Abc News Weighs In On Church'S Current State

[Eldwynn]

How about, instead of speculating (the church doesn't really release numbers, and who would believe them anyways?) we avoid the problem and just look at surveys. I got this all from the wikipedia religious demographics page, which is based off of census data. This is America only.

People were asked "What is your religion, if any?". The sample size was pretty large (like 60,000 people).

1990- 1.4% of adults identified as LDS

2000- 1.3% of adults identified as LDS

2008- 1.4% of adults identified as LDS

The Mormon church, despite probably the biggest missionary program out of every religion in the world, has remained the same percentage of the population.

For comparison:

Jews went from 1.8% to 1.2% (as earlier in this thread)

Those who identified as agnostic or atheist went from 0.7% to 1.6%.

Those who said "no religion" went from 8.2%-15% (That's the fastest growing "church")

Oh and those who refused to respond/ didn't know was about 5%.

All in all, Mormonism is just a tiny tiny drop in the bucket in the USA. That's probably why its critics are pretty much just former members.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Eldwynn

[why me]

All in all, Mormonism is just a tiny tiny drop in the bucket in the USA. That's probably why its critics are pretty much just former members.

Is it actually just a tiny drop in the bucket? It seems that mormonism is having influence in American society on the political and the business level. And also on the community level. And the fact that the lds had two candidates for president shows that mormonism is just more than a tiny drop in the bucket.

[why me]

As a matter of perspective: a lot of people left during the Kirtland apostasy; but more people joined over that time. The Church still experienced net positive growth. Elder Jensen, of course, knows this.

Unfortunately, the Schadenfreude brigade probably don't. That's okay; I won't tell them if you don't. It would be a shame to disturb their premature whooping and cheering.

Regards,

Pahoran

You are correct. In fact, kirkland was a difficult time for the lds church because leaders also left the fold and since the church was located in basically a small area, the impact would be that more greater. And Jensen knew this too. However, for the critics today, the celebration is a false one since the church is a world wide church and not limited to a small area as it was during kirkland. And I haven't seen a mass exodus as had happened in kirkland.

Edited February 7, 2012 by why me

[BCSpace]

In the OP, the title of the article is:

Number of faithful Mormons rapidly declining

The hook is:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is losing a record number of its membership. A new report quotes an LDS general authority who said more members are falling away today than any time in the past 175 years.

Yet here is what MKJ is actually quoted as saying:

But according to a recent Reuters article citing LDS General Authority Marlin K. Jensen, for the church as a whole, the record in going in a different direction.

Elder Jensen told the news outlet times have changed, and "attrition has accelerated in the last five or 10 years.".

Hardly seems to match the title or the hook. At best, there is an unquantified trend.

Here is another recent quote from MKJ in response to all the hullabaloo:

“I have heard that our overall activity, especially in the United States, is as good as it’s ever been,” he said. “To say we are experiencing some Titanic-like wave of apostasy is inaccurate.”

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53408134-78/church-lds-mormon-faith.html.csp

[Storm Rider]

This remains a temptest in a teapot. Religion, across the board, is having a difficult time in the Western world. There are some bright spots, but overall many people are leaning away from organized religion or religion all-together. This overall trend has affect most, if not all, churches.

It is funny how the ex-Mormon sites have been beating a drum about the hoards of saints running for the exit doors. Yet, the Church continues to build buidlings, continues to build temples, send out missionaries, and apparently feels like their work is not done. It operates as it always has, much to the consternation of those same doomsday sayers.

IF the membership is growing, IF the membership is contracting, it does not affect the Church and what its sees as its mission on earth. More talking about does not make this problem more real or more false; it just makes that teapot blow a little more. I recommend we just turn the heat down and move forward

[Calm]

There are people who have not stepped foot in a chapel in decades who would be very offended if you took them off the roles of the church.

I can see having a dormant membership category that is not counted in general membership, but is kept on file in case someone wants some sort of contact again. I see no reason to not count as full members anyone who desires some form of contact with the community, even if they don't attend the official meetings. If they envision themselves as community members, then count them as such (as long as their behaviour meets a minimum standard in terms of not actively working against it).

[KevinG]

I can see having a dormant membership category that is not counted in general membership, but is kept on file in case someone wants some sort of contact again. I see no reason to not count as full members anyone who desires some form of contact with the community, even if they don't attend the official meetings. If they envision themselves as community members, then count them as such (as long as their behaviour meets a minimum standard in terms of not actively working against it).

We pretty much do that now. Dormant members are not counted for purposes of budgeting or attendance. That is why you see the membership clerk walking down the aisles in Sacrament meeting counting heads.

[Duncan]

There are people who have not stepped foot in a chapel in decades who would be very offended if you took them off the roles of the church.

I guess but we can send out a letter with chocolate bunny sweets or something! then at least we know who wants to be a member and who doesn't

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

For example,I'm still a Mormon according to the Church. Most ex-Mormons I know are considered Mormons also. And the Church keeps consolidating and closing missions because they cannot be as productive as they originally thought when they started opening

Or this is a living breathing Church that adapts to change. My son has had three Baptisms in two weeks. The Ward I attend is very crowded every Sunday. So were you stating fact or just making a declaration? This Church like any other faces the future with optimism, sometimes these goals are met and sometimes not. It is the natural order of things.

[Jeff K.]

As a matter of perspective: a lot of people left during the Kirtland apostasy; but more people joined over that time. The Church still experienced net positive growth. Elder Jensen, of course, knows this.

Unfortunately, the Schadenfreude brigade probably don't. That's okay; I won't tell them if you don't. It would be a shame to disturb their premature whooping and cheering.

Regards,

Pahoran

I also think that one can miscalculate. During the Kirtland years, it wasn't simply the number of people slipping away, it was also the number of leaders, people with property in their name and not the church's name, those who thought or sought to destroy the church via a much more direct method of impugning its reputation (ie correspondence was limited and therefore those who corresponded had greater influence versus today where correspondence like the internet is unlimited and the impact and influence is therefore more diffused). I won't even get into the localized versus international church with a centrally located powerbase rather than a more international church with people everywhere. Those are incredibly important differences that put the church in much greater peril then than it does now. I would bet that Brother Jensen knows this, but perhaps hasn't illuminated the crowd that screams Schadenfreude! But I will tell them if you will.

[KevinG]

I guess but we can send out a letter with chocolate bunny sweets or something! then at least we know who wants to be a member and who doesn't

I did end one short visit with an embarassingly confrontational man who no longer considered himself a Mormon by instructing him on how to write a letter to the Bishop asking for his name to be removed from the Church rolls so he wouldn't get pesky visits from Home Teachers every few years when someone in the Elders quorum asked who he was and why we haven't visited him.

[KevinG]

Is the lack of growth stated in terms of percentage of general population or as raw membership numbers? The former may temper the Schadenfreude (what a great word) a bit upon further examination.

[selek1]

Is the lack of growth stated in terms of percentage of general population or as raw membership numbers? The former may temper the Schadenfreude (what a great word) a bit upon further examination.

The ABC article which MaxRep tried to use as the basis for his "I told you so" has deliberately misrepresented the nature and setting of Elder Jensen's remarks.

MaxRep was made aware of this but continued to cite thier version of "Jensen's" comments to advance his agenda.

It is interesting to note that both MaxRep and ABC have studiously ignored comments from Jensen which are fatal to their position.

And yet even the Strib (no friend to the Latter-day Saints) has the integrity to at least mention those comments:

“I have heard that our overall activity, especially in the United States, is as good as it’s ever been,” he (Jensen) said. “To say we are experiencing some Titanic-like wave of apostasy is inaccurate.”

If MaxRep and ABC4 are willing to distort and misrepresent in little things, why should we believe any of the conclusions they draw or any of the charges they make?

Given the shaky foundations upon which their arguments are predicated, why should we accept their characterizations or projections as anything more than wishful thinking from a bitter and disaffected minority who desperately hope to see the Church fail?

Edited February 7, 2012 by selek1

[Loran Blood]

CFR. Is there any information to substantiate that statement or is that your opinion only? Has there ever been a comparison (or is it even possible to compare) the number of people leaving for historical reasons vs. the number of people leaving the LDS church due to internet pornography?

Its an opinion based upon a lifetime of experience, observation, and thought about the whys and wherefores of apostasy from the Church, and my conclusion is that most people leave, not because of "historical issues," much of which is obscure and can involve highly rarefied scholarly quibbling, but because they, at some point, are overwhelmed by the surrounding secular culture, and especially its always destabalizing and corrosive pop culture.

I've been a member all of my life, and I've known about most, if not all of the historical issues presently in play since I was in my late teens (including the issues surrounding the BofA), and I'm still here, still have the same testimony I had then, and have no intention of leaving. When I look about me, however, I see powerful and insistent forces that would like to drag me out of the Church and into misery and confusion. Yes, some of those forces have names attached to them (many of whom write for Signature Books and sometimes post in Internet forums), but you really have to go looking for those names and delve into their arguments for those arguments or beliefs to have any effect. Pornography, like many of the other attitudes, values, and beliefs about us - the culture of Babylon - are pervasive, conspicuous, and corrupting of gospel sensitivities in a way that a peice of obscure, tendentious revisionist history like Quinn's Same-Sex Dynamics Among Nineteenth-Century Americans could never achieve (unlike the lifestyle and associeated Kulturkampf that lies at the root of Quinn's purpose in penning that work).

My whole point is simply that, if there is a larger than historically normal exodus from the church going on, its not because the so beloved "historical issues" of dissafected LDS intellectuals (and I have little doubt the degree to which these people would love to think that their own particularistic preoccupations and concerns are at the base of any "exodus" from the church in numbers in any way unusual) are suddenly blooming like sunflowers, but because of the stubborn resistence of the general culture to gospel values and standards.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Loran Blood

[thesometimesaint]

eldwynn:

What percentage of salt does it take to flavor the whole loaf?

[sjdawg]

Its an opinion

Thanks. Thats all I was curious about.

[Jeff K.]

Wisdom is only an opinion when you get right down to it.

[Loran Blood]

This remains a temptest in a teapot. Religion, across the board, is having a difficult time in the Western world. There are some bright spots, but overall many people are leaning away from organized religion or religion all-together. This overall trend has affect most, if not all, churches.

This is true. Religion is all but finished in Europe, and, as I mentioned above, North American secular cuture is increasingly deeply resistent and hostile to the values and standards of the gospel. Liberal church intellectuals may want to stride triumphant over what they think is a declining church, but I would say, "Not so fast." Look around at the surrounding popular, media, political, and entertainment culture, and one will quite quickly see the vast bulk of the clear and present danger posed to church membership. If a small group of apostate and neo-orthodox LDS intellectuals wish to "pile on" in their own small, if sincere way, it is their choice to do so.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Loran Blood

[Loran Blood]

Thanks. Thats all I was curious about.

Yes, I'm sure that's the case.

[Minos]

Thread closed because of personal squabbling.