Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Varied Temple Schedules


Recommended Posts

Posted

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/halifax-nova-scotia?lang=eng#tab=schedule

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/adelaide-australia?lang=eng#tab=schedule

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/colonia-juarez-chihuahua-mexico?lang=eng#tab=schedule

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/bismarck-north-dakota?lang=eng#tab=schedule

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/montreal-quebec?lang=eng#tab=schedule

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/lubbock-texas?lang=eng#tab=schedule

These are random temple schedules that I clicked on. The schedules vary of course, with some of the temples being open far fewer days/hours compared to Utah and Tonga (both very busy).

Are we being told that we are to save the dead as much as we use to? And now it is stated that we are to only search for our own family names not those outside our family. Could this be why there are lulls in times in schedules? Or maybe the temples are built in places that don't have big LDS populations. In the past I've heard that one day our church buildings will be used for temple work and we'd just hold Sacrament and SS in our own homes. Is there not that big of push to redeem our dead as once before? Is temple attendance "especially" for the temple goer vs. the dead?

Posted (edited)

... Are we being told that we are to save the dead as much as we use to?

Been to church lately? ;) You're welcome to come to my ward. I'd be happy to PM you with some IRL contact information to facilitate your visit! :) (We recently had a whole month of Sacrament Meetings in which this was the topic.)

And now it is stated that we are to only search for our own family names not those outside our family. ...

Now, as in, we were told something different before? I'll grant you, I'm not as long in the Church of Jesus Christ as some people on this Board, but as far as I know, the instruction has always been for members to seek out their kindred dead.

Edited by Kenngo1969
Posted

As Freedom stated, temple schedules are dictated by how often they are used and how well they can be staffed.

The temple in my town is only open thursday-saturday unless they run a special session, and it's because there are only three stakes assigned to the temple and all but one are 6 hours from it. The one that is closest is comprised of wards that are hours away, and the town where the temple is located serves an area of about 100,000 people but only has two wards.

There just aren't enough people who can serve in the temple, or who attend, to keep it open more often. As it is, sometimes sessions are closed because only one person (or no one) shows up.

Posted

I can speak to what Bluebell and Freedom are saying, especially in the Canadian Temples. not enough folks to go around. They don't want to be open with no one showing up and weekends are typically busier but even then not hoards of people are coming. The last session I went to was in the Regina Saskatchewan Temple and there were 4 of us brethren, three from my city and one guy from Edmonton passing through.

Posted

The temple in my town is only open thursday-saturday unless they run a special session, and it's because there are only three stakes assigned to the temple and all but one are 6 hours from it.

Which temple is that? I thought they tried to build temples where there was enough members to justify it. Only being open 3 days doesn't seem to justify having a temple.

Posted

Which temple is that? I thought they tried to build temples where there was enough members to justify it. Only being open 3 days doesn't seem to justify having a temple.

It's in North Dakota.

Posted

The number of people who are temple attenders that actually do family history is rather small, in my estimation. Nobody has said to not do family history that is not yours, but rather to do temple work for your ancestors. This isn't really a shift in policy change as much as it is understanding the doctrine and what exactly the mission of Elijah was/is. Comparing Jordan River to some random Canadian temple is a bad example. In the past 5 years, there have been 2 new temples in Utah and now there are two more under construction (well, 3 technically), with likelihood of others being announced in the future. I think that would help answer your question better.

Posted

Then again I don't know if any Temple was built to have multitudes of people coming in, I know there are some that do but I don't know if they were designed for heavy traffic(peoplwise) Temples aren like Train stations or Hockey or Football Arenas

Posted

That depends on if "How busy will it be?" is the justification for building a temple.

According to bluebell the membership in the area is very spread out. Although it is North Dakota so maybe it was a matter of providing a temple closer than the alternative.
Posted

With the new year schedule, it was suggested that the Atlanta temple cut back on its hours, but the temple president decided to continue on the same schedule.

The Atlanta temple used to serve many stakes in the area, and the locals were actually asked to give the Saturday hours to the distant stakes. We had a temple appreciation day where there were sessions late into the evening. But there are now four temples in what was the Atlanta temple district, so that has changed. But I am confident that the total attendance number has increased over the previous numbers in that district.

Posted

It's also important to remember that just because attendance at any particular temple seems sparse now, that doesn't mean that it'll always be the case. :) It's not just about what growth has occurred in the area recently, but what growth will occur in the area in the future.

Posted

Then again I don't know if any Temple was built to have multitudes of people coming in, I know there are some that do but I don't know if they were designed for heavy traffic(peoplwise) Temples aren like Train stations or Hockey or Football Arenas

I think the Provo temple Is pretty close to that (designed for heavy traffic). They service the local area, the MTC, and the BYU students (its a 20 min walk from campus). So it has to be. The design is definitely what I would call practical for large numbers of people in a way that still allows for good spiritual experiences for all. We've been very busy for the last few weekends and am definitely NOT getting any feeling that it's become any less important. The smallest group i've ever seen in an endowment session there was 7-8 people, I think. Usually there's 20-30+. And lately we've been hitting 60-70+ per session....and there's a session every 20 minutes. There was an hour wait for both men and women's initiatories.

Is there not that big of push to redeem our dead as once before? Is temple attendance "especially" for the temple goer vs. the dead?

Again, I've never felt that...ever. That there's less a push anywhere. Temples are a biggie wherever I've gone.

And temples are especially for all. All are to be edified and sanctified: Patron, worker, and spirits alike. The way God works is for all to be edified. The work of the temple is to bind all in the ways and ordinances of God which best understood when looked not by numbers or a specific action but looking through the view of charity and Christ.

With luv,

BD

Posted

Tacenda, you're mostly looking at schedules of smaller temples which exist in remote areas and have always offered few sessions, as per the plan as originally announced by Pres Hinckley in General Conference:

But 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 the temple ordinances? While visiting such an area a few months ago, we prayerfully pondered this question. The answer, we believe, came bright and clear.

We will construct small temples in some of these areas, buildings with all of the facilities to administer all of the ordinances.

...

These structures would be open according to need, maybe only one or two days a week—that would be left to the judgment of the temple president.

...

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

By the way, if you've been inspired in any way by the current 'the Church is closing temples' threads I've seen popping up on various apostates sites lately, those people are confused.

Posted

Tacenda, you're mostly looking at schedules of smaller temples which exist in remote areas and have always offered few sessions, as per the plan as originally announced by Pres Hinckley in General Conference

In fact if you go google maps lubbock you can get an idea as just how small these temples are...it's fairly comparable to the stake building right beside it.... the stake building is somewhat longer.

With luv,

BD

Posted

In fact if you go google maps lubbock you can get an idea as just how small these temples are...it's fairly comparable to the stake building right beside it.... the stake building is somewhat longer.

With luv,

BD

The Lubbock temple is actually rather big in comparison to the numerous 10,700 sf designs (Oklahoma City; Columbus, OH; Columbia, SC; Monticello, UT, Nashville, TN; a lot of the Canadian ones, to name a few).

Posted

Also, if you're looking at schedule also correlate this with the size of the temple district. At www.ldschurchtemples.com you can view how many stakes are in each temple district.

Posted

Even in Utah some temples are open more. SLC and Prov, for example, are the only two open Monday mornings-maybe the only two in the church.

P.S. If you want a decent chance of seeing a GA in a Temple session, hit a Monday AM one in Salt Lake. It's their only day off.

Posted

Even in Utah some temples are open more. SLC and Prov, for example, are the only two open Monday mornings-maybe the only two in the church.

P.S. If you want a decent chance of seeing a GA in a Temple session, hit a Monday AM one in Salt Lake. It's their only day off.

Ok, btw, are you speaking from experience?
Posted

Even in Utah some temples are open more. SLC and Prov, for example, are the only two open Monday mornings-maybe the only two in the church.

P.S. If you want a decent chance of seeing a GA in a Temple session, hit a Monday AM one in Salt Lake. It's their only day off.

you have a better chance of seeing them at General Conference, if you know what they look like of course! if you see any former Apostles please let someone know :rofl:

Posted

Even in Utah some temples are open more. SLC and Prov, for example, are the only two open Monday mornings-maybe the only two in the church.

P.S. If you want a decent chance of seeing a GA in a Temple session, hit a Monday AM one in Salt Lake. It's their only day off.

I'm good....already saw one in the temple when he came to see his granddaughter get endowed for her mission. I won't be greedy, one's enough ;)

Posted

I'm good....already saw one in the temple when he came to see his granddaughter get endowed for her mission. I won't be greedy, one's enough ;)

I hear you-I talked to one that is currently serving for maybe 5 minutes and if he bathed in cologne (not the place in Germany) I wouldn't be surprised, I smelled like him for a day after that but hey free Eau Du Lawyer smell!

Posted

Perth Australia is a small temple serving avast area about 1/3 the size of the US. We have four stakes all in the metro area and stretching out into the bush and outback.

The Perth temple is open Tuesday-Saterday you never need an appointment.

A bit of trivia for you, the Perth temple is the most remote on earth and has the largest physical service area.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...