Data and Church Retention

[Nofear]

It's messy. Naysayers want to portray retention as abysmal. Church doesn't publish "retention" data. Statistics are messy.

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2026/04/28/latter-day-saint-retention/

[Pyreaux]

Independent researchers argue that the official membership count includes many who are no longer active based on census data. Countries like Brazil and Australia, national census data for people who self-identify as "LDS" is often 30% to 60% lower than what the Church reports on its records. Yet, its disputable, there are 10 operating temples and 10 more under construction in Brazil. You cannot sustain 20 temples with only 250,000 people if those people aren't extremely active and committed. Physical buildings are the hard data that proves the census is under-reporting. The continued announcement and construction of temples suggests there is a strong base of full-tithe paying members capable of staffing those buildings.

Data from the Spiritual Seismology Survey suggests that the naysayers are misinterpreting the inactive list. The survey found that nearly 40% of LDS members who haven't attended a meeting in over a year still identify as "LDS" when asked by a third party. And many adopt a hybrid faith. They might still pray, believe the Book of Mormon, and keep some version of the Word of Wisdom, but they find the social cost of attending a struggling, under-staffed local branch too high.

Concerning the new convert influx problem. In the U.S., you might have one active Melchizedek Priesthood holder for every 3–5 total members on the books. In parts of the Global South, that ratio can balloon to 1 leader for every 50+ members. A Bishop simply does not have the hours in a week to minister to hundreds of new converts. Without that support, the members stop attending, not because they stopped believing in the Book of Mormon, but because they weren't culturally integrated. The number of new wards/branches in Latin America often lags behind the number of baptisms. There thousands are on the books that can become paper. They may go back to Catholicism, but many are also "Believing but Non-Attending" members.

Record-breaking Seminary and Institute enrollment and expansion of the missionaries shows the youth are not having as many problems. Seminary and Institute added 200,000 students in just the last two years. Interestingly, about 75,000 of those students are not members of the Church. This suggests that the youth aren't just staying, they actively invite their peers. That enrollment is directly feeding a massive expansion of the missionary force, which has reached 85,000+ full-time missionaries in early 2026.

Edited May 1 by Pyreaux

[MustardSeed]

My opinion on this is just mine. But if the church is having a hard time retaining folks, that’s the church’s fault. It’s my opinion that a pure gospel based church experience would be beautiful and people would be flocking to be a part of it and remain.  
But, humans.

[Senator]

38 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

My opinion on this is just mine. But if the church is having a hard time retaining folks, that’s the church’s fault. It’s my opinion that a pure gospel based church experience would be beautiful and people would be flocking to be a part of it and remain.  
But, humans.

I dunno.
Jesus said that there would be few that find it.   I would add that "there would be few that find it beautiful.   Why?   As you say, "humans"

[Calm]

There is a lot of variation on what people find beautiful. How to provide enough variety so enough find a sufficient level of beauty in the community. 

I think the biggest issue is size. How does the Church create the personal, supportive, intimate social community while still providing consistency of doctrine, if not practice.  Consistency requires control and the more involved the more control is needed. Add in it’s all volunteers meaning training will be erratic.  Therefore you have to keep things simple.

Edited May 1 by Calm

[the narrator]

15 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

Yet, its disputable, there are 10 operating temples and 10 more under construction in Brazil. You cannot sustain 20 temples with only 250,000 people if those people aren't extremely active and committed. Physical buildings are the hard data that proves the census is under-reporting. The continued announcement and construction of temples suggests there is a strong base of full-tithe paying members capable of staffing those buildings.

Assuming that this isn't another Fiend of Dreams, where buildings were built with faith that they would be filled, there is another reason for the increased temple building that won't necessarily mean expected growth. Part of Nelson's larger temple-focused project was to have rooms in temples with a large TV screen and tablets for group studies of the endowment. The idea is that a elders quorum, ward relief society, or family group could reserve a room and then be able to watch, rewind, pause, skip, etc the endowment video, as well as the tablets having accompanying notes with scriptures, GA quotes, and explanations for each line of the endowment. Essentially, in these rooms people would be able to study the endowment as a group just as they would the scriptures. This is one of the main reasons why the Salt Lake Temple was gutted rather than just the seismic and electrical updates they initially announced, as it is supposed to now have multiple rooms for this purpose. I suspect this is the same reason that Nelson was announcing so many temples: it wasn't necessarily to meet new expected demands but rather to make it easier for members to more regularly study the endowment. I'm assuming this will still happen, but I know that other updates he wanted to the endowment were squashed.

[Senator]

10 minutes ago, the narrator said:

Assuming that this isn't another Fiend of Dreams, where buildings were built with faith that they would be filled, there is another reason for the increased temple building that won't necessarily mean expected growth. Part of Nelson's larger temple-focused project was to have rooms in temples with a large TV screen and tablets for group studies of the endowment. The idea is that a elders quorum, ward relief society, or family group could reserve a room and then be able to watch, rewind, pause, skip, etc the endowment video, as well as the tablets having accompanying notes with scriptures, GA quotes, and explanations for each line of the endowment. Essentially, in these rooms people would be able to study the endowment as a group just as they would the scriptures. This is one of the main reasons why the Salt Lake Temple was gutted rather than just the seismic and electrical updates they initially announced, as it is supposed to now have multiple rooms for this purpose. I suspect this is the same reason that Nelson was announcing so many temples: it wasn't necessarily to meet new expected demands but rather to make it easier for members to more regularly study the endowment. I'm assuming this will still happen, but I know that other updates he wanted to the endowment were squashed.

Can you provide any references for these claims?  

[the narrator]

9 minutes ago, Senator said:

Can you provide any references for these claims?  

I cannot; or, rather, will not. Sorry. Don't want to cause any trouble for anyone.

[Senator]

6 minutes ago, the narrator said:

I cannot; or, rather, will not. Sorry. Don't want to cause any trouble for anyone.

Then I'll file that away in the ol rumor bin

[the narrator]

6 minutes ago, Senator said:

Then I'll file that away in the ol rumor bin

Fair enough.

[Pyreaux]

1 hour ago, the narrator said:

Assuming that this isn't another Fiend of Dreams, where buildings were built with faith that they would be filled, there is another reason for the increased temple building that won't necessarily mean expected growth. Part of Nelson's larger temple-focused project was to have rooms in temples with a large TV screen and tablets for group studies of the endowment. The idea is that a elders quorum, ward relief society, or family group could reserve a room and then be able to watch, rewind, pause, skip, etc the endowment video, as well as the tablets having accompanying notes with scriptures, GA quotes, and explanations for each line of the endowment. Essentially, in these rooms people would be able to study the endowment as a group just as they would the scriptures. This is one of the main reasons why the Salt Lake Temple was gutted rather than just the seismic and electrical updates they initially announced, as it is supposed to now have multiple rooms for this purpose. I suspect this is the same reason that Nelson was announcing so many temples: it wasn't necessarily to meet new expected demands but rather to make it easier for members to more regularly study the endowment. I'm assuming this will still happen, but I know that other updates he wanted to the endowment were squashed.

But if you double the number of temples, even if these new ones will have new classrooms, you still double the human cost of keeping them running and patroned. These still function as temples, just with an extra 5th room, doing ordinances alongside classes, they'll require a constant supply of active workers who are worthy full tithe-payers and can commit 4–6 hours a week, plus patrons. Though I guess, if strategically placed, more temples mean less travel, making it easier to serve.

Edited May 1 by Pyreaux

[the narrator]

46 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

But if you double the number of temples, even if these new ones will have new classrooms, you still double the human cost of keeping them running and patroned. These still function as temples, just with an extra 5th room, doing ordinances alongside classes, they'll require a constant supply of active workers who are worthy full tithe-payers and can commit 4–6 hours a week, plus patrons. Though I guess, if strategically placed, more temples mean less travel, making it easier to serve.

Yeah, they would still require staffing, but when I heard these plans Nelson's building plans made a lot more sense to me.

[why me]

If people would join after receiving.a witness of the Book of Mormon, the retention would be much better. It was like this in the good old days.  The missionaries would encourage investigators to read and pray. People had a hard time forgetting their. confirmation of the truth.

[Navidad]

I can only speak for where I live, which is in a small village in the state of Chihuahua in Mexico. I believe that the church does not grow in our area because of the constant turnover of the missionaries and the isolation of the existing members. Rural Mexico is incredibly social in all of its interactions. It is also extremely familial in its social structure. In virtually every case, one of a pair of missionaries is Anglo. Right or wrong, that is a negative. On the other hand, many of the missionaries who are mestizos come from central Mexico - the big cities or more highly developed areas. They clearly (to me at least) are not comfortable up here in the boonies of rural northern Mexico. There is deeply rooted prejudice both ways here in Mexico - both north and central/south. They each have not-very-nice names for each other. The cultures vary greatly. Combine that with the rapid turnover (every six weeks or so) of the missionaries, and there is no way to build relationships - an essential element for winning converts or doing anything here. Of course, here we also have more than a century of bad relations between the Anglo Mormons and the Mestizo Mexicans. I am uncertain that will ever go away. The LeBarons do much better here in that regard. If anything, over time it may be getting worse. The more I type, the more I think we have some unique factors here. Anyway, that is my two cents. 

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, why me said:

If people would join after receiving.a witness of the Book of Mormon, the retention would be much better. It was like this in the good old days.  The missionaries would encourage investigators to read and pray. People had a hard time forgetting their. confirmation of the truth.

I never have quite understood this witness of the Book of Mormon concept. I have read the Book of Mormon. I believe in many places therein can be found a wonderful testimony of Jesus Christ. I also believe He is the Savior. But those have never led me to desire to join the LDS Church because of them. I could say the exact same thing about the spiritual books, witness, and testimony of scores of other Christian groups, but I have never had an interest in joining any of them. I do not understand the correlation between the witness and desire to join the church when I see the same witness in many other churches. I would be church-hopping every time I got inspired by something written by their founder or leaders. Not sure I understand. Best to all. 

[manol]

8 hours ago, why me said:

If people would join after receiving.a witness of the Book of Mormon, the retention would be much better. It was like this in the good old days.  The missionaries would encourage investigators to read and pray.

That has changed?  I've been out of the loop for a while.

What do the missionaries encourage investigators to do now?

Edited to add:  Back when I was active LDS, growth rates (in the US at least) supported the view that the LDS Church was the "stone cut without hands" rolling forth to fill the whole earth.  My recollection is that, among US religious groups of significant size, the Pentecostals were the only ones with a similar growth rate. 

Today, my understanding is that, among those self-identifying as religious or spiritual or both, "spiritual but not religious" is not only the largest category (Evangelical Protestants being the second-largest), but also the fastest-growing by a significant margin.  One might even posit that, for now at least, this category seems to fit the "cut without hands" part of Daniel's prophecy pretty well, as it has no leaders and no organization and no formal set of beliefs and no particular text.  Ime it seems to be mostly just seekers seeking, which makes it a far-from-homogeneous category.

 

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

I never have quite understood this witness of the Book of Mormon concept. I have read the Book of Mormon. I believe in many places therein can be found a wonderful testimony of Jesus Christ. I also believe He is the Savior. But those have never led me to desire to join the LDS Church because of them. I could say the exact same thing about the spiritual books, witness, and testimony of scores of other Christian groups, but I have never had an interest in joining any of them. I do not understand the correlation between the witness and desire to join the church when I see the same witness in many other churches.

My recollection is that there is a series of logical conclusions implied, or claimed to be implied, when someone receives a spiritual witness of the Book of Mormon.  Something like this: 

IF the Book of Mormon is witnessed to by the Holy Spirit, THEN the Book of Mormon is true.  IF the book of Mormon is true, THEN Joseph Smith was a true prophet.  IF Joseph Smith was a true prophet, THEN Christ restored the one and only true church through Joseph Smith.  IF Christ restored the one and only true church through Joseph Smith, THEN the modern LDS church is that church.  And IF the modern LDS church is that church, THEN you should join it.

Somebody please correct me if I've got that wrong. 

Edited May 24 by manol

[MrShorty]

I think one of the challenges here is understanding exactly what we mean by "retention" and exactly how we are measuring it. The timing being what it is, I can't help but wonder if this is somehow aimed at Jeff Strong's latest work, which claims that 40% of those who were active LDS 25 some odd years ago are no longer active or have completely disaffiliated. The Des News article in the OP focuses on Pew/PRRI data that suggests that the overall church population has remained roughly constant or grown slightly. IMO, Strong's measure seems more in line with my understanding of retention, where the Des News statistics would seem to be more of a combination of people leaving and being offset by new converts so that the overall growth rate is slightly positive. At least that's how Strong reconciles his 40% number with other claims of slow, overall growth. Ryan Cragun (former LDS and researcher in the field of sociology of religion) went on Mormon Book Reviews and suggests that data he is aware of largely agrees with Strong's data that 30% or more of LDS disaffiliate (details needed to pin down exactly what it is measuring). Within my own circles, I don't see that many people disaffiliate, but the disaffiliation rate is clearly more than 0%.

I largely agree with the idea in the Des News article -- accurate information leads to accurate conclusions. The never ending trouble with statistical data is trying to understand exactly what the numbers are measuring. I can see ways to understand how the church can both have a near steady population, and also have a relatively high percentage of people who disaffiliate.

[Calm]

9 hours ago, why me said:

was like this in the good old days.  

Meaning 1800s?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/missionary-preparation-teacher-manual/lesson-5-what-is-the-role-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

“The Book of Mormon is powerful evidence of the divinity of Jesus Christ and proof of the Restoration through the Prophet Joseph Smith. It answers the “questions of the soul” (see Preach My Gospel, 107) that many of Heavenly Father’s children have about their lives. An essential part of conversion is receiving a witness from the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon is true. A prospective missionary should study the Book of Mormon daily, have a personal testimony of the Book of Mormon, and gain experience in sharing that testimony with others.”

”Explain to the class that they can help investigators feel the converting power of the Book of Mormon by helping investigators find answers to life’s most important questions within its pages.”

Certainly seems like they are teaching prospective missionaries that they are to encourage their investigators to read the Book of Mormon.

Edited May 24 by Calm

[Calm]

8 hours ago, manol said:

IF the Book of Mormon is witnessed to by the Holy Spirit, THEN the Book of Mormon is true.  IF the book of Mormon is true, THEN Joseph Smith was a true prophet.  IF Joseph Smith was a true prophet, THEN Christ restored the one and only true church through Joseph Smith.  IF Christ restored the one and only true church through Joseph Smith, THEN the modern LDS church is that church.  And IF the modern LDS church is that church, THEN you should join it.

 

Quote

“Each time we encourage others to read the Book of Mormon, we do them a favor. If they read it prayerfully and with a sincere desire to know the truth, they will know by the power of the Holy Ghost that the book is true.

“From that knowledge there will flow a conviction of the truth of many other things. For if the Book of Mormon is true, then God lives. …

“If the Book of Mormon is true, then Jesus is verily our Redeemer, the Savior of the world. The great purpose of its preservation and coming forth, according to its own statement, is ‘to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations.’ (Title page of the Book of Mormon.) …

“If the Book of Mormon is true, Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God, for he was the instrument in the hands of God in bringing to light this testimony of the divinity of our Lord. …

“If the Book of Mormon is true, the Church is true, for the same authority under which this sacred record came to light is present and manifest among us today. It is a restoration of the Church set up by the Savior in Palestine. It is a restoration of the Church set up by the Savior when he visited this continent as set forth in this sacred record” (“The Power of the Book of Mormon,” Ensign, June 1988, 6).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/missionary-preparation-teacher-manual/lesson-5-what-is-the-role-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

[The Nehor]

17 hours ago, why me said:

If people would join after receiving.a witness of the Book of Mormon, the retention would be much better. It was like this in the good old days.  The missionaries would encourage investigators to read and pray. People had a hard time forgetting their. confirmation of the truth.

I have bad news about retention back in the “good old days”. It wasn’t that good.

[longview]

15 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I have bad news about retention back in the “good old days”. It wasn’t that good.

The Lord is sifting the wheat and Lucifer is sifting the tares.

[why me]

On 5/24/2026 at 12:04 PM, The Nehor said:

I have bad news about retention back in the “good old days”. It wasn’t that good.

What I remember is. that the church had inactive members. I knew very few people who left the church. There was a push to activate the inactive. I think that the term inactive is no longer used. It seems to me that people just leave the chrurch and not become inactive. 

Edited May 26 by why me
More information.

[why me]

On 5/23/2026 at 8:28 PM, Navidad said:

I never have quite understood this witness of the Book of Mormon concept. I have read the Book of Mormon. I believe in many places therein can be found a wonderful testimony of Jesus Christ. I also believe He is the Savior. But those have never led me to desire to join the LDS Church because of them. I could say the exact same thing about the spiritual books, witness, and testimony of scores of other Christian groups, but I have never had an interest in joining any of them. I do not understand the correlation between the witness and desire to join the church when I see the same witness in many other churches. I would be church-hopping every time I got inspired by something written by their founder or leaders. Not sure I understand. Best to all. 

I think that an important factor is when the missionaries would challenge the investigator to read the BofM and pray about its truthfulness. When the confirmation from the Holy Ghost was received they were encouraged to join. These days, it is my understanding that investigators  are encouraged rather soon to join the church. This would influence the retention rates. No witness, why stay?

[why me]

On 5/24/2026 at 4:43 AM, Calm said:

Meaning 1800s?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/missionary-preparation-teacher-manual/lesson-5-what-is-the-role-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

“The Book of Mormon is powerful evidence of the divinity of Jesus Christ and proof of the Restoration through the Prophet Joseph Smith. It answers the “questions of the soul” (see Preach My Gospel, 107) that many of Heavenly Father’s children have about their lives. An essential part of conversion is receiving a witness from the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon is true. A prospective missionary should study the Book of Mormon daily, have a personal testimony of the Book of Mormon, and gain experience in sharing that testimony with others.”

”Explain to the class that they can help investigators feel the converting power of the Book of Mormon by helping investigators find answers to life’s most important questions within its pages.”

Certainly seems like they are teaching prospective missionaries that they are to encourage their investigators to read the Book of Mormon.

 

But to seek a spiritual witness? I was referring to my good old days of the 1970s and early 80s. Missionaries usually can encourage quick baptisms. I was encouraged to seek a spiritual  witness, I did and got a strong witness which has kept me in the church all these years, although many of them as an inactive member. I even received a powerful witness of the D&C without asking for one. I think that this would retain members. To get a powerful witness of the truth claims. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, why me said:

I think that an important factor is when the missionaries would challenge the investigator to read the BofM and pray about its truthfulness. When the confirmation from the Holy Ghost was received they were encouraged to join. These days, it is my understanding that investigators  are encouraged rather soon to join the church. This would influence the retention rates. No witness, why stay?

Back in the 1950s or 60s, the Church did a study on converts who stuck around.  They found that the deciding factor was the spiritual witness that often occurred quite early and so they changed the method of extended teaching and switched to a short, standardized number of lessons where the challenge to be baptized occurred in in the first one or two lessons when the person was often receiving a witness.  The way it was taught …read the scriptures and pray, talk over them with missionaries will often result in a witness.  I never went on a mission and I know there were mission presidents that went with numbers, but my memory was missionary work was always focused in the teachings materials on setting up chances for experiencing a spiritual witness.

Can’t remember where I read that (what motivated changing to early suggestions for baptism), most likely one of the church history/sociology texts…Maybe Tom Alexander’s book.  I can’t check because I purged.

I assume they are still doing studies looking to improve missionary outcomes, so my guess is what they are doing now is what works for the most in the here or now.  Or at least would if members listen. 

When the Church was getting going, they had very quick baptisms.  Wish we had stats for that.  We assume they were getting spiritual witness.

Edited May 26 by Calm