Mormon church membership - who to count as members

[Notatbm]

14 minutes ago, Amulek said:

You’re basically arguing that the Church should kick people out who stop showing up, stop paying, or embarrass the faith. Okay, but that’s not how covenants, agency, or accountability work. Membership isn’t a fan club where the admins prune inactive users - it’s a covenant people. If someone wants out, they can ask. Until then, their standing in the church is between them and God, not you.

 

sure they can and they have. 

[Notatbm]

14 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Isn't that a two-way street? I mean, if you wanted us to stop counting you as a member, maybe you would put forth the (minimal) effort to have your name removed from the records of the church. But if you don't care either, that is fine.

 

Most people don’t resign for a number of reasons. For me my extended family Mormonism is their life. All conversations revolve around the church, callings, missions, temple trips etc. known apostates and inactives don’t do well in that environment. Besides, the moment I die half of em would be clamoring to do all my ordinances all o er again. They already did that for a family member who was exed st his request back then (no such thing as resignation) and right away we got a few of em bragging about getting all his stuff done. Can’t even leave the dead alone. 

[Notatbm]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Yet you are complaining about it.

nope just piggy backing on the failure of ministering program. There is a workforce in place to take care of purging roles, but they don’t even talk to the inactives. In my neighborhood ( which is literally the entire ward) everyone’s hone is within I believe < 1/2 mile. 

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The garment checkers?

yea so d Mormons like to visually or tacitly (byu girls) check to see if people are wearing their garments. It is a way of establishing either membership or in some cases perceived righteousness/trustworthiness. You can visually see garment lines on shoulders, backs, sleeves etc. it is a thing. 
 

this George Zinn probably wears them to make sure he is regarded as an active Mormon. He is in Utah so makes sense he can get into some circles just because of church membership. 

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Cool, I wish the victims success in pursuing justice.

As do I. Good thing that hedge fund is well-stocked. This is what Jesus would want it used for. 

[Notatbm]

10 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Most members of the church are messy.  Thank goodness you don’t have to be perfect to be counted among the membership. 

Messy? I think most are just fine. The problem from a PR perspective is why let a child molester, bank robber, scam artist etc remain as members? 
 

inactive?? That doesn’t make someone messy, just makes them disinterested. They should get purged too unless there is a compelling reason to keep them on the rolls. This is where the failed ministering program can come in handy. If they would just do their jobs they can be the ones who find out (from those who cooperate with them) reasons for non-attendance. They could even show up with pre-written resignation papers and they can sign em. They can report that to the bishop and he can have them removed from the rolls if necessary. Obviously this would have to be authorized from the top , but logistically it isn’t a stretch to pull off. They can at least get rid of a large percentage of people who have zero interest in the church. 
 

end result is church reported numbers are realistic. With a ~25% ish attendance rate the membership truly is only about 4-5 million ish. Huge difference. 

[InCognitus]

Maybe I should talk to our stake president about starting an inquisition to get all these garment wearing hypocrites off the church roles and do away with them the old fashioned way.  This could put a new spin on the concept of a "stake fireside".

[JVW]

13 hours ago, Notatbm said:

he is wearing garments… kinda hard to waltz into a bookstore and buy them without a recommend I suppose. Last time i bought them ( many moons ago). Had to present my recommend. 

I'm pretty sure that you don't have to have a current temple recommend to buy garments. After you are initially authorized to wear them, you can buy replacements for the rest of your life. AFAIK.

13 hours ago, Notatbm said:

why would he wear garments if he wasn’t an active member anyway.  I guess there are wierd people out there. 

My mom was one of those weirdos. She hated God and was done with the church for 10-20 years before she passed yet continued to wear her garments at least 90% of the time and also was adamant about living the law of chastity. So, because single men who are divorced and middle aged all want sex, she never got remarried. My mom was actually pretty crazy though, she had a lot of issues, many issues.

-------

According to what you've posted so far in this thread, it sounds like your family is pretty messed up and they've really done a number on your soul (or however you want to define your outlook, consciousness, baseline state of being, way of thinking, etc.). I'm so sorry that you've had to deal with a crappy family. I have had to deal with the same, and I have several friends who also are in crazy families of a similar nature to yours. It really did a number on me and there have been many times that I've thought (after I wasn't atheist anymore) "If I existed before I was born, and God is picking out a family for me to be born in to, why in the hell did he put me in this one?" I've thought that many times. My family is a wreck. And I had a very bitter taste in my mouth about religion for most of my life as a result. Even to this day, after 15 years of working with God to heal, I am still so broken as a result of my upbringing. So I am really sorry that you are having to deal with all of that crap from your family. May God bless you, brother.

[Notatbm]

13 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think the church does what it does because it's not that concerned about 'the look'.  It's concerned with doing what they believe is right (though in an imperfect and flawed way 

From the church General Handbook:

“32.2.3

Protect the Integrity of the Church

The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11⁠). The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them.”

the church is very much concerned with image. 

[JVW]

I was going to edit the previous post, but this warrants its own.

I think that more members should be disfellowshipped and/or excommunicated. Not a sweeping thing, I just think the church should be more strict. If the state of a person's membership is a tool that can be used to help people repent and return to God, then use that tool! The sooner a person repents, the better, so use all the tools you have. That's what I think.

I was speaking with my brother-in-law recently and he is the executive secretary in his ward in Springville. He told me that recently there was a meeting that Bishops were required to attend. And if a Bishop couldn't make it, a counselor was not allowed to attend. It was for Bishops only. In the meeting the apostle or seventy or whoever (he clarified what level of leadership was running the meeting, but my memory sucks, this is like a 2 or 3 week old conversation) told the Bishops that they need to be more discerning in temple recommend interviews and more willing to decline members a recommend renewal if they feel like the Spirit is telling them to say, "no".

I think that is a great meeting for the Bishops to have and I was happy to hear it. When he first said there was a "Bishop only" meeting I thought the story would be, "you Bishops aren't being good enough church admins. Tithing is down, ward activity is down, do better." Like the Bishop equivalent of an Elder's Quorum opening chat about how everyone sucks at ministering. I was pleasantly surprised to hear that instead of focusing on admin, they were telling the Bishops to do better at what really matters, what a Bishop is supposed to really do, be a judge in Israel.

It has bothered me for some time that probably 90% of an Apostles work in the modern church has been administrative when it is well known that the Apostles only *required* role is to witness of the resurrected Lord. I hope and believe that this story indicates that the winds are changing and the church leaders won't have to focus as much on admin and will focus more on being witnesses of Christ and judges in Israel, etc.

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, JVW said:

I'm pretty sure that you don't have to have a current temple recommend to buy garments. After you are initially authorized to wear them, you can buy replacements for the rest of your life. AFAIK.

I’ll have to try it out. The deseret book by gilbert temple sells them. I don’t have a recommend and don’t know my membership number. I’ll see if they will sell me some. Not gonna buy em, just want to see if I can. I think I’ll have to prove membership somehow. 

1 hour ago, JVW said:

My mom was one of those weirdos. She hated God and was done with the church for 10-20 years before she passed yet continued to wear her garments at least 90% of the time and also was adamant about living the law of chastity. So, because single men who are divorced and middle aged all want sex, she never got remarried. My mom was actually pretty crazy though, she had a lot of issues, many issues.

-------

According to what you've posted so far in this thread, it sounds like your family is pretty messed up and they've really done a number on your soul (or however you want to define your outlook, consciousness, baseline state of being, way of thinking, etc.). I'm so sorry that you've had to deal with a crappy family. I have had to deal with the same, and I have several friends who also are in crazy families of a similar nature to yours. It really did a number on me and there have been many times that I've thought (after I wasn't atheist anymore) "If I existed before I was born, and God is picking out a family for me to be born in to, why in the hell did he put me in this one?" I've thought that many times. My family is a wreck. And I had a very bitter taste in my mouth about religion for most of my life as a result. Even to this day, after 15 years of working with God to heal, I am still so broken as a result of my upbringing. So I am really sorry that you are having to deal with all of that crap from your family. May God bless you, brother.

They are not that bad, but truly the only thing in their lives is church stuff. If you ain’t in to that there’s not much of a place for you. Last few years interestingly we have had lots of grandkids bailing on the church, coming out of the closet, non temple marriages etc. at least the open talk of contempt for those types of people has basically ceased. Now that they have all been affected by an aspect of it. I remember after the family proclamation came out my stake pres (former) father waxed poetic at a family get together about it and how the gays are ruining this country. They should all swing from a rope… oh boy. Good Mormons! All those grandkids sitting around hearing that are now married adults… some with lgbtq kids
 

anyway at least no one it openly talking like that anymore. 

Edited September 17, 2025 by Notatbm

[Notatbm]

35 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

Maybe I should talk to our stake president about starting an inquisition to get all these garment wearing hypocrites off the church roles and do away with them the old fashioned way.  This could put a new spin on the concept of a "stake fireside".

Brigham approves

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

Most people don’t resign for a number of reasons. For me my extended family Mormonism is their life. All conversations revolve around the church, callings, missions, temple trips etc. known apostates and inactives don’t do well in that environment. Besides, the moment I die half of em would be clamoring to do all my ordinances all o er again. They already did that for a family member who was exed st his request back then (no such thing as resignation) and right away we got a few of em bragging about getting all his stuff done. Can’t even leave the dead alone. 

So you won’t resign because it’s inconvenient and/or might cause some awkward family conversations, but you’ll gripe that the Church won’t do it for you. That's like refusing to break up with someone and then being mad about them still calling you their boyfriend. Oh, and spare me the hand-wringing about proxy ordinances after you’re gone - if you don’t believe, why care?

 

[Notatbm]

14 minutes ago, Amulek said:

So you won’t resign because it’s inconvenient and/or might cause some awkward family conversations, but you’ll gripe that the Church won’t do it for you. That's like refusing to break up with someone and then being mad about them still calling you their boyfriend. Oh, and spare me the hand-wringing about proxy ordinances after you’re gone - if you don’t believe, why care?

 

My kids don’t need to be shunned and othered and neither do my wife and I. I put up with it in order to stay in the family. Lots of PIMO do the same thing. 

[Notatbm]

2 hours ago, Amulek said:

Isn't that a two-way street? I mean, if you wanted us to stop counting you as a member, maybe you would put forth the (minimal) effort to have your name removed from the records of the church. But if you don't care either, that is fine.

 

I don’t care if I’m counted as a member or not. The church SHOULD purge its roles of known inactives and convicted criminals as a means to protect its “good name.” I mean just this week two people come to light who are members (one inactive and the other probably active due to garment wearing) one of which is an assassin and the other a child porn trafficker all in the same incident. If the inactive had been purged and the other dude also purged because of his long list of criminal activity the church wouldn’t have the PR problem. Granted they just choose to ignore it so it goes away but people round the world read the news and know these two are Mormon. It’s one thing to have to keep tabs on your active members, but it is a whole different task having to answer to the actions of those who have not shown up to church in years or are chronically in trouble with the law. 
 

every org I have ever been a part of will purge you from the roles if you dont pay dues, attend meeting etc. why the church holds on to those who don’t tithe or otherwise participate at all is senseless… unless the theory that the truthfulness of the gospel is proved by the growth of membership numbers… oh there we go 

Edited September 17, 2025 by Notatbm

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

sy? I think most are just fine. The problem from a PR perspective is why let a child molester, bank robber, scam artist etc remain as members? 

Human beings are all messy. Like it or not.
Where would you like to draw the line with regards to membership? And why do you care?

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

From the church General Handbook:

“32.2.3

Protect the Integrity of the Church

The third purpose is to protect the integrity of the Church. Restricting or withdrawing a person’s Church membership may be necessary if his or her conduct significantly harms the Church (see Alma 39:11⁠). The integrity of the Church is not protected by concealing or minimizing serious sins—but by addressing them.”

the church is very much concerned with image. 

Like I said 'barring serious sin'.  Thanks for providing the reference for my statement.  

[Notatbm]

9 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Like I said 'barring serious sin'.  Thanks for providing the reference for my statement.  

Yet known child molesters are found on the rolls of the church. The guy who produced the temple endowment films is one of them. I guess child molestation isn’t a serious sin. 🙂

Edited September 17, 2025 by Notatbm

[Notatbm]

12 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Human beings are all messy. Like it or not.
Where would you like to draw the line with regards to membership? And why do you care?

I don’t care- the church should. Most organizations care how their members represent them. 

[Raingirl]

14 hours ago, Notatbm said:

sounds like the ministering program is killing it.  Have not attended in about 1.5 yrs. No one talks to me. I live within a literal baseball throw of I think six active families… six

he is wearing garments… kinda hard to waltz into a bookstore and buy them without a recommend I suppose. Last time i bought them ( many moons ago). Had to present my recommend. 
 

I thought the church had to authorize the wear of garments or is that just an old wives tale? 
 

why would he wear garments if he wasn’t an active member anyway.  I guess there are wierd people out there. 

so the church does not retain any child known child molesters? 

You faith in the force is weak Luke 

Your comments about garments are ill informed. 

You can still purchase garments even if your recommend has lapsed.  Your membership and endowment are verified via computer. 
 

Many inactive members continue to wear their garments. I imagine those that have officially left the church, do not.   It is not your place to judge them.  That says much more about you, than it does about them. 

[Raingirl]

14 minutes ago, Notatbm said:

I don’t care- the church should. Most organizations care how their members represent them. 

You say you don’t care, but here you are, making a whole thread about it. 🙄

[Notatbm]

5 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

You say you don’t care, but here you are, making a whole thread about it. 🙄

I made one post. You and others contributed to the thread. Thanks for helping out. It takes a village. 

Edited September 17, 2025 by Notatbm

[Raingirl]

46 minutes ago, Notatbm said:

I don’t care if I’m counted as a member or not. The church SHOULD purge its roles of known inactives and convicted criminals as a means to protect its “good name.” I mean just this week two people come to light who are members (one inactive and the other probably active due to garment wearing) one of which is an assassin and the other a child porn trafficker all in the same incident. If the inactive had been purged and the other dude also purged because of his long list of criminal activity the church wouldn’t have the PR problem. Granted they just choose to ignore it so it goes away but people round the world read the news and know these two are Mormon. It’s one thing to have to keep tabs on your active members, but it is a whole different task having to answer to the actions of those who have not shown up to church in years or are chronically in trouble with the law. 
 

every org I have ever been a part of will purge you from the roles if you dont pay dues, attend meeting etc. why the church holds on to those who don’t tithe or otherwise participate at all is senseless… unless the theory that the truthfulness of the gospel is proved by the growth of membership numbers… oh there we go 

Inactive members remaining on the rolls does not harm the church. Indeed, if you put a couple of functioning brain cells together, you could understand why the church doesn’t arbitrarily remove inactive members from its rolls. 
 

By the way, the growth of membership numbers stems from new members being added to the rolls, not by members who have already been on the rolls for decades. 

[Raingirl]

1 minute ago, Notatbm said:

I made one post. You and others contributed to the thread. Thanks for helping out. 

I could say something about you not being very bright, but that would be against the rules. 

[Notatbm]

2 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

I could say something about you not being very bright, but that would be against the rules. 

Now you have posted four times on this thread. Keep up the good work! You are doing great!

[MustardSeed]

Ah but a church is not a “regular organization” is it.? Not if it’s doing its job correctly. The priority of bringing people to Christ and helping them change their lives is of greater importance than image.  I’m sure some churches are all about image but when the church’s mission is to bring people to Christ and they align with that mission as much as the LDS church does, I think it’s fair to say that this is the priority over image.
 

I think the church has proven time and again that image is not important lol- but that’s another conversation for another day. 
 

I suspect either you are a zealot for righteousness  who has no tolerance for sin and you want the bad guys out (errant thinking) or you are embittered and crying out about the unfairness of it all (victim mentality). I could be wrong here?  Something about your posting here feels less curious and more accusatory.  

 

but I’ll ask again. If you are sincere in your need to eliminate sinners from the church, where do you wanna draw the line?

[Notatbm]

4 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I suspect either you are a zealot for righteousness  who has no tolerance for sin and you want the bad guys out (errant thinking) or you are embittered and crying out about the unfairness of it all (victim mentality). I could be wrong here?  Something about your posting here feels less curious and more accusatory.

but I’ll ask again. If you are sincere in your need to eliminate sinners from the church, where do you wanna draw the line?

Me a zealot for righteousness?? lol I openly don’t pay tithing. Drink coffee and beer etc. IDGA FLIP about righteousness.

 

my post was not to solely remove sinners. I do think the church should clean up its rolls of inactives and criminals ( sinners I suppose) 

getting the roles cleaned up can accomplish a number of things: 

1- elimination of bad press when an inactive member or career criminal brings attention to the church through their actions. This Charlie Kirk thing will be known to have been committed by a Mormon for a century. Wouldn’t be the case if after he stopped attending and lived with a trans girlfriend/ boyfriend (don’t know the setup) they cut the cord

2- makes future growth measurable against a real number instead of one still inflated by millions of lifetime inactive or baseball baptism victims. 
 

3- focus on the active members. The church does teach to go after the  one of 99, but in reality there really is no effort to do that.