Sunday, April 4, 2021

20 New Temples Announced

This afternoon, Church President Russell M. Nelson announced plans to construct 20 temples in the following locations:

  • Oslo, Norway
  • Brussels, Belgium
  • Vienna, Austria
  • Kumasi, Ghana
  • Beira, Mozambique
  • Cape Town, South Africa
  • Singapore, Republic of Singapore
  • Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  • Cali, Colombia
  • Querétaro, México
  • Torreón, México
  • Helena, Montana
  • Casper, Wyoming
  • Grand Junction, Colorado
  • Farmington, New Mexico
  • Burley, Idaho
  • Eugene, Oregon
  • Elko, Nevada
  • Yorba Linda, California
  • Smithfield, Utah

With today's announcement, there are now 251 temples announced or dedicated worldwide. This marks the most temples ever announced for specific locations in a single day by the Church. I will provide additional analysis of these new temples announced in the coming days.


EP said...

What an incredible blessing each one of these will be. Definitely a pattern of helping bring the temple within reach of places currently distant from temples. There are a lot of ones I didn’t expect so soon, but I am grateful for those locations. I am so excited for what the future holds.

Eric S. said...

Wow! I was not expecting 20, that's exciting!

One of my older siblings served his mission in Norway and mentioned that the Church has had land for a temple there for many years.

Ben H said...

Served as a missionary is Helena, Casper, Bozeman, Riverton, WY and Missoula.

Don't take Missoula off of your future temples list. Helena is for Great Falls, Helena, Butte and Bozeman. Missoula would still serve four stakes. Initially, however, Helena will probably serve 9 stakes. Perhaps when the Kalispell stake splits, which could happen soon, Missoula will get their temple.

John said...

I was thinking Missoula for western Montana but Helena is a more central location, especially now that it's harder for the Great Falls stakes to go to Cardston. The other temples around the Western States make sense, since most of those sites are a bit of a hike from something else.

I suspect that with the temples in Europe, the Brethren may think it will soon become harder to cross borders there.

Noel said...

Makes you wonder 2030, 200th Anniversary how many Temples will be operating?

Hastening the work?

Usain Bolt would be struggling at this pace.

Pascal Friedmann said...

I am most surprised by the announcement for Brussels. This one was not on my radar at all, especially since the usage rate of the temple in The Hague is extremely low.

L. Chris Jones said...

A few wonderful surprises. The Lord is truly hastening the work. Plus I think this is the most temples announced (by name) in any single conference. (Although President Hinkley announced in April 1998 a plan for 30 upgraded to 32 small temples to be built by the end of 2000, but the names were announced over several weeks or months.). This is definitely unprecedented and the saints around the world will be blessed and greatful.

JMR said...

A lot of these really surprised me. Areas that I wouldn't have guessed, but really cool announcements. The Lord is hastening the work and President Nelson even said yesterday that this is one thing he has learned even better during this pandemic. We live in exciting, historic times!

JMR said...

We live in exciting times! Some of these really surprised me, but I am happy for the people who live close to these new temples. The Lord is hastening his work and this is one thing that President Nelson said yesterday in his talk.

Jim Anderson said...

The goal apparently is a temple within a three hour drive of every member where that is possible. And that 'three hours' can vary based on condition of roads, the speed limits which are usually design speeds and that also the speeds they can be safely traveled at.

Elder Stevenson said that once everything announced prior to today was built, 81 percent of members will be within that three hours driving distance.

So what would all this mean added to that?

This also cleared the table for everyone's lists, so while a few on those didn't get on this time it is not too early to start sorting things for October.

Wisconsinite said...


Belgium, Norway, AND Austria, but not Mongolia?????

Helena Montana instead of Missoula Montana??

Eric S. said...

President Nelson has now personally announced new temples in every Western US state except for Arizona. I think a new one there will come soon, however.

I'm a bit surprised at some of those locations, but the more I think about it I think some of these new temples (in western US) are being announced in areas that may be more central or accessible or where property can be acquired rather than if a certain city has "x" number of stakes. It may be a shift in thinking than what we may be used to.

In any case these are all exciting locations. Who would have thought three in Europe alone when there are already two announced? Just awesome. Of course, Mozambique and Singapore are huge as well as additional temples in all of the other countries. Hurrah for Israel!

L. Chris Jones said...

I was looking at the meetinghouse locator map for Yorba Linda CA. A chappel at 17130 Bastanchury Rd on the corner of Osmond St has a softball field behind it that could be used for a temple. Unless the church has other plans, this might be a possible site for that temple.

txshaner said...

I’m curious about the announcement of another temple to be built in California. With the church membership on the decline now for many years, does it make sense for another temple in California?

txshaner said...

I was surprised by the announcement of another temple to be built in California. Considering the the church membership has been in decline there for many years now, does it make sense to build another temple in California?

Yamil Inosotroza said...

Pres Hinckley announcement +30 in 1998

Eduardo said...

This is pretty amazing to me for California; Yorba Linda is not too far from the very large Yorba Linda, and stakes have downsized near there the last few years.

Really good to see; Africa continues to grow impressively, and more Mexicans and others in Latin America will be set up better.

Unknown said...

That moment when I thought they would be announcing a Farmington, Utah temple.

John Pack Lambert said...

I have to say I am not at all surprised that Mongolia was not on the list.

I am also very much seeing I was right that Beira would get a temple before Maputo.

The bay sayers against an Elko Temple were also proved wrong.

John G said...

Wow! Good job everyone who guessed so many of these! I'm still surprised that Mongolia has yet to receive a temple, especially with a focus on distance. I wouldn't have guessed Burley this soon, but as Idaho grows it would've came. I'm also surprised about Yorba Linda CA, is Newport Beach at capacity? All in the Lord's time...

John Pack Lambert said...

There are amazing stories of faith behind the Bgg era Tempkr. Chico Mapenda, the first Mozambiquen baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was bvb baptized in Jan. 1990 in East Germany. He was kicked out of East Germany in returned to Beira in Ictober 1990 when East Germany was abolished and thus visas that government had issued were revoked.

Mapenda on returning to Bgg eira shared the gospel with his father in law Francisco Dique Sousa. He also shared it with his brother Gimo Mapenda. Both these men prepared hundreds over the next 9 years so that when missionaries arrived in 1990 they were able to baptize several people immediately.

John Pack Lambert said...

I am a little surprised at Vienna getting a temple. It is the adjacent to not stake to Budapest.

Brussels getting a temple shocks me the most of all thse announcements.

Singapore getting a temple was no surprise. Belo Horizonte was often top for lists of Hrazil. Torreon getting one is not super surprising. Queretaro not that much either.

I am not sure Burley was on any lists. I had suggested Smithfield. Farmington, New Mexico gas been an occasion as l contender as has Grand Junction. Eugene gets on some lists.

Yorba Linda may be the one that surprises me the most. It seems everyone thought the next temple in southern California would be north of Los Angrles. Orange County has actually been losing stakes for the last decade.

Erik said...

"This marks the most temples ever announced for specific locations in a single day by the Church."

This statement is correct but should be contextualized by noting that President Hinckley announced a higher number of temples at the April 1998 conference (he just didn't name their locations).

L. Chris Jones said...

The temples announced in 1998 have the official announcement date as the day each city was formally named. I remember the day in 1998 when I heard President Hinkley's announcement. We are living in amazing times.

L. Chris Jones said...

I think most of us thought Bakersfield would be California's next temple. I also thought maybe northern CA. Due to the reduction of stakes in Southern Cal. However the Lord knows what he is doing. Brussels surprised me too. Others not so much but I thought other cities in MT and WY would come before the ones announced today. However looking at map, Helena seems more centraly located.

Nancy said...

I'm super happy about Grand Junction, as I've been longing, hoping and praying for a temple here, but figured Colorado Springs would come first. It will be a huge blessing for much of Western Colorado. Totally surprised that Farmington was also announced, as that will leave Monticello with nowhere to go for more patrons. Unless Price area gets assigned to them when Manti starts renovations. We truly live in interesting times.

Gnesileah said...

Brussels, Vienna, Burley, and Yorba Linda were surprises to me!

Ulaanbaatar, Antananarivo, Monrovia, Iquitos, Charlotte, Heber City...all still seem ripe for a temple announcement, and no doubt they will come in due time.

I live in Billings, and am grateful Montana is getting a second temple. I was in Missoula yesterday, wondering if a temple announcement was imminent. I drove home through Helena while listening to conference in the car. Helena makes sense for a regional temple between Great Falls, Butte, and Bozeman. I agree that Missoula could still support a temple in its own right, but the distance to the temple would still be cut down a bit.

Missoula to Billings Temple is 5:16
Missoula to Spokane Temple is 3:16
Missoula to Helena is 1:48

Gnesileah said...

President Nelson only has 9 more temples to be tied with President Hinckley with the most number of temples announced during a Prophet's administration. Which is all the more impressive considering that Nelson has only been in the position for 3 years, while Hinckley held the position for nearly 13 years.

Temples Announced by Prophet:
Nelson - 69
Monson - 45
Hinckley - 78 (not counting Harrison Temple)
Hunter - 3
Benson - 9 (not counting original Hartford Temple)
Kimball - 31
Lee - 0
JFdlgSmith - 0
McKay - 7
GASmith - 0
Grant - 3
JFSmith - 2
Snow - 0
Woodruff - 0
Taylor - 0
Young - 4
JSmith - 2 (not counting Independence, Far West, Adam-ondi-Ahman, and Seth Temples)

Eduardo said...

I meant to write "very large Los Angeles Temple" in relation to Yorba Linda in the Los Angeles area. There has been growth in nearby citiea like Corona, but the decrease of units across southern California has been discouraging but news is exciting. The fact that the LA Temple will still be running, hopefully, at full strength, is a great thing.
I was hoping that Wisconsin and West Virginia would get one. Mongolia and Patagonia, for sheer distance, too.
Oslo makes a lot of sense; good for Belgium and Austria.

Unknown said...

I find Brussels, Vienna, and Yorba Linda rather bizarre locations, given the small number of Saints they will serve (in the case of Brussels and Vienna) and proximity to other, often underutilized, temples. I assume those locations weren't just chosen off the cuff -- presumably the brethren either are privy to some statistics/projections not publicly available that might justify these, or they are acting in faith on promptings that they themselves may not understand the reasons for. There does seem to be a pattern of building temples across Europe with far smaller membership bases than elsewhere in the world; it makes me wonder if there is an expectation of either more difficulty in being able to build temples there in the future or more barriers to movement between countries there in the future.

The announcements today cleared out several temples I have been predicting for a while now. The one that has been on my list for the longest time that remains unannounced is Tacloban City, Philippines.

Ohhappydane33 said...

Why, according to the apparent majority of this blog, should the Church automatically disqualify a certain area from having a temple because of declines in membership? Aren't the faithful remaining members entitled to a temple? And maybe temples in areas of decline are possibly more needed than areas of growth, did any of you ever think of that? If temples are only announced in areas of growth, then most of Europe would never qualify, including the ones announced today. So much sanctimonious judgment here.

Matt said...

I am totally stoked and excited for Orange County, California to get its 2nd temple in Yorba Linda. The nearby Newport Beach Temple is often the busiest "smaller" temple of the Church, with more ordinances performed there than many larger temples.

Rumors have it by people in the stake, the Yorba Linda Temple Site will be on top of the hill on Fairmont Blvd (near Yorba Linda High School) where the Church owns a sizeable plot of land.

John said...

Thinking again about Missoula vs. Helena, it may be a while before Missoula gets one too. Helena is actually closer than Spokane, so Spokane is still getting relieved to the east. THe Brethren may look to relieve it to the south at some point.

And it gives more weight to my idea of putting a temple in Asheville, North Carolina as opposed to Charlotte, so it can better serve East Tennessee.

Looking at the map, the only ones in the western states that really surprise me are Burley and Smithfield. But the Lord knows what He's doing.

David Huckvale said...

I’m the most shocked that Tacoma, WA still hasn’t had a temple announcement. The Seattle temple is extremely difficult to get to. I have friends in Olympia who come down to Portland because it’s just about as far. A Tacoma temple would cut it from a 2 hour drive to about 20min.

Now I’m also really curious if Jacksonville, Florida or Savannah, Georgia will get temples. The Tallahassee temple is about the same distance for Jacksonville as the Orlando so that didn’t have much impact for their stakes. Savannah is in a temple void as well having to travel up to South Carolina.

EP said...

What do you think gets done with Kalispell? Cardston still?

Eduardo said...

OhHappy Dane. Sanctimonious.

You do get my dander. You seem to make things personal, and insulting, and we end up removing your comments and many of ours, too.

This sand box is big enough for all ideas without blaming, offending, condescending.

Sorry, Matt. I have to be honest.

In the spirit of honesty and pure analysis, or at minimum reaction and assessment, the LA Temple is very large and has many rooms. My surprise to Yorba Linda is based on that, the proximity to Los Angeles, and it is a pleasant surprise that they can sustain both. I am happy for northern Orange County and Riverside County, and the whole Church.

I lived in San Bernardino when we took day trips to LA, a mere hour 15 away in good traffic. Traffic is another consideration.

Places like Bakersfield and east of LA like Santa Barbara are much further away.

Sanctimonious. Please.

I appreciate the food for thought from all and look forward to less condemnation of our feedback.

Yes, good points, sir. I should have thought of all those things you mentioned. How holier than thou of me not to even consider it, ever.

This is a time of celebration, not attack.

Speaking of attacks, Mozambique has terrorism up north, so I am interested to look at the location of this newly announced temple.


Danny said...

One of the major factors that we dont have is how actively engaged the people in a ward or stake are. That is to say, if an area is declining in total numbers, but those who remain go from 10% activity to 50%, thats a significant number of additional people who are now qualified and desiring to go to the temple.

Please dont see peoples remarks of surprise as being judgemental against the people there. All the statistical analysis in the world means little when the will of the Lord is the deciding factor. However, there is a pattern and order by which God follows. When we see things that we think dont fit the pattern, that usually means we dont have the full picture.

John Pack Lambert said...

I have held out the hope for 1000 temples by 2030. I am not sure that is in any way possible. Although who in 1991 would have believed there would be over 100 temples when the year 2000 closed.

I have to admit that Brussells and Yorba Linda are the temples that surprised me the most. Although Yorba Linda maybe should not be too much of a surprise.

I do not think Yorba Linda rules out some temple or multiple temples being announced for the area of California north and north west of Los Angeles.

Eduardo said...

Part of the reaction of surprise to some temple location choices is that there are some members who live 10 or more hour drives away from many temples, while some people a mere 40 minutes away are getting new ones.

Many of us are pulling for those in far off, far flung regions and locations, without holding any misgivings or ill will to those who are blessed to have a temple so close.

Everybody wins with any new temple.

So happy for all involved.

I think Beira is the first Portuguese speaking temple outside of Portugal and Brazil. Five or six more Portuguese speaking countries to go...

John Pack Lambert said...

To put things in perspective when President Hinckley announced plans to build 32 new temples in April 1998 he had been president of the Church for 3 years. The exact same thing is true of President Nelson. However some of those 32 temples were not announced for over a year after President Hinckley said there would be 32 more temples. True, by the end of 2000 there were 102 operating temples, but there were various factors that allowed for those temples to be built at record speeds.

John Pack Lambert said...

It is about 40 miles from Yorba Linda to the Los Angeles temple. In the traffic situation in Los Agneles this means the only way for people in that area to attend the temple is to take the day off or go on a weekend.

This in turn means that a temple in Yorba Linda will not effect much weekday attendance at the LA Temple. It actually makes a lot of sense.

Considering how small some other temples have of attendance areas I am not at all surprised by Vienna or Brussells. This goes back to President Hinckley's question of if long faithful members will be forever denied a close temple.

My sister spent a summer in Vienna. From talking to her, Budapest is really not all that close. Brussells is not super close to either Paris or the Hague, and considering the number of stakes served by some temples in Canada, giving another country its own temple in Europe makes sense there.

Keep in mind the fulness of the Church is only received with a temple.

John Pack Lambert said...

Smithfield is one of the least surprising to me. The number of members in the Cache Valley is huge, and the growth in Smithfield has been phenomenal. This also significantly reduces travel times from further north. Also since Logan is scheduled for renovation soon, if they super speed it, it might be open before Logan closes, so that Brigham City will not be totally overwhelmed.

John Pack Lambert said...

David Huckvale,

Well if we got 20 temples announced this conference, we could get the same announced next conference. Of even more.

There are lots of things that we do not know. We do not know how close to finding a site the Church decides to be before announcing temples. In the 1998-1999 time frame it seems they picked out a specific site and then announced the temple. At other times temples seem to have been announced before an exact site was picked. Of course, Philadelphia the first announced site was determined on further review to not be workable. In Nashville the first site they could not get approval to build on so they chose a second site, Tegucigalpa there was so much opposition to the first site that they did a second ground breaking at a new site.

So for all we know Tacoma, Monrovia, Antonarivo, Ulaam Bator and several other locations are under consideration, but they want a firmer site.

I also think length of stake existance is a more relevant figure than some seem to think. If I am thinking clearly Beira got its second stake before Maputo did, and that was why I was 100% sure Beira would have a temple announced first.

On another note, this round seemed to heavily focus on the western US. I wonder if in another session President Nelson might announce several temples for another area.

Still keep in mind that Asia area has 1 operating temple, 1 under renovation and expasion temple, and now 5 more temples announced. Africa West area has 2 operating temples, 1 under construction temple and 4 temples announced. I think Mexico may have at one point had 1 operating tmeple and 11 more temples announced, so we could see more announcements in some international areas.

The process of temple announcement is complex. We know that President Nelson was impressed to announce the Bangalaru India Temple the night before he announced it, he had orginally only planned to announce 6 temples in April 2018 general conference. Also bear in mind that no temple announced by President Nelson has yet been dedicated, but a few have had presidents called.

Jim Anderson said...

Oslo, Brussels, and Vienna are national capitals. That may be part of what the plan is. Additionally, Brussels is a huge international center for diplomacy so a lot of it is going to be people on those types of assignments that will attend.

Yorba Linda is near a major freeway confluence in the LA area, if anyone has gone through the 60/57 interchange, you know how big a deal that is, it also will be an easy one for those that use the 71, it crosses the 60 not that much further east and ends in the Kellogg Hill interchange just a few miles north of the 60. That area between LA and the Inland Empire will have less traffic issues to deal with as a result.

The next few go-arounds will be somewhat interesting to try to guess. Some ideas:

Cottonwood Heights, Herriman, and north Lehi, not in any particular order
Bakersfield CA (new city proposed at the foot of the Grapevine, not that much further south.
Queen Creek AZ (constant rumors, two possible sites already fingered.)
Washington County 3 (north of St. George) already possible based on a statement by Elder Steven R. Snow two years ago, was based on heavy use of the St. George temple, how Red Cliffs will impact that will not be known until after both are functioning)
Las Vegas 2. Summerlin or north of that past Lone Mountain, 215 freeway nearing completion north of NV-613 and the interchange with I-15 underway.
South Bay (SF area) *NEW* Travel times, other factors, San Jose being as big as SL county is one.

John Pack Lambert said...

I think with these announcements President Nelson has now announced new temples for all areas of the Church. He had previously not announced any new temples for Africa South Area. I believe the same may have been true for North America Central (I am thinking President Monson announced Pocatello). I can not remember if President Nelson announced the temple under way in Mexico. So at least 1 maybe 4 areas had their first Nelsonian temple announcements this weekend.

Fredrick said...

Hard to say - I think Kalispell will be assigned to Helena. Temple attendees will have to drive down through Missoula. That's quite different from driving through the mountains near Glacier National Park to get to Cardston. I still think Missoula would have been the better location but it seems lately the Church prefers to build temples in state capitals (Tallahassee vs. Jacksonville).

Helena looks like it will serve 8 or 9 stakes. Billings looks like it will go down to 7 stakes while the Casper WY Temple will serve 6 stakes.

Ross Tenney said...

Like most others, most surprised about the Yorba Linda and Brussels temple announcements. Almost all the others have had some mention on this site.

My thoughts:

Farmington, NM - I am hoping for a hogan themed footprint which also incorporates other Navajo Nation themed elements.

Elko, NV - Had this one as an outside shot for a few years. Distance was always the driver here. Likely will serve the two Elko Stakes plus stakes based in Ely and Winnemucca, NV. Could see the design similar to McAllen, Tallahassee and Pittsburgh. Could also see a design like Star Valley. Lots of strong, faithful members in Elko who attended and worked at the SLC Temple.

Elko to Twin Falls, ID Temple - 168 miles
Elko to SLC Temple - 231 Miles
Elko to Reno, NV Temple - 295 Miles
Elko to Las Vegas, NV Temple - 420 miles

Vienna, Austria - Had a chance to attend Stake Conference there in 2019. First time I had attended any church meeting where German was spoken. About 1000 members in attendance. Had traveled from all over Austria. Was held in a hotel ballroom because no church buildings were large enough to hold all the members of the Stake together at once. Two stakes in Austria. Even with Budapest Temple being relatively close by, the Vienna Temple could also serve parts of the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Germany and Croatia.

Fredrick said...

The Yorba Linda Temple does not seem to be a surprising as it initialled sounded. The Newport Beach Temple is quite small for 15 stakes and is overworked. With the Yorba Linda Temple, Newport Beach will probably go down to just 10 stakes which sounds still too much for a temple its size. Yorba Linda will probably serve about 8 stakes - probably serving Whittier, Chino Hills and Corona stakes along with 5 from Newport Beach - Cypress, Anaheim, Anaheim East, Brea and Orange.

Eugene, OR was quite a surprise. Thought it would be Salem since there are lots of stakes around that city and large ones that will likely split. Even though only an hour from Portland Salem seems to be more central to the stakes that it would serve without taking too many stakes away from Medford. Now Medford will be down to 3 or 4 stakes.

Daniel Moretti said...

You forgot Cape Verde

Fredrick said...

Cape Verde was announced in October 2018.

Eduardo said...

Right, Cabo Verde is the 3rd Portuguese speaking nation with a temple, Mozambique is the 4th! Only four more to go!

EP said...

I'll get around to typing up my major analysis sometime later, but I did want to ask you all something that has come to mind. Do you think the Church has a ratio for stakes per temple square footage or number of endowment/sealing rooms/baptistries in the area? Example: 15 stakes in Twin Falls, 32,000 square feet, 2/2/1, but with Burley announced, that 15 stakes goes down to probably 7-8. Then you look up north at, say, Spokane, WA which is serving the same number of stakes in a 10,700 square foot space. I think it's still a 2/2/1 temple, but those rooms are significantly smaller. Does that now make a temple in Coeur d'Alene, ID more likely to get that 15 stakes down to 7-8? It's so fascinating seeing how both data and inspiration play a role in temple expansion. Would love to hear your thoughts.

Ohhappydane33 said...

Please Eduardo. I rarely post here anymore. It had probably been at least 6 months to a year since my last post and I get under your "dander"? You and JPL are the ones here posting on a near daily basis monopolizing the conversation and controlling the narrative as you all apparently see fit.

Danny said...

I suspect that active temple recommends & (in a subset of the previous) active Melchizedek priesthood holders are two key factors (among many), just from a practical aspect of being able to have ordinance workers in the temple on a regular basis, but where it doesn't become a significant burden on other responsibilities.

two other thoughts on temples:

- Smaller 1998/2000 era temples could be renovated to increase their size/capacity as areas grow.

- Given the decision to move to film-only in the Salt Lake and St. George temples, it is possible that other temples are renovated to allow for single room instead of multi-room. Perhaps this wont be the case for every temple given design constraints, but it seems like a relatively easier way to increase capacity.

John Pack Lambert said...

Santa Barabara is west of LA. Which is probably what you meant to say. Dane feels that me and other people with Autism should not be able to discuss ideas and are only good for cleaning toilets.

John Pack Lambert said...

Is it possible to get to a temple from Yorba Linda in 40 minutes. It is 34 miles from downtown Los Angeles, but the temple is west of downtown.

The more I think of it, the more I am not as surprised by Yorba Linda.

John Pack Lambert said...

What are the changes we will get temples in all 50 state capitals by 2040?

To date we have then identified with 19 states I think if we count operational and announced.

This gives us Boise, Idaho; Salt Lake City, Utah, Sacramento, California; Phoenix, Arizona; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Bismark, North Dakota; St. Paul, Minnesota; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Talahasee, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Columbia, South Carolina; Raleigh, North Carolina; Richmond, Virginia; Indianapolis, Indiana; Columbus, Ohio; Nashville, Tenneseee; Boston, Massachusetts and Hartford, Connecticut.

John Pack Lambert said...

The remaining list is Honolulu, Hawai'i. I could see Oahu getting a 2nd temple. Juneau, Alaska. It is isolated enough I could see it. Olympia, Washington. Well there is some view Seattle needs relief. I am not sure Olympia would make sense though. Salem, Oregon. I am not sure with Eugene getting a temple a 4th temple in Oregon is that likely short term.

Carson City, Nevada. I think this is the least likely short term we have come across. Reno is not that far, and there is just not the membership there for a second temple I could be wrong.

Cheyenne I might have thought vaguely possible before Casper, now I don't think a temple there is likely. Plus Fort Collins is not super far away. More likely than Carson City, but still low.

Santa Fe is a bit more likely, but still pretty unlikely. Austin I would rate almost certain by 2025, and high probability for this year. Austin is the most likely one yet.

Topeka, Kansas is a possibility, but I expect Wichita to be Kansas' first. Lincoln, Nebraska may be even less likely than Carson City. Pierre will only get a temple if they decide for giving all 50 state capitals a temple, unless things change there a whole lot. Des Moines is possible, a high priority candidate for Iowa's first temple, but with 2 temples just outside Iowa not all that likely.

Jefferson City might be Missouri's 3rd temple, but I would be shocked to see it by 2025. Little Rock is another low contender, although not as low as some.

Jackson, Mississippi I could see. I want to place it on an extreme short list but that may not be likely.

Frankfurt, Kentucky is in my opinion the absolute least likely. I think it even less likely than Pierre. It is another that will only occur if 50 temples for 50 capitals becomes a thing.

Lansing, Michigan I could see. It could take 4 stakes and leave functionally 4 stakes with Detroit, plus parts of Toledo Ohio and London, Ontario stakes with Detroit. If Traverse City gets a stake, which is an event probably closer to the present than the most recent stake creation in Michigan, it would seem a little more likely. Still it is less than an hour and a half drive from Landing to the Detroit Temple. Also Grand Blanc and Ann Arbor stakes both have areas that might be closer to a Lansing Temple. Also the one plot of land the Church currently owns in metro Lansing big enough to build a temple is behind the Institue Building/student apartments the Church owns, and that is east of East Lansing, thus towards Detroit. The Detroit Temple is north of Detroit, and towards the west, so it is also fairly accessible from Lansing.

Keep in mind also that my statement about when we will get a Traverse City stake only means before 2063. Yes, it has been 42 years since Michigan got its last stake. At that point Michigan's oldest stake was only 27. To be fair the Toledo Stake organized in 1983 took a good chunk of its membership from Michigan stakes. Green Bay Stake organized in 1996 absorbed a district from Michigan as well. Almost 30 years ago I heard people predict a stake centered in the city of Detroit in the next 10 to 15 years but that did not happen.

John Pack Lambert said...

Remaining US state capital temples.

Annapolis, Maryland. This rates just a little more likely than Pierre. I think a Baltimore, Temple is more likely. Built within the city of Baltimore itself. Ideally an area that burned in the 2017 riots. It would be the most aggressive outreach to African-Americans to date. I could see President Nelson doing it and sending Elder Mutombo back to Baltimore as a general authority/temple president to inaugurate it. I am not sure that is super likely, but it is more likely than an Anapolis Temple. Those are not even top likelihood ways to subdivide the DC Temple district.

A Charleston, West Virginia Temple might be the top candidate in West Virginia.

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania is a counter with Gettsburg getting a stake. I still think Oakland Township, Pennsylvania will get Pennsylvania's next temple but I might be crazy.

Trenton, New Jersey is not even the top contender for a New Jersey Temple. Albany, New York I can see although I think Utica or Syracuse more likely.

Montpelier, Vermont is a contender since Winnipeg got a temple, but the distances are not so great, so not a high one. Concord is New Hampshire's capital I believe. It is not a,strong contender but might happen. Providence, Rhode Isl and 2nd I can see occurring at some point. Augusta, Maine I am tempted to rate 3rd or 4th most likely. Basically tied with Jackson, Missisippi.

I think the leading contender after Austin, Texas is Madison, Wisconsin. Although I think Milwaukie, Appleton and Green Bay are all also contenders for Wisconsin's 1st temple.

John Pack Lambert said...

The related list is countries with a temple but none in the capital.

Canada I see Ottawa as a low contender for a temple. Yamasoukro seems to be the top contender for the 2nd temple in Ivory Coast, unless Abijan gets two temples before anywhere else gets one, but there are only 2 stakes in Ivory Coast outside of Abijan. We may see some more districts mature to stakes, and Yamasoukro is close to division. We will see what occurs. One day there will be a temple in Daloa, but President Nelson may not live to announce it.

Abuja has 3 stakes, so I could see it getting a temple. Not sure it will be the next temple announced in Nigeria though. I want that to be Ikot Eyo.

South Africa has multiple capitals, so that is just a mess. With Cape Town having a temple announced we now have one for one of the capitals. Bloemfontaine and Pretoria may eventually get temples, but if President Nelson announces those he will either live longer than Moses we may get to 1000 temples at least announced by 2030. I think President Nelson will exceed Moses' age in 2044.

New Delhi I could see getting a temple, it is at least as isolated a stake as Winnipeg. Beijing I can see getting one if the Shsnghai Temple works. Will the Russia Temple be in Miscow? I have no clue. I think the Russia Temple city may be announced either when they announce the open house or when they give people directions to the dedication, since an open house was deemed undoable. I could be wrong but it would not surprise me.

With Vienna getting a temple I believe a Berlin Temole could come to be.

What is the Capitol of Guam? If it is not Yigo than I rate Guam as less likely to get a temple in its capital than Kentucky, the state that ranked lowest.

Have I forgotten anywhere?

John Pack Lambert said...

Austria has 2 stakes, the other in Salzburg. So I doubt people came from all over Austria. The far west of Austria m.j may be in a Swiss stake. I am not sure.

John Pack Lambert said...

I think the Medford sized temples were really built to serve 4 and under stakes if people truly value temple attendance.

How long does it take to go from Yorba Lina to the Newport Beach Temple.

This seems to say LA Temple will be only minimally effected by the Yorba Linda Temole. Which means another temple north or west of LA is still as likely now as before.

I believe the largest city in the US without a temple in its metro area is San Jose. Although some consider San Jose/Oaklamd/San Francisco one metro area, I think San Jose is the 9th largest city in the US and San Francisco is the 10th.

If San Jose/San Francisco/Oakland is all one metro area what is the largest without a temple metro area in the US? Is La Paz, Bolivia now the metro area with the most stakes without a temple?

John Pack Lambert said...

Based on the Wikipedia list of Metro areas I found Tampa is the most populous one in the US without a temple.

John Pack Lambert said...

Tampa is bigger than Orlando in its metro area. After Tampa the next largest ones are Charlotte, Baltimore than a few more. San Jose is actually the 6th largest metro area in the US lacking a temple. 48 of the 100 top metro areas in the US lack temples. That is assuming Palmyra is in Rochester Metro Area, which I am not sure it is. Durham and Raleigh are two separate metro areas.

John Pack Lambert said...

I would say this is one consideration. However it is only one. Probably the best state is ordinance usable square footage. Some temples have assembly rooms, cafeterias, large laundries and other items that may this comparison hard from straight square footage.

There are other factors. Where are the current temple workers and patrons coming from. Torreon will take stakes from Mexico City, but since it is 8 hours or more drive from the Mexico City Temple, and that may not fully account for how bad traffic is in Mexico City, the temple attendance achieved in Torreon will probably far exceed the loss from Mexico City.

I doubt Kinshasa getting a temple had any noticeable negative impact on temple attendance at any existing temple. Even Cape Town will probably not reduce attendance at Johanesburg a lot.

With the end of marital and child age restrictions on temple workers some other plotting have changed. The Church wants temples to be district supported with temple workers as much as possible.

There are lots of factors to weigh.

Michael Worley said...

Happydane, I was pleased to see you comment.

Christopher Duerig said...

Recently added to Classic Maps, in preparation for future dedication, is the new "Pocatello Idaho Temple - 2101653".,-112.40717&z=18&m=google.hybrid&

With the following assigned Stakes as the primary assigned Temple :

From Idaho Falls Idaho Temple Ditrict:

501859 American Falls Idaho
500526 Blackfoot Idaho
515647 Blackfoot Idaho East
510769 Blackfoot Idaho Northwest
502332 Blackfoot Idaho South
505552 Blackfoot Idaho West
511307 Chubbuck Idaho
500739 McCammon Idaho
500380 Pocatello Idaho
504491 Pocatello Idaho Alameda
516848 Pocatello Idaho Central
511234 Pocatello Idaho East
504130 Pocatello Idaho Highland
502243 Pocatello Idaho North
516368 Pocatello Idaho Tyhee
501646 Pocatello Idaho West
504440 Pocatello Idaho YSA

From Logan Utah Temple District
516864 Arimo Idaho
500372 Grace Idaho

And as secondary option after Logan Utah Temple,
500305 Malad Idaho

And as secondary option after Star Valley Wyoming Temple,
500747 Soda Springs Idaho

Historia Familiar Valenzuela Escobar said...

The announcements of the 20 temples were long-awaited news, it is a blessing to have a temple closer to the members, that should provoke more attendance and work in family history and genealogical work. It is always striking that in remote places and with few baptized temples are built, however, it is necessary and vital in the spirituality of a person who loves temple work, to attend often.

As a Chilean, I always wait for the announcement of a temple, I know that we have many inactive people, although this not only happens in our country but throughout the world, despite the few active in the gospel, the temples in the country are still very far apart, time and money do not always allow people to attend the temple and convert to God. With NELSON we have had many temple announcements and that I think is the most important thing.

I always keep in mind that if Winipeng in Canada got a temple with a stake, then it is possible that in our countries the same thing happens, I look forward to seeing that the gospel continues to grow and so the temples can get closer to the faithful and baptized devotees, in Chile still there are great distances without a nearby temple and many with a desire to attend more often if it were closer.

John said...

Looking again at Asheville vs. Charlotte:

The new temple would get about eleven stakes. The difference is Asheville would get the Knoxville stakes from Nashville while Charlotte would get the Piedmont Triad from Raleigh. Either way, it would take seven stakes from Columbia, South Carolina and that would be a big bite. It may not be time yet for either.

L. Chris Jones said...

I think at least on of these (Grace) may be assigned to Smithfield when it's completed. Maybe one or two others. Or a stake that could split depending upon what wards are closer either way.

twinnumerouno said...


Puebla and Queretaro will both probably have some impact on the Mexico City temple. But it appears to me that Torreon is closer to both Monterrey and Guadalajara than to Mexico City, so I wouldn't think that temple will have any noticeable impact on Mexico City.

I would have to agree that the church is often building a nation's first temple in its capital, though there are some cases (Brazil and Ecuador come to mind) where they are now getting a temple in the capital but previously had one or more in other locations.

I came up with a few more countries that have temples that are not in the capital:

Bolivia has 2 capitals, La Paz and Sucre, and neither of the temples is in those cities.

Dubai is the largest city but not the capital of the United Arab Emirates.

The Hague is functionally but not officially the capital of the Netherlands (that would be Amsterdam), but maybe that's a little too nitpicky.

Australia and New Zealand also have multiple temples without one in the capital- I am not sure if distance and membership would warrant getting one.

I don't remember if you mentioned that the newly announced temple for Mozambique is not in its capital.

You're right that Yigo is not the capital of Guam.

I would have to agree that Ottawa seems like an unlikely site to get a temple any time soon, but I think somewhere in Ontario may be more likely than anywhere else in Canada apart from maybe a 2nd in BC or a 4th in Alberta. (However, I understand the Toronto temple is underused, so that prospect is still probably a long way off.)

Pretoria doesn't seem likely to get a temple as it is fairly close to Johannesburg.

All right, that's my two cents.

Matt said...

I suspect the Yorba Linda Temple will take in the following 10 or 11 stakes from the Los Angeles, Newport Beach, and Redlands Temple Districts.

La Verne
Hacienda Heights
Anaheim East

Possibly Lake Elsinore Stake as well.

All the other Orange County stakes (12 stakes) will remain in the Newport Beach Temple District.

Yorba Linda to Newport Beach without traffic takes about 25-30 minutes.

Logan H said...

I think Casper would serve 4-7 stakes. For sure the Riverton, Casper, Casper East, and Gillette stakes.

I think the Sheridan stake would still go to the Billings Temple as it is closer, but I could be wrong.

The Worland stake is the same distance from Billings as Casper so it could go to either Temple.

The outlier is Rawlins. I think with one more ward it could get a new building and become a stake. If that doesn't happen before the Casper Temple is dedicated I wonder if Rawlins with Hanna and Saratoga would be made a District to be assigned to Casper. Casper is almost an hour closer than Fort Collins for Rawlins.

PanOptikAeon said...

Any chances of Flagstaff getting one anytime soon? Just curious since Tucson and Phoenix each got one.

Steve Crandall said...

There’s also La Paz, Bolivia. Now two temples there, but none for the capital city. With 9 stakes in the metropolitan area, I suspect it won’t be too long now.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I agree about the surprise about Helena.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I'm moving up north of Kalispell this summer (but originally grew up in Missoula area and born in Bozeman).

Hope to see a Missoula Temple some day (Kalispell and Great Falls wouldn't hurt, either), due to distance and personal ties, but glad to see the Treasure State's capitol represented!


It'll be interesting to see what gets assigned to what in Montana when the Helena Temple is built. When Billings was built, our stake (south of Missoula, in the Bitterroot Valley) was assigned to Billings even though it was slightly farther away than our previous temple, Idaho Falls (I think they did it out of a sense of giving us a sense of unity as Montanans, as Billings was now "our" temple). Shortly after, they assigned our stake to the Spokane Temple, as that was closer than even Idaho Falls even though it was technically two states away.

So, I can see them assigning parts of Western or Northern (or even North-western) Montana to Helena temporarily again to reinforce that sense of solidarity. (Also, because the Canadian border is more impassible these days then it once was.) If and when the pandemic restrictions (and the border) loosens up, then who knows?

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I appreciate you laying out how many Temples each prophet has announced. I did some calculations a while back and figured out that if Pres. Nelson keeps announcing temples at the same rate he has been, within the next few years he'll surpass not only Pres. Hinckley's total, but all temples announced by all the other Modern Day Prophets. Combined.

I'll have to update my calculations, but I'm pretty sure the 20 Temples just announced accelerated how fast he'll achieve that mark.

Eduardo said...

Right, John PL. I meant to write that Santa Barbara was a major population center west of LA, further from downtown than most of Orange County.
It would be awesome if California got more temples in the next five years. I have a lot of family and friends in the Golden State.
Unit growth and temple building is a normal correlation that is not sanctimonious to make conjecture about, but as agreed by many, does not always match as we figure.
I wish we would not have to bash others based on our personal assessments on these matters.
Most of us commenters do not.

Pascal Friedmann said...

Thinking of Casper, I think it is possible that we could see two or three more small temples annouced in Wyoming in the next few years. Distance and winter travel are always a concern.

People talk about Evanston, and they have a fair point because of distance, but compared to other towns on I-80, Evanston is fairly accessible from Utah in just about all weather conditions. I still believe that a small temple in Morgan would serve Evanston well, but I do understand that hardly anyone here shares my feeling that Morgan could get a temple (despite somewhere around 8 to 10 stakes in a potential district and the complete lack of temples on the Wasatch Back).

I think Rock Springs could be a good location for a temple along the I-80 corridor. Rawlins may become a stake. Maybe take Martin's Cove or Baggs for a boost in membership. And then go for splitting another ward, either in Rawlins or Hanna or Saratoga. Not sure how close either of those are. But even without Rawlins, a temple in Rock Springs would have at least three stakes assigned to it (RS, Green River, Lyman), with a possibly fourth one in Riverton.

Sheridan is another hot candidate, despite the relative proximity to Billings. They could cover Sheridan, Worland, Lowell, Cody and Gilette. I think anytime you have five stakes in a place like Wyoming, there is a fair chance a small temple could be announced.

Finally, I would go with Cheyenne again. Two stakes in Cheyenne plus Laramie. Again, close to Fort Collins, but it would cut travel times and make temple attendance more feasible year-round.

Mentally, I would treat Wyoming like Manitoba or Guam or Okinawa, where perhaps the distance to the temple is the main concern for a relatively small number of members (at least if you split them five ways), rather than overcrowding of the existing temples.

Brett Stirling said...

Asia has Taipei, Taiwan, Seoul Korea, Fukuoka, and Sapporo as operating temples at the moment.

Brett Stirling said...

Asia has Taipei, Taiwan, Seoul Korea, Fukuoka, and Sapporo as operating temples at the moment.

Jim Anderson said...

Also things can move a lot faster on temples and their construction if we donate to the Temple Construction Fund with our donations.

Select Other on the online form and it will be an option, or if you still do paper, write in Temple Construction fund on the line for Other.

Started with the 1999 announcement, in modern terms it is crowdfunding, and we were doing that before that ever was a word, or a way of doing things. Doesn't cover all costs yet, but more donated to that fund will go a long way.

twinnumerouno said...

On second thought, Wellington New Zealand is probably a good candidate site, better than Christchurch in terms of how many members are there, although the latter has a stronger distance factor. I don't know if Canberra Australia is very strong- it would maybe be a good place for dividing the Sydney district if that becomes necessary. And La Paz Bolivia is on a lot of people's lists for future temple predictions.

twinnumerouno said...

I was intrigued also by the fact that Pres. Nelson announced 9 temples for the US, each in a different western US state. In fact, 9 of the 11 states that include or are west of the Rockies (that is among the 48 contiguous states, and becomes 9 of 13 with Alaska and Hawaii added) are getting a new temple. This list includes the 2nd temple for Montana, Wyoming and New Mexico and the 3rd for Colorado, Nevada and Oregon.

I am also excited by the announcement of a Grand Junction temple. It will still be farther than my assigned temple in Vernal, but is close enough that I could take a day trip there on occasion (I think it is a little over 2 hours from where I live, so a lot closer than any of the other Utah or Colorado temples).

twinnumerouno said...

Baggs Wyoming is one of the two branches in the Craig Colorado stake, which is my stake. If they are assigned to Rawlins or any other stake in Wyoming they will be at least twice as far from their stake center, so my guess is that they are not likely to be moved, unless there is a deliberate decision to avoid having units in neighboring states. (One branch is also not much of a boost in membership.)

Of course, the other branch in my stake, Granby, is farther from Craig than they were from their previous stake center. So I guess anything is possible.

twinnumerouno said...

Palmyra is a fairly short drive from the southeastern part of the Rochester metropolitan area, but definitely outside it. When I have made that drive it was very obvious that I was no longer in the city.

Dennis said...

Wow, I never heard of anyone speak of Baggs Wyoming. That’s the branch I grew up in and my parents still go to. It will be interesting if it changes stakes, but I doubt it. I believe Vernal is still closer than Grand Junction, but Vernal probably has plenty of wards to support it without the Craig stake.

Christopher Nicholson said...

Why does the Church's news release about these temples claim that missionary work began in Ghana in May 2002? That's not even close. It began in December 1978. Did nobody proofread this and think "Gee, it seems a little odd that Ghana's first temple would be dedicated two years after missionary work began?"

In the Deseret News article about new opportunities for young single adults, the Washington D.C. YSA stake president said the stake has grown from 1,300 to 2,000 members in five years, and "We’re looking to add more units and eventually split the stake".

I look forward to more callings being made available to women, such as ward clerk, financial clerk, and Sunday school president or counselor, none of which require priesthood ordination. I'm surprised that wasn't a higher priority. A lot more young people are leaving the Church over women's issues than over their YSA bishoprics and stake presidencies having to be married.

EP said...

I’m working backwards from the bottom. Lots of great discussion in here.

@Dennis, I think you’re right. Vernal is still closer to the Craig stake by about a half hour, though I don’t know how the winter drive is. Perhaps Grand Junction may be listed as an alternate temple for that stake?

@twinnumerouno, I don’t think you have to worry about Baggs being pulled from the Craig stake anytime soon. That’s my personal guess, at least.

@Pascal, I’ve actually thought about Morgan as a good place for a temple in terms of helping winter driving. It would serve at least the 5 stakes behind the Wasatch north of Salt Lake City (Coalville, Morgan, Morgan West, Morgan North, Huntsville). It would also be a closer choice for Evanston, though I eventually see a temple in Lyman serving Evanston, Evanston South, Lyman, Green River, Rock Springs, and Kemmerer. I think the biggest issue with the smaller Utah options is that the Church can’t keep up with the existing temples in the big metros. Before we see Morgan, Heber City, Price, Richfield, or Delta (which I think will all have temples announced within the next 10 years), there’s still probably at least 5-6 more Mormon corridor temples to come (Spanish Fork, Traverse Mountain, Herriman, East Salt Lake Valley, Farmington, Pleasant View) to alleviate the pressure.

You know, when you start looking at temples serving 5-10 stakes instead of 20-30, it becomes pretty easy to start seeing how we could get up into the several hundreds of temples quickly. Sheridan is one I hadn’t thought of, but I could see that being a solid location for the reasons you mentioned, though it would also depend on how small the Church was willing to make the Billings district, as Billings would drop to only 4 or 5 stakes. But that may be a better option for all involved, perhaps. Cheyenne is further out, but I could see another stake of growth in Cheyenne or a couple more in Fort Collins being a reason to satellite a location in Cheyenne.

That reminds me, Casper is another blessing to have announced because it will likely shorten the distance for Rapid City, SD. I still envision a tiny temple there due to its isolation, but Casper will be great for them in the meantime.

@Johnathan Reese Whiting, thanks for your insight as a local. I think we’ll see the districts shape out as such for the time being:

Helena [8]: Helena, Butte, Great Falls, Great Falls East, Kalispell, Frenchtown, Missoula, Stevensville
Billings [8]: Billings, Billings East, Billings South, Bozeman, Glendive, Cody WY, Lovell WY, Sheridan WY (assuming Gillette, Riverton, and Worland, WY go to Casper)

This would remove some pressure from Spokane, which at 15 stakes in a Hinckley temple, is likely under heavy use; that said, I do ultimately think a reliever temple will be built in the Coeur d’Alene area in the next few years. Bozeman is interesting, as I could see that listed under both temples due to the massive size of the stake, and winter driving may be more of an issue to Helena than Billings. Kalispell would be better served by a temple in Missoula, but I think to avoid the border crossing, I could see the Church assigning it to Helena over Cardston.

@PanOptikAeon, I had discussed this with another poster in the prediction thread, but I think with a focus on driving distance to temples and particularly winter conditions, a temple in Flagstaff or Prescott would not surprise me at all, servicing 6-7 stakes.

@Matt, when you lay it out like that, Yorba Linda actually makes a ton of sense as a location. I didn’t realize Redlands was also serving 20 stakes currently, there are temples 4 times its size that serve that many stakes. 35 stakes between two smaller temples (17k sf, 2/3/1 each) is definitely a lot to ask of each temple district. I’ll admit that this one snuck by me and I’m glad it was announced. Orange County and the Inland Empire definitely seem to be strongholds for the Church in California.

Butterfly and Bones said...

Now more than ever, I really think Scotland could get their own temple! I'm rooting for Edinburgh next time. (If Oslo, Vienna, & Brussels can have their own)!

But what I'm curious about now is (because I haven't seen anyone else mention it)... if you think that Cardiff, Wales has a fighting chance at all?

It could be supported by the following Stakes:
Merthyr Tydfil Wales Stake
Cardiff Wales Stake
Cheltenham England Stake
Bristol England Stake
Plymouth England Stake
(maybe Poole England Stake?)

While I think Bristol, England is more central to that bunch of stakes above than Cardiff, the Early Church can thank Wales for so many of the earliest and first converts (who later immigrated to the States). In fact, it's been reported that 20% of all Utahans have Welsh ancestry. There is such a rich LDS Welsh heritage. Look up the history of Dan Jones and John Parry who organized the choral group that went on to become Mormon Tabernacle Choir! Also, Welsh was one of the first languages the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants was translated into.

Any thoughts on a temple in Wales? Or do you think a temple in Birmingham, England would be called before one in Wales is?

Butterfly and Bones said...

Now more than ever, I really think Scotland could get their own temple! I'm rooting for Edinburgh next time. (If Oslo, Vienna, & Brussels can have their own)!

But what I'm curious about now is (because I haven't seen anyone else mention it)... if you think that Cardiff, Wales has a fighting chance at all?

It could be supported by the following Stakes:
Merthyr Tydfil Wales Stake
Cardiff Wales Stake
Cheltenham England Stake
Bristol England Stake
Plymouth England Stake
(maybe Poole England Stake?)

While I think Bristol, England is more central to that bunch of stakes above than Cardiff, the Early Church can thank Wales for so many of the earliest and first converts (who later immigrated to the States). In fact, it's been reported that 20% of all Utahans have Welsh ancestry. There is such a rich LDS Welsh heritage. Look up the history of Dan Jones and John Parry who organized the choral group that went on to become Mormon Tabernacle Choir! Also, Welsh was one of the first languages the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants was translated into.

Any thoughts on a temple in Wales?

EP said...

Still working my way up.

@John, I actually think given the small capacity of the temples in the area, Charlotte will happen sooner rather than later. I favor Charlotte for the number of stakes in Charlotte proper over Asheville, though I could see the argument for Asheville. Charlotte would also set up an eventual smaller temple in Knoxville. I see something like this when announced:

Nashville [10]: as is
Charlotte [7-9]: Charlotte Central, Charlotte South, Gastonia, Hickory, Asheville, Fort Mill SC, Kingsport TN, possibly Winston-Salem and High Point
Columbia [10]: remove the seven stakes listed above
Raleigh [10-12]: remove Winston-Salem and High Point potentially to Charlotte

That would balance the area out nicely and ease the stress on Columbia and possibly Raleigh as well.

@Historia Familiar Valenzuela Escobar, I hope that the Chilean people have another temple announced soon. Perhaps Osorno to help the saints in the southern tip of Chile.

@Christopher Duerig, thanks for the info. No real surprises from the IF district, though Arimo and Grace from Logan surprise me a bit. I think ultimately, after Smithfield, a temple will be announced in Preston, ID that will handle Arimo, Grace, and another 6-8 stakes in southern Idaho. I wouldn’t be shocked to see Arimo and Grace traded back to Smithfield once that temple is complete.

@John Pack Lambert, I think you’re correct on the Hinckley temples being meant to only serve a few stakes with a focus on temple attendance. Also, I think San Jose will happen in the next 5-10 years. Bakersfield is still my favorite for next in California, but then San Jose, then Redding, then maybe Victorville or elsewhere in the Inland Empire.

I generally don’t have much analysis otherwise or on the new temples either. Generally all places that are somewhat isolated or otherwise in need, this was a huge set in filling in some holes. European travel difficulty in the future wouldn’t surprise me, nearly every Western Europe country will have a temple now, depending on how things pan out with Barcelona, Ireland, Scotland, etc. I can’t wait to see what the Church does in Singapore, that should be a very unique temple.

Honestly the biggest surprise for me was Burley being the next Idaho temple. I figured we’d see it in 5-6 years after a few other locations of need, but I’m over in Idaho Falls, so I wasn’t aware of how used Twin Falls’s temple is. Hopefully we don’t have to wait for the Burley to be nearly done before another Idaho temple is announced, like was done with Pocatello (towards the end of Meridian’s construction) and now Burley (at the end of Pocatello’s construction). Over the next 10 years, between natural growth and people fleeing to this great state, we could easily see a third and fourth temple in the Treasure Valley (Nampa is the main candidate for the next temple there), a temple in the Coeur d’Alene area, a temple on the east side of Idaho Falls or Ammon, a temple in Preston to serve the 10 southern Idaho stakes, and maybe even Blackfoot and Rigby. Oh, and a second temple in another very special place. Rumor is a very large parcel of land is about to change hands in the north part of Rexburg...

John Pack Lambert said...

In the 1998-2000 time frame President Hinckley expressed the views that when those temples reached capacity new ones would be built. None of the renovations to date have significantly increased temple size of those temples.

On the other hand I believe Laie and Cardston are both significantly larger than when first built.

A temple like Columbus Ohio or Detrout Michigan it would make far more sense to build a temple in an outlying area than expand that temple.

John Pack Lambert said...

On the other hand South Carolina has significantly more stakes then when first built.

John Pack Lambert said...

New Zealand and Australia are clearly teo I missed.

UK still think Guam is bottom of the list.

I think I forgot to analyze Springfield, Illinois getting a temple. Not super likely, but way ahead of Frankfurt, Kentucky.

I could see Sudbury, Ontario getting a temple since Winnipeg did. Although I may be underestimating how isolated Winnipeg is.

My other vision is a Toronto City Center Temple. Also a Boston City Center Temple and a Detroit City Center Temple. If President Nelson lives to announce any I will be shocked, unless he outlives Moses by more than 10 years. I mean if Elder Soares lives to announce any of those I would be a little shocked.

John Pack Lambert said...

Well, it is hard to say. Flagstaff has 2 stakes in the city and probably could get like 7 in a district. Is Kingman closer by drive time to Flagstaff or Las Vegas? Still some think a Prescott, Arizona Temple more likely. Anything is possible.

John Pack Lambert said...

Actually how far of a drive from LA Temple are places in Ventura County. I think a Ventura Temple, a Santa Barabara/San Luis Opisbo, and a Bakersfield Temple all three could be done.

I also think there is hope for a San Jose Temple. I am also hoping for a Modesto Temple.

I think th

John Pack Lambert said...

Sorry, I posted before I was done. I think those 5 are possible and maybe one in Riverside County. I would live to see east LA County, but I am not sure that is likely before 2030.

There are lots of thinks that I do not know, so lots of changes may come.

John Pack Lambert said...

I think I have put Morgan on lists. I think it will get a temple. I think Heber City will be first but I could be just plain wrong.

I just had a crazy idea of building a temple to just to baptism for the dead and integrating it with a church owned and operated youth camp. A crazy idea, but who knows.

John Pack Lambert said...

Is La Paz metro area now the one with the most stakes without a temple?

twinnumerouno said...

My suspicion also is that the Craig stake will stay with the Vernal temple- I think Granby is the only unit in the stake that might have a quicker trip to Grand Junction than Vernal- and if that were the only consideration they would probably be assigned to Denver, which is closer for them then either.

I think we had a high counselor from Baggs speak in my ward a couple months ago. I've traveled through Baggs a couple times but never stopped.

Brett Stirling said...

I feel this has been a long term plan for the Church since President Hinckley. The new Auckland temple was earmarked under him back in 2006, I have the original site plan approvals from council (I worked there at the time), with Wellington and Christchurch earmarked at the same time. I think this has been an ongoing theme for a very long time. Anecdotally, many people have information of sites being held in reserve for decades now.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I'm still mixed as to whether the Helena announcement makes a Missoula Temple more or less likely now. Don't get me wrong, more temples in my home state are always welcome, I just really thought it would be in Missoula rather than Helena, as did many others. I hope that a Missoula Temple will still happen eventually, hopefully within the next twenty years or so (if not sooner), but with the unpredictability of how the Lord is rolling things out through President Nelson, I'm kind of at a loss right now as far as trying to even approach guessing at His next move with any sort of accuracy.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

With the unexpected announcements we've just had, I think I will re-add Lexington Kentucky to my temple wishlist for October. That's one that was predicted by my mission president back in 2003, during the Hinckleyan temple boom. It may be wide-eyed of me, but what the heck.

John said...

I have more to say, but the Spirit is restraining me from putting words together right now. I do know that while we know about 251 temples, the Brethren's list probably has at least 300.

Mon Chou said...

Any prediction lists for October's conference? I'm excited!

Mon Chou said...

Everyone seems surprised by the Brussel's Temple announcement since it falls within several temples' 200 mi radii.

But as a Belgian citizen (now living in Canada), I can tell you from personal experience that many Belgian saints (and European saints in general) do not own cars and instead rely heavily on public transportation, which makes a trip to the temple very costly and longer than one would expect since public transportation has multiple stops and connections. This will surely bless the Belgian saints and get them to the temple more frequently!! (I think members in USA/Canada, think 200 mi is not that far and is doable... But that's because they're assuming people have access to cars and such. I grew up in Belgium and never once went to England or Germany even though I fell within that 200 mile radius. I hardly ever went to France either and it was unique for me to visit the Netherlands even though on a map it looks like I'm surrounded by all these areas.

I wonder if we will see a trend of more European cities such as Brussels that would "surprise" us because of their ostensible close proximity range to temples? Which ones do you think that will be? Prague?

Now the remaining gaps falling outside a 200 mile radius to a temple (in europe) are: northern spain/southern france, northern italy, and sicily & Albania. (Although I do know it was quite the undertaking to get a Rome and Paris temple so I'm not sure if that will play into more temples in those countries, for now anyway).


twinnumerouno said...

I've written about my stake more than people are probably interested in, but I will just say that the winter drive to Grand Junction is probably worse than to Vernal, for every unit except maybe the Meeker Ward. From my part of the stake there is an 8000-foot high pass that is scary in winter, and makes me nervous the rest of the year. That said, people seem to make the drive all the time, in part because lots of them like the hospitals there better than the ones in Vernal and Rangely. Also there are more shopping options. So I suspect there will be some usage of the temple there by my stake.

Cuffers said...

Temple INCREASE apr 2021:
Mozambique first
Norway first
Belgium first
Austria first
Singapore first
Ghana 100% 1/ 1
S Africa 50% 1/ 2
Colombia 50% 1/ 2
Mexico 14% 2/ 14
United States 9% 9/ 97
World 9% 20/231
Brazil 8% 1/ 12

Africa 26% 3/ 13 3.5 areas
Europe 18% 3/ 16 2 areas
World 9% 20/231 22 areas
N America 8% 11/133 9 areas
S America 6% 2/ 33 3 areas
Asia 5% 1/ 19 2.5 areas
Oceania 0% 0/ 17 2 areas

Daniel Moretti said...

I am amazed when I see you say that a temple district should have 10 to 15 stakes. My temple district, Campinas Brazil, has more than 100 stakes, the biggest in the world, except Manila! Of course, it will be divided between Rio, Brasilia and Belo Horizonte, and the factor that does not allow the construction of more temples in the country must be poverty and low donation rates, but it is still too vast território and full of patrons with recommendation and units. I think the Americans could have a little more empathy with the brothers from foreign, including the leadership. And sorry for my bad English

brycen said...

You are right, Daniel. Brazil needs and could support a lot more temples. It is a very large country, 5th largest in the world (even larger than the US if we exclude Alaska).

I am so happy for the ones that have been announced, and the ones that have been built already. I am happy that there is one in the city where I served my mission, in Curitiba. When I was there the Sao Paulo temple was the only one in the whole country, and the members there had to really sacrifice to attend. Of course, many other members from other parts of Brazil had much longer trips.

Campinas does have a huge number of stakes attending, and it will be a welcome blessing when those other temples are built, or in the case of Rio de Janeiro which is finished, dedicated.

I can't speak for others, but as someone who served in Brazil, I think that many American members do understand some of the issues that face Church members in other countries, at least those who have served missions or visited those places. Not the same as living there your whole life, I know. But I certainly saw more extreme poverty in Brazil than anywhere I have been in the US or Canada. I had to walk a lot on my mission, we didn't always have the funds to take the bus, and cars and bikes weren't allowed. Sometimes we were miles away from the chapel, asking people to attend Church under those circumstances was a big commitment to ask for. And it would have been unusual in some of the areas where I served, for more than one or two member families to have their own car. Everyone else had the same travel limitations.

Would you say transportation is one of the biggest challenges in your area too, Daniel?

Unknown said...

@Daniel Moertti, thank you for commenting on here, I like to hear about the experiences and perspectives of members outside the United States (and I think your English is pretty good). I am surprised that some of the other commenters speculate that the church wants 10-15 stakes per temple in areas with lots of stakes. Until a few years ago, it was not uncommon to have 50-70 stakes per temple in places with lots of members such as Utah, Peru, Brazil, and the Philippines. Based on temple construction in Utah, and now in Lima, Sao Paulo, and Manila, it looks to me like they are reducing the number to about 20-25 stakes per temple in places with lots of members (although of course a large temple like the Salt Lake temple can serve a lot more people than a smaller temple, so how many stakes are assigned to a temple partly depends on its size). Hopefully once he Rio, Brasilia, Belo Horizonte, and 2nd Sao Paulo temples are dedicated that will help members in the Campinas district. I also think there will be temples announced for Riberao Preto, and maybe Londrina in the next few years, which might help the Campinas temple district as well.

brycen said...

I am very happy for each of these 20 new temples announced, although some were definitely surprises. Another one for the Los Angeles metro was not something I was thinking about.

Casper and Grand Junction will be great blessings, as the distances there are long. It took me 3 hours to drive from Cheyenne to Casper, even though it was a freeway and both are in the southeast part of the state. I am sure Helena is equally needed, though I have not been to Montana since I was 6. Elko was badly needed, and besides the stakes others have mentioned, will surely include the branches / district, not sure, in Wendover Utah/West Wendover Nevada.

I was noticing on my map, that every US state from the New Mexico to Montana tier, and west, now has at least 2 temples in operation, under construction, or announced. Not counting Alaska, of course. Now there is a place where distances are large.

Very excited about the new temples in other countries too, I hope we will get one in Maine or New Hampshire soon. The Church is not growing very much here, but Massachusetts did have several new stakes recently and probably needs the temple workers from this area less than before (at least, once normal operations resume). Boston, Manhattan, and Philadelphia are 3 of the 7 temples that are still only in Phase 1 of operations, I am thinking it may have to do with state level restrictions.

Torreon is exciting as one of my brothers served his mission there, happy to see new announcements for Mexico, and other Latin American countries. Plus another location in Brazil, where I served my mission.

In terms of Europe, those are all great locations, although I was surprised by Brussels. I have been anticipating a temple in Singapore for many years, or in Indonesia. I still think we could get both. The two locations in Africa will be wonderful too.

I have giant maps of the world and US (and Brazil) on my wall, I put in a pushpin in each temple location, it is exciting to see the gaps filling in. I know, not as important as actually preparing for and serving in temples, but it has been a strong interest of mine for many years, and I am sure many of you other regulars on this blog share this type of interest. Every conference in Pres Nelson's presidency has been exciting in that regard.

Jim Anderson said...

On the donation rates, the only metric used is 'full tithe-payers', along with attendance at an existing temple.

Right now yes, Rio is assigned to Campinas, not that easy of a trip, down Via Dutra over Serra Araras which is a very snaky road even with four lanes, then about Sao Jose dos Campos up Via Dom Pedro ! which almost goes right by it, the Church News said it is visible from that.

Belo Horizonte will go to Rio until Belo Horizonte completed, down BR-040. It seems to be closer to Rio than Brasilia.

Fredrick said...

I'm getting my October 2020 predictions out of the way. Going with 20 temples this time.

1. Spanish Fork / Springville UT
2. Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
3. Marshall Islands
4. Monrovia, Liberia
5. Vina Del Mar, Chile
6. Iquitos, Peru
7. El Paso, TX
8. Colorado Springs, CO
9. Tacoma, WA
10. Queen Creek, AZ
11. Summerlin, NV
12. Austin, TX
13. Charlotte, NC
14. Charleston, WV
15. Edinburgh, Scotland
16. Osaka, Japan
17. Naga, Philippines
18. Wellington, New Zealand
19. La Paz, Bolivia
20. Riberao Preto, Brazil

Cory C said...

I'm curious what will happen in the Idaho area. Burley isn't very far from Twin Falls, and yet is receiving a temple. While both Twin Falls and Meridian are growing quickly, Meridian area is growing at an extreme rate. However, The Meridian Temple is about double the size of the Twin Falls temple. Meridian Temple district has 18 stakes, Boise Temple district has 16 stakes, Twin Falls Temple district has 15 stakes.

If this growth continues in Meridian/Eagle/Nampa area and we see a few more stakes established there in the coming years, could we perhaps see a temple announcement for a smaller temple some place close to the Oregon/Idaho border? Perhaps Fruitland, Idaho or maybe some place like Caldwell? Caldwell, Fruitland, Ontario, Nyssa, Weiser, and Emmett could share a temple, perhaps?

Logan H said...

I overlooked Rapid City being assigned to the Casper Temple. Casper is an hour closer than Billings and Bismark where Rapid is currently assigned. I guess Bismarck can afford losing Rapid? I look forward to the day when Rapid City gets a Temple because they are still 4 hours from Casper.

Adam said...

While serving in the Philippines in 2010, I shared an apartment with an Elder who's father owned a large engineering firm in Utah that would run the specs on temple designs. His father sat on the temple committee, and when his son got his mission call he told him that the Philippines already had funding committed for 20 temples, but that various targets had to be hit for more to be announced (ie the "aren't ready yet" line.) At the time, Manila was the only one open and Cebu City was under construction.

If they had an extra 15+ temples already funded and lying in wait for the Philippines, you can extrapolate that to the rest of the world, and they easy already have their sights on 500+. As the stock market continues to do well and the church has even more financial resources to throw around, they will continue to lower previous membership thresholds for temple qualifications.

Christopher Duerig said...

Here is my list of numbers of Stakes assigned to each of the current 251 Temple Districts (as if they were all In Operation status). As an approximate "guesstimate" of each based on distances and suggestions here in Matt's blog site.

I have 5 Stakes that are repeated twice on the list, that I am narrowing to locate where I have repeated the same in another Temple District.


Christopher Duerig said...



Luke said...

@Logan as a previous resident of Rapid City, I can say in my opinion that Bismarck will be fine. Most members in my ward only went there a few times a year anyway, and it was mostly the older members who worked in the temple. And, with winter driving conditions, I only knew a few people who went at all during those winter months. Casper will be a blessing to the southwest South Dakotan members.

Cody Quirk said...

Johnathan- I could be wrong, but I'm getting a vibe that the next temple announcement for that area might likely be in northern Idaho instead of the Missoula, and would be meant to cover extreme western Montana and all of the northern Idaho stakes.

Maybe I'm wrong, yet that's the vibe I'm getting.

Cody Quirk said...

1000 temples by 2030?!
Sorry John, but even if the church was growing at a far faster rate then it is now -that still wouldn't be a realistic number.
However, I can realistically see 500 temples by 2040; that is still a possibility if growth picks back up and doesn't decline for the rest of the decade and the next.

Jim Anderson said...

Rapid City has largely been considered part of the Denver district for years, at least until Bismarck was built, if not that, Fort Collins. Bismarck is a tedious trip in winter, no direct freeway connection either, kind of a weaving series of state highways in various conditions. No large places really to speak of and an about 7 hour trip also.

Could Burley be a test site for a small temple concept that we have not quite seen yet? We have the Yigo/Praia/San Juan concept, but one slightly larger to be used in the small places that are on land? With more members in that area a larger, more like Boise size, is likely but Burley proper is one of the smallest areas a temple has been announced for, I think the smallest was Monticello, and they had to redo some things right off there.

Hilton Shumway said...

Can I ask why the hype for a temple in Austin? It would pull 6-7 stakes from San Antonio and 2-3 from Dallas, but looking at Christopher's numbers that seems unnecessary. Of course, as a member of one of those stakes I'd love a closer temple, but that's beside the point m

Fredrick said...

@CodyQuirk - The Helena Temple would still be closer to the Missoula and Kalispell stakes, than to a temple in Coeur d'Alene. Given the small size of the Spokane Temple I think a CdA Temple is quite likely but it would only serve the five stakes in Northern Idaho. None in Montana.

EP said...

@Jim Anderson, interesting thoughts, though I doubt the Church would test a new version of tiny temple in Burley. While Burley proper is small, the temple should serve 7-8 stakes, so I feel we'll see a design similar to Moses Lake, WA or Bentonville, AR (single story, 20-25k square feet, 2 instruction, 2 sealing, 1 baptistry) based on the similar size of the temple district. This would be in line with Twin Falls having 7-8 remaining stakes at 32k square feet with 2/2/1 respectively. I think if we saw a test like that, maybe somewhere like Elko that may serve 4-5 stakes max (Elko West, Elko East, Winemucca, maybe Ely, and Wendover District which has 3 branches) would be a good choice for such a test temple, or Grand Junction (Grand Junction, Grand Junction West, Montrose, Rifle stakes). It seems the Church is moving towards standard temple floorplans for the most part, so a standard design in the 15-17k square foot range wouldn't surprise me for smaller temples.

@Cody Quirk, I'm inclined to agree with you. Even if we have 20 temples announced every conference until 2030, we're still in the 500 range, with those operating by 2035-2040. Those are still mind-boggling numbers, though. Also, I agree that I see a temple for the Coeur d'Alene area announced before Missoula. However, I can't see any temple being reassigned from Helena to Coeur d'Alene because that would be a further drive for any MT stake. Coeur d'Alene would probably serve just northern Idaho stakes (Sandpoint, Moscow, Lewiston, Coeur d'Alene, Hayden Lake), maybe being announced when a stake in Post Falls is inevitably organized. I will say though, a temple in Coeur d'Alene may be less of a priority as it wouldn't shorten distances to a temple for any stake, so it may just depend on how heavily Spokane is being used.

@Christopher Duerig, thank you for sharing that list. Really makes for a useful tool in evaluating the need for temples to relieve other busy locations. It'll be intriguing if Taylorsville opens with 42 stakes in its temple district. With Oquirrh Mountain having 36, I can't imagine an announcement for Herriman is far off, which should relieve those two. This list is also very telling in showing how most of the South America temples still have massive districts despite the large number of new temples announced there. I'll have to study this list more.

@Adam, thank you for that anecdote. Makes that supposed $100 billion stockpile much more logical when we remember how far ahead the Church plans financially. Very grateful for the Church's fiscal prudence and example in that regard.

@Corey C, I'd expect both Nampa and Caldwell to be announced over the next 10 years. There are no signs of slowing growth in the Treasure Valley. Just last year, Nampa had two more stakes organized. And there are several stakes with 9-10 wards that are contenders to split in the next few years in that area.

I foresee that the whole Snake River Plain of Idaho will someday be like the Salt Lake area, with temples in every city. Caldwell, Nampa, Meridian, Boise, Twin Falls, Burley, Pocatello, Blackfoot, Idaho Falls, Ammon, Rigby, Rexburg, and North Rexburg/Sugar City. Just imagine. 13 in the Snake River Plain, 15 overall (Coeur d'Alene, Preston). It is what I pray to someday see.

@Daniel Moretti, thank you for your comments. You are right, it is tough to think of a goal of 10-15 stakes per temple district (if that is the goal, realistically more like 5-20 depending on temple capacity) when your district currently has 101 stakes and districts, but the Saints in Brazil have prepared themselves well, and I think that's part of why you see the continued building of temples in Brazil, to help with this. Rio, Belo Horizonte, Brasilia, and even Sao Paolo Este should help significantly with this at both Campinas and Sao Paolo, and I can still see in the future Ribeirao Preto, Campo Grande, and Cuiaba at a minimum. This will help spread the blessings of the temple even more there.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


You're right about Frankfurt, Kentucky. Lexington is the more likely next location, in my opinion.

Logan H said...

Could Moses Lake at 20,000 square feet, yet only serving 4 stakes I think, already be such a small Temple concept?

I could see Burley as a test for the next size up at around 32,000 square feet like Twin falls.

Skorance said...

The new Europe temples might also make sense in terms of the immigrant populations in those areas. It might be easier to build a temple there than some areas of Africa and from what I understand a lot of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East in Northern Europe. A lot of the future population growth of the world expected to come from Africa so if the temple can serve parts of those populations in Europe it may be a more stable way of doing their work than going directly through Africa.

Matt said...

My feeling is that at some point in the future the European Union could dissolve, with each country having greater sovereignty and tighter border controls. So having temples available for more countries in Europe makes a lot of sense.

Cory said...

It’s hard to judge what is necessary. In the recent past, the temple announcements that have been surprises to commenters on this blog have been Moses Lake, Yuba City, Yoruba Linda, and Burley. All of these temples are located near temples with similar designs: Columbia River, Sacramento, Newport Beach, Redlands, and Twin Falls. The San Antonio temple was built at the same time as these temples and has a similar design. Perhaps the capacity with these temples is less than they appear. There had been a lot of population growth in Austin in the past decade and subsequently new wards and stakes. If this pattern continues and the number of temples keeps increasing, a temple in Austin is only a matter of waiting.

Another surprise was the temple in Meridian when it was announced. This split the district of the Boise temple, which is a similar design to Dallas. This has led many to speculate about another temple in the DFW.

Many church officials have commented that a temple renovation is as expensive as a major renovation. So it seems more likely that an additional temple would be announced before an existing one is expanded. I think that if a temple were to be expanded, it would be Spokane. There are three large baseball fields next to the temple. Other small temples are limited by available space, but this temple is not. I could imagine either a temple in Couer d’Alene or an expansion for Spokane. Regardless, there might be a renovation for Spokane a la Columbus without an expansion.

Christopher Duerig said...

Disclaimer: @EP, My list of numbers of stakes in each Temple District, is just my own observations. It does not in any way reflect the will or decisions of the Brethren in the Temple Department in Church HQ in Salt Lake City. Using Rick Satterfield's site as a starting point and both @Matt's observations here and other bloggers comments around said temples. Taking into account travel distances as closely as possible and trying to stay within country borders as much as possible, with regard to future Temple Districts once they are fully constructed and dedicated. I hope to compare my observations with the reality once they are formed the new districts after Dedication using the Classic Maps website.

I hope this helps to clarify. Thank you all for your excellent comments on this Church Growth blog.

John Pack Lambert said...

I do not think making women ward clerks is a good idea and do not think it will happen. They spend too much intensive time with the bishop.

Kevin said...

Austin, San Antonio and Dallas are all in the top 10 MSA's for population growth in the USA, Austin alone has seen 28% population growth along with 18% in San Antonio and Dallas

John Pack Lambert said...


Aba Nigeria is essentially the same size as Spokane. It has over 50 stakes and will still be above 25, maybe even above 30, when Lagos and Benin City are completed.

John Pack Lambert said...

Christopher, as I keep saying Aba is 12,000 square feet of that. 36 stakes is just crazy. Likely to grow before either Lagos or Benin City are complete. I could see southeast Nigeria supporting 3-4 temples with the current number of stakes. I have no strong guesses on where those temples would be.

Hilton Shumway said...

Interesting. I will say that San Antonio was often full, with appointments required and usually filling up for the Saturday sessions

Ryan Wilson said...

I agree. Stakes and wards are consolidating and have been for years. Same with all of Europe. President Nelson must not be using the prior requirements that had to be in place in order to build temples because the church is hemorrhaging members in Europe yet we are building more temples there. Like others said, they his must be more about proximity and less about church growth.

Christopher Duerig said...

8 April 2021 - Salt Lake City COVID-19 Update

Utah Area Updates COVID-19 Safety Measures

Ryan Wilson said...

The difficulty is that a temple has to be staffed and in areas with low and declining membership, it is difficult to staff a temple with the requisite temple recommend holding members. That is why the church has always had certain requirements of “how many male temple recommend holders” are within a geographic location in order to decide if a temple can be built. It’s not sanctimonious judgment. It’s feasibility in order to have a functioning, staffed temple.

Matt said...

Ryan Wilson - What you have about declining membership in Europe is not true. I track church attendance figures throughout Europe, and these figures have held steady or slightly increased for most congregations. Yes, congregation consolidations have been ongoing for 20+ years, but the vast majority of these are small branches. There has been a trend in most of Europe to consolidate smaller units to create ones with more active members (like in Belgium a few years ago). Moreover, we regularly see new units created from larger wards, specifically in major cities in Spain and even in some oddball places like Luxembourg where a second branch was created last year to accommodate large increases in active membership. However, one of the biggest challenges in Europe is attracting converts from the native population rather than from foreigners. As a result, the Church in some countries, such as Spain, is primarily made up of non-Spaniards which creates an additional barrier to proselytism among the majority of the population.

Christopher Duerig said...

It is good to see growth in places like Venezuela, with political instability. The new "La Concepción Branch - 2177935" was recently organized in the "Maracaibo Venezuela West Stake - 486604".

58 Apr 08, 2021 La Concepción Branch,-71.815178&z=12&m=google.hybrid&layers=stakecenter&q=2177935&find=ward:2177935

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

Curious to see what architectural elements they implement into the Vienna Temple.

Cuffers said...

Great 20 List.
More Africa needed.
I suggest Congo, Uganda, Madagascar, & Indonesia replace the weaker needs at El Paso, Colorado Springs, Queens Creek, and Charleston.

21-24 for hardship are Fairbanks, Punta Arenas, Kananga, & Maputo.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Danny & JPL

I've been curious too as to whether the Brethren will eventually announce expansions to the smaller Hinckleyan Temples, or just keep announcing new temples of various size in surrounding remote areas (usually smaller).

So, I went back and read the following article from 1997 when President Hinckley first announced the smaller temple design (and before announcing the plans for 32 of them at once).

Here's a quote from President Hinckley on those temples:

"These small buildings would have at least half the capacity of some of our much larger temples. They could be expanded when needed," he said."

Keep in mind, though, that just Anchorage, Monticello, and Colonia Juárez had been announced as smaller temples at the time. Two of those have since been expanded capacity-wise or floor plan wise. Now, with the later block of 32 smaller ones, over the years we've seen just upgrades to the exterior facades and the interior structure materials, without any significant upgrades to the floor plans or capacity (such as with Montréal, Asuncion, Memphis and Columbus). Keep in mind those were prototype temples before the big surge came the following year.

My question then is probably the same as the two of you: will the Church eventually expand these smaller ones in significant ways, or just give them superficial face-lifts over the years as the materials need to be renewed? Or will they just keep announcing new smaller temples in outlying areas?

My guess is (and hope) is for a mixed approach going forward. We haven't seen a lot of the smaller ones upgraded, but that may be due to them having only been around for twenty-so years now. President Hinckley did give the possibility of expansion early on, and President Nelson was involved in those councils as an Apostle at the time. The trend right now seems to be for exterior upgrades and new remote announcements, but I think some of us will be interested to see if that changes.

After all, we sometimes forget (because President Hinckley's 1998 announcement was so unprecedented) about the Church's earlier big temple push in the late 70's and 80's (with the international sloped-roof, six spire designs). Several of those have been expanded since, in some cases multiple times, while Lima Peru (still one of the smallest temples in the Church), has never been expanded or rededicated.

Personally, I like hearing expansions announced, and I think it's only a matter of when on many of these locations, on a case by case basis, driven by local Church growth and attendance. However, the trend for right now (especially after these last few conferences under President Nelson's leadership) is pointing towards announcing more and more remote temples in new locations.

Searchthetruth said...

I looked at Ricks church unit and temple map and noticed the cluster of stakes by Burley and thought it was a possibility. It will most likely serve 7 stakes. Twin falls will have an equal amount most likely with 7. Looking at other Idaho stake clusters I think Blackfoot and Rigby will get their own temples and serve 6 stakes a piece. I still think Preston will get one that serves four stakes and Montpelier might see one that serves 4. Montpelier Stakes and Paris Stake have to travel over an hour through snowy canyons to get to Star Valley or Logan temples.
There are other temples likely in the more populous areas of Caldwell or Nampa.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

This current temple surge seems to have brought back memories to many of us of President Hinckley's announcement 20+ years ago.

On that note, I went back and read the original mini-temple announcements in the following two articles:

Here are two quotes from Pres. Hinckley that particularly stood out to me:

"There are many areas of the church that are remote, where the membership is small and not likely to grow very much in the near future. Are those who live in these places to be denied forever the blessings of temple ordinances?" President Hinckley asked, rhetorically. "While visiting such an area a few months ago, we prayerfully pondered this question. The answer came bright and clear."

"The small temples may only be in use one or two days a week, depending on local need. "That would be left to the judgment of the temple president," he said."

I know this info is old, but I immediately thought of Brussels. It seems to fit the criteria mentioned above.

Perhaps at times when we are doing our predictions, we are thinking of the 99 rather than the One? Perhaps Brussels will be like (from what I understand) The Hague's situation: a smaller temple that is only utilized occasionally, but still greatly appreciated by those who have access to it, and especially those stalwarts who've been faithful and waiting for years for a temple near enough to them that they can frequent, and that doesn't completely strain their resources.

On that note, as I was re-reading President Hinckley's announcement, I thought of a fun exercise:

How have you personally been blessed by one or more of the smaller temples, and which ones?

Here's mine:

Louisville, Kentucky was my mission temple, and blessed many members in the areas where I was serving. In my last area in Indiana, I attended a baptismal trip there with the branch and, for one reason or another, was allowed to remain in the font the whole time and baptize all the members who had come with us. (To this day, I still jokingly tell people that I "baptized a whole branch on my mission.")

One other of the smaller temples was Spokane, Washington. That one became the assigned temple for those of us in Western Montana and I got to visit it several times after my mission, going on memorable road trips through the Idaho Panhandle with my fellow YSA friends.

This last one is cheating a bit, but the Billings, Montana Temple (though a mid-sized one and announced one year before the smaller temples started to be announced). Though slightly earlier, I still lump it in with the excitement of the late-nineties'/early-2000's temple boom. I got to do baptisms there with my friends in my home ward in high school. It was the first one announced for my home state, and its presence there helped me and my fellow Montanans know that the Lord cared about us, even in a place so remote and with such a small population as Montana.

I think the faithful in places like The Hague or Brussels or Vanuatu probably feel the same way.

John Pack Lambert said...

I heard from a missionary maybe 5 years ago that was assigned to the San Antonio Temple that he felt its design had little useable space and that getting a temple in Austin would be needable.

The staies per temple count chart did not account for how big the temples were. However not all square footage is equally useable so even if we calculated that it would tell us little. Lima Peru has an uncounted annex, while other temples have clothing rental space, cafeterias and laundries.

The amount of bathroom and changing space is probably a function of overall size, but there is nothing clear about that. If I understand correctly the Detroit Temple does not have a president's office, he uses the bride's dressing room sometimes when it is not otherwise used, and other times uses other space.

Some temples like Provo and Las Vegas have a chapel where you meet before going to the endowment room. In Detroit you go straight to the endowment room.

While this is also a function of size, it complicates things.

The size of the temple office also probably varies. Plus a few temples have assembly rooms that are virtually never used. So square footage is not going ccx to tell us much about usability.

John Pack Lambert said...

Our goal is to invite all to come into Christ. I would hate to see us turn down changes to baptize and bring to Christ Nigerians in Spain on the perception it would lessen the chances to bring in Spaniards.

If you look at the number of stakes in various parts of western Europe this has noticeably increased in the last 20 years of so. This is a much truer and more consistent measure of church strength than the total number of congregations.

Bob Kerns said...

I'm not sure if the Tucson Arizona Temple falls under the "small" temple category. Nevertheless, when our youngest daughter and her family moved to Southwest Arizona to be near her husband's large extended Latter-day Saint Family, many wonderful things happened. They became almost immediately fully active in the Church. Her oldest daughter, our middle granddaughter was surrounded by love and support which resulted in her asking her biological father permission to be baptized. We had the opportunity and blessing to witness her baptism, go to the Tucson Temple to see our daughter and her husband sealed and their own young daughter and their teenage daughter/step-daughter sealed to them, and the opportunity for all of us together to do temple work for ancestors. Since we live in the Washington D.C. Temple District this was a "tender mercy" for all of us.

Christopher Nicholson said...

Both of the temples I had access to as a youth, Palmyra and Montreal, were small Hinckley temples. My branch was able to organize temple trips once or twice a year.

I wonder if another reason for more temples in Europe is to discourage people from emigrating to Utah.

Eric S. said...

@Johnathan Whiting

Thanks for bringing up those quotes from President Hinckley. Couple that with what President Nelson said just last week before announcing the new temples, it makes complete sense to bring temples closer to members worldwide, whether small or large presence, whatever form it takes. That quote from President Nelson is:

"We are building now for the future...We want to bring the house of the Lord even closer to our members, that they may have the sacred privilege of attending the temple as often as their circumstances allow."

Christopher Duerig said...

With the now 8 Wards and 4 Branches, I wonder how close the "Luanda Angola Stake - 1558579" is to dividing to form a 2nd Stake in the country?,16.320187&z=6&m=google.hybrid&layers=stakecenter&q=1558579&find=stake:1558579

The "Zango Branch - 2058928" was recently upgraded to Ward status.

31 Apr 10, 2021 Zango Ward Luanda, Angola

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I will be curious and delighted as well to see if we get any other City Center Temples.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

Great story, Bob! Thanks for sharing.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


Jealous. I'd still love to go to Palmyra one day. I've never had the chance to do a Church History trip out east...yet.

You may be right about the European Temples. Or at least, to encourage people to keep building up the Church in their native lands.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Eric S.

You're welcome. And thanks for reiterating that President Nelson quote. I think it goes with what Christopher Nicholson and I were discussing above.

I know I myself get a little disappointed at times to hear about places with stagnant growth, but The Prophet's line about building for the future gives me hope and makes me curious to see when and if those trends will turn around.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


No problem. :)

Thanks for breaking down the potential districts for the MT Temples.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Butterfly and Bones

I'm one of those members with Welsh Ancestry that you mentioned. I was named "Reese" after my grandfather, and it's a family name that was passed down to him through his Welsh line (and a very common name in Wales, apparently, though I was the only Reese in my hometown growing up which made me sad at the time).

After the Brussels, Oslo, Vienna, and Budapest announcements (especially Brussels), I think all bets are off as far as where the next Temples announced in Europe are concerned. I hope you get your wish for the ones you mentioned in the British Isles. I don't know if any of us can truly rule those possibilities out in the wake of President Nelson's continually surprising announcements.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...


I wonder if the Singapore one will be similar to the Hong Kong or Bengaluru styles?

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Mon Chou

I would love to see a temple announced for Prague.

Albania's probably a given, the way it's growing.

Are the Baltic states in one of those 200 mile gaps? I know Vilnius Lithuania had a temple publicly proposed by one of the leaders a while back.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Logan H

You're probably right about the Moses Lake smaller/midsize temple concept. They're using similar designs to that one in Tallahassee, Bentonville, Brasilia, McAllen, Cambodia, etc.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Logan H

Pittsburgh, Neiafu, and Pago Pago are of that similar design, as well.

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

Speaking of Temples, Brian Olson (who does the 3D renderings of all the Temples on YouTube, just put out a pretty cool article on temple design, history, and renovations (particularly how they relate to Logan's unique history). Check it out:

Johnathan Reese Whiting said...

@Cody Quirk

Hey, you may be right! I'd be downs for a Cœur d'Alene temple. It's a beautiful city, and would be slightly closer for Western Montanans than Spokane. Plus, new temples in Idaho are almost always more likely than new temples in Montana.