General Conference Thread (Open)

John DehlinMormon 60 Comments

Rome temple?!?!?  In the shadow if the Vatican?!?!?!


Other thoughts?

Comments 60

  1. Wow, temple near independence and roma, under the pops nose? They won’t like it!

    Now mission memories, (mostly nightmares for me!)

  2. Unfortunately I’m at work and cannot see this session of Conference. Will the one in Rome be one of the larger temples? My guess is it will follow the newer, smaller floor plan.

  3. President Monson was very careful to use the term “Greater Kansas City Area.” My inclination is that they are looking to build a temple in the area that will be a prepatory temple where the Saints can gather when the Lord cleanses the area. I would think that Far West would be a good location since they already have the land, but its a bit far away. Perhaps it will on the Kansas side. Another thought is that they are preparing for a temple at the Centerplace of Independence but don’t yet have the land ready (like it hasn’t been cleansed yet but soon will) so they are announcing it so that when they start talking about plans, people won’t freak.

  4. Arthur – they’re actually building it right in the Vatican. The Sistine Chapel will be the celestial room. Pretty cool! 😉

  5. Elder Perry’s invocation of Thoreau and Waldon Pond was very intriguing. There was a sense that in living very simply, making no money, that one could be very happy and contemplative of the Lord. This to me was a forcast for how to live life in very difficult economic conditions.

  6. the greater kc is a lot of area, the last time i lived there is was really growing in johnson county. thats in the southwest kc area. the opposite of independence

  7. Arthur – well, the whole bones argument is pretty specious, IMO. Sorry, RC friends. Peter was killed by Romans pretty nastily and dumped in a pit. Then hundreds of years later, they decided he was right (kind of like the recent Episcopalian apology to Darwin), so they dug him up, moved him across town and reburied him under the new Vatican. Did they get the right guy? Same with St. Mark. He’s buried in Venice (Cathedral of San Marcos), a city which didn’t even exist until 500 A.D. How do they know they got the right guy? When these guys died, Christianity was a pretty small obscure religion. It seems unlikely they have the right guys.

    As a contrast, Marie Antoinette was beheaded in 1793 in Paris, then her body was dumped in the sewer along with others who were beheaded. They went back to find her later (not much later comparatively), and they saw the futility of recognizing her body and gave it up. So, if you tour the Paris underground, you just might see the queen’s remains. Seems to me that the Frenchies were just more honest in this case.

  8. President Uchdorf’s Hope talk a good anecdote for what ails us in our personal, community, and economic conflicts. It’s the Gospel version of The Secret. The Secret never teaches much of what you ought to hope for in the Law of Attraction, while the Gospel does. You ought to hope for peace, everlasting life, righteousness, and love for fellow man. Nice talk. Great personal anecdotes from a man you know has suffered in ways we Americans haven’t usually suffered–through political and economic oppression.

    We need to tuck this talk under our mattresses.

  9. “My inclination is that they are looking to build a temple in the area that will be a prepatory temple where the Saints can gather when the Lord cleanses the area….Another thought is that they are preparing for a temple at the Centerplace of Independence but don’t yet have the land ready (like it hasn’t been cleansed yet but soon will) so they are announcing it so that when they start talking about plans, people won’t freak.”

    Well, um (gulp), maybe – but I wouldn’t read too much into this. President Monson announced a temple, not the apocolypse. 🙂 We need a temple just like the rest of you need a temple. I doubt that many of us here see this annoucement beyond the beneficence of a loving Heavenly Father to the Saints in the area. But you’d better believe we’re excited.

    “Perhaps it will on the Kansas side.”

    This rumor has circulated for at least five years now and I’m inclined to lean this way given what I’ve heard, church membership and local economic growth. As #12 Becky said, Johnson County, Kansas seems like the place it would be but I’m sure we’ll know more soon.

    I haven’t been so excited for a long, long time.

  10. Arthur – nah, I just vacationed in Europe this year. 😉

    Srsly, tho. If they haven’t got the land in Rome yet, announcing it could hurt. That happened in Boston which took years to get built as a result.

  11. Well, I’m open to all interpretations. I’ve always seen temple construction as the ultimate redemption of stakes of Zion. That’s why I find it such a great thing that they do in General Conference. It says something about the righteousness of the people in the areas. It’s a great progress report. I don’t want to read too much into it either, but I also don’t want to not read what we ought to not read if that’s what we’re supposed to ought to read. Clear as mud? 😉 I like to keep my mind open.

    I also like the preparatory idea–that shouldn’t scare you. I want to live near a temple when times get tough. I would hope all of our Western Missouri brothers would want a place to flee in the tough times ahead in preparation for the Millennium. At least we need somewhere to go when our own personal tough times hit us.

    I’m happy for all of you living near these newly announced constructed temples.

  12. Forget Italy the new Canadian Temple will likely be next door to our chapel
    Now that’s excitement for us. A beautiful prominent location on the way to Banff National Park

  13. KS vs MO for the Greater Kansas City area temple… this will be interesting, I think that there are 3 likely areas, Lee’s Summit is one (Jackson County), Lenexa/Olathe, and Shoal Creek area up near Liberty. The Church owns a lot of land in all three areas, actually all over the place. Far West would be very historical, but it’s miles from nowhere. Now that I’m interviewing and ready to move elsewhere, it comes….

  14. Okay, I’m going to be just slightly cynical here. Suppose the president of a large religious organization has given a political directive which many members of his organization find troubling, even to the point of open opposition. Suppose he wants to make LDS members more nervous about the idea of questioning his directive. What better way to do this, than to play a psychological game by announcing (with “wiggle room” in the precise wording, to allow ample later equivocation) a project which to most LDS is directly associated with late-stage apocalyptic timetables? “Better not dare to disobey, children, ’cause the end is coming any day now, and Jesus is gonna GET you!”

  15. Honestly, how many LDS are going to react so wildly to this? In my conversations with fellow LDS, the most I hear is the token remark: “The time is comin'” and then we go back to eating our pizza. There have been enough “big moments” in the past that could have/should have “scared” us into submission. A temple that could be as far away as Johnson county isn’t going to do the trick. It’s interesting to me, but honestly, it doesn’t have the visceral response that some suggest that it would have. You’re not going to see LDS out tomorrow with candle light vigils, at least not more than they have when they heard Pres. Hinckley simply say: “Try a little harder to do a little better.”

    The Mormons I know just aren’t scare tactic types.

  16. That thought also crossed my mind, Nick.
    And Russell, I think the older generation of Mormons will take this very seriously as some sort of a sign. That is unless the temple ends up on the Kansas side… which will take some of the heat off.
    Also, where were the financial and statistical reports? Aren’t they normally done on Saturday?

  17. Or Nick, you of the former Mormon polarist bent, maybe Monson they will be building the temple. Or, maybe it is true that thinks are going to start falling apart, so it seems as a shot accross thw warning bow.

  18. What I meant to say what that maybe Monson is hinting that they WILL be building the temple in the future (doubtful but possible). Maybe its true that things are falling apart and that we need to get ready. It is warning shot, not meant to pound obedience into wayward saints, but as a warning so they will repent. Don’t true blue disaffected believe that the Brethren have bought into their congnative dissonance? If so, why should Monson behave as if New Jerusalem wasn’t going to happen?

  19. The temple here as a place of refuge as you suggested earlier – sure, I agree, but Peter, I don’t get how this is a ‘warning shot’ any more than the average conference talk from the President of the Church is a warning shot. This was not the announcement of the destruction of Jackson County in preparation for the Second Coming! Anybody who has driven through many parts of Independence knows they’re already well on their way down, but today all we got was a non-specific announcement of a temple in a very large geographical area.

    I can understand how this is an intriguing topic – believe me – I look forward to a temple in Independence too, but that IS NOT what was announced today and we shouldn’t make wild assumptions based of a non-specific announcement.

  20. Hmmm, I completely feel like this is NOT any warning shot, but I like to play a little devil’s advocate because we all like to believe things will always go the way they’ve always been going where can sit behind computers and navel gaze. I do believe things will change and they will change dramatically. I don’t think ANY temple in Independence will be built until after the tribulation of the Saints. The tribulation, IMO, is closer and more impending than any temple.

  21. It is warning shot, not meant to pound obedience into wayward saints, but as a warning so they will repent. Don’t true blue disaffected believe that the Brethren have bought into their congnative dissonance? If so, why should Monson behave as if New Jerusalem wasn’t going to happen?

    Peter, I think that in the minds of many LDS leaders, “pound obedience into wayward saints” is the same thing as “warning so they will repent.” I’ve sat with LDS leaders who very sincerely concluded that an entire stake was in great spiritual peril, because some men were showing up to church meetings in non-white dress shirts. It wasn’t that they were “demanding conformity,” so much as that they literally believed that people they loved were in danger.

    It’s certainly true that I see a certain Machievellian pattern among modern LDS leadership. At the same time, however, I’m well aware that most, if not all, of these men are absolutely sincere in their belief—even to the point that they will sometimes rationalize bad behavior as a “means to an end” in doing what they think is the will of deity.

  22. I’m not sure that I’ve ever agreed with Ray on anything–until now. I’m afraid I have to agree with #37. That’s all.

  23. #35: I can understand how this is an intriguing topic – believe me – I look forward to a temple in Independence too, but that IS NOT what was announced today and we shouldn’t make wild assumptions based of a non-specific announcement.

    Ryan, I think it’s fair to say that LDS leaders (and their PR staff) are generally very careful in choosing their words. If Monson didn’t want LDS members to think that his announcement could refer to the prophesied Independence temple, I’m confident that he would have specifically said this was not “that” temple, or that this would be “preparatory to” the “future” building of “that” temple. He’s not a stupid man, and it doesn’t take a “prophet” to know how LDS members would respond to his non-specific announcement.

    On the other hand, can you imagine the media circus which would have ensued, if he had specifically said that his plan was to go forward now in building the prophesied Independence temple? The media would go nuts, trumpeting stories about how the LDS were now “preparing for the end of the world,” etc.

  24. Here is an alternate view of the new temple in greater Kansas City. The population of temple recommend holding members is ripe and it will shorten the distance needed to go to Oklahoma City or St. Louis. The exact location (and even the exact state) has yet to be determined, so it was announced as a general area. Like Palmyra, having a temple near a number of historic attractions is a good fit.

    The area near the Independence Visitor’s center is not the most attractive or convenient location and the “competition” for the Temple Lot land is something to move beyond. Relations with the other restorationist churches would probably be better if the temple was built away from the center of their church complexes. The temple-goers could do their own thing in a new location of reverence and worship.

  25. Nick, I think you are too cynical. To me, its a loving warning. To you, its pounding fear. Its a difference of belief.

  26. I was impressed with Elder Hale’s talk on having Christian courage to react with love rather than a tendency to aggressively defend in the face of detractors. I did find it a bit contrasting to the talks given by Elder Holland at the last two conferences where he defended the church against accusations of being non-Christian. Is this a difference in direction, a return to prior direction of just personality differences??

  27. I think it’s just a different emphasis…honestly, Elder Hales is not asking that we not answer our critics or even that we not answer with smart answers. The scriptures say to be “wise as serpents.” But when we do answer, we need to remember the purpose…not to win, but to love. Notice, Elder Hales even said that different responses are appropriate at different times…Christ drove the moneychangers out, after all. So there might be times where a touch of sarcasm (which Christ used quite effectively) might be appropriate.

    Great talk.

  28. #40 – I do agree that his announcement for the “greater KC area” was rather vague. All the other four temples were announced in one specific city: Rome, Italy. Philadelphia, PA. Calgary, AB. Why didn’t he say Lenexa, KS? Or Independence, MO? Or whatever.

    Shorter after hearing the news, I decided it was Lenexa, since they are already in construction on the new Stake Center and I’ve heard that it’s a large plot of land, perfect for having a mini temple next to it.

    But, since thinking about the vague wording, I have wondered again… they had to have known that the vagueness would make people guess about Independence. So, either it’s NOT there but they wanted people to think that. Or, it WILL be there and they didn’t want to make such a shocking announcement yet b/c everybody would freak about the Second Coming. It seems unrealistic that they would have announced it without already being certain of the location.

    About Rome: I recently heard (second hand) from an Italian friend that the reason they don’t have a temple in Italy is b/c “all buildings must have public access to law enforcement at any time. The sacredness of the temple would be violated with police officers tromping through at will.” Has anybody else heard of that idea? Was my friend just mistaken? Or did it used to be an issue that they have since resolved?

  29. I don’t know about the specifics of Italy’s rules, but I’ve heard that paramedics teams are permitted to enter a temple with escort to attend to workers with medical emergencies. Sounds like a similar public safety issue.

  30. As far as why he wasn’t more specific, it’s because the city of KC is the most prominent city in the area. Boston’s temple isn’t in “Boston,” but in Belmont. San Diego’s temple isn’t in SD, but La Jolla. Heaven knows where Lenexa is. The small towns in Utah are so-named largely because of the vast familiarity with Utah geography in Intermountain Mormonism.

  31. I don’t know about Italy but it seems that we have the same law in France. Or I should say this is what I have been told. This makes me start wondering if this is not a made up explanation for a question to which we did not have answer.
    The thing is that no law has been changed on this subject in France and a temple has been announced a long time ago (I was still on my mission). We came close to have one but the land was eventually not sold to the church.
    If the law had been changed in Italy I think we would have heard about it in France too because it implies much the cultural and politcal european world.
    The more I am typing about it the more I think this is just a rumor more than anything else.
    Since my sweet little sister has started studying law I am going to ask her where I could find the answer.

  32. For the record (I know I’m late on this!), the Philly PA temple location is known. It’s on the corner of North Broad Street and Hamilton (taking the entire block between Hamilton and Noble). Broad Street is also Highway 611. This is just about 4 blocks north of Highway 676. This is very close to both the Spring Garden Station and the Race-Vine Station (Philly Metro), which makes it very convenient for those without access to a car.

    From the anouncement on the stake website: “It will be a multi-chapel building with a temple included, similar to that in Manhattan.”

    The pdf-map they have available shows the current land usage to be nothing more than a parking lot, so I’m guessing that they are going to raze that and dig deep and go up as well, but I don’t really know.

    Too bad the folks in KC area don’t have quite as much information as yet…

    It’s exciting for us here in Philly since that means pretty much anyone can hop on the train and be in the temple fairly easily without much worry about traffic.

  33. Ray,
    the little brat went to se a movie tonight. I am going to have to wait until tomorrow but I have talked with someone at work and I realized that this theory about law is not logical in France at least.
    I know for sure that policement are not allowed to enter any place with explicit authorization because of the “not guilty until proven”. I would think that Italy is the same and that this thing has just been spread as an opposition to the stupid rumor about members in France not being faithfull enough.
    The truth is that the church had bought two pieces of a parcel inside Paris and needed a third one. the man owning it refused to sell it to “this american cult” that we all know here/ this is what I know for sure. Then he died but his children would not sell it to the church to respect their father’s will. They cannot be blamed for that.
    Then they church had its eye on a land outside Paris but it was sold to someone else who was going to “bring more money” according to the mayor.
    What makes me laugh is that it was sold to an Equestrianism club. I don’t know what you understand when I talk about this club in the US. In France it means little kids droped by their parents to ride a horse and then picked up by them really quickly because mom still has to go gorcery shoping. No money spent there in the town.
    When a temple is built ni Europe members always forget to bring something and therefore have to buy it near the temple. Thus they spend money.
    Good call mayor!

  34. I just learned that the Kansas City temple will be built in/near Liberty, MO. That’s about all I know right now. Have a friend in that area who is a ward executive secretary, so he’s got pretty good information.

  35. So much for all the “there won’t be a temple in Kansas City in our lifetime” naysayers. I think I’ve even met a few of these naysayers on Mormon Matters.

    To all those who see this greater KC metropolitan area temple as a sign: Remember, a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.

    (Does that mean you’ll be swallowed by a whale and brought to where you least want to go? Zion is the new Nineveh. Much like the Assyrians of Nineveh, judgment and condemnation are upon the Gentiles of Zion for their being lifted up in pride.)

    Also: Woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress upon the land, and wrath unto this people.

  36. Nothing seems to be easier than seeing someone whom you can help but not helping.
    I suggest we start giving it a try. Give love to the ones that need it.
    God will appreciate it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *