Rome Temple

[Okrahomer]

This is an interesting article about the Rome LDS Temple.  The quotes from the two RCC officials are interesting.  I get where the Monsignor is coming from, more than I do the Cardinal.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Okrahomer

[JLHPROF]

Interesting new article on the Rome Temple

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/28/a-mormon-st-peter-s-in-rome.html

 

Based on the membership numbers quoted in the article 30,000 in Italy would seem to warrant a temple, but placing it in Rome where there are only 18%/2000 of the membership seems a little bit more for publicity than practicality.

The article claims the majority of Italian members (53%) are in the north, closer to Milan.

 

I will say the temple looks beautiful, but that is one big complex being built - stake center, family history library, and visitors center.  I think this entire complex is more about missionary work than member services.  Not that that's a bad thing.

[JLHPROF]

Oh, you beat me to it...just posted the same thing in Gen Discussions.

 

I guess the Mod's can merge them if they like.

 

EDIT:

Interesting new article on the Rome Temple

http://www.thedailyb...-s-in-rome.html

 

Based on the membership numbers quoted in the article 30,000 in Italy would seem to warrant a temple, but placing it in Rome where there are only 18%/2000 of the membership seems a little bit more for publicity than practicality.

The article claims the majority of Italian members (53%) are in the north, closer to Milan.

 

I will say the temple looks beautiful, but that is one big complex being built - stake center, family history library, and visitors center.  I think this entire complex is more about missionary work than member services.  Not that that's a bad thing.

 

Edited September 29, 2014 by JLHPROF

[Ahab]

Interesting new article on the Rome Temple

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/28/a-mormon-st-peter-s-in-rome.html

Based on the membership numbers quoted in the article 30,000 in Italy would seem to warrant a temple, but placing it in Rome where there are only 18%/2000 of the membership seems a little bit more for publicity than practicality.

The article claims the majority of Italian members (53%) are in the north, closer to Milan.

I will say the temple looks beautiful, but that is one big complex being built - stake center, family history library, and visitors center. I think this entire complex is more about missionary work than member services. Not that that's a bad thing.

Thank you for the update. I hadn't heard anything else except for the gasp after it was announced during conference.

[Duncan]

maybe the Church couldn't get land in Milan so they went with Rome, who knows. 

[JLHPROF]

maybe the Church couldn't get land in Milan so they went with Rome, who knows. 

 

Nah, I think it's about visibility.  Not a bad thing.

[Rain]

I think visibility may be a small part of it, but it may have more to do with a central location and normal travel patterns.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Rain

[strappinglad]

Well, fair is fair. There has been a Catholic presence in SLC since the 1870s and a cathedral there since 1910 . My understanding is that the LDS have helped with land and building of churches for other religions. Contrasting favorably with how the LDS have been treated until recently in Italy.

[Garden Girl]

 

Based on the membership numbers quoted in the article 30,000 in Italy would seem to warrant a temple, but placing it in Rome where there are only 18%/2000 of the membership seems a little bit more for publicity than practicality.

The article claims the majority of Italian members (53%) are in the north, closer to Milan.

 

I will say the temple looks beautiful, but that is one big complex being built - stake center, family history library, and visitors center.  I  think this entire complex is more about missionary work than member services.  Not that that's a bad thing.

 

There's probably a good amout of truth to this, JLH, and there's nothing to say that the Church will not grow in this region now that such a complex exists...

 

GG

Edited September 30, 2014 by Garden Girl

[Calm]

 placing it in Rome where there are only 18%/2000 of the membership seems a little bit more for publicity than practicality.

The article claims the majority of Italian members (53%) are in the north, closer to Milan.

But if all the roads lead to Rome…..

[Calm]

Milan is not that far away from the Bern temple.  OTOH, Rome will be more accessible for everyone south and east of Austria as well as North Africa.  Perhaps if the airlines are anything like they are here, anyone from outside the country will have to stop off in Rome so while those in and around Milan now have the choice of two temples, those south of the area and outside of the country now have a more convenient place to travel to….plus I would assume that much business takes place in Rome as well as tons of tourism so some will be able to take advantage of traveling there for business to make a trip to the temple as well.

Edited September 30, 2014 by calmoriah

[Rain]

You said what I was thinking, but couldn't figure out how to word.

[Kenngo1969]

I don't know how all of the geography will shake out once the Temple is completed in terms of which Temples will serve which areas, but it wouldn't surprise me if the Rome Temple were to serve parts of Northern Africa and Eastern Europe, as well.  So just because there may be a greater concentration of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in other parts of Italy than there is in Rome doesn't necessarily mean the Temple will be underutilized.

[Calm]

I don't know how all of the geography will shake out once the Temple is completed in terms of which Temples will serve which areas, but it wouldn't surprise me if the Rome Temple were to serve parts of Northern Africa and Eastern Europe, as well.  So just because there may be a greater concentration of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in other parts of Italy than there is in Rome doesn't necessarily mean the Temple will be underutilized.

I think I posted the same idea in the duplicate thread.  I looked up the map on lds.org and when one sees how close Milan is to Bern, it makes more sense that the temple is further south.

[Storm Rider]

It always surprises me when I hear a Catholic talk about our faith - that:   "...I have a lot of respect for Mormons in Rome, but they certainly do not share the Gospel with us because their concepts and the way they operate in society differ so greatly to Catholics.”  I just don't understand the position.  What do you think is a addressing that is so different?  Our missionaries?

 

A more valid comment was, "“As for ecumenism, dialogue and the search for unity among all Christians, their presence in Rome is not necessarily an uplifting factor. We shall wait and see.”  We are not very good at ecumenism because we see ourselves as the restored Church of Jesus Christ, which is what Catholics see themselves as.  To have unity is to recognize the Vicar of Rome.  

[CV75]

Interesting new article on the Rome Temple

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/28/a-mormon-st-peter-s-in-rome.html

 

Based on the membership numbers quoted in the article 30,000 in Italy would seem to warrant a temple, but placing it in Rome where there are only 18%/2000 of the membership seems a little bit more for publicity than practicality.

The article claims the majority of Italian members (53%) are in the north, closer to Milan.

 

I will say the temple looks beautiful, but that is one big complex being built - stake center, family history library, and visitors center.  I think this entire complex is more about missionary work than member services.  Not that that's a bad thing.

According to the talks I've heard recently, I think the Restoration has come along far enough  to see the integration of all aspects of the work of salvation (preach the gospel, redeem the dead,  perfect the saints, heal the world, etc.) and to see our advancement in terms of a continuum of fulfilling past, present and future promises.

[3DOP]

It always surprises me when I hear a Catholic talk about our faith - that:   "...I have a lot of respect for Mormons in Rome, but they certainly do not share the Gospel with us because their concepts and the way they operate in society differ so greatly to Catholics.”  I just don't understand the position.  What do you think is a addressing that is so different?  Our missionaries?

 

A more valid comment was, "“As for ecumenism, dialogue and the search for unity among all Christians, their presence in Rome is not necessarily an uplifting factor. We shall wait and see.”  We are not very good at ecumenism because we see ourselves as the restored Church of Jesus Christ, which is what Catholics see themselves as.  To have unity is to recognize the Vicar of Rome.  

 

Gobbledygook. First he says he has a "lot of respect." It might seem difficult to know why given what he says afterward.

 

He is mentally hamstrung by his own modernist and non-Traditional views on religious liberty. It makes him conflicted. He thinks every idea has the right to be propagating its beliefs without interference. Truth has no privileges in his worldview. The Traditional teaching is merely that no one may be coerced in matters of faith. It does not teach that the best way to spread the Gospel in a community is by supporting a political society that recognizes no truth and is intent on giving souls a panoramic display of every idea on the basis of a right to be heard. It would allow that it is permissible, when prudent, to try to suppress false religious teachings by restricting the political rights of false teachers. I think this might explain the reason for his confusing ideas about respect (of rights) combined with an obvious lack of belief in equality of truth and error.

[Boanerges]

"All roads lead to Rome."