Cities with more than one temple

[ldspsygenius]

Could someone speak to the practice of putting two temples in the same city? Is the point exclusively to reduce traffic at the original Temple? It seems like having temples built away from the cities could reach people who would have a difficult time traveling to the temple especially if distance is the main factor. I'm not opposed to it at all I just want to understand better the thinking behind it

[Admin]

Larger cities make sense to host temples better than small outlying ones because you need a large number of temple workers who ideally do not need to travel far. In the case of Lima, Manila, and to an extent Provo, the temples in those cities were over capacity, so the temple district needed to be divided. The most logical place for them to put the new temple just happens to still be part of the same city or metropolitan area.

[james]

That is true. And the same principle applies also to neighboring or "sister cities" that have gotten a temple when there is one nearby. At first, it was something that only happened in Utah, and the first example of that was having the Jordan River and Oquirrh Mountain Utah Temples both in South Jordan. Then came the more recent example of Provo, where the second temple came about after the determination was made to take the burnt-out shell of a building and reconstruct it as the second temple in Provo. And the principle applies even more if we consider cities outside of Utah that have that distinction. The general intent is to divide the district somewhat in half, as evenly as possible. A look at the temple district for the Lima Peru Temple shows that the second temple, which will presumably be built in the Los Olivos District, based on the name there. And the Church has already identified the site of the temple to be built in the Greater Manila Philippines area, which is, as noted on the LDS Church Temples site where that site identification has been confirmed, to split that district in half. Saratoga Springs is one of many close sister cities of American Fork, the home of the Mount Timpanogos Temple, and the Church has already determined that the district for Utah's newest temple will take in the 27 stakes that are currently in Lehi, SS and Eagle Mountain, and any others in the area that might be created in the interim. The one thing that is not clear is how the YSA stake headquartered in Lehi might be divided among the two temples. I would imagine that YSA wards in the three cities named above would then be assigned to the SS temple, and that the other wards in the stake will continue to attend at the Mount Timpanogos Temple. I hope that helps as well, though it might not have been as insightful or helpful as the original reply by David above. Thanks for letting me add my response.

[james]

I had an additional thought on this subject which I wanted to share here: In the cases of the second temples for Lima Peru and Manila Philippines, both cities are large enough that some Saints have to travel inordinate distances to get to their temple. The idea of a second temple for those cities makes sense because it would provide a more central location for those Saints. In the case of the two Lima Peru temples, the first is located in La Molina, and the released name of the other temple in that city seems to indicate that it will be built in the Los Olivos District. The city of Lima Peru spans 1,032 square miles. The distance between La Molina and Los Olivos is roughly 19 miles. As the Lima Peru temple district currently has 73 stakes and 11 districts, Though I am not familiar with the geographical regions of Peru, it seems that the newest temple in Lima will split the current district roughly in half. In the meantime, the city of Manila in the Philippines spans roughly 14.88 miles. The distance between the first Manila Philippines Temple (located in Quezon City, Metro Manila) and Alabang, Muntinlupa City is roughly 21 miles. The district of the first Manila Philippines Temple comprises 62 stakes and 46 districts. Again, the intent was likely to reduce the distance Saints in the southern part of Manila have to travel to get to their temple. Hope that additional information helps. I am always excited to hear of cities outside the United States getting a second temple, and I am sure we will see that happening more frequently in other major world cities. I can definitely see the appeal of having a second temple in capital cities around the world. Sometimes, it is not always clear why such a second temple would be needed. I am certain of one thing, though: As progress is made for the second temples in Lima and Manila, we will surely discover more about why they were needed. Hope that helps as well.