See below for the promised analysis of new temples announced during the October 2022 General Conference. Given the large number of temples announced and my goal to provide a quality and in-depth analysis of each temple announcement, this analysis will be broken down into several parts. This post provides analysis of new temples that were announced in Asia and Africa. With the exception of the Busan Korea Temple, the temple announcements in these regions of the world have occurred in areas with steady or rapid growth within recent years.
Busan Korea Temple
As a returned missionary from Korea, this announcement was very exciting as Korean members have speculated and hoped for a second temple in Korea to be one day announced for the port city of Busan. The Busan Korea Temple will likely include 6-7 stakes and three districts in southern South Korea. Church growth in southern South Korea has been essentially stagnant for more than two decades, albeit no stakes have been discontinued in the area yet. However, several stakes have only four wards, so it is probable that stake consolidations will occur in the foreseeable future unless a reversal in the decline in the number of congregations occurs accompanied by an increase in the number of active members. The oldest stake in the likely temple district is the Busan Korea Stake (organized in 1979), whereas the most recently organized stake in the likely temple district is the Daejeon Korea Stake (organized in 1998). It is probable that the new temple in Busan will be a small temple, perhaps like the Fukuoka Japan Temple, given there are only likely to be six stakes assigned and the area has experienced stagnant growth for multiple consecutive decades. The Busan Korea Temple will be the Church's second temple in South Korea.
Naga Philippines Temple
The Naga Philippines Temple will be the Church's ninth temple in the Philippines following temples in Manila (dedicated in 1984), Cebu (dedicated in 2010), Urdaneta (announced in 2010), Alabang (announced in 2017), Cagayan de Oro (announced in 2018), Davao (announced in 2018), Bacolod City (announced in 2019), and Tacloban City (announced in 2021). The announcement of temples in Naga and Santiago constitutes the first time the Church has announced two temples in the Philippines on the same day. The new temple in Naga will likely include six stakes and six districts in southern Luzon and Masbate. The Church in southern Luzon has experienced a significant reversal in Church growth trends in the past few years from essentially stagnant congregational growth and no new stakes organized between 2001 and 2018 to the creation of two new stakes (from districts) and the regular creation of new wards and branches. The oldest stake in the likely new temple district is the Naga Philippines Stake - organized one day prior to the Legaspi Philippines Stake in 1985. A second mission was created in the region headquartered in Legaspi in 2013. Also, there are reports that a second stake will be created in Naga on November 6th, and two other stakes also appear likely to divide in the foreseeable future (Daet and Goa). It is unclear whether districts in the likely temple district are close to becoming stakes, but Ligao and Tabaco appear most likely based on the most recent information I have received. Most members in the likely temple district speak Bikolano, making the new temple the first temple to operate in a predominantly Bikolano-speaking area of the Philippines.
Santiago Philippines Temple
The Santiago Philippines Temple will be the Church's 10th temple in the Philippines, and the new temple will likely include 10 stakes and 10 districts in extreme northern Luzon - most of which are in the Cagayan Valley. Church growth has been slow, but steady, in this region of the Philippines during the past decade. Of the 10 stakes likely to be in the new temple district, four have been organized since 2011. None of the stakes in the area appear likely to divide within the near future, albeit some member districts appear close to becoming stakes. Santiago is one of only two cities in the Cagayan Valley with two stakes as all other cities in the region have only one stake if there is a stake present. The oldest stake in the region is the Tuguegarao Philippines North Stake which was created in 1989. Most members speak Ilokano in this area of the Philippines.
Eket Nigeria Temple
The Eket Nigeria Temple will be the Church's fourth temple in Nigeria following temples in Aba (dedicated in 2005), Lagos (announced in 2018), and Benin City (announced in 2020). The new temple will likely include 14 stakes and one district in the Nigerian states of Akwa Ibom and Cross River - the same number of stakes that were assigned to the Aba Nigeria Temple when it was dedicated in 2005. The new temple's location in Eket is less than 10 miles from where the Church organized most of its first branches in Nigeria in small villages in 1979, such as Ikot Anang, Ikot Eyo, and Ukat Aran. Some local government areas (LGAs) in this area of Nigeria may be as high as 2-3% Latter-day Saint in the general population. Eket is the largest city in southern Akwa Ibom State, but there is only one stake headquartered in the city (albeit it is likely to divide soon as the stake has 10 wards and four branches). Rapid growth has occurred for the Church in Akwa Ibom and Cross Rivers. Of the 14 stakes likely to be assigned to the new temple district, eight were organized after 2014. The oldest stake in the likely temple district is the Eket Nigeria Stake, organized in 1996. Six of the 14 stakes in this area of Nigeria appear likely to divide in the near future. Thus, there may be as many as 20 stakes in the temple district by the time the temple is dedicated if the process for design, approval, and construction occur at a typical rate (within 3-5 years).
48 comments:
Very interesting! Thank you for the report
Newsroom announced two temple locations, for Singapore and Modesto, California. Singapore looks to be potentially a Okinawa design given the shape of the property, and there is an error in the srticle regarding Modesto as Daly Road is to the west and there are other properties that front that, the temple site is on Bangs Avenue. That will be a mid-size temple.
Matt, thanks for this report. I am assuming that your second post will handle the 5 temples announced in Central and South America, with a third for the 5 US temples, and the fourth handling the remaining four temples announced near Mexico City. I look forward to the rest of your analysis. I especially appreciated your observations about the stagnation or lack of growth in some areas where temples have been announced.
That observation indicates that stagnant growth might not prevent some locations from having temples announced in the same way that was true in the past. It appears in several respects that President Nelson has opted to throw out the book of considerations that have usually guided temple announcements, and that the overall goal is to reduce hardship and improve accessibility while also diminishing sacrifices that have been previously necessary for some members to visit the temple only once in their lives.
I was likewise intrigued by the fact that two new temples were announced in the Philippines. I will be interested to see the sizes of each temple among the latest batch of temple announcements. Asa general point of information for readers of this blog, I had previously referenced that the Yigo Guam and Praia Cape Verde Temples include two ordinance rooms that can alternately be used for endowment sessions and sealings as necessary. That may also apply to the San Juan Puerto Rico Temple. I would not be shocked to see other temples in the current queue having a similar arrangement.
Above and beyond that, I had mentioned in the past that there might only be a few temples with modular components since only one company made those components at that time. And I had theorized that once the company had more experience with that, their employees could be sent to other companies to train their workers on how to make the modular components. Since the Church subsequently released information about the size of and rendering for the Torreon Mexico Temple appears to show that as the first temple outside the US to use the modular design, it wouldn't shock me if the process of training other companies on making those components has begun. If that turns out to be an accurate assumption, then that opens the prospect that the Church could use either design (the multi-purpose ordinance rooms or modular) for several temples now in the queue. My thanks once again to you all.
Do Naga and Santiago also count as the two temples announced on the same landmass that is smallest on the same day? I believe the next smallest landmass to have 2 temples announced at once is Australia, although I am not 100% sure how the 4 temples announced in Australia after Sydney were timed. They were announced in the 1999 time frame when temple announcements were done at various times, whereas starting with President Monson becoming president of the Church almost all announcements have been in general conference, and President Nelson has announced 117 or the 118 temples he announced in general conference.
Announcements did occur in general conference under President Hinckley, including most until his "we will built 30 temples but we will not tell you where yet" announcement (although one of his listed places they would be built was "Fiji", his other listed places were too geneeric to be counted as anything concrete).
With President Nelson he did hint at a temple in Singapore while visiting there about 18 months before it was announced. However President Hinckley hinted at a temple in France in about 1898, and it was not announced until about 2011.
Anyone know how many temples have taken longer from annoucement to dedication than Urdeneta?
I think to understand President Nelson's approach to temple building you have to realize that he starts from the assumption that to be a full member of the Church you need to not only receive your temple ordinances, but go to the temple often enough that you understand what is going on.
This means building temples wherever members are, even if there are not a lot there, and even if the number there has remained pretty much the same over time.
I think another part of President Nelson's vision is wanting youth to be heavily involved in doing temple ordinances. Also wanting families to take their youth to do temple ordinances.
I remember a member in my branch, who was about 60, saying he had never considered going to the temple on his own, he just always went with groups. President Nelson's vision is for all youth to have regular chances to do baptisms for the dead.
In Sister Dew's not really a biography of President Nelson there is a quote from him about feeling that building nice stake centers for an area before we build a temple is not quite the right approach.
Very good analysis of these announcements of temples, in these parts of the world.
I feel that having temples closer together should encourage doing family history and going to the temple more often.
Even the temples are too far away for the baptized to attend.
In my opinion, there is enough money in the church to have temples closer, avoiding such long and expensive trips, especially considering that there are many of us who are not rich.
In these analyzes it is seen that the church grows and in many cases is stagnant, that requires greater attention from each one of us. Hopefully they continue to announce temples closer to each place where the church is, regardless of whether there are few baptized or active.
https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/elder-bednar-ministers-central-europe-2022
"During his ministry of Central Europe, Elder Bednar is also planning to visit Austria, Albania, Hungary and Romania where many of the members are still considered pioneers in their countries. Newsroom will continue to follow Elder Bednar’s ministry through October 16."
We have to find when the letters concerning the 1998-2000 announcements were dated to find the announcement dates, as President Hinckley said those would be announced that way. That is where an assumed announcement of a Paris France Temple came about years before it was actually done.
Kyiv Ukraine was announced at another temple dedication also, I was in a temple later that day but I would hear the announcement of that later.
Bogota was dedicated 15 years after it was announced (1984 announcement-1999 dedication) and Guayaquil was even longer (17 years, 1982 announcement-1999 dedication). Urdaneta is scheduled to be dedicated in 2023, after having been announced in 2010, so that will only be a 13 year interval. While it's way too early to tell, and I have no inside knowledge, I would suspect that if any current temple challenges Guayaquil's record, it may be Russia.
Do you think this may be to further scout out a temple location in Budapest & Vienna (both having been announced) and further than work along?
Among his various other significant reasons for being there, of course. **And to clarify -- the Budapest & Vienna temples have been announced, but the precise locations haven't been announced (as far as I am aware), so I was curious if one speculates if he is sent to assess prospective temple locations during this visit. Sorry for not making that any clearer.
Some temples they do not announce until they find a sight. President Hinckley looked for a sight to build a temple in Accra in 1993, but could not find a good one, so the announcement was not made until 1998.
It is hard to know what causes the time lag between annoucement and sight designation. Some may be finding a sight. Others may be getting various levels of government approval, and so the sight was already designatied, but they wanted to get government onboard before going with it.
A few temples have had sites change. Nashville, Tennessee is one. In that case the Church went to court because of the refusal to rezone the site, but since they could not prove malice, they could not get the courts to say the community in question having made it impossible to build any church was troublesome. Von G. Keech, who worked as a lawyer for the Church and was later a general authority, spoke of this development in his testimony in favor of RLUIPA.
Tegucigalpa, Honduras the temple site was moved after groundbreaking, and there was a second low key gorundbreaking. The first site for the Philadephia Temple was replaced with a second one because the first site was found to have issues in the underground that could not be addressed.
On the other hand the La'ie Hawai'i Temple had its site dedicated before President Smith even got approval to build it from anyone else. Well, technically Elder Smoot and Bishop Nibley who were in Hawai'i endorsed it, but he did not even run the plan by his counselors or the other 11 of the 12 until he returned to Salt Lake City.
Los Angeles I think took about 20 years from announcement to completion.
Regarding the question of temple timelines, the following page from the Church Temples site is instructive:
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/statistics/timelines/
Also, for the record, when the Lord inspires a Church President to act, the prophet does not need any approval or ratification from any other Church leaders, not even his fellow apostles, before acting on the impression. When the Lord commands and the prophet obeys promptly, the prophet has both the prerogative and authority to move ahead.
We saw that in 2018, when the Church's April plan to announce 6 new temples was altered as the Lord told President Nelson on the evening before General Conference that he was to announce a temple in India.
He made the announcement, which sent the Temple Department into overdrive to prepare what they could prior to the prophet embarking on his first Global Ministry Tour
Fast forward to late April of last year when Elder Rasband was "one of the privileged few" to be advised of the plans to announce the temple in Ephraim Utah before that was announced in conjunction with altered plans for the Ephraim temple. The prophet was under no obligation to "get approval" from his counselors and every member of the Twelve before he set that in motion.
The prophet may, and more often than not does get approval of the other Apostles, but he is not under any doctrinal mandate to delay acting on such impressions until all other Apostles are all aware of and unanimously approve such measures
In fact, Thomas B. Marsh's arrogant assumption that the Prophet Joseph Smith needed Marsh's approval to send two Apostles to open the work in England directly led to the course of events resulting in his personal apostasy, the removal of his Church membership, and his subsequent participation in the events that led to the Saints' expulsion from the state and the infamous extermination order. Thankful in our day, none of the other current 14 Apostles are under that kind of mistaken impression.
@Johnathan Reese Whiting, I am very curious about your comment (on Matt's previous post in which the newest 18 temples were announced & listed) regarding your personal observation regarding a resurgence of temple attendance to new and existing temples and your awareness in an uptick in temple ordinances, which you observed/recognized by seeing the number of ordinances completed by the Temple System of the Family names that you have submitted since President Nelson started announcing more temples.
First of all, congrats!! That is so exciting to have 300 names completed since June! I can't imagine the party your ancestors must be having in the Spirit World. So wonderful!
I'm just wondering... am I doing something wrong? Because I submitted/shared about 30 or so names back in 2018 (due to me being in a wheelchair and not being able to attend the Vancouver, BC temple, which is actually far from Vancouver Island), and there have been no progress made on any of the names I've submitted to the Church. Why aren't the names I've submitted being completed?
I'm not that tech-savvy, but would love for my ancestors to have their work completed too! :)
I've also submitted many names, but have only had a couple go through. Some differences could be male/female and the type of ordinance. I submitted a name to the temple the first week this was a feature and that person just got their ordinance about 3 months ago. So that was 7 years! I still have a couple from 2017 waiting.
Other factors could be the temple district you live in and whether there are other direct ancestors doing temple work.
The differences some are seeing as to submitted names shared with the temple has more to do with how they set that up about ten years ago.
Right now, any name shared with that temple 90 percent of the time, that name will be done in the temple you are in the district it serves. Names can thus take longer to be done at smaller temples although that can vary. But at some point they are going to do away with that and put everything into one big pool and whenever any temple needs names, they will pull from the general pool, first in, first out.
That should both even things up and move things a little faster. FamilySearch told someone that there were names waiting that have been in there waiting for 20 years. Oldest one I have seen was put in in 2008, but largely it is 2015 or later. Utah temples it is indeed a little faster from submission to completion, but everything eventually is backed up waiting for the endowment given we do them one at a time and usual time to do it is an hour.
Male names take longer than female names, men have jobs, are in some of the big church callings, etc., so they cannot do quite as much as women are able to get done, the big part of the day you may bee able to get in without an appointment is like 9-10 am to about 2-3 pm. You see more women than men in a session, but at Provo and Provo City Center, those midday sessions on weekdays are seldom full.
@Mon Chou, to answer your question. I too am curious as to if the Apostle during his Ministry to both Austria and Hungary, if he was sent to inspect possible sites to announce for the the already announced Vienna Austria and Budapest Hungary Temples to move them along in the construction queue. Also I am curious as to the visit to the saints in Albania and Romania during that same Ministry visit. I know that Tirana Albania has recently been on our radar as a next Europe Area temple to be announced for the Balkans Region. And possible in distant future searching a possible locations with local members for a Bucharest site. As President Nelson has shown his inspiration for small Temples in far locations with few members, i.e. the Yigo Guam Temple recently dedicated and the soon to be finished Okinawa Japan with just 1 Stake and 1 District. Possibly the Lord has inspired for the search in the Bucharest Romania area also to both hasten the Temple work for the locals and improve the total members baptized in the area, having a Temple in country. Any thoughts?
When I could go to the temple years ago, there were always more women in that place, from that time that are more than 15 years, I still have names left to finish ordinances.
Almost every day I receive notice of some temple in the world, where a baptism or investiture is performed. There are still many hands left in the temple to be able to advance in this task.
I work daily on familysearch, for me it is a blessing, I find strength, I am waiting to be able to enter the temple now that I am baptized for the second time.
I am as a temple and family history consultant, and the truth is that in my stake the work is null or almost nothing, there is much to be done, the brothers must be encouraged, guided and helped
I hope that every day there are temples closer to our homes, now I live 30 minutes walking to the temple, 7 minutes by car, but I still can't enter until next year, there I will stay 2 hours. That is why I feel that more temple announcements are missing for our countries.
Elder Gong's dedicating of the Winnipeg Temple marked the point at which less than half of all operating temples had been dedicated by President Hinckley. I wonder who will be the first person to exceed President Hinckley's record of dedicating 85 temples (if you count the two Apia Samoa Temples seperately). If we get a pattern of even distribution among all the 12 and First Presidency of temple dedication assignments, we are close to that under President Nelson, we would need either someone called younger than 50 (which has not happened since Elder Packer was called, unless I am making a miscalculation somewhere), someone to live and be serving fully past 100, or to get to an average of at least 45 temples announced per year, instead of the just over 30. It might be easier if we could do it based on total dedications and rededications, but I would have to find the number of that for President Hinckley.
Keep in mind that something close to 45 would need to be the average number of temples, over multiple decades, to beat President Hinckley's record is dedications regularly are rotated between all apostles.
I guess first I should create a chart of all dedications and rededications.
Heard yesterday from someone that the issue hanging up having the open house and dedication of the Saratoga Springs Temple (and possibly some next year) is the furniture ordered is still on backorder. Supply chain issues with the supplier.
So if I counted things right I believe that President Hinckley presided at 96 dedications of temples, or rededications of temples. Some of these are repeats of the same temple. Next comes President Monson at 26, followed by President Eyring at 14, Elder uchtdorf at 13 counting Hamilton New Zealand this coming weekend. After that comes President Kimball at9, President Faust at 7, President Nelson and President McKay are tied at 4, President Oaks is at 4, and that leaves President Grant and Elder Bednar at 3.
I believe 10 come in at 2 and 14 comes in at 1. I know I missed a few rededications though, so someone might want to review these numbers.
Elder Soares with 2 at 64, and Elder Bednar with 3 at 70 are the only ones who might be contentders to break President Hinckley's record, but it would take huge numbers or a change in distribution. Elder Rendlund is also I believe 70 and Elder Gong is 68 and they both have 2, Elder Andersen is 71 with 2. Elder Christopherson is 76 and has 2. Elder Uchtdorf is 81 at 13, and President Eyring is at 14 at 89.
With over 100 temples in the works these numbers are going to start changing soon, but 96 is a huge number to reach. I think there are only about 125 dedications and rededications total not done by President Hinckley, and that includes are future announced ones (Hamilton, Quito, Belem and San Juan).
This is the most important milestone of President Hinckley's tenure, and I hope no one can break his record for a long time. He will always be my favorite leader, for my youth and all of my family's ordinances have taken place under his leadership.
I see Nigeria as a huge part of the future of the Church of Jesus Christ and the planet in general. By some projections Nigeria will have more people than the United States in many of our lifetimes. I worked with a handful of Igbo and Yoruba linguists a few years ago. Most were Christian, but some Muslim. Most were convinced that the country will split. That could lead to tragic violence and death, and perhaps some displacement of populations. Regardless, it is great to see our faith grow there quickly and substantively.
We hope and pray the Church will continue to improve and sustain the lives of the Nigerian Saints, the rest of the continent and world.
Is there consensus that Muslims are overtaking the Christian world in population? Then again, secularism is also making large strides. The temples will ultimately be the exaltation for all of us, and I look forward to all of us meeting these missions and destinies.
Philippines are also a huge part of the growth, hopefully expanding more into Asia.
There must be more than 100 temples in the U.S., yes? I wonder how many states have 100 temples by themselves. Maybe 30? The top ten states likely have 70 or so.
There are 82 operating temples in the US, counting the ones closed for renovation, and 91 outside the US. For many years, and as recently as 3 years, the number of dedicated temples in and out of the US stayed roughly equal. But since the Rome temple was dedicated in 2019 (when there were 81 temples each in and out of the US), we have had only 1 new temple in the US (Pocatello) out of the 11 total dedicated worldwide- and the other two that will be dedicated in 2022 are both in South America. The temples most likely to be completed in 2023 are a bit US-heavy (13 out of the 20 most likely are in the US, including 5 in Utah. I am counting Puerto Rico in that list but in the old church almanac it was usually listed as a separate country). I believe the general trend of the church moving away from a US majority will continue.
As far as total temples, Rick's Temple Map
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/maps/
shows 124 temples in the US- this is counting all the ones announced and under construction. (There will be 176 outside the US.)
There are 7 states with 5 or more temples, for a total of 71. Adding in the ones with 3 or 4 gives us 90 temples in the top 13 states. There are also 8 states that have 2 temples, so 106 temples are in the top 21 states. 18 states have 1 temple, and 11 have none.
*3 years ago*
@Christopher Duerig & Mon Chou:
I bet he's probably looking at the prospects in Albania and possibly Romania, too.
Romania currently has three districts. Wondering if there's been any growth there since 2019 when Matt last reported on it.
https://www.cumorah.com/countries/viewStats/Romania
https://www.cumorah.com/countries/reachingNations/Romania
Two of the five inhabited US territories do not have temples. They have have small populations and church presence. The U.S. Virgin Islands has only one district and is not far from Puerto Rico. The Northern Mariana Islands are part of the same Island Group as Guam and also part of the same stake. The three US Territories with temples in any stage are in Guam, Puerto Rico and American Samoa.
@Johnathan Reese Whiting, Also Albania has 1 Stake (Tirana Albania Stake) + 1 District (Elbasan Albania District). The same amount as the soon to be finished Okinawa Japan Temple. So I consider both Bucharest Romania (3 Districts) and Tirana Albania (1 Stake and 1 District) as next possible East Europe announced locations that he is scouting for. Or Some say as a dark horse option, either the Riga Latvia or Vilnius Lithuania location to cover the 3 ex-Soviet Baltic States with the 3 Districts there, plus the St. Petersburg Russia Stake.
Also either a Tirana or Bucharest Temple could take in the several Branches located in Greece, Bulgaria and Turkiye. The Nicosia Cyprus District is about the halfway mark between Dubai UAE and either of these 2 cities, could go either way. Same goes for the Beograd Serbia District is about the halfway mark between Tirana or Bucharest and the previously announced Budapest Hungary site, it could go either way assigned. So I personally feel that speaking for the Southern Balkans region, either city has a good chance to be announced the next year or two, for the number of church units in the region. Although I have no access to the active member rolls to see how many actually attend in those Stakes, Districts, and Mission Branches.
@Steve Crandall:
I'm afraid I may have to agree with you about the Russia Temple delay, though I hope for the best.
The China situation will be interesting to see, as well.
If we're counting exceptions to the rule (such as a temple that was announced, then retracted, then announced again), then Hartford took 24 years from 1992 to 2016.
Pago Pago is similar: 1977 (original announcement) to 2024 (possible actual dedication date). 47 years.
And if we count Temples that were built, then completely demolished and rebuilt again, Nauvoo of course takes the cake at 162 years from when the original was announced (1840) to when the modern version was dedicated (2002).
Then you have other rare exceptions like Provo City Center, Vernal, Copenhagen, etc. But let's don't be too silly. ;)
@Chistopher Duering
First, I live in Turkey and have traveled in the Balkans and Eastern Europe from Istanbul by air and train. Traveling times in the Balkans involve a lot of guesswork, prayer, and bounteous quantities of luck. What you see on a map never reflects how difficult is actually is to get from point A to point B.
For Turkey, the situation is complex. Due to EU visa rules, all Turkish members have to get a visa for travel to Romania or Bulgaria, which make assigning Turkey to a temple there problematic. Currently, we are assigned to the Kyiv Temple, which, before the war, was wonderful because Turks need only their national ID card to travel there--no passport. Unfortunately, no one knows when that temple will again be operational. Travel to Romania by land involves three visas: Bulgaria (going and returning) and Romania. Travel to Albania by land also would need one (potentially two) Bulgarian visas. Air travel is direct but expensive. There is an overnight train (18 hours) to Bucharest in the summer from Istanbul; there is no train to Tirana. Bus from Istanbul to Tirana is 16 hours officially--I would be extremely surprised if the ride was under 20.
The biggest problem that we have in Turkey is that a large number of our active members are refugees from Iran. They cannot travel anywhere outside Turkey to go to a temple. In some cases, they cannot leave their local city by government rule. There needs to be some accommodation for those faithful members.
Albania may be near the geographic center of the area, but that country is still quite inaccessible by road or rail from neighboring countries. A temple in Tirana would probably be limited to Albania itself, which alone would be a boon to the members there. There is a new high-speed rail line opening (app. 3 hours) in 2025 (hopefully--this is the Balkans) between Beograd and Budapest, which will make Budapest the preferred destination for Serbian Saints.
A temple in Bucharest also, due to lousy rail and road connections, would probably serve only Romania, Moldova, and perhaps Bulgaria (one train from Bucharest to Sofia per day with multiple stops).
It sounds like the only way to get a lot of the members in Turkey to the temple would be to build a temple there. President and Sister Toronto, the current president and matron of the Rome Italy Temple, were earlier the first leaders of a mission based on Turkey in the 21st century. They also earlier than that ran a site as missionaries for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Jordan. Even earlier they presided over I believe the Italy Catania Mission. President Toronto was a BYU professor with expertise related to south-west Asia (what some call the Middle East). So if being able to identify someone who has the skill and expertise to run a temple, or maybe even more run the negotiations and such to get the temple placed even before that is key, the Torontos are the ones for that. Sort of like how the Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo only happened as soon as it did (I know the time from announcement to dedication is not super short, but it has nothing on Bogota or Guayaquil), because Norman Kamosi was head of public relations for the project. Kamosi was an airline excutive and member of the Zaire legislature, he fled to the US as a refugee in the process of Zaine becoming DR Congo, and then joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Washington, DC. He was a branch president, possible of a French speaking branch mainly made up of refugees from DR Congo, Ivory Coast and a few other Francophone African countries. Still, his getting on the project only really happened because one of the missionaries who taught him was a son of a high ranking executive at Jacobsen Construction, that does a lot of contract work for the Church, and I think had the general contractor contract for the DR Congo Temple.
I was living in Serbia when the Budapest temple was announced. The members there were estactic about it! If the beograd district were to be assigned to Tirana it would be a disastrous oversight. Both branches and 1 of the groups in Serbia are situated in northern Serbia less than two hours driving from the Hungarian border. One group, čačak, is more in central Serbia than southern Serbia.
That is just the geographic issue. There is also some other issues between some Albanians and some Serbs to this day
"Latter-day Saint temple in Ukraine reopens on 'limited basis'"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/latter-day-saint-temple-in-ukraine-reopens-on-limited-basis/ar-AA1304r1?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=fd5d9134f7dd4c8a89cfde8debd98447
Butterfly and Bones,
It may take some time yet for work on your family names to be completed. The chances of work being done increases with the number of family names one has shared with the temple. It boils down to statistical probability.
In March 2020, at the onset of Covid-19 in the USA, I learned how to find family members, including distant cousins, already in FamilySearch who needed their temple work done. Using the app called Family Tree and my smartphone, I began reserving those names. I would then share those names with the temple.
In the past 30 months, I've shared more than 20,000 family names with the temple. Currently, there are 18,440 names in the hopper for temple work to be done. The average number of ordinances still needing to be done is about 2.7 per person. This is because some ordinances have already been completed.
The count of 18,440 times 2.7 estimates there are currently 50,000 ordinances to be completed in my batch. I keep adding to it all the time.
It seems the names are chosen at random when a temple needs to prepare temple cards for patrons who arrive without their own family names. Some are assigned to temples after being in the hopper just a few days; others that were shared 30 months ago have yet to be printed by a temple.
Because I have shared such a large number of family names with the temple, it is not unusual for 200-300 ordinances to be completed each week. As examples, 61 were completed yesterday (Friday, 14 Oct); 49 were completed today for a total of 110.
There also does not seem to be any rhyme or reason for the various temples pulling from my batch of names. Again, it may be random. I see ordinances completed each week by dozens of temples in North America with occasional numbers completed at temples elsewhere, such as in the Pacific and in Europe.
FamilySearch will only show 3,000 of the last completed ordinances in one's account. So I don't know how many ordinances have been completed since I started clearing names and sharing the with the temple. However to illustrate, going back in time, the 3,000th ordinance in my account was completed on 4 June 2022, a little over four months ago.
In spite of these numbers I have shared, the total percentage of completed ordinances each week is less than one-quarter of one percent. Keeping things in perspective and exercising patience are definitely required.
Increase the number of family names shared with the temple to increase your chances.
Be well,
David Tilton
Edinburg, Texas, USA
Shared names are first in, first out, your temple pulls first. If another temple is short names, or someone else finds a name you submitted then it goes there. That explains the wide number of temples that are doing names submitted and shared by others.
Soon, all names will be in a general pool, still first in, first out, but any temple could pull the names and it will seem random.
I heard that the Bentonville AR temple dedication is also being delayed for the same reason.
The Spencers,
I'm not sure which comment you're responding to. What is the reason for the delay in Bentonville? Rick's temple site says that interior work is still going on:
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/bentonville-arkansas-temple/
May be the same issue Saratoga Springs is having, that is the furniture is apparently backordered due to supply chain issues at the supplier who manufactures that.
Per new updates from the Church of Jesus Christ Temples page within the last 3-4 days, construction is being finalized on Saratoga Springs Utah, Richmond Virginia, Bangkok Thailand, and Columbus Ohio:
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/saratoga-springs-utah-temple/
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/richmond-virginia-temple/
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/bangkok-thailand-temple/
https://churchofjesuschristtemples.org/columbus-ohio-temple/
I wouldn't be too shocked to see opening arrangements announced for most or all of these 4 temples within the next month or sooner, even if the dates are set to accommodate allowances for the supply chain issues.
Am from Nigeria. Yes am excited about the Temple in Eket, but I still think construction in the previously announced temples should begin before making for new ones.
It appears to be common knowledge in Utah County that Saratoga Springs is having that furniture delivery issue, that appears to be holding that one up. May be affecting more than that though.
@Butterfly and Bones:
Hey, thanks for your question. I was sick there for a couple of weeks, so it took a bit to get back to you (also, I was thinking about what you said, and reading the other responses).
It looks like Downtownchrisbrown, Jim Anderson, and David Tilton all answered you pretty well. I'll just add a little bit to their remarks from my situation:
First of all, your question: "Are you doing anything wrong?"
No. Absolutely not.
We all appreciate your hard work in submitting names to the temple for our shared kindred dead. Like others here (namely Historia Familiar Valenzuela Escobar), I'm a Family History Consultant, too, so I love to hear that others are joining us in doing the work (whether they are submitting a few or a lot of names).
The more names we all submit/the more we attend the temple (as our individual circumstances allow), the more the Lord inspires the Brethren to build more temples, making more opportunities for the older names we've submitted to be completed. And the work will be done. We have that as a promise from the Lord.
Like David Tilton, I've submitted a large volume of names (not near as many as him, though - nice work, David!). So, that might account for more of mine being done.
Like you, Butterfly (and Chris Brown), a lot of the ones I submitted years ago have taken years to complete (I'm just now seeing the results). Because of the Temple System taking a long time to complete them, I've mailed or emailed a lot of my family names to friends (mostly my singles ward friends who have more flexibility) or relatives who live in Utah or in other states close to Temples to share the work load with them. And they've been good enough to work on them for me.
To be fair, I also had the good fortune to be able to do a lot of the work personally when I lived in Ogden. I attended the Ogden or other nearby temples (with my friends who are continuing that work for me now that I've moved back to Montana) regularly, sometimes a few times a month.
Like David said, volume has a lot to do with it, but as he and Jim said, the Temple Name Submission System is being overhauled. I imagine some improvements have been made (which is why I'm seeing a lot more of my submitted names completed), but it's obviously not perfect yet, as I have seen names completed that I've submitted more recently being completed over names I submitted years ago.
I guess what I'm getting at (and what the others here said), is that it's not your fault if those older names you submitted haven't popped up as completed (yet). The system is still a work in progress and being improved as we go.
I would encourage you to keep submitting and to keep being patient. The more we do the work, the more the Lord blesses our efforts, and the more those in charge recognize the need to improve the system.
Johnathan Reese Whiting, thanks for your great perspective about the temple file of names. Also, thanks for the shout-out.
As Jim Anderson wrote, "first-in first-out" is the intended protocol. However, the reality I see is that the software temples use to obtain names from the temple file is much more random.
Just to illustrate, 64 of the names I have shared with the temple file since 1 October 2022 (last three weeks) have already been printed by various temples. Those names were leap-frogged over 19,000+ other names which were previously shared and are still in the queue.
A bit of spiritualism here, but what if the people whose names get accelerated are more ready for their temple ordinances than the others? That thought has occurred to me. In any event, it doesn't bother me that names are worked in a particular order. It all has to be done. If I am keen on completing certain names sooner rather than later, I can take them to the temple myself.
Ground was broken on the McAllen Texas Temple 23 months ago and we have probably another five or six months before open house and dedication. The temple is four miles from my house, a mere 10-minute drive. Currently, we spend four hours each way driving to the San Antonio Texas Temple. We are looking forward to having an operating temple nearby next year.
Be well,
David Tilton
Edinburg, Texas, USA
@David Tilton
You're welcome and thank you.
Maybe it's the old principle: "The last shall be first and the first be last?" ;)
That'll be awesome when the McAllen Temple is available for you guys. :)
Post a Comment