks the third most temples ever announced on a single day after October 7th, 2018 (12 temples) and April 1st, 1981 (nine temples). This group of locations probably constitutes the most unusual cohort of temples ever announced by the Church to date given the small size of Church membership in these locations, historically slow growth in most of these locations, and geographical distribution. Also, I believe this marks the first time when I did not accurately predict any of temples actually announced in General Conference per my top ten list I publish within the month before General Conference (five of the eight temples were on the map of 55 likely and 38 less likely locations for future temples).
The location and number of temple announcements within the past year suggests a significant shift to build temples in areas where there have historically been long-term membership in the Church regardless of the number of stakes or current/recent growth rates. For example, half of the new temples announced today have not had a new stake organized within the probable future temple district during the past decade. Also, most of the temples announced would service small Latter-day Saint populations. For example, of the eight new temples announced only three temples appear likely to service more than five stakes (Tooele Valley, Utah; Antofagasta, Chile; San Pedro Sula, Honduras). This suggests a shift to reinstituting small temples like during President Gordon B. Hinckley's presidency of the Church. Also, there remain many locations where steady growth has occurred in the past 1-2 decades, but no temples have been announced, such as Rogers, Arkansas; Benin City, Nigeria; and Santa Cruz, Bolivia to name a few. I believe we may see 5-15 new temples announced per General Conference going forward given this recent shift in temple construction.
Pago Pago Samoa Temple
The Pago Pago Samoa Temple will be the Church's first temple in the United States territory of American Samoa and second temple in the Samoan Islands. With a mere population of 51,000 according to the CIA World Factbook estimate, American Samoa is now the country/territory with the smallest population with a temple dedicated, under construction, or announced. The Church has reported steady growth in American Samoa for many years. The Church initially announced a temple in Samoa for American Samoa in 1977, but moved the location from Pago Pago to Apia, Samoa in 1980 to better meet the needs of Samoan members who were most heavily concentrated on Upolu. The population of American Samoa in 2018 was the same as it was in the early 1990s, yet Church membership increased from 12,000 to 16,390. Between 2000 and 2018, the number of stakes increased from four to five, the number of wards increased from 29 to 38, the number of branches remained unchanged (5), and the percentage of members in the population increased from 22.2% to approximately 32%. Based upon year-end 2017 membership data, American Samoa was previously the country/territory with the fourth most members without a temple. It is anticipated that the new temple will services five stakes - all of which are located in American Samoa.
Okinawa City Okinawa Temple
The Okinawa City Okinawa Temple will be the Church's fourth temple in the sovereign nation of Japan. The new temple will likely serve only one stake and one district - both of which are headquartered on Okinawa. The Church previously had two stakes in Okinawa, but closed one of the stakes (Ginowan Japan Stake - created in 1999) in 2014 and combined many of the Japanese-speaking congregations on the island. Today, the Okinawa Japan Stake (organized in 1980) has five wards and three branches. The Okinawa Japan Military District (organized in 1979) has four branches, three of which are located on Okinawa. The Church also briefly operated a mission in Okinawa between 1990 and 1996. Okinawa has a population of 1.4 million people. The announcement of the Okinawa City Okinawa Temple came as a complete surprise to me given the small size of the Church in Okinawa and the lack of growth on the island in recent years. This development suggests that the Church may announce temples in many additional, remote locations around the world where only one or two stakes operate, such as Fairbanks, Alaska; Puerto Arenas, Chile; and Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Neiafu Tonga Temple
The Neiafu Tonga Temple will be the second temple to be built in Tonga after the Nuku'alofa Tonga Temple was dedicated in 1983. The new temple is located on Vava'u and will likely service five stakes and two districts in central and northern islands of the country. The Church organized its first stake in Vava'u in 1975. Three additional stakes were organized in Vava'u in 1980, 1995, and 2017. 18.7% of the population of Vava'u identified as Latter-day Saint on the 2016 census. Church-reported membership for Tonga constitutes 60% of the population although individuals who self-identified as Latter-day Saint on the 2016 constituted only 19% of the population. Nevertheless, Latter-day Saints number among the fastest growing major churches in Tonga based on census data.
Tooele Valley Utah Temple
The Church announced its 21st temple in Utah in the Tooele Valley. The new temple will likely service the 10 stakes and one district in Tooele County, as well as the two stakes in Elko, Nevada for a total of 12 stakes and one district. The first stake in Tooele was organized in 1877. The number of stakes in the Tooele Valley has increased from six to 10 since 2000.
Moses Lake Washington Temple
The Moses Lake Washington Temple will be the Church's fourth temple in Washington. Temples have previously been dedicated in Seattle (1980), Spokane (1999), and Columbia River [located in Richland] (2001). The new temple appears likely to service only four stakes although a fifth stake may be organized in the foreseeable future from the Moses Lake Washington Stake (11 wards, 1 branch at present). Slow growth has occurred for the Church in the Moses Lake area of Washington, with the most recently organized stake in the probable future temple district being created in Ephrata in 1980. The first stake in the area likely to be serviced by the temple was organized in Moses Lake in 1954.
San Pedro Sula Honduras Temple
The San Pedro Sula Honduras Temple will be the Church's second temple in Honduras. The Church dedicated its first temple in Honduras, the Tegucigalpa Honduras Temple, in 2013. Rapid growth has occurred in northern Honduras within the past decade as evidenced by the number of stakes increasing from nine in 2010 to 15 at present. The new temple will likely service 15 stakes and one district in northern Honduras.
Antofagasta Chile Temple
The Antofagasta Chile Temple will be the Church's third temple in Chile and first temple in northern Chile. The Church has previously dedicated temples in Santiago (1983) and Concepcion (2018). The new temple will likely service seven stakes and two districts in northern Chile. Prior to the announcement, Chile was the country with the most members with only two temples dedicated, under construction, or announced.
Budapest Hungary Temple
The Budapest Hungary Temple will be the Church's first temple in Hungary and third temple in Eastern Europe (excluding former East Germany) after the Kyiv Ukraine Temple (dedicated in 2010) and the Russia Temple (announced in 2018, city yet to be announced). The new temple will likely service three stakes (one in Hungary, two in Austria) and as many as eight districts in Hungary (2), Romania (2), Croatia, Serbia, Slovakia, and Slovenia. The Church in Hungary has historically experienced some of the greatest growth for the Church in former communist Central Europe and Eastern Europe. However, the Church in Hungary nevertheless has only 5,250 members, of whom only about 1,000 regularly attend church. The new temple has good potential to help discourage Hungarian members from emigrating and strengthen the Church's sense of community.
47 comments:
I for one would love if the Church would announce a temple in Rogers Arkansas just so this location would go away as a speculated location discussed on this forum over and over again for what seems like years :-)
These announcements certainly strengthened my testimony that temple are determined by revelation. What looks good on paper, does not necessarily translate to an announcement.
I think the age and maturity of the stake(s) has a great deal to do with it as well. Although places like Liberia or Sierra Leone have many stakes, the stakes are relatively young. Temples might not be announced for a few more years there. Meanwhile, places with less units like Okinawa (1980), Antofagasta (1980), Fairbanks (1979), Oslo, Norway (1977), Puerto Arenas (1984) and Iquitos Peru (1980), could be more likely due of the age of the stakes. However Budapest (2006) is rather young, so Mongolia (2009) and UAE (2011) are still very likely.
Nearly 19 years ago, I had a few friends in my YSA Ward at Utah Valley University (then UVSC) who were from Moses Lake Washington. Although I lost touch with them. I am happy for them.
Bengaluru, despite being on many people's lists, certainly wasn't justified on paper because each of the few stakes and districts it will serve is hundreds of miles away from the others. President Nelson came right out and said it wasn't on his list either, but the night before Conference the Lord told him to announce it.
Today in the afternoon session I sat with several Latinos who spoke Spanish among themselves and listened to the Spanish dub with headphones. I don't know where they were from, but after the closing prayer one said to another with moisture in his eyes, "Such emotion, brother... such emotion. Antofogasta."
I have to say that I don't really buy the "respect for God = silence and/or acting like you're at a funeral" mindset we have in the Church, and I'm quite disappointed about being told not to cheer at temple announcements. The cheering in previous sessions didn't detract from the Spirit for me at all, but on the contrary made me even more excited about temples as I witnessed how much they meant to other people. And if I were God I certainly wouldn't complain about my children cheering when I gave them a gift. I suppose it would be a stupid thing to apostatize over though.
I don't think there is anything wrong with excited gasps or audible chatter, rather I think it was the very vocal whoops among relative silence that were heard from individuals last October in a couple of the temple announcements that President Nelson was referring to. I think there are other times and places for that, but maybe I am wrong. I agree though, not something to get hung up over.
I agree with the comments made by Matt and Cory. These temple announcements are ultimately guided by revelation. While many "on paper" factors consider greatly into temple location considerations (such as recent and projected growth patterns, especially), they are not the only factors in play. It is the "study it out in your mind, then ask if it be right" (probably quoted wrong, but found in D&C). Don't forget that the prophet is also a seer. There could be other factors we don't know about or may not know about for a long time that President Nelson may be prompted to announce a location for. I also agree that we will see a steady announcement of temples over the next several years. Places such as Arkansas, Santa Cruz Bolivia, Freetown, and others will come.
The ones that excited me most/surprised me most were Pago Pago (finally picking up where they left off in 1980), Antofagasta (a friend of mine served there, and I'd written it in as a dark horse on my temple predictions bracket), Budapest (I'd picked Vienna, instead - I think a temple would be a lovely addition to the fantastic architecture they have there - particularly the Secession building, which already looks like a temple), and Tooele (I'd mentioned it as a possibility to some others earlier in the week, and they'd scoffed at it).
The biggest surprise for me though, was no Africa temples. I thought for sure we'd see at least two this time around. Hopefully next time for Freetown, Monrovia, and Benin City.
Okinawa Japan Temple will be the closest temple to Shanghai China. Okinawa is closer than Hong Kong or Taipei. I wonder in the future when the flood gates open in China, the Church will have multiple temples surrounding China ready to help Chinese members attend the temple until new temples are able to be built in Mainland China.
President Nelson will forever be connected to temple building. He has announced 27 temples in 364 days.
I wonder if it would be cheaper to fly to Okinawa, or take a train to Hong Kong from Shanghai. Sometimes distance is not the only factor. Also I wonder with some countries if the feasibility of getting a Visa to a nearby country with a temple. In some cases it may be easier to go to a further country. For example the saints in Papua New Guinea go to the temple in FFij iinstead of nearby Australia.
I checked I think Papa New Guinea is actually closer to Fiji than Australia. But I also think Visa issues or the cost of travel may be a factor for some places around the world.
I wouldn't get rid of your old "likely temples" list yet Matt. During President Hinckley's time small temples in deserving areas were only announced for a small time, sort of like a booster, then they went back to only announcing larger temples. I think it would be wise to present both lists until it looks like the booster is over. There's a reason they backed off of it after a while.
P.S. I was thrilled that President Nelson was encouraging reverence. It felt really awkward that we had no problem with adults being loud but won't allow children to come because they might make it too hard for translators to hear. I for one was kind of hoping for an announcement that conference would be open to all ages so I wouldn't have to explain why the disciples were wrong to shoo the children away but not conference security, but resigned my opinion once I realized that even some of the loud coughs and shouts weren't good for translators. Now I'm more hoping for cry rooms, but I don't know how well that would work to install all those, I guess the nearby tabernacle will have to work for now.
In the case of Okinawa, it is the tolls on the expressways that eat you alive, only on weekends is it really inexpensive, about 1k Yen. The rest of the week the toll to Tokyo or Fukuoka would be quite steep, and the surface national routes often are backed up when you get into a city although a few cities have a national route bypass that is a freeway.
Often between cities some national routes can also have traffic issues if for no othe reason than congestion.
Correction in spelling a name: Punta Arenas, Chile.
The three last listed locations in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, Benin City Nigeria and Northwest Arkansas are tome three of the 4 top likely locations for fall. The other is Freetown. The church is built up enough there I think it a strong likelyhood combined with extreme distance even to Abijan, let alone the closest curent temple in Kinshasa. I half hope that they will announce a Lumbumbashi Temple at the Kinshasa dedication. It wouldbe awesome but I would be surprisedby such a move. Also still a slight sliver hope that the April 19th plans will include a West Valley Square of Welfare Square Temple. The last I think wouldbe super awesome but with Tooele announced both those ideas seem unlikely.
Wait, fewer people live in Amerixan Samoa than Guam? I thought it was the other way around.
I think Freetown is still likely this year. However Monrovia not as soon. Benin City's first stake was in 1994 so I think Benin City is a doable option. When I get time I may try to figure more complete analysis. How old is the Abuja stake? Now I see Brussels as a possible temple, but not highly possible.
I could see Autralia fearing indigent temple goers from PNG would overstay a visa and be hesitant to grant them. However flight costs are also an issue, as would be visa prices, processing times etc.
Well who knows what will happen with the April 19th announcement.
Wait isnt Okinawa an island? How doesoneget to Tokyo except by boat or plane? Are you sureyou are thinking of the rightplace?
Okinawa is a bunch of islands, and there are no bridges to go anywhere so traffic to any other temple is absolutely irrelevant. James Anderson might be thinking of Okayama or some other place.
The distance between Shanghai and Okinawa is also irrelevant, considering that the Taipei temple is closer, and Seoul and Hong Kong are not much farther. In the case of the Hong Kong temple, you can travel there via bus, high-speed trains and normal trains. People in China need visas or similar documents to go to any of those temples, including Hong Kong. I pray the Chinese government would allow for the construction of a temple in mainland China very soon.
Another potential remote island temple could be Las Palmas Spain (Canary Islands). This temple could serve one stake and potentially two districts (Madeira and Açores Portugal).
The first two stakes in Cambodia were created in 2014, four years before the Phnom Penh Temple was announced. This means we are seeing a variety of temple locations announced, whether or not a location has had a stake established for a long period of time. We're basically in uncharted waters with these temple announcements. Almost anything is possible and to me that is exciting!
@R. Jofre
There are direct flights from Shanghai to Okinawa (1hr 45 min flight). True when flying, Hong Kong and Taipei are roughly the same, but the Okinawa Temple is technically the closest. Depending the geopolitical issues between China, Japan, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, having more options, gives Chinese members more flexibility and access to the temple.
I was looking at the newly created temple website. They have quite a bit said there on the endowment. I especially like how it explains the initiatories and endowment as being connected as two ordinances needed for the whole as are baptism and confirmation.
On another interesting note Elder Pter M. Johnson's call to the 70 has lead some publications saying he is the first high ranking black leader oof the Church. Most would actually rank Helvicio Martins as such. Even in the present seventy Elder Sitati has been there over a decade and Elder Dube not as long. Both are without question black. Evidently some saw Elder Johnson called the first African-American general authority, and missed that rhe wording was precise and mattered. Black and African-American are not synanomous. I argue African-American is a cultural designation. Johnson is clearly African-American, so much so that some of the defences of his African-American cred sound stereotypical. He went to college intially on a basketball scholarship and was at one point a rapper.
True he is a PHD holding college professor of accounting who was a professional accountant in Salt Lake City, and a professor at BYU for 8 years. There are few African-Americans who have that background. By most definitions BYU has few African-American professors. The history department apparently one. The college of religios education none although they have obe Haitian who has a PhD from a university in France with hid dissertation on Latter-day Saints and the Republican party from Reed Smoot to George Romney.
Elder Johnson is also a former Muslim, maybe part of the Nation of Islam, but I am not sure the sourcing on what type of Muslim he was is reliable. Some people think all blacks who are Muslims are part of the Black Muslims, but this has never been the case, and since 1980 many of those who were part of theNation of Islam have gone to mord mainstream Muslim organizations so I hesitate to assume anything about the Muslims Elder Johnson joined in about 1978.
All told it is clearer that Elder Johnson is African-American than Barack Obama. Some understandings of African-American would also exclude Colin Powell. Those necesitate having links to slave ancestors in the US. This not only excludes post slavery (almost all post WWII) immigrants from African countries and their dedcendants, but those whose families immigrated from the Caribbean, such as Colin Powell, Mia Love and the list could go on.
On that front though I do not know enough to say that Elder Johnson is more clearly African-American than Colin Powell. New York City wher ed Elder Johnson was born has huge numbers of immigrants and descendants of immigrants from the West Indies, Guyana and so forth. Of course this includes the quasi immigrant Puerto Ricans, Guyanese of Indian descent who at times face exclusion by immigrants straight from India, Dominicans who generally look black but get counted generally as Hispanics, and others as well. Rven here in Detroit our one "black" congregation leader in our stake is not one of the thousands of children and grandchildren of migrants from Alabama and Mississippi as my wife is (ok, it was her great grandparents who migrated, but that is because of genwrations of yeenaged births, the family came up in the late 1930s, but I have had friends my daughter's age whose grandparents cane up from Alabama, and many of the people in Detroit about my parents age hafe stories of going back to Alabama or Mississippi to visit their grandparents as children. These are the Emmet Till generation, although come to think of it generally a little younger than Mr. Till.
However the one current congregation leader who is African American is a Haitian born man who was raised in the Bahamas.
The fact is I cant rule out Elder Johnson having West Indian ancestors. On the other hand his ancestors may have migrated north, or it is possible his last slave ancestors (not that I definatively know he had such) were slaves in New York. I highly doubt that, but it is possible.
Under curent conditions it would probably be required to have only chinese nationals allowed in the temple or to have explicit limits as to which sessions nationals abd non-nationals can go to.
Easing travel to Hong Kong is also a hope. Since China controls Hong Kong if members allowed yo go to the temple regularly return to China it will help.
With the strained rekations between Taiwan and China that might not be a good destination for Chinese nationals.
Phenon Penn is a clear precedent as to why Freetown which has had a stake since 2012 abd now the ciuntry has I think 5 stakes is a clear contender. Penon Penn and Bankock both having planned twmples is why I dont think they will go with a temple in Bo to serve everything from Freetown to Monrovia. One question I dont know is how wasy it is to traverse from Sierra Leone to Liberia.
On the other hand I can see Bo, Freetown and Monrovia all 3 having opearting twmples by 2030, but I was sure Trujillo would gave a temple by 2000, so what do I know.
Penon Penn getting a temple announced makes me hope one will be announced for Kampala by 2020. It also makes me hope Mozambique might get a temple.
With Okinawa having a temple annouced, Kiribati is vack on my highly likely list. It is still incredibly far to Guam.
On Papua New Guinea the big question to me is will the temple be built in Port Moresby or somewhere further east in the country. I expect somewhere further east, maybe Lea.
One interesting thing would be to plot all stakes by year organized and distance to the closest temple. Actually most reasonable would be to plot by real time travel including average delays at interbational crossings and then plot in average cost of the journey and try to then plot in opportunity cost by considering how likely such a trip will involve uncompensated rome off work and how the cost of the trip compares to precailing wages and salaries.
Lastly we can consider if the 2 hour schedule increases temple attendance
To most memvers in Utah the a n.v swer might seem no. Those of us who remrmber grueling youth baptism trips involving close to 12 hours from first keaving tge house to getting home again, maybe on at least one occasion scheduled the same day as a youth dance would submit having more time to nap on Sunday, or be with children that day makes it easier to forego sleep or timd spent with children to attebd the temple on Saturday. Also having time freed from prepping for a Sunday School lesson every week makes using if to go to the templs easier. I have to admit I have not allowed the 2 hour block to increase my temple attendance, but at least once I didnt go to the temple because when I called on Friday to schedule for a Saturday session it was all full.
Taiwan is probably not an option for members who are Chinese nationals. While Hong Kong as Chinese territory is provably the best option, as you move north the travel time to Okinawa and Seoul becomes less than to Hong Kong. This opens the issue of whether Japan or Korea is easier for Chinese nationaks to go to. I also wonder if China might fear defection less in an isolated place like Okinawa than a large cosopolitan city like Seoul.
Unknown,
I seem to remember hearing about a black member of the 70 before the priesthood ban. If so he probably counts as the first black American general authority.
The first black General Authority was Elder Helvecio Martins, who served 1990-1995. The first non white General Authority was Elder Adney Y. Komatsu who was of Japanese descent but was from Hawaii
Elijah Abel was the first black man to be ordained a Seventy.
He was called to the Third Quorum of the Seventy by Joseph Smith in 1836, although I don't know if he was considered a general authority or another type of Seventy.
More info on him and other prominent black members of the Church can be found here:
http://www.blacklds.org/history
and here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah_Abel
I had an earlier look over the info on Elijah Abel also. Apparently the 3rd quorum in the past and today is not defined as a General Authority quorum only is defined as a General Officer quorum along with the woman and sunday school general leaderships.
In the early days of the church, the quorums of Seventy were not considered general authorities- the only exception was the 7 members of the First Council of Seventy, roughly equivalent to today's Presidency of the 70. It was not until 1975, I believe, that the First Quorum of the 70 was reconstituted as General authorities. Also, it was usual to have ordained seventies in every stake, as another priesthood office between that of elder and high priest- my grandfather was a seventy.
I believe most missionaries were ordained to the office of Seventy. My great grandfather in the 1940's was ordained as a seventy when he served a mission at age 21.
Elijah Abel served a few missions, which appears to be why he was ordained as a seventy. Recently the Salt Lake Tribune Mormonland podcast interviewed a historian about the recent discoveries the church history department has made with regards to this subject as they are in the process of going through the Joseph F. Smith papers. It's worth listening to:
https://soundcloud.com/mormonland/mormon-land-72-paul-reeve-022719-mixdown
Thanks for the clarification on Elijah Abel's calling, you guys.
Cory, I think you're right- my grandfather did not serve a full-time mission, probably because of the Depression, but I think he was a stake missionary. And he was ordained a seventy in 1938, or about a year after he married my grandmother, if I remember the dates correctly.
Seventies back in the day, were considered in many cases to be the "Stake Mission Leader" or Stake Missionary and had the responsibility to manage missionary work in their area.
Why the need to renovate all these temples all of a sudden? (And I say that lightly because I know it's been ongoing). But, haven't these Pioneer-Era temples been renovated numerous times before so that they could meet safety codes? Surely, the Oakland Temple (though not a Pioneer-era temple, but is the wave of temples being renovated) was built up to earthquake code in the first place -- so why the renovations across the board?
Are they renovating all the temples to be tornado/hurricane-, fire-, flooding-, or nucelar- proof in addition to the earthquake proofs?? :p
Or are they adding more baptismal fonts so so baptismal ordinances can hasten?
Are they enlarging them?
Or are they adding like a Genealogy/Family History annex right on the grounds too?
Or are they changing the interior to make it more effective for 24/7 operation for when that time will arise... (in the next decade or so).
Or is it simply: "update style." It seems like they would gradually do aesthetic work on Pioneer-Era Temples -- not all at once for several years -- if it was just aesthetically involved?
What is the real (this is tongue in cheek) reason for the sweeping renovations? Guesses?
The Millenium. Book it.
Would be a shame if the temples crumbled during the earthquakes that restore pangea and when valleys are exalted and mountains are made low and the coming natural disasters of that :-)
Unknown...I don't think this was sudden. If you read the news articles you will find the reasons for many of these renovations. The Oakland Temple needed its mechanical systems upgraded and they were refreshing the furnishings and finishes.
The Washington DC Temple needed significant upgrades to its mechanical system and new furnishings and finishes.
The Mesa Temple is undergoing extensive renovations, inside and out including HVAC systems.
Elder Snow, the Church Historian, spoke at my Stake Conference a few months ago and he said the St. George Temple needed significant structural work done and that the church could no longer wait to close it and take care of it.
As the church builds more and more temples we will see more and more temples undergoing renovation at the same time. It is no different than an aging home that needs to be remodeled and/or refreshed. Thousands of people go through the Temples each year and it puts a lot of wear and tear on the buildings and furnishings. I was recently in the Logan Temple and the mens dressing room and the inititory was in bad need of being upgraded and remodeled. I think the Lord wants his temples to be kept updated and looking nice.
Actually prior to 1975 the only general authority seventies were the 7 members of the first council of the 70. When my grandfather was called as a missiinary in 1941 he was ordained to the office of 70 before leaving on his mission. Up until about 1986 in each ward there was a 70s group that functioned along with the elders quorum and high priests group. The 70 groups in a stake were under a 7 stake presidents of the 70. They ran the stake mission and when my father was first such in the late 1970s he had an assigned companion who he taught lesson to perspective members with.
About the time I was born my dad was made the ward seventies group leader. The call was extended by Richard Headlee, the leading tax control advocate in Michigan who was Republican candidate for governor. Headlee had joined the Church after working on one of George Romney's gubanatorial campaigns.
As ward seventies group leader my dad functioned a lot like a ward mission leader, butalso oversaw a group of 60s. I remember hearing missionaries surprise on mymission to see inactives with the priesthood position of 60, but since my Dad was a 70 for until I was 11 I understood. One of my ward mission leaders on my mission held the priesthood office of 70.
1975 they called 3 additional general authority seventies. 1976 all assistants to the quorum of the 12 were made 70s. At that point all grneral authorities were actively serving until death except the presiding bishopric. It was I believe 1979 when emeritus status is introduced, about 1985 when the first seventy are called who can be released. They were originally fixed at 5 years. However after areaa seventies were created the 2nd quorum stars serving longer terms without any formal announcement and in avout 2016 the two quorums are lumped together as general authority 70s.
Also prior to 1979 there was a hereditary office of presiding patriarch.
In the early days especially in Nauvoo the 70s quorums were numbered 1, etc. These quorums were retained in Utah but the members of each spread throughout the territory. Either in 1875 when Brigham Young did a major priesthood reorganization shortly before his death or in the 1880s when John Raylor did a reorganization pursuant to a revelation Elder Rasband quoted a few general conferences back, the old numbered 70s quorums were replaced with 1 or more in each stake. Elijah Able being in the 3rd quorum reflects this early set up. He probably was assigned to a new quorum in the 1870s or 1880s.
All male stake missionaries were seventies. Elder Maxwell was either made a 70 when he was called as a missionaru just after World War II or he was a 70 shortly after that. When the Korean War hindered the flow of young single missionaries they asked married 70s to become missionaries. Elder Maxwell volunteered but was turned down because they wanted men who had not yet served missiond.
You're spot on.
If Jesus doesn't come before. The plan is to build (the Jews) the temple of Jerusalem this coming August. We are really in the end of the end.
Post a Comment